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

Opening the North American charging standard

tesla.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 192 posts

Re: Opening the North American charging standard

#161

Post by chroma »

DannyBee wrote: post #116
sneak wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the article: > NACS vehicles outnumber CCS two-to-one, and Tesla's Supercharging network has 60% more NACS posts than all the CCS-equipped networks combined. This suggests to me it’s not Tesla that’s late. If anything is a society-wide EV standard in North America, it’s the Tesla plug.

At one point that number was probably 100% or very close to it. Now it's 60%. It has nowhere to go but now, and is almost certainly dropping fast. The number is also a feint. It's true that NACS outnumbers CCS, but that's because they are only comparing fast-charging spots, which they outnumber. If you included the J1772 part, tesla is outnumbered at this point in the US. Going by ports (because that's what tesla is…

It's great that J1772 is ubiquitous, but it charges too slowly to be useful for road trips. It's meant for "destination charging" such as hotels and homes, where the car will be sitting around for hours. It can't substitute for fast DC charging, so it shouldn't be counted.

Re: Opening the North American charging standard

#162

Post by xxpor »

morio wrote: post #87
xxpor wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ccs1 vs 2 comes down to the fact that the base plug (the ac part) has to be different between the two. Europe supports 3 phase because it's common there, while the NA plug doesn't, because 3 phase is unheard of in residential installations, and it has to support 120 level 1 charging.

Huh? CCS1, CCS2 and NACS are DC. You are probably thinking Type 2 (Europe) which is indeed 3 phase and j1772 (US) which is single phase.

Look up the difference between CCS1 and 2. It's just J1772 vs Type 2. The DC part is the same.

Re: Opening the North American charging standard

#163

Post by advisedwang »

jsmith45 wrote: post #115
advisedwang wrote: post #68

It sounds like folks are assuming this will be free for implementors and license universally with little restriction. Nothing in this press release says it's free. "open" could just mean "open to apply", for example. " We invite charging network operators and vehicle manufacturers to put the Tesla charging connector..." could be read as an invitation to negotiate. I expect licensing terms to be announced, and I bet y…

The specification is posted publicly, with no listed restrictions, so the only method Tesla has of licensing this is via enforcing their patents. While I expect car manufacturers would want to negotiate a custom patent license, others interesting in using the patents (like say EVSE manufacturers) could technically just utilize the Tesla patent pledge. Of course if they do so they cannot later sue Tesla for any form o…

The risk that Tesla sues over patent infringement stands alone of any tit-for-tat infringement. Realistically, it's much more likely Tesla will just sue for $ rather than try and make a counterfeit of an infringer's product. No sane counsel would let their company knowingly and openly infringe on major patents like this.

The spec being open put up on a website does practically nothing. Patent's are public and it'd be trivial to reverse engineer a charging standard anyway.

Re: Opening the North American charging standard

#164

Post by reindeerer »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #22

This is starting to feel like... the XKCD meme about too many standards. Everyone in North America that isn't Tesla: CCS1 Telsa in North America: NACS Everyone including Tesla in Europe: CCS2 Everyone in Japan: CHAdeMO Everyone in China: GB/T

CHAdeMO / GB/T were harmonized into a new connector ( CHAdeMO 3.0 aka ChaoJi )

Re: Opening the North American charging standard

#165

Post by novok »

DannyBee wrote: post #116
sneak wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the article: > NACS vehicles outnumber CCS two-to-one, and Tesla's Supercharging network has 60% more NACS posts than all the CCS-equipped networks combined. This suggests to me it’s not Tesla that’s late. If anything is a society-wide EV standard in North America, it’s the Tesla plug.

At one point that number was probably 100% or very close to it. Now it's 60%. It has nowhere to go but now, and is almost certainly dropping fast. The number is also a feint. It's true that NACS outnumbers CCS, but that's because they are only comparing fast-charging spots, which they outnumber. If you included the J1772 part, tesla is outnumbered at this point in the US. Going by ports (because that's what tesla is…

Those metrics are deceptive, because tesla has consistently working chargers while the other ones tend to be broken at a way higher rate.

Re: Opening the North American charging standard

#166

Post by ip26 »

matthewdgreen wrote: post #90
InTheArena wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are all tiny in comparison... The vast majority of EVs in the United States use this now, and it's not just historical - Just to emphasis the most popular EV cars in the US today are: Tesla Model Y 60,271 20% 191,451 50.7% 33.2% Tesla Model 3 55,030 67% 156,357 94.5% 27.1% Ford Mustang Mach-E 10,414 – 28,089 49% 4.9% Tesla Model S 9,171 150% 23,464 79.9% 4.1% Chevy Bolt EV/EUV 14,709 226% 22,012 -11.3% 3.8% Hyun…

Cars can last 10 or more years. If you buy a car today you're making a bet that Tesla and its standard will still be dominant over all other car and charger manufacturers in the year 2032+. That is an extraordinarily foolish bet. My bet is that within two years Tesla standardizes on CCS for its US cars (thus getting rid of an annoying upgrade/adapter/retrofit problem) and then what'll be left is the sad minority (AKA…

Since good adapters exist, it's not really a deeply committing bet.

Re: Opening the North American charging standard

#167

Post by plorkyeran »

darknavi wrote: post #45
_joel wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The T.C. video is very thorough and worth a watch for all EV related shennanigans.

That's most T.C. videos I've seen. Often niche topics but I sat* through (and enjoyed) 20 minutes of why an obscure can opener is superior than the mainstream ones.

So far he's mostly been an exception to Gell-Mann Amnesia, too. The videos I've seen from him that are on subjects which I'm knowledgable about haven't been perfect, but the inaccuracies I've noticed have been nitpicks, not major problems. That combined with his willingness to do further research and make an update video when people object to something he said makes me a lot more willing to trust him on the subjects I know nothing about.

Re: Opening the North American charging standard

#168

Post by rootusrootus »

chrisseaton wrote: post #151
rootusrootus wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> technically limited Is it? I can go to a 350kW charger with CCS1. What's the max for a supercharger? 250kW?

Says 1 MW?

2500 amps? I don't think liquid cooling is enough to allow for that.

You are probably thinking of the megawatt charger for the semi, which is different.

A regular V3 supercharger caps out at 250kW. There are rumors that the V4 might get closer to 400kW, but as far as I know those remain rumors. There's also a rumor of an upgrade of V3 superchargers to about 325kW, which would at least be getting close to CCS1.

Re: Opening the North American charging standard

#169

Post by gwbas1c »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #72
ip26 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That really doesn’t explain all of it, J1772 is not really that big. CCS adds a ton of bulk on top of J1772.

J1772 can't carry enough amps through those pins. So it needs two more huge pins in a separate compartment. CCS isn't the absolute smallest way to add two more huge pins, but it's pretty close.

Why keep the J1772 connector? Only the data pins are used. I'm sure there's a way to make a connector that's just the CCS part and fudge the data pins into it.

Then supporting the old cars just happens with a dongle.

Re: Opening the North American charging standard

#170

Post by rootusrootus »

systemvoltage wrote: post #150
rootusrootus wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't say "more adoption" with a serious face and accuse someone else of making a bad faith argument. You are carefully limiting your definition of adoption. It would be just as valid to point out that CCS1 has vastly more adoption, by using manufacturer as the metric.

Jeez. Why are you guys so cynical? I am trying to assume the best of what the PR release says. No wonder this place is becoming toxic. It only raises my own cynisism that folks here are acting in bad faith because it is Tesla or some kind of an ideological trope people have gotten sucked into. The parent comment is frothing with hate and bad faith.

Sorry, I was not intending to be hostile or cynical. But this whole discussion is overflowing with people who think Tesla can do no wrong, and they're not making anything like good faith arguments. It's grating. I should just walk away rather than respond, but... https://xkcd.com/386/
Post reply on HN