Live data from Hacker News

Rivian embraces Tesla's charging standard for EVs

ev-edition.com

21–30 of 761 posts

Re: Rivian embraces Tesla's charging standard for EVs

#21
post #6
post #4

Meh... shrugs Just a niche automaker adapting a niche plug while the rest of the world has adopted CCS for its cars, enabling universal charging all over the place...

How often do you drive your car from North America to Europe?

I chafe at the US (and NA) tendency to stray from otherwise global standards, but in this case I'm not convinced it really matters. Car companies are already really good at localizing vehicles to regions, so that's not an argument either.

Re: Rivian embraces Tesla's charging standard for EVs

#22
I'm not an EV user, so I need some clarification. Is NACS actually a better connector? Or is it just more abundant at the moment? Technology Connections did a deep dive on CCS and it seems like it's a more flexible connector with a truly open standard. The argument for NACS I've seen is that it's a little sleeker (does this really matter all that much?) and it's already on Tesla's supercharger network.

Re: Rivian embraces Tesla's charging standard for EVs

#23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are many brands of DCFC around me. EA obviously, EVGo, blink, 7Eleven, Road Ranger, Francis, and Volta. There's a few other travel centers on the routes I take which have their own branded chargers as well The earlier non-Tesla charging stations definitely had a rough start as there was practically zero market at all for them. The economics will change as more EVs are on the road. I do agree most early EV owner…

Those are brands, not networks. No one is going to road trip if they can't trust they can roll into a station at 10% state of charge and charge in 20 minutes off hours. The network uptime is the selling point of Tesla Superchargers. You will never be left stranded. Install the PlugShare app or check out their website and see what comments users leave about reliability with regards to your local stations. https://insi…

> Those are brands, not networks

I don't care about "networks". I don't choose Exxon or Shell or whoever because they have the most gas stations, I go to the one that's most convenient for me. I'm not beholden to any particular "brand" or "network" of charger, I just want one close that works. I'm no particular brand fanboy, I'll use whatever works and is convenient.

> Install the PlugShare app or check out their website and see what comments users attempting to charge look like.

I use the PlugShare app a good bit. All the chargers I referenced are 9.5+, with most of them having 10 ratings. I also have my own personal experiences at those chargers. In all of my public charging sessions I've never once failed to charge at a decent rate at a DCFC. And I'm one who has driving around the city testing out chargers because I've been interested in the tech. I have experienced some of those free L2 chargers at grocery store parking lots being offline, but even then most of the time those have worked flawlessly.

And I don't bother with specific apps for charging "networks", all my DCFC has either been plug and charge or phone NFC/EMV payment terminals.

I don't personally put a lot of weight on Twitter polls to give me an accurate picture of reality, and if JD Power tells me something I'm likely to think the opposite is true. Most of JD Power's statements are meaningless noise to me.

I don't doubt Tesla's chargers have more uptime on average. There's a lot of things they do better historically, like having lower lifetime rated cables they change out more often and they're faster to roll out to places with issues to repair. But its not inherently a Tesla thing, the other chargers can do it and it seems in the past year a number of companies have stepped up their maintenance and reliability considerably. I'm going by the data I can see around me and what I see on PlugShare around me, which shows the non-Tesla chargers near me and on the routes I want to take are generally pretty reliable.

Re: Rivian embraces Tesla's charging standard for EVs

#24

At this point, the rate at which automakers NACS support is a good proxy for corporate malaise. Everyone sees the writing on the wall for CCS, and if an automaker takes another couple months to announce a migration it simply means the executive leadership has no clue what they are doing with regards to EVs.

Is NACS superior to CCS in any way apart from install base? I was under the impression NACS was inferior.

Re: Rivian embraces Tesla's charging standard for EVs

#25
I'm going to assume all these companies did their homework and NACS is a real open standard, not something under Tesla's boot.

In which case, great! This is the outcome I was hoping for. NACS is the better and more popular connector, it should become the standard in NA. CCS1 isn't that bad, but when you have a choice, choose the better one.

Nissan leafs are still using Chademo, which shows how serious they are about EVs.

Re: Rivian embraces Tesla's charging standard for EVs

#26
Offtopic: could people that write news titles please learn how to capitalize words? Or can we make sure that at AI will know it, when most of news are written by it?

Took me 3 tries to parse the title.

"Rivian Joins Forces" - is that name of an organization? - "with Tesla"... nope, that doesn't make sense.

"Rivan Joins forces" (somebody to do something), syntax error got "with".

"Rivan joins forces with Tesla" - yay!

And you know that person who wrote this knows about lowercase, because of "with" and "for"...

Re: Rivian embraces Tesla's charging standard for EVs

#27

I'm not an EV user, so I need some clarification. Is NACS actually a better connector? Or is it just more abundant at the moment? Technology Connections did a deep dive on CCS and it seems like it's a more flexible connector with a truly open standard. The argument for NACS I've seen is that it's a little sleeker (does this really matter all that much?) and it's already on Tesla's supercharger network.

The physical shape of Tesla/NACS is way better: it's more compact, and easier to plug in. The CCS connector OTOH is a lazy retrofit of a design-by-committee plug.

The wire protocol of CCS is a bit overengineered, but it's a standard, and it's a sunk cost (all cars, including current Teslas, are already compatible with it). So physical NACS + CCS protocol seems like the best of both.

It's also worth pointing out that the US uses CCS1, while Europe standardized on a slightly improved CCS2. So the US is alone in its (non)standard connector either way.

Re: Rivian embraces Tesla's charging standard for EVs

#28

I'm not an EV user, so I need some clarification. Is NACS actually a better connector? Or is it just more abundant at the moment? Technology Connections did a deep dive on CCS and it seems like it's a more flexible connector with a truly open standard. The argument for NACS I've seen is that it's a little sleeker (does this really matter all that much?) and it's already on Tesla's supercharger network.

My perception is that CCS2 is better egineering than NACS but both are improvements over CCS1 so any alternate adoption is a market improvement. Having the pure "best design" is very rarely the deciding factor to market adoption.

Re: Rivian embraces Tesla's charging standard for EVs

#29

I'm not an EV user, so I need some clarification. Is NACS actually a better connector? Or is it just more abundant at the moment? Technology Connections did a deep dive on CCS and it seems like it's a more flexible connector with a truly open standard. The argument for NACS I've seen is that it's a little sleeker (does this really matter all that much?) and it's already on Tesla's supercharger network.

yes. just look up photos (to scale) of different connectors on the web. All others are UX abominations

Re: Rivian embraces Tesla's charging standard for EVs

#30

I'm not an EV user, so I need some clarification. Is NACS actually a better connector? Or is it just more abundant at the moment? Technology Connections did a deep dive on CCS and it seems like it's a more flexible connector with a truly open standard. The argument for NACS I've seen is that it's a little sleeker (does this really matter all that much?) and it's already on Tesla's supercharger network.

AFAICT NACS (read, the "standard" and not Tesla's original release) speaks the same protocol as CCS, it just combines the AC and DC pins into, yes, a sleeker connector.

So no real "benefit", and it actually adds complexity into the car itself. But theoretically one could also make a NACS -> CCS adapter, so it wouldn't end up as a CHAdeMO situation.

EDIT: I forgot, the NACS connector is more or less self-aligning if you get it in the right general orientation, whereas CCS is pretty particular.

Post reply on HN