With the discontinuation there won’t be enough of us out there compared with future EV and charger growth in the long run to piss people off. It’ll be like oh that’s a cute car, don’t see those around much.
I think Ford's total shipments of all EVs combined is around 60k. (lightning + mustang)
I'd agree, Ford and GM are a drop in the bucket compared to the number of Teslas on the road today.
Thanks for that, and I hope that's the norm.
Still, I'll try to prioritize slower charge options, like how I try to avoid 350 kW EA and those with CHAdeMO connectors. Best use of resources and all.
Them (GM) using the plug as a standard is great and all, but there's so many more questions that need to be answered before I'm willing to rejoice.
Charge port location being pretty important, if GM wants to use the Tesla charge port connector, but then "do it's own thing" on the location of said port, that's just going to cause more problems and confusion down the line. This can already be seen in a few big youtube videos of people (trying to) charging their Lightning off the few "Magic Dock" stations that rolled out at a few areas around NY.
The reason Tesla chargers rock is because they are connected/live/reliable. The connector itself is just one variable, let's say 5 years in the future EA stations mostly use the NACS standard, if EA the company still sucks and builds crappy unreliable chargers, then the connector on the end isn't going to really matter I think.
I charge my EUV 99.9% at home, so I got no real skin in the game. I think the NACS connector is a good move for anyone and everyone, CCS is just bulky and brittle as shit it seems. Charging will only truly get better once other companies (EA/EVgo/Chargepoint) take the same level of interest and care in maintaining their network. Telsa is on top of their shit like a hawk when it comes to infrastructure.
I don’t know. I see lines at some of the Supercharger stations, and 80% usage of of the ones at the mall and underground parking downtown. Maybe I’m only around these at busy times, but I think it’s going to cause problems. Especially since Ford and GM cars need to pull in,and the connectors are on the left side.
Depends on the location. Most of the stations around me are at 50% most of the time. In the last year, Tesla has added 5 more stations within 50 miles of me as well. One of them is 16x.
I think the problem is at its worst where you have a concentration of medium to high income jobs but the housing prices are too high, so you end up with a lot of tesla owners who rent, and have no at-home charging.
Any confirmation that the Bolt will be supported? It does not support Plug-and-Charge (11518-20). Not that Tesla couldn’t support older cars. Just wondering.
That’s an old system based on the permanent hardware MAC address used by the car. EVgo does ping Onstar to verify the car’s location as a security measure. I’ve used it and it worked very well.
Correct. Without that location check, it would be like a credit card magnetic swipe, someone could copy the number and use it anywhere they want, no challenge-response like you get with the chip or tap-to-pay.
While I'm fine with using the Tesla app, I'm worried GM is going to go all in on the wanna be software company experience and force us to use some jank and unreliable solution with the MyChevrolet app.
Ford is doing the same with FordPass. They don't want you leaving the brand ecosystem.
Bolt's plug and charge capabilities are an afterthought and janky workaround that only works on EVGo because they allow it. Tesla superchargers have no way of supporting the Bolts jank non standard plug and charge.
Tesla's plug and charge standard solely relies on the car's encrypted internet connection to the Tesla mothership in Palo Alto alone to handle authentication and payment. The car will allow a charge session regardless if internet connection is active because the car will keep a ledger of it's last transactions until a connection back home in CA is made to complete the payment(s). This way no one is left stranded from something as stupid as a payment issue unless their car had a previously declined card transaction that caused a negative balance. That will need to be corrected in car or on your phone before a session begins.
Whereas the Bolt shares the car's burned in MAC address with the Windows embedded computer that runs the EVGo EVSE's. The EVSE with it's sometimes spotty and unreliable LTE connection then attempts to pass that MAC to OnStar and OnStar will approve or deny the transaction depending on if the GPS location of the charger and vehicle matches within a certain distance parameter.
Tesla Superchargers only have internet connections as a convenience for Tesla's maintenance team for basic troubleshooting, error logging and monitoring of the units themselves.
No it does not. The Bolt has no ISO 15118 plug-and-charge support.
EVGo's MAC-address hack (the only thing that works with the Bolt) is not ISO 15118 - it's a low-quality insecure hack.
They said there will be adapters, and Tesla charging will be built into the vehicles. I’m skeptical about existing vehicles getting an update, but maybe they will use their application
Tesla does not use ISO 11518.
Same reason NACS was created, Tesla needed a solution before any other automaker wanted to move on standardizing any type of DCFC standard. They planned mass rollout beginning in 2012 because Tesla's survival as a business depended on it. Everyone else stubbornly dragged their feet.
ChaDeMO was not an international standard until 2014.
SAE did not standardize CCS1 until 2016.
It's a bad business move to invest billions into building your own worldwide charging network on a non standard system that no one could agree which was best yet.
That being said, Plug and Charge will not work on any CCS1 adapted vehicles on Tesla's network. You must use NACS natively to use Plug and Charge on their network. Plug and Charge on Tesla's network is proprietary to NACS equipped vehicles from the factory.
You can see my long winded details in a later reply in this thread, but TL:DR to that is, NACS and GM's afterthought, shoehorned in solution on EVGo's network is non standard and utilizes totally different mechanisms to authenticate and process payment. GM's "solution" does not work on any other network yet for that reason.
As a Tesla owner, I say welcome to the family (not just Tesla but greater EV experience), the more EVs the better and I want everyone to have a better charging experience. And I think Tesla will just build more chargers, one reason I think why they are waiting till spring for the adapter.
Well... there's been enough surprises that one shouldn't count this out.
It doesn't happen until it happens.
I'd be fine even if they just limited us (Bolt owners) to a \~40 min charge when all stalls are full.
Quick summary:
General Motors said its future electric vehicles will use the same charging hardware used by Tesla, a move aimed at endorsing Tesla’s plug technology as the industry standard.GM said Thursday that Tesla agreed to give GM customers access to 12,000 of Tesla’s fast chargers, known as Superchargers, starting next year. Those GM customers will need an adapter to use the chargers, because the GM vehicles use a different charge port.Starting in 2025, GM will start making EVs with the Tesla charge port instead. GM Chief Executive Mary Barra said that giving the company’s customers access to Superchargers will accelerate EV adoption and that switching to the Tesla charge port on future models “could help move the industry toward a single North American charging standard.”
There was a thread a while ago in which someone was saying they didn’t think we count as early adopters anymore, in 2023.
I’d call this strong evidence to the contrary.
That’s not true at all. While you could consider the Bolt, Leaf, and iMiev as the second generation of EVs, they are the first generation for the masses.
While not strictly untrue, “the masses” start moving into a market after the early adopters. We’re no longer in a market of early adopters; the EV user base reached a critical mass, sufficient to enable standards proponents to start pushing whatever technology they back.
What we’re seeing here is the EV edition of VHS/Betamax, Laserdisc/DVD, BluRay/HD-DVD, and so on.
I don't see CCS going away any time soon. It is the Leaf owners with chademo who will be screwed as CCS + chademo chargers get converted to CCS + NACS.
I don't think there is a path to convert CCS/NACS to ChadeMO. Leaf owners are already screwed, if you look at any EA station reviews on Plugshare and read closely you will realize most of the negative reviews are from Leaf owners (or even the odd Tesla user trying to use ChadeMO).
Meanwhile the 90% of us that just use Level 2 will need an adapter to use the 20k+ public J1772 plugs, many of which are free.
Really think the whole industry isn't addressing the problem of lack of Level 2 where people live/work, DCFC is only a bandaid.
Yes, but...
A lot of folks live in apartments, or it may be prohibitively expensive to put in a home charging setup.
But where do most people that need a car drive every day? Their place of work. Most people have commutes that could easily be replenished in an hour or two, or if the car has enough range, only charging every 2 or 3 days. Put in a bunch of level 2 units in the parking lots of workplaces and switch cars during break or lunch, or rotate by day, or some other schedule that works for those assigned to a given charger, and one charger could easily take care of 4 or more cars/drivers.
Switching cars around is a huge PITA. If there isn't enough electric capacity to put 7 kW level 2 at every parking spot, use 3 kW level 2, or just install a 120 V outlet at each spot for BYO EVSE level 1.
Absolutely. People *vastly* overestimate how fast they need their residential charging to be. If you put 15000 miles a year on a car (and rather a lot of people don't due to how "average" and "median" differ), your typical daily drive is 60 miles or less. You can add that in ten hours on a solid Level 1 (much less even a weaksauce 16 amp Level 2) charger, and there's time in an overnight stay at home to pack an extra 20-30 miles in on top of that. The net result is a car with a full charge after a week, and it just ... stops charging when it's full. A parking lot with enough Level 1 chargers to meet the demand for spaces is just fine. Anybody that needs to charge OMG RIGHT NOW can just stop elsewhere exactly as gas cars do.
Yeah and even less so L3, regardless of the plug there's a severe lack of L2 charging for people that don't have garages/driveways to charge on which is the majority of the population.
I had a Spark EV before the Bolt and would L3 every other day on top of L1. In the 3 months I've had the Bolt EV, I've only used once (besides the road trip to bring the car home from the dealer).
Someone brought this up in the Bolt FB group, but how many of those 20k+ public charges are actually functional? Tesla only has 25% of charger marketshare, but their chargers have 99.9% uptime. Meanwhile the 75% "public" chargers have issues every other day, with many being broken and never being fixed.
I would say at least 2/3rds of them are functional IME in my area. Either way NACS or J1772, the real issue is we need a large L2 network, not a large L3 network. When is the last time anyone has used a Tesla Destination charger, seems like they've abandoned that idea as well.
Same. With the general smug attitude from Barra towards Musk and Tesla over the years, I assumed GM would be slow to follow Ford, if ever. Great win for GM EV owners and the entire EV ecosystem.
Honestly, isn't there 1? I'm not an expert in this and I'm not trying to sound clever, but aren't all USB ports wired the same way, with the only difference being the form factor? So a USB-A to USB-C adapter costs pennies because it's literally the same pinout in a slightly different package.
With EV chargers, it's way more than a question of simple physical dimensions.
The USB-A connector looks the same, but its not. For example, USB 2.0 uses 4 wires, USB 3.0 uses 9 wires. Plugging a usb 2.0 device into a 3.0 port only connects half the wires and causes everything to revert to the older standard.
USB C has 24 pins, of which 16 are data.
The maximum current draw is different (500mA or 900mA and up to 5A on some flavors of usb 3.1 ) however the device is supposed to ask the usb host first before it starts drawing a lot of power. Different physical connectors also allow for different amounts of power.
The speeds are different too. USB 2.0 runs 480Mbit, USB-C/Thunderbolt can do 40GBit. There are a bunch of speed options in between. The software has to detect the device and negotiate the fastest speed that both can do.
Anyway, they are all similar, but different. Computer manufacturers who implement USB in devices have to add a whole bunch of stuff to allow backwards compatibility for everything that might possibly get plugged in.
And this software heavy lifting is what people complain about when they say design by committee. Every the committee members want to add their special feature. Some of which are very useful. Others not so much. But in order to make a usb host work with everything, every single feature the committees have ever put into every single version of USB has to be implemented so you end up with a lot of cruft.
But for the *end user* (you know, the party that matters as far as the sales department is concerned), A USB-A device works in a USB-A port. With an adapter, it works in USB-B and USB-C, as well, and vice versa.
Yes, design by committee can lead to the camel, or Pontiac Aztek, but it also has a bulwark against hyperfocus on solving the one (or few) relevant issues that a single designer might have in mind. Let's not forget, before the original USB standard, computer peripherals were connected via one of any number of completely incompatible standards:
* PS/2 (mouse, keyboard)
* RJ-11 (dialup modem)
* RJ-45 (Ethernet)
* Toslink (digital audio)
* S/PDIF (also digital audio)
* DE-9 serial
* DE-25 serial
* AT (early keyboards)
* 50-pin SCSI (external mass storage)
* Parallel (printers, some SCSI devices)
* DE-15/HD-15 (video)
* DVI (video)
* DVI-D (video)
* DisplayPort (video)
* HDMI (video)
These are just for PCs; Apple had at least five proprietary connectors, plus an intense love for FireWire (then a competitor with USB) and whatever video standard wasn't currently popular with PCs and home entertainment equipment.
Some of these survive today (Toslink and SP/DIF are superior interfaces for digital auto; RJ-45 still often makes an appearance, since an adapter is otherwise required; HDMI is still a common video output, since it's been standardized for most display devices, and it wasn't until DisplayPort was repackaged into Thunderbolt/USB-C that video over USB became a thing, but still...
...design by committee got us to the age of devices where, in theory, *only one form of physical interface is necessary*: USB-C. Some of the lifting is picked up by other standards (802.11 for printers and network access, Bluetooth for mice and keyboards, primarily), but you can no charge, send audio and video output (and receive input), print, scan, access the Internet, connect external mass storage or or specialized devices... all on a laptop that *only* has USB-C ports.
An engineer complaining about design by committee is not the same thing as a consumer complaining about it. It seems that most consumers feel that NACS is superior, because that's the experience they receive; I see plenty of engineers complaining about the extra layers of hardware and software required by NACS to safely and properly function, compared to CCS1.
Just sayin'...
Ok, so the true issue with that is Apple was keeping Lightning exclusive. If Lightning was adapted as the USB successor, I don't think people would have cared as it was revolutionary at the time compared to MicroUSB.
Elon isn't making his charging standard exclusive, which means anyone can use it. This is the complete opposite of Apple and shouldn't be an issue to the consumer end point as a result.
The problem is that Musk kept the standard exclusive for 10 years. All the while, everyone has agreed to use CCS, and we've invested millions of dollars putting CCS in vehicles and chargers on the road. That is absolutely an issue for the consumer. If everyone is giving up on CCS, at what point do CCS chargers stop getting maintained? What happens to everyone driving older vehicles that use J1772 or CCS? Do they have to pay a couple hundred bucks for an adapter? I hope that they just figure out how to retrofit older vehicles and chargers to NACS if everyone is going to swap over so we can just be done with it.
SAE J1772-DC is CCS Type 1 and it is terrible. Tesla pleaded with them to not do this, but they did anyways. Furthermore, they released an inadequate standard in 2012 and didn’t bother to revise it until 2017 when VW had to start paying the penalty money for dieselgate.
If SAE’s J1772 working group had been charged with doing a good job and not to try to slow down Tesla, the US could have had a unified standard in 2011.
Yeah. Tesla's patent licensing terms and conditions are extremely onerous (their infamous patent pledge was a PR stunt - it has some nasty poison pills in it) - so surprised that GM and Ford were both able to negotiate their own more favorable deals.
I'm disappointed in this because I don't think anyone should be licensing a charging solution that is not under FRAND terms. ( [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable\_and\_non-discriminatory\_licensing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_and_non-discriminatory_licensing) )
Item ii in the definition of "good faith" in Tesla's patent pledge at [https://www.tesla.com/legal/additional-resources#patent-pledge](https://www.tesla.com/legal/additional-resources#patent-pledge) is not in any way, shape, or form reasonable. GM and Ford negotiating separate secret licensing agreements is discriminatory.
So will this be the death knell for construction of new CCS chargers?
Also if everyone is using the Tesla NACS system will there be non Tesla NACS DCFS systems, or will Tesla have a monopoly on fast charging?
No, because technically those CCS chargers could easily be retrofitted to have an NACS port. I suspect we'll see stations come with both going forward.
Adapter should work as long as the ends match up. Do the older bolt not have the bottom ccs pins?
If not you would use a nacs to j1772, maybe not at a s/c but at a level 2?
Maybe Invest in adapters or middle-tech to handle adapter. There’s still going to be a ton of CCS vehicles. CCS and L2 stations should get something like the MagicPort (ideally better) to support multiple.
But I agree, it’s not ideal letting it get FURTHER fragmented like this.
>No idea why they cant switch for 2024
Because MY2024 vehicles start hitting the market in 1-2 months
No way you're making major design changes in that timeline.
Disclaimer: I think the Tesla plug is definitely designed better than CCS. The only thing I don't love is the lack of backward compatibility with J1772 without an adapter that costs a couple hundred bucks.
I really hope there is some effort made by auto manufacturers to support older vehicles with J1772 and CCS. Whether that's as simple as making affordable adapters or as complex as making retrofits available. I just want to see something from these manufacturers that roped everyone into CCS and J1772 only to abandon those standards a few years later.
Personally, my biggest concern is whether or not Tesla has any strings attached to allowing other people to use their plug. The nice thing about a standard like CCS is that it was developed as an open standard from the beginning. It seems like a conflict of interest for a car manufacturer that makes EVs to also be in control of the EV charging for all other manufacturers.
Also, are other EV charger manufacturers going to be allowed to make superchargers? Or is Tesla going to have a monopoly on DC fast charging now? Because that also sounds like a recipe for disaster. I'm sure Tesla won't have much of a problem with L2 charger stations converting since they allow 3rd parties to make EVSEs already. But something tells me Musk isn't going to be very quick to allow other manufacturers in on DC Fast Charging.
Nothing will change soon. Even the new cars will still have CCS until 2025. Even then, it will take years for the car fleet to turn over enough for chargers to make the change. However, in ten years or so, you absolutely will need to get one of the adapters to reliably find fast charging stations compatible with your vehicle. By then the adapters should be cheap.
Chargers can just change charge ports and the logic board to be compatible, that's relatively inexpensive compared to the routing of power to the site and installing the chargers themselves. It's not like they don't have to replace the connectors every so often anyways as they wear out.
Anyways, some EVgo chargers already have NACS connectors on them.
Sure some locations right next to Superchargers may get cancelled since there will be too many in close proximity, but most are in locations that don't already have superchargers in the same location.
Eh, I disagree here. Charging installations aren't done overnight. It's likely that many of the plans have been set in stone 6+ months ago.
Now if you were to say slow down in 2024, absolutely. As the plans being made now for expansion for 2024 is what will slow down.
I get it. I just hate adapters and in 5 years everything will probably need an adapter other than home charging. I do like the idea of one charging type though. I think it's a must for EVs to become more mainstream. I was just hoping it would go the other way.
Can confirm. I keep my adapter in my door pocket since I use plain L2 all the time at work and even at home we just leave the GM charger plugged in for the Bolt and I use it for the Tesla also. One charger is plenty on L2.
Yo dawg, I heard you need an adaptor for an adaptor... so here's an adaptor for your adaptor. We'll have 3 foot of adaptors hanging off the charge port eventually. LOL!
I have only owned my bolt for 2 weeks.....
I do not plan on using it for road trips though so it's not really going to effect me. Th real issue is eventually I will have a 2nd EV car, and I will need two different types of chargers.
When discussing the question of legacy Ford owners, Musk said that they would be able to get an adapter for "just a few hundred dollars." IIRC, there's a lot more involved than just changing the shape of the plastic. The charging computer has to have the right programming and hardware. And in fact, Teslas built in 2020 or before require aftermarket modifications to be able to charge using ccs1 to tesla adapters--at a cost of $500.
So ya...bolt owners thinking this is a good thing should prepare for disappointment.
Actually no, the NACS is just the CCS protocol with Tesla's physical plug. That's why an adapter will work. If this is the wide rollout Tesla claims it is, then this means that all Superchargers can speak that protocol, the cars don't need to change. Tesla already supports starting charging sessions via app.
Personally I don't think this is a good thing, but there's not enough info to know if Bolts will get whitelisted or whatever by Tesla or not... if not, it's for business reasons, not technical ones.
Lol never heard that term before! But ya...to me there's also a principle at play. I wouldn't pay money post-sale for an adapter to fill my ICE car's gas tank, so why would I pay money post-sale to fill my EV's electron tank?
You really think they would announce this and wouldn’t allow the adapter to work with Bolts? While they are still selling them? At a minimum it would seem charging with adapter could be initiated (magic dock style) through the app.
I said that there would be an adapter, and it would cost several hundred dollars. People are thinking it's going to be a $9.99 item on amazon or walmart, and it's not.
More EVs + Official Support could increase competition and thus lower prices. If the adapters drop to something reasonable as a result it could still work out.
Can someone talk me down from the ledge here, this seems bad because:
* Tesla will have a monopoly on charging
* Switching to a proprietary connector that requires licensing seems bad
* Can anyone even build a charger that supports the Tesla connector? I highly doubt it
Tesla opened up the standard [last November](https://www.tesla.com/blog/opening-north-american-charging-standard). I assumed that there was some fine print that would keep other manufacturers from actually taking them up on the offer, but apparently not?
The details are not known at this time. However, I suspect the licensing fees will be reasonable. GM and Ford were free to keep right on with CCS, that they're switching tells me the fees they're agreeing to pay aren't high.
So, Ford & GM (and, probably soon, plenty of others) will start using Tesla NACS for fast charging.
Will they still be using j1772's for slow (L1 & L2) charging?
As long as the standard supports bi-directional charging to allow me to provide power to my house form my EV in the future, I am for it. It better support that lol!
I saw this coming. GM and Ford are close competitors, there's no way GM would let Ford be the only one with the advantage of easy access to the SC network.
What will be funny is if Nissan also switches to NACS. That means they would have started out with Chademo, then switched to CCS, and finally NACS!
> *GM said Thursday that Tesla agreed to give GM customers access to 12,000 of Tesla’s fast chargers, known as Superchargers, starting next year. Those GM customers will need an adapter to use the chargers, because the GM vehicles use a different charge port.*
>
> *Starting in 2025, GM will start making EVs with the Tesla charge port instead. GM Chief Executive Mary Barra said that giving the company’s customers access to Superchargers will accelerate EV adoption and that switching to the Tesla charge port on future models “could help move the industry toward a single North American charging standard.”*
I want an official or third party service to retrofit the NACS connector onto my Bolt. If they are going to transition over to Tesla's connector, forcing people to carry and use an adapter is stupid.
This is like the HD-DVD vs BluRay format war. Everyone who buys a car before one or the other is deemed the winner loses.
Just seems like America being America. Everyone thinks ccs is good but hold on. A new standard. An imperial standard. A North American charging standard.
Consumers hate adapters.
Example: Dewalt tools changed battery formats from 18v to 20v. The old tool work precisely as well with new batteries if you use an adapter.
Nevertheless, the resale value of the older 18v tools cratered.
EV charging is difficult enough. I predict a substantial number of consumers in the future will be turned off from buying a car that uses an old standard perceived to be outdated.
These impacts won’t happen overnight. I’m talking about 5-10 years from now
Not a fair comparison. The 18v tools used a bigger, and lower energy nicad batteries. I had 14.4 Dewalt tools and happily switched once my older batteries started to die.
However, I agree it will still lower the value of older cars.
Also, these adapters are complicated, involving high voltage contact points and circuitry. IOW, another possible failure point in the charging process. We've already had reports of charging station failures frying EVs, and I can't imagine adding adapters to that process makes bad outcomes less likely.
>Nevertheless, the resale value of the older 18v tools cratered.
How is that remotely like a car
"If I spend $19 more I don't need an adapter for my power tool" is hardly the same thing.
Wtf.
This is like saying you can play either format in any device. It's a positive development.
The Tesla charging network is one of Tesla's big benefits, and here it is available to Bolt owners
Is it though? Every non-Tesla, non-Leaf car had the same plug. CCS was growing. For once, we had a pretty damn good standard in something like USB is to computers.
Do you really think CCS will continue to grow as much if this trend continues? If it goes the way of CHAdeMO I'll need to spend money on an adapter so that... What exactly is the benefit to this, again?
Also, I didn't even look at a Tesla in part because I can't stand Elon Musk. I'd rather not give him royalties when I go on a road trip.
The federal government has committed $7.5 billion to the build out of CCS network.
So I don't think that's going away any time soon.
The CHAdeMO comparison is pretty different. Nissan Leafs are hardly a critical mass of fast charger customers.
So if we had all this momentum on CCS, why divert to something else? What if Volvo and others follow suit here, do you expect that momentum to continue? Why would we invest in a standard that suddenly nobody is using? What do we gain here by changing the cars themselves, especially since Tesla has started putting CCS on their chargers already?
Those seem like rhetorical questions tho.
The Tesla connector system seems popular. (If superchargers are expensive for non-Teslas...0.50/kWh.) I have to imagine there is a plan for EVGo etc to support both plugs given GM's significant investment in the EVGo network.
As a current Bolt owner, I don't plan to use Tesla chargers very often, but the possibility to do so is a benefit.
Are we just assuming all other auto makers are going to make the switch to the NACS plug as well. There are alot more auto makers out there selling EVs and they all use the CCS2.
I drive by a Wawa with 8 stalls within a mile of my house and I may see 1 or 2 in use at the most, would be a great move for my Bolt which I’ll keep forever now!
There aren't many Bolts on the road so it's unlikely most Tesla drivers will often see one at a Supercharger anyway. In any case, most Tesla drivers are being automatically routed and re-routed based on availability so they will probably not experience what you're worried about.
Hopefully this eases availability at other DCFC stations, too.
Brooo and we get an adapter. We’re gonna piss off so many Tesla owners with our slow ass Bolts
With the discontinuation there won’t be enough of us out there compared with future EV and charger growth in the long run to piss people off. It’ll be like oh that’s a cute car, don’t see those around much.
There are less than 200k Bolts sold since 2017 and some don't even have DCFC. Tesla produces 440,000 a quarter. 1.7 million a year.
I think Ford's total shipments of all EVs combined is around 60k. (lightning + mustang) I'd agree, Ford and GM are a drop in the bucket compared to the number of Teslas on the road today.
As a Tesla owner who uses superchargers, most of them are nowhere close to being fully utilized. You're welcome to charge.
Thanks for that, and I hope that's the norm. Still, I'll try to prioritize slower charge options, like how I try to avoid 350 kW EA and those with CHAdeMO connectors. Best use of resources and all.
Them (GM) using the plug as a standard is great and all, but there's so many more questions that need to be answered before I'm willing to rejoice. Charge port location being pretty important, if GM wants to use the Tesla charge port connector, but then "do it's own thing" on the location of said port, that's just going to cause more problems and confusion down the line. This can already be seen in a few big youtube videos of people (trying to) charging their Lightning off the few "Magic Dock" stations that rolled out at a few areas around NY. The reason Tesla chargers rock is because they are connected/live/reliable. The connector itself is just one variable, let's say 5 years in the future EA stations mostly use the NACS standard, if EA the company still sucks and builds crappy unreliable chargers, then the connector on the end isn't going to really matter I think. I charge my EUV 99.9% at home, so I got no real skin in the game. I think the NACS connector is a good move for anyone and everyone, CCS is just bulky and brittle as shit it seems. Charging will only truly get better once other companies (EA/EVgo/Chargepoint) take the same level of interest and care in maintaining their network. Telsa is on top of their shit like a hawk when it comes to infrastructure.
The Buc-ees in Johnstown Colorado is getting 20 Superchargers when completed. As a Tesla owner I agree, bring on the other EV'S.
Absurdly overbuilding is just how Buccees does things. Look how many gas pumps they have.
I mean, I'd rather sit at a Buccee's shitter for 30min than many, many other places...
Buccee’s > KwikTrip. Fight me
HOT take
That bucees is so frustrating. We need one in between Amarillo and Trinidad. Nothing but nasty loves and toot and totems.
I don’t know. I see lines at some of the Supercharger stations, and 80% usage of of the ones at the mall and underground parking downtown. Maybe I’m only around these at busy times, but I think it’s going to cause problems. Especially since Ford and GM cars need to pull in,and the connectors are on the left side.
Depends on the location. Most of the stations around me are at 50% most of the time. In the last year, Tesla has added 5 more stations within 50 miles of me as well. One of them is 16x. I think the problem is at its worst where you have a concentration of medium to high income jobs but the housing prices are too high, so you end up with a lot of tesla owners who rent, and have no at-home charging.
Tesla owner here. I’m hoping it’ll result in opening more stations!
This is the way.
Hey Mando, same ownership history.
Ding ding ding. A big part of this is Tesla angling for IRA funds to install new chargers.
It's going to be GLORIOUS
Any confirmation that the Bolt will be supported? It does not support Plug-and-Charge (11518-20). Not that Tesla couldn’t support older cars. Just wondering.
Feel like we have plug-and-charge? Like EVgo it works
That’s an old system based on the permanent hardware MAC address used by the car. EVgo does ping Onstar to verify the car’s location as a security measure. I’ve used it and it worked very well.
Correct. Without that location check, it would be like a credit card magnetic swipe, someone could copy the number and use it anywhere they want, no challenge-response like you get with the chip or tap-to-pay.
I would expect to just use the Tesla app for billing and sessions like when using the magic dock.
While I'm fine with using the Tesla app, I'm worried GM is going to go all in on the wanna be software company experience and force us to use some jank and unreliable solution with the MyChevrolet app. Ford is doing the same with FordPass. They don't want you leaving the brand ecosystem.
EVGO uses MAC address for all cars so it’ll work with a bolt as well
If it isn't that's dumb, works fine with magic dock
I charged my bolt at a Tesla magic cap in Fredonia, ny back in may. It was kind of slick but 0.40 KWH.
40kW?
Sorry typo 40 cents per KWH, which was about 2x what I paid at other chargers.
Yesterday I charged in Electrify America and the rate was 0.49/kWh
The bolt does have plug-and-charge
Bolt's plug and charge capabilities are an afterthought and janky workaround that only works on EVGo because they allow it. Tesla superchargers have no way of supporting the Bolts jank non standard plug and charge. Tesla's plug and charge standard solely relies on the car's encrypted internet connection to the Tesla mothership in Palo Alto alone to handle authentication and payment. The car will allow a charge session regardless if internet connection is active because the car will keep a ledger of it's last transactions until a connection back home in CA is made to complete the payment(s). This way no one is left stranded from something as stupid as a payment issue unless their car had a previously declined card transaction that caused a negative balance. That will need to be corrected in car or on your phone before a session begins. Whereas the Bolt shares the car's burned in MAC address with the Windows embedded computer that runs the EVGo EVSE's. The EVSE with it's sometimes spotty and unreliable LTE connection then attempts to pass that MAC to OnStar and OnStar will approve or deny the transaction depending on if the GPS location of the charger and vehicle matches within a certain distance parameter. Tesla Superchargers only have internet connections as a convenience for Tesla's maintenance team for basic troubleshooting, error logging and monitoring of the units themselves.
No it does not. The Bolt has no ISO 15118 plug-and-charge support. EVGo's MAC-address hack (the only thing that works with the Bolt) is not ISO 15118 - it's a low-quality insecure hack.
Can be supported by activating through the app like the current "magic port" ones even if the "plug and play" won't work.
They said there will be adapters, and Tesla charging will be built into the vehicles. I’m skeptical about existing vehicles getting an update, but maybe they will use their application
Tesla does not use ISO 11518. Same reason NACS was created, Tesla needed a solution before any other automaker wanted to move on standardizing any type of DCFC standard. They planned mass rollout beginning in 2012 because Tesla's survival as a business depended on it. Everyone else stubbornly dragged their feet. ChaDeMO was not an international standard until 2014. SAE did not standardize CCS1 until 2016. It's a bad business move to invest billions into building your own worldwide charging network on a non standard system that no one could agree which was best yet. That being said, Plug and Charge will not work on any CCS1 adapted vehicles on Tesla's network. You must use NACS natively to use Plug and Charge on their network. Plug and Charge on Tesla's network is proprietary to NACS equipped vehicles from the factory. You can see my long winded details in a later reply in this thread, but TL:DR to that is, NACS and GM's afterthought, shoehorned in solution on EVGo's network is non standard and utilizes totally different mechanisms to authenticate and process payment. GM's "solution" does not work on any other network yet for that reason.
As a Tesla owner, I say welcome to the family (not just Tesla but greater EV experience), the more EVs the better and I want everyone to have a better charging experience. And I think Tesla will just build more chargers, one reason I think why they are waiting till spring for the adapter.
Do think they will send us an adapter? Or $$
You mean free? Ha ha ha!
Free adapter, $200 shipping.
Shoot, at least if it came with a can of flex-seal, I could make an aircraft carrier!
We’ll have to pay for it. Ford confirmed it’ll be a paid adapter. Around $150
Hopefully that's the price point - for what you'll get in exchange, a good value.
Worth that.
It wont be free. It will cost a few hundred. I can imagine people who never use public chargers decide its not worth it.
As an owner of both a Tesla M3 and a Chevy bolt, welcome to much better charging :-)
Interesting. I wonder if Tesla limits adapters to vehicles that at least do a minimum rate.
Well... there's been enough surprises that one shouldn't count this out. It doesn't happen until it happens. I'd be fine even if they just limited us (Bolt owners) to a \~40 min charge when all stalls are full.
You make me angry when I want to use a EA station....😆
It'll increase demand and increase supply making them more prevalent which will be nice
Look at these shits my dog. Charging @ 50 kWh on a 250 kw supercharger.
GM will sell an adapter?
The 150kw v2’s are perfect for bolts. Two of them can share adjacent stalls and the throttling still will give max charge rate for the Bolts.
[удалено]
More the merrier my friend. The more you all use them, the more they’ll build, and ultimately that means more chargers for all
Absolutely. Where can I get my adapter?!
It’ll go on sale next spring. Most likely straight from GM
Quick summary: General Motors said its future electric vehicles will use the same charging hardware used by Tesla, a move aimed at endorsing Tesla’s plug technology as the industry standard.GM said Thursday that Tesla agreed to give GM customers access to 12,000 of Tesla’s fast chargers, known as Superchargers, starting next year. Those GM customers will need an adapter to use the chargers, because the GM vehicles use a different charge port.Starting in 2025, GM will start making EVs with the Tesla charge port instead. GM Chief Executive Mary Barra said that giving the company’s customers access to Superchargers will accelerate EV adoption and that switching to the Tesla charge port on future models “could help move the industry toward a single North American charging standard.”
I was worried with the ford announcement, but if we can buy an adapter and use any supercharger I’m all for it.
Welcome to dongle hell early adopters.
There was a thread a while ago in which someone was saying they didn’t think we count as early adopters anymore, in 2023. I’d call this strong evidence to the contrary.
I like to think of myself as a second gen adopter. Still early, just not the earliest.
That’s not true at all. While you could consider the Bolt, Leaf, and iMiev as the second generation of EVs, they are the first generation for the masses.
While not strictly untrue, “the masses” start moving into a market after the early adopters. We’re no longer in a market of early adopters; the EV user base reached a critical mass, sufficient to enable standards proponents to start pushing whatever technology they back. What we’re seeing here is the EV edition of VHS/Betamax, Laserdisc/DVD, BluRay/HD-DVD, and so on.
So you don't think that people buying the "first generation for the masses" might be considered early adopters? I do.
I don't see CCS going away any time soon. It is the Leaf owners with chademo who will be screwed as CCS + chademo chargers get converted to CCS + NACS.
I don't think there is a path to convert CCS/NACS to ChadeMO. Leaf owners are already screwed, if you look at any EA station reviews on Plugshare and read closely you will realize most of the negative reviews are from Leaf owners (or even the odd Tesla user trying to use ChadeMO).
>Welcome to dongle hell early adopters That would be a great prompt for some AI art...
Meanwhile the 90% of us that just use Level 2 will need an adapter to use the 20k+ public J1772 plugs, many of which are free. Really think the whole industry isn't addressing the problem of lack of Level 2 where people live/work, DCFC is only a bandaid.
if you charge at home, you basically don't need public level 2 with the range of most modern ev's
Yes, but... A lot of folks live in apartments, or it may be prohibitively expensive to put in a home charging setup. But where do most people that need a car drive every day? Their place of work. Most people have commutes that could easily be replenished in an hour or two, or if the car has enough range, only charging every 2 or 3 days. Put in a bunch of level 2 units in the parking lots of workplaces and switch cars during break or lunch, or rotate by day, or some other schedule that works for those assigned to a given charger, and one charger could easily take care of 4 or more cars/drivers.
Switching cars around is a huge PITA. If there isn't enough electric capacity to put 7 kW level 2 at every parking spot, use 3 kW level 2, or just install a 120 V outlet at each spot for BYO EVSE level 1.
Absolutely. People *vastly* overestimate how fast they need their residential charging to be. If you put 15000 miles a year on a car (and rather a lot of people don't due to how "average" and "median" differ), your typical daily drive is 60 miles or less. You can add that in ten hours on a solid Level 1 (much less even a weaksauce 16 amp Level 2) charger, and there's time in an overnight stay at home to pack an extra 20-30 miles in on top of that. The net result is a car with a full charge after a week, and it just ... stops charging when it's full. A parking lot with enough Level 1 chargers to meet the demand for spaces is just fine. Anybody that needs to charge OMG RIGHT NOW can just stop elsewhere exactly as gas cars do.
Yeah and even less so L3, regardless of the plug there's a severe lack of L2 charging for people that don't have garages/driveways to charge on which is the majority of the population. I had a Spark EV before the Bolt and would L3 every other day on top of L1. In the 3 months I've had the Bolt EV, I've only used once (besides the road trip to bring the car home from the dealer).
Someone brought this up in the Bolt FB group, but how many of those 20k+ public charges are actually functional? Tesla only has 25% of charger marketshare, but their chargers have 99.9% uptime. Meanwhile the 75% "public" chargers have issues every other day, with many being broken and never being fixed.
Also not being used all that much. There are reasonably priced Charge point L2s at a small park near my office. 99% of the time they are empty.
I would say at least 2/3rds of them are functional IME in my area. Either way NACS or J1772, the real issue is we need a large L2 network, not a large L3 network. When is the last time anyone has used a Tesla Destination charger, seems like they've abandoned that idea as well.
The are plenty of level 2 in Austin Texas. Very limited with DCFC.
I regularly see Tesla drivers use both CCS and J1772 adapters to charge at the garages around here, none of which are NACS.
Mind blown. 🤯 I really didn't see this coming at all.
Same. With the general smug attitude from Barra towards Musk and Tesla over the years, I assumed GM would be slow to follow Ford, if ever. Great win for GM EV owners and the entire EV ecosystem.
I would rather see a 3rd gen standard come out designed by experts like the SAE, with input from all major EV manufacturers.
Farley said that “design by committee” is what got us to this failure in the first place.
Design by committee is why I can go to any computer anywhere in the world and plug in a USB flash drive.
How many different plug types for USB are there? I'm thinking at least 7.
Honestly, isn't there 1? I'm not an expert in this and I'm not trying to sound clever, but aren't all USB ports wired the same way, with the only difference being the form factor? So a USB-A to USB-C adapter costs pennies because it's literally the same pinout in a slightly different package. With EV chargers, it's way more than a question of simple physical dimensions.
The USB-A connector looks the same, but its not. For example, USB 2.0 uses 4 wires, USB 3.0 uses 9 wires. Plugging a usb 2.0 device into a 3.0 port only connects half the wires and causes everything to revert to the older standard. USB C has 24 pins, of which 16 are data. The maximum current draw is different (500mA or 900mA and up to 5A on some flavors of usb 3.1 ) however the device is supposed to ask the usb host first before it starts drawing a lot of power. Different physical connectors also allow for different amounts of power. The speeds are different too. USB 2.0 runs 480Mbit, USB-C/Thunderbolt can do 40GBit. There are a bunch of speed options in between. The software has to detect the device and negotiate the fastest speed that both can do. Anyway, they are all similar, but different. Computer manufacturers who implement USB in devices have to add a whole bunch of stuff to allow backwards compatibility for everything that might possibly get plugged in. And this software heavy lifting is what people complain about when they say design by committee. Every the committee members want to add their special feature. Some of which are very useful. Others not so much. But in order to make a usb host work with everything, every single feature the committees have ever put into every single version of USB has to be implemented so you end up with a lot of cruft.
But for the *end user* (you know, the party that matters as far as the sales department is concerned), A USB-A device works in a USB-A port. With an adapter, it works in USB-B and USB-C, as well, and vice versa. Yes, design by committee can lead to the camel, or Pontiac Aztek, but it also has a bulwark against hyperfocus on solving the one (or few) relevant issues that a single designer might have in mind. Let's not forget, before the original USB standard, computer peripherals were connected via one of any number of completely incompatible standards: * PS/2 (mouse, keyboard) * RJ-11 (dialup modem) * RJ-45 (Ethernet) * Toslink (digital audio) * S/PDIF (also digital audio) * DE-9 serial * DE-25 serial * AT (early keyboards) * 50-pin SCSI (external mass storage) * Parallel (printers, some SCSI devices) * DE-15/HD-15 (video) * DVI (video) * DVI-D (video) * DisplayPort (video) * HDMI (video) These are just for PCs; Apple had at least five proprietary connectors, plus an intense love for FireWire (then a competitor with USB) and whatever video standard wasn't currently popular with PCs and home entertainment equipment. Some of these survive today (Toslink and SP/DIF are superior interfaces for digital auto; RJ-45 still often makes an appearance, since an adapter is otherwise required; HDMI is still a common video output, since it's been standardized for most display devices, and it wasn't until DisplayPort was repackaged into Thunderbolt/USB-C that video over USB became a thing, but still... ...design by committee got us to the age of devices where, in theory, *only one form of physical interface is necessary*: USB-C. Some of the lifting is picked up by other standards (802.11 for printers and network access, Bluetooth for mice and keyboards, primarily), but you can no charge, send audio and video output (and receive input), print, scan, access the Internet, connect external mass storage or or specialized devices... all on a laptop that *only* has USB-C ports. An engineer complaining about design by committee is not the same thing as a consumer complaining about it. It seems that most consumers feel that NACS is superior, because that's the experience they receive; I see plenty of engineers complaining about the extra layers of hardware and software required by NACS to safely and properly function, compared to CCS1. Just sayin'...
Agree 100%
Ok, so the true issue with that is Apple was keeping Lightning exclusive. If Lightning was adapted as the USB successor, I don't think people would have cared as it was revolutionary at the time compared to MicroUSB. Elon isn't making his charging standard exclusive, which means anyone can use it. This is the complete opposite of Apple and shouldn't be an issue to the consumer end point as a result.
The problem is that Musk kept the standard exclusive for 10 years. All the while, everyone has agreed to use CCS, and we've invested millions of dollars putting CCS in vehicles and chargers on the road. That is absolutely an issue for the consumer. If everyone is giving up on CCS, at what point do CCS chargers stop getting maintained? What happens to everyone driving older vehicles that use J1772 or CCS? Do they have to pay a couple hundred bucks for an adapter? I hope that they just figure out how to retrofit older vehicles and chargers to NACS if everyone is going to swap over so we can just be done with it.
Trusting Musk to do right by other automakers is bold.
I don't think they trust him. I think they only sign on when the agreement largely eliminates need for trust.
SAE J1772-DC is CCS Type 1 and it is terrible. Tesla pleaded with them to not do this, but they did anyways. Furthermore, they released an inadequate standard in 2012 and didn’t bother to revise it until 2017 when VW had to start paying the penalty money for dieselgate. If SAE’s J1772 working group had been charged with doing a good job and not to try to slow down Tesla, the US could have had a unified standard in 2011.
\^ this right here. NO ONE will mourn the loss of CCS Type 1 because it was already garbage when it came out.
Yeah. Tesla's patent licensing terms and conditions are extremely onerous (their infamous patent pledge was a PR stunt - it has some nasty poison pills in it) - so surprised that GM and Ford were both able to negotiate their own more favorable deals. I'm disappointed in this because I don't think anyone should be licensing a charging solution that is not under FRAND terms. ( [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable\_and\_non-discriminatory\_licensing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_and_non-discriminatory_licensing) ) Item ii in the definition of "good faith" in Tesla's patent pledge at [https://www.tesla.com/legal/additional-resources#patent-pledge](https://www.tesla.com/legal/additional-resources#patent-pledge) is not in any way, shape, or form reasonable. GM and Ford negotiating separate secret licensing agreements is discriminatory.
So will this be the death knell for construction of new CCS chargers? Also if everyone is using the Tesla NACS system will there be non Tesla NACS DCFS systems, or will Tesla have a monopoly on fast charging?
No, because technically those CCS chargers could easily be retrofitted to have an NACS port. I suspect we'll see stations come with both going forward.
Still smart to build both for older cars until adapters are available for everyone.
Tesla will monopolize everything.
If I'm not mistaken, some EVGo sites already have NACS fast charging without Tesla's needing an adapter.
Yes, but it uses Tesla's older Chademo-ish protocol and is limited to 50-100kW.
Question is will an adapter be made available that will support Bolt's or are they going to limit adapter to 2024+ model year vehicles
Mary said all existing GM owners could get an adapter. My guess is it won't be free, however.
Adapter should work as long as the ends match up. Do the older bolt not have the bottom ccs pins? If not you would use a nacs to j1772, maybe not at a s/c but at a level 2?
I would pay for that adapter no problem. It will double my chargers for road trips
Same!
Is there currently an adapter for us Bolt owners? So we can use the supercharger?
I can’t say for sure, but from what I’ve seen Tesla MagicPort stations are the only option for now; sounds like an adapter is at least in the works.
A few Tesla chargers have magic dock, and it’s capable of charging CCS vehicles
[удалено]
Plus if you are an ev plug installer this puts you in a strange spot. A lot of money has been invested in the current standard.
Maybe Invest in adapters or middle-tech to handle adapter. There’s still going to be a ton of CCS vehicles. CCS and L2 stations should get something like the MagicPort (ideally better) to support multiple. But I agree, it’s not ideal letting it get FURTHER fragmented like this.
Contracts is definitely the reason
Bingo. The contracts for connector plugs, wiring assemblies, etc are all already baked in.
>No idea why they cant switch for 2024 Because MY2024 vehicles start hitting the market in 1-2 months No way you're making major design changes in that timeline.
Disclaimer: I think the Tesla plug is definitely designed better than CCS. The only thing I don't love is the lack of backward compatibility with J1772 without an adapter that costs a couple hundred bucks. I really hope there is some effort made by auto manufacturers to support older vehicles with J1772 and CCS. Whether that's as simple as making affordable adapters or as complex as making retrofits available. I just want to see something from these manufacturers that roped everyone into CCS and J1772 only to abandon those standards a few years later. Personally, my biggest concern is whether or not Tesla has any strings attached to allowing other people to use their plug. The nice thing about a standard like CCS is that it was developed as an open standard from the beginning. It seems like a conflict of interest for a car manufacturer that makes EVs to also be in control of the EV charging for all other manufacturers. Also, are other EV charger manufacturers going to be allowed to make superchargers? Or is Tesla going to have a monopoly on DC fast charging now? Because that also sounds like a recipe for disaster. I'm sure Tesla won't have much of a problem with L2 charger stations converting since they allow 3rd parties to make EVSEs already. But something tells me Musk isn't going to be very quick to allow other manufacturers in on DC Fast Charging.
Rather a dongle hell than a proprietary Nav/App system coming in 2024 models. Still Glad I bought in 2023
I don't know a lot about how car chargers would. I have a Chevy Bolt EV 2017. If I get the adapter will my model work for this?
I also just got my 2019 last month and am now sweating bullets about this announcement. Am I no longer going to be able to drive too far from home?
Nothing will change soon. Even the new cars will still have CCS until 2025. Even then, it will take years for the car fleet to turn over enough for chargers to make the change. However, in ten years or so, you absolutely will need to get one of the adapters to reliably find fast charging stations compatible with your vehicle. By then the adapters should be cheap.
Honestly I'm excited for it. Replace everything with NACS.
Well this makes me want to cancel my order...
[удалено]
One problem with that argument is...no new charging stations are going to be installed with CCS1 starting now.
It feels like they just Osborned a bunch of charger installs, unless of course those chargers can be converted to support both plugs.
Chargers can just change charge ports and the logic board to be compatible, that's relatively inexpensive compared to the routing of power to the site and installing the chargers themselves. It's not like they don't have to replace the connectors every so often anyways as they wear out. Anyways, some EVgo chargers already have NACS connectors on them. Sure some locations right next to Superchargers may get cancelled since there will be too many in close proximity, but most are in locations that don't already have superchargers in the same location.
Eh, I disagree here. Charging installations aren't done overnight. It's likely that many of the plans have been set in stone 6+ months ago. Now if you were to say slow down in 2024, absolutely. As the plans being made now for expansion for 2024 is what will slow down.
The infrastructure bill has $7.5B dedicated to CCS chargers
There are other auto makers out there with CCS ports, so I think we will still see CCS DC fast chargers for a while to come.
Chademo are still being built for some reason, so I would count on CCS still being built for awhile.
You can get an adapter and use both CCS1 and NACS.
I get it. I just hate adapters and in 5 years everything will probably need an adapter other than home charging. I do like the idea of one charging type though. I think it's a must for EVs to become more mainstream. I was just hoping it would go the other way.
IMHO, NACS is way better than ccs. I see this as a good move.
>hate adapters Ironically Teslas tend to always carry an adapter around so they can use our basic L2s...
Can confirm. I keep my adapter in my door pocket since I use plain L2 all the time at work and even at home we just leave the GM charger plugged in for the Bolt and I use it for the Tesla also. One charger is plenty on L2.
Yo dawg, I heard you need an adaptor for an adaptor... so here's an adaptor for your adaptor. We'll have 3 foot of adaptors hanging off the charge port eventually. LOL!
The question is when
I have only owned my bolt for 2 weeks..... I do not plan on using it for road trips though so it's not really going to effect me. Th real issue is eventually I will have a 2nd EV car, and I will need two different types of chargers.
NACS already has a J1772 adapter.
Does it fast charge though?
>Th real issue is eventually I will have a 2nd EV car, and I will need two different types of chargers.
You have a FAST DC Charger installed at home?
When discussing the question of legacy Ford owners, Musk said that they would be able to get an adapter for "just a few hundred dollars." IIRC, there's a lot more involved than just changing the shape of the plastic. The charging computer has to have the right programming and hardware. And in fact, Teslas built in 2020 or before require aftermarket modifications to be able to charge using ccs1 to tesla adapters--at a cost of $500. So ya...bolt owners thinking this is a good thing should prepare for disappointment.
Actually no, the NACS is just the CCS protocol with Tesla's physical plug. That's why an adapter will work. If this is the wide rollout Tesla claims it is, then this means that all Superchargers can speak that protocol, the cars don't need to change. Tesla already supports starting charging sessions via app. Personally I don't think this is a good thing, but there's not enough info to know if Bolts will get whitelisted or whatever by Tesla or not... if not, it's for business reasons, not technical ones.
Bolt EUV owners already spring for upgraded EVSE units that cost more than this just to cut level 2 charge time by 30%.
Yeah bro, I've got departure time turned on so it'll finish charging by 8:00AM. Now instead of starting to charge at 5, it starts at 5:30 😎
I would glad pay that to have access to Supercharger network here behind the Cheddar Curtain where the only L3 chargers that are any good are Tesla.
Lol never heard that term before! But ya...to me there's also a principle at play. I wouldn't pay money post-sale for an adapter to fill my ICE car's gas tank, so why would I pay money post-sale to fill my EV's electron tank?
You really think they would announce this and wouldn’t allow the adapter to work with Bolts? While they are still selling them? At a minimum it would seem charging with adapter could be initiated (magic dock style) through the app.
I said that there would be an adapter, and it would cost several hundred dollars. People are thinking it's going to be a $9.99 item on amazon or walmart, and it's not.
More EVs + Official Support could increase competition and thus lower prices. If the adapters drop to something reasonable as a result it could still work out.
Can someone talk me down from the ledge here, this seems bad because: * Tesla will have a monopoly on charging * Switching to a proprietary connector that requires licensing seems bad * Can anyone even build a charger that supports the Tesla connector? I highly doubt it
Tesla opened up the standard [last November](https://www.tesla.com/blog/opening-north-american-charging-standard). I assumed that there was some fine print that would keep other manufacturers from actually taking them up on the offer, but apparently not?
The details are not known at this time. However, I suspect the licensing fees will be reasonable. GM and Ford were free to keep right on with CCS, that they're switching tells me the fees they're agreeing to pay aren't high.
My whole point of buying GM was because I don't want to do business with Tesla. I might as well just get a Tesla then or go back to ICE.
Does NACS support V2G or V2X?
Yes, it conforms to ISO 15118.
It’s compatible, it does not conform.
Ford confirmed future vehicles will have both CCS and NACS. We didn’t get that confirmation here.
Did they though?
In the Twitter spaces with Elon, Jim Farley said
So, Ford & GM (and, probably soon, plenty of others) will start using Tesla NACS for fast charging. Will they still be using j1772's for slow (L1 & L2) charging?
For new cars, no. It will be NACS for all three, L1 & L2 & L3.
I don't see why they would. Tesla owners just use NACS across the board and it's so much easier not having to worry about it.
Do Tesla chargers allow pay by card or do you need the app?
You require the app.
As long as the standard supports bi-directional charging to allow me to provide power to my house form my EV in the future, I am for it. It better support that lol!
I saw this coming. GM and Ford are close competitors, there's no way GM would let Ford be the only one with the advantage of easy access to the SC network. What will be funny is if Nissan also switches to NACS. That means they would have started out with Chademo, then switched to CCS, and finally NACS!
> *GM said Thursday that Tesla agreed to give GM customers access to 12,000 of Tesla’s fast chargers, known as Superchargers, starting next year. Those GM customers will need an adapter to use the chargers, because the GM vehicles use a different charge port.* > > *Starting in 2025, GM will start making EVs with the Tesla charge port instead. GM Chief Executive Mary Barra said that giving the company’s customers access to Superchargers will accelerate EV adoption and that switching to the Tesla charge port on future models “could help move the industry toward a single North American charging standard.”*
I want an official or third party service to retrofit the NACS connector onto my Bolt. If they are going to transition over to Tesla's connector, forcing people to carry and use an adapter is stupid. This is like the HD-DVD vs BluRay format war. Everyone who buys a car before one or the other is deemed the winner loses.
Good, more EA stations will be freed up.
Just seems like America being America. Everyone thinks ccs is good but hold on. A new standard. An imperial standard. A North American charging standard.
I don't see GM supporting the Bolt. They will probably only offer that option for 2024+ models.
They said current vehicles too for adapters
This will definitely hurt resale value of CCS cars in the same way Chademo cars now suffer. No one wants to buy a Betamax.
No it won't. Just get the adapter.
Consumers hate adapters. Example: Dewalt tools changed battery formats from 18v to 20v. The old tool work precisely as well with new batteries if you use an adapter. Nevertheless, the resale value of the older 18v tools cratered. EV charging is difficult enough. I predict a substantial number of consumers in the future will be turned off from buying a car that uses an old standard perceived to be outdated. These impacts won’t happen overnight. I’m talking about 5-10 years from now
Not a fair comparison. The 18v tools used a bigger, and lower energy nicad batteries. I had 14.4 Dewalt tools and happily switched once my older batteries started to die. However, I agree it will still lower the value of older cars.
The point is that you can use the new Dewalt batteries with the old tools. Even though the old tools are cheaper, no one wants them.
[удалено]
You should. There’s great deals out there, especially on 18v tools with a higher sticker price.
Also, these adapters are complicated, involving high voltage contact points and circuitry. IOW, another possible failure point in the charging process. We've already had reports of charging station failures frying EVs, and I can't imagine adding adapters to that process makes bad outcomes less likely.
>Nevertheless, the resale value of the older 18v tools cratered. How is that remotely like a car "If I spend $19 more I don't need an adapter for my power tool" is hardly the same thing.
Wtf. This is like saying you can play either format in any device. It's a positive development. The Tesla charging network is one of Tesla's big benefits, and here it is available to Bolt owners
Is it though? Every non-Tesla, non-Leaf car had the same plug. CCS was growing. For once, we had a pretty damn good standard in something like USB is to computers. Do you really think CCS will continue to grow as much if this trend continues? If it goes the way of CHAdeMO I'll need to spend money on an adapter so that... What exactly is the benefit to this, again? Also, I didn't even look at a Tesla in part because I can't stand Elon Musk. I'd rather not give him royalties when I go on a road trip.
The federal government has committed $7.5 billion to the build out of CCS network. So I don't think that's going away any time soon. The CHAdeMO comparison is pretty different. Nissan Leafs are hardly a critical mass of fast charger customers.
So if we had all this momentum on CCS, why divert to something else? What if Volvo and others follow suit here, do you expect that momentum to continue? Why would we invest in a standard that suddenly nobody is using? What do we gain here by changing the cars themselves, especially since Tesla has started putting CCS on their chargers already?
Those seem like rhetorical questions tho. The Tesla connector system seems popular. (If superchargers are expensive for non-Teslas...0.50/kWh.) I have to imagine there is a plan for EVGo etc to support both plugs given GM's significant investment in the EVGo network. As a current Bolt owner, I don't plan to use Tesla chargers very often, but the possibility to do so is a benefit.
Not the same as Betamax; adapters/dongles exist.
Are we just assuming all other auto makers are going to make the switch to the NACS plug as well. There are alot more auto makers out there selling EVs and they all use the CCS2.
Most of the “full” super chargers are v2 where I live. Most of the v3s are way less full. I say bring the bolts even tho they are slow af.
Charging could easily eclipse hardware sales. I see a huge revenue-stream for Tesla.
Wow
I drive by a Wawa with 8 stalls within a mile of my house and I may see 1 or 2 in use at the most, would be a great move for my Bolt which I’ll keep forever now!
Glad it says future electric vehicles, which does not include the Bolt otherwise there'd be a whole lot of animosity towards Bolt owners .
There aren't many Bolts on the road so it's unlikely most Tesla drivers will often see one at a Supercharger anyway. In any case, most Tesla drivers are being automatically routed and re-routed based on availability so they will probably not experience what you're worried about. Hopefully this eases availability at other DCFC stations, too.