Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Rivian embraces Tesla's charging standard for EVs

ev-edition.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 761 posts

Re: Rivian embraces Tesla's charging standard for EVs

#51

Post by satrday »

pathartl wrote: post #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.

Having used both, NACS is more compact, so both the port on the car and the end of the cable are significantly smaller than CCS. The cable itself is also lighter and more "usable" than CCS. At least at the newest V3 superchargers, the NACS cable is so much more flexible and easier to manage.

Munro Live took both connectors apart and did an overview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmjofPpThWU

Re: Rivian embraces Tesla's charging standard for EVs

#53

Post by rblatz »

kozziollek wrote: post #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!…

It’s called Title Case, major words are capitalized and minor words aren’t.

https://apastyle.apa.org/style-grammar-guidelines/capitaliza...

Re: Rivian embraces Tesla's charging standard for EVs

#54

Post by SideburnsOfDoom »

piinbinary wrote: post #34

I wonder if Tesla is repositioning from being a Ford to being an Exxon

Tesla has been the the vertical integration and power supply business for a while now. Or at least has wanted to be. See the Tesla PowerWall and Solar Roof projects.

Re: Rivian embraces Tesla's charging standard for EVs

#55

Post by jancsika »

Would love to hear fast how charging stations will scale in a way that beats the current price and speed of filling up a car with gasoline.

I mean, even in a small town with, say, three gas stations, there are peak times when all the spots are taken. Average fueling time is probably a few minutes.

How to switch that to an all-electric system?

+ build a significantly higher number of fast electric charges than there are gas pumps. But apparently fast charging stations are rather expensive to build, and that's reflected in prices-- they are higher than current gas prices. There's also the significant increase in the time to fuel the vehicle compared to gas, and that's not going to change any time soon.

+ ramp up at-home charging as well as "at-business" charging for things like landscapers/etc. who use a lot of vehicles. But if you do this at scale electricity costs go through the roof and you're back to the same pricing problem as above.

I'm just thinking of this in terms of a kind of soft-realtime system. You've got something like "blocks" of vehicles all of which need to be fueled on deadlines which can generally get met currently. If there's a massive switch to EV I don't see how those deadlines get met without an enormous increase in charging prices. And without massive subsidies there's no way to build the infrastructure needed to meet the deadlines.

(And let's just assume zero risk of a fast-charger monopoly or cartel...)

Re: Rivian embraces Tesla's charging standard for EVs

#57

Post by bryanlarsen »

outlace wrote: post #33
pathartl wrote: post #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.

I don't know if there are any studies on this but the perception amongst EV users that I'm aware of is that NACS is a very reliable system (low rate of charging stall breakdowns) compared to CCS chargers that seem to break down quite frequently. However, it is unclear if this is due to the technology difference between CCS and NACS or if it's just due to the poor implementation of CCS charger infrastructure.

It's both. The latch on CCS1 is particularly prone to breaking, but is responsible for only a small fraction of the CCS1 downtime.

Re: Rivian embraces Tesla's charging standard for EVs

#58

Post by [deleted] »

kozziollek wrote: post #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!…

[deleted]

Re: Rivian embraces Tesla's charging standard for EVs

#59

Post by throw0101c »

pathartl wrote: post #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.

> Technology Connections did a deep dive on CCS and it seems like it's a more flexible connector with a truly open standard.

He did a video on this Connextras channel about this news:

* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjny4u5THpU

While he thinks the Tesla physical connector is probably better, the CCS communications standard is better (AIUI). So once Telsa adopts that, it will probably be a good system.

Also: he's talking about CCS1, and not CCS2, which can do things like handle three-phase power.

Re: Rivian embraces Tesla's charging standard for EVs

#60

Post by amluto »

outlace wrote: post #33
pathartl wrote: post #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.

I don't know if there are any studies on this but the perception amongst EV users that I'm aware of is that NACS is a very reliable system (low rate of charging stall breakdowns) compared to CCS chargers that seem to break down quite frequently. However, it is unclear if this is due to the technology difference between CCS and NACS or if it's just due to the poor implementation of CCS charger infrastructure.

I think it’s incentives. If Tesla chargers break and stay broken, then Tesla owners get mad. (And Tesla chargers seem to break or malfunction with some regularity — they’re not indestructible. But they get fixed, and there are always more than one or two chargers at a site.)

The third party chargers don’t seem to act like they have a reputation to uphold. Also, I’m not convinced they’re even really motivated to have people use their stations.

Post reply on HN