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

91–100 of 761 posts

Re: Rivian embraces Tesla's charging standard for EVs

#91

Post by wlesieutre »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #83
pornel wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Not all Tesla's can speak CCS. Older Teslas need a $400 retrofit to be able to use the Tesla CCS1 adapter. https://shop.tesla.com/en_ca/product/ccs-combo-1-adapter

Not much of a practical problem until some other charging network builds out enough NACS chargers that a Tesla driver would try using anything other than a Supercharger.

Looks like the cutoff for this is vehicles before May 1, 2019.

Re: Rivian embraces Tesla's charging standard for EVs

#92

Post by Brometheus »

pipnonsense wrote: post #42
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 is called Title Case and part of a lot of (American?) news organizations style guides. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_case It confuses me, a non-native English speaker, a lot too. I hate it.

Me too. They should just use the German way.

Nomens are big and other Words are small.

Re: Rivian embraces Tesla's charging standard for EVs

#93

Post by jkestner »

bequanna wrote: post #68
piinbinary wrote: post #34

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

Idk if that is a perfect comparison. Maybe if Tesla starts mining uranium and opens some nuclear plants.

Tesla is building a lithium refinery now. https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/tesla-...

Re: Rivian embraces Tesla's charging standard for EVs

#94

Post by bryanlarsen »

alistairSH wrote: post #87

Is Tesla planning to update Supercharger stations to accommodate non-Tesla vehicles. Charge plug notwithstanding, the placement of Supercharger stands is usually for the left-rear charge port on all current Teslas. The stand location and cable length is a problem for vehicles with different designs. Demonstrated here (particularly the F-150 Lightning)... https://youtu.be/W-oaVLRH-js?t=519

Yes. https://www.theverge.com/2023/4/19/23689247/tesla-v4-superch...

Re: Rivian embraces Tesla's charging standard for EVs

#95

Post by dagmx »

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.

This is anecdotal but:

1. Whenever I’ve been on road trips, Tesla chargers outnumber CCS chargers by at-least 5:1 and are in much more convenient locations

2. Tesla is much better about repairing their chargers. You’ll still find busted ones but because there are so many, it’s easy to go to the next stall. With CCS, there’s often not a next stall at all nearby.

If you watch YouTube review channels in Canada like The Straight Pipes, the number one issue they have with CCS EVs is that they can never find working charging stations.

Re: Rivian embraces Tesla's charging standard for EVs

#96

Post by wlesieutre »

satrday wrote: post #51
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

v4 are the new Superchargers, but they're mostly being installed in Europe where everything has been CCS for ages and Tesla needs the longer cable to support cars with ports in random corners.

Unless all these other manufacturers move their charging ports around in addition to switching connectors, the short cables on all the v3 Supercharger infrastructure is going to be an issue here for a while. If your port is in the wrong spot there's no way to reach without blocking two spaces.

Re: Rivian embraces Tesla's charging standard for EVs

#97

Post by dreamcompiler »

jancsika wrote: post #55

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 a…

Currently the price of energy per mile at a Tesla Supercharger is about 1/3 to 1/2 the equivalent amount of gasoline. If you charge at home it's more like 1/4.

A large fraction (probably more than half) of EV owners charge at home and rarely need a fast charger. Approximately zero ICE owners refuel at home. ICE cars must be refueled at gas stations. Demand for fast chargers will never be as high as demand for gas stations for this reason.

Anybody with $10,000 can install PV panels and charge their EV at home for free forever. Fleet owners with $50,000 can charge their entire fleet for free forever. No impact on the grid with these latter options.

Re: Rivian embraces Tesla's charging standard for EVs

#98

Post by panick21_ »

simondotau wrote: post #73
piinbinary wrote: post #34

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

Despite being one of its most visible operations, the supercharger network is an utterly minuscule part of Tesla's overall business. It's unlikely to ever represent much more than 1% of Tesla's profit. There's never going to be big money in vehicle charging because the vast majority of charging occurs at the owner's premises, and there's no technical impediment stopping the remainder from being a highly competitive i…

The impediment is that it takes a huge amount of technical knowledge and execution, plus a huge amount of capital, plus the ability to operate a huge service and maintenance team.

If there is already a very large first rate infrastructure, then replicating that is very difficult.

Your statement sounds to me like 'trains are technically easy' there is not reason we can't have highly competitive industry in cargo transport from Chicago to New York. But yet there is only one company really operating that infrastructure.

Charging is not as extreme of a case as trains, but putting in huge capital investment for minimal profit just doesn't make a lot of sense.

We can see this today, EA is losing money. Non Tesla charge companies all lose money.

Re: Rivian embraces Tesla's charging standard for EVs

#99

Post by Pyramus »

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!…

Here we go again: HN user educates experts from different domain about said domain.

Why not say "I prefer X" instead of "you are too stupid to do X"?

Which might be a legit point and could lead to an interesting conversation...

Re: Rivian embraces Tesla's charging standard for EVs

#100

Post by toomuchtodo »

enragedcacti wrote: post #31
toomuchtodo wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who else is going to invest in a fast DC network? The closest competitor was Electrify America, and they can't make the economics work. Tesla made it work by subsidizing their $1B+ global fast DC charging network cost out of robust vehicle margins. Most EV users will charge at home, some at their place of work and businesses, with fast DC charging filling the remaining gap (people who can't charge at home or people o…

> Tesla made it work by subsidizing their $1B+ global fast DC charging network cost out of robust vehicle margins. VW is doing the same with EA (although with more vehicles and lower margins). I don't know the specifics and I'm sure they would love for every stall to be full but I wouldn't be surprised if they had no expectation of making a profit at this point or even in the next five years. Honestly I think they ha…

VW was required to fund Electrify America ($2B) as part of their Diselgate settlement with the US goverment, and they were prohibited from branding them as VW as part of the deal (hence the EA brand). EA has tried to get additional funding with not so great results.

Might be able to salvage the network if they add or swap out for NACS plugs (opening up to the mass market EVs), but if they can't make the unit economics work and increase utilization, those EA stations are going to end up abandoned with the enterprise shuttering.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/10/vws-2-billion-penalty-for-di...

https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/electrify-america

Post reply on HN