Rivian embraces Tesla's charging standard for EVs

Post by pathartl » Tue, Jun 20, 2023, 9:04 PM UTC

pseudosavant wrote: post #529

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.

If I compare it to USB-based connectors where USB-C never came along. NACS is like a Lightning plug. From a practical/pragmatic perspective, it was clearly the best plug at the time it was created. It solved real user problems. CCS a micro-USB 3.0 plug. Maybe you've never seen one[0], but they are a real thing. Let's take an awful plug (micro USB / J1772) and clumsily add a few more wires on to it to make it both mor…

Post by sebzim4500 » Tue, Jun 20, 2023, 9:05 PM UTC

speed_spread wrote: post #497

sebzim4500 wrote: post #461

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When Tesla sells someone a car for $50k, what do you think is the value of the data on how often they charge it? $20? Surely it can never be a significant revenue stream.

It's not just charging data obviously, it's all the car usage data. Where you go, how fast, with who... And yes, after a few years, the value of that data is worth more than the original profit they made selling the car itself. Its also recurring revenue, they don't even need to sell you a new car to keep making money. There's a reason the Ford CEO declared a few years back that Ford was to become "a data company". T…

Post by cyberax » Tue, Jun 20, 2023, 9:06 PM UTC

sp332 wrote: post #132

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.

NACS doesn't have a standard for vehicle-to-home (or vehicle-to-grid) charging. When they opened up the standard, Tesla said that it was allowed, but they didn't specify any standard way to do it. So it might happen, but there's potential for incompatibilities between car manufacturers and charging systems.

Post by wilg » Tue, Jun 20, 2023, 9:09 PM UTC

sangnoir wrote: post #546

wilg wrote: post #540

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it's possible for NACS to support 800V charging then that is not really a very meaningful advantage of CCS, is it? I think Tesla themselves will eventually switch to 800v at some point. V3 Superchargers have liquid cooled cables, that's why they are thinner than V2 cables. V4 has even crazier liquid cooling, where the conductors are directly immersed in the coolant.

Sure it can support higher voltage in a new revision, but that means currently deployed chargers have an inferior design in that aspect, doesn't it?

Post by bombcar » Tue, Jun 20, 2023, 9:09 PM UTC

philg_jr wrote: post #138

saalweachter wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a little confused by fast charging standards, to be honest. 1MW is 20x the maximum draw of a standard house, and 800x the average draw of a US house. The hydro plant down the road generates 5MW. It just sounds crazy to plan to pull that much power charging a car at a time.

You'll never need that much power at home. Level 2 AC 240V 30-50A is fine for overnight charging. The way Tesla Supercharging works is by using a large bank of batteries for the heavy bursts of power draw (>100kW) during the initial periods of charging when the battery is warm and at a low percent. The batteries at the station are backfilled with less current from the grid in the background during periods of low use.…