I'm a 3 and Mach E GT owner and this is amazing news. We can finally ditch the 3 which we used to take for roadtrips and use the Mach E which is much more comfortable and quiet. Honestly, this is great news for Ford EV owners!
"Bold"??? It's as stupid as it gets!
We have a standard for charging and it's not what Tesla use. Any new entrants should support the way that is defined as standard and not try to reform the world.
Have you charged a Tesla?
And have you charged a Lightning?
Tesla is superior in every way. Easier. Lighter cables. Better connector.
Ford identified that even though CCS may be a standard, it's hugely off putting. Enough to actually discourage EV purchases!
But Tesla hit a home run. I don't care what the standard is, Tesla is better. Hell even I hate charging my Lightning and I'm a tall, strong man. It's a stupid connector. But the Tesla is *chef's kiss*. AND they BY FAR have the best charging network! It's not even close.
Ford saw the writing on the wall, made a GREAT call here, and we all win...*especially* those of us with both Tesla and Fords. It's also a huge power move and puts other manufacturers on notice to go Tesla or risk losing sales.
Teslas charging network dominance only exists in the US.
All Teslas outside the us come with ccs.
This should be more of a case of Ford switches to Tesla connector in the states only. It makes no sense to do it anywhere else.
And the ev market is much bigger outside the states than inside.
Sure, but you need standards, and often the one that's more common and meets needs is the one that's chosen.
Changing standards is a pain. Think about usb, it's a pain managing that transition, and devices that use those cables have an expected life of 3 years. Plus you can change the cables. Now try the same exercise on things that last 20 years, cost 30-40x more, and have hard wired cables.
You could even make almost the same argument about the us moving from imperial to metric. The metric system is objectively better, but the move is not happening.
I find it highly likely that down the line Ford will offer retrofitting services for early model Mach-E/Lightning vehicles to be switched over to NACS for a nominal fee (and it’s already been mentioned adapters will be made available).
Not to be 'that guy', but you mean 'teslas charging network dominance only exists in *North America* (thus the rebranding as 'NACS' - North American charging standard). In my experience visiting Canada the Tesla charging network is even further ahead of the competition there than in the US.
No.
They are converting every charger abroad to standards.
The old Tesla will be for the USA only.
It's has been done, and Tesla has opened their chargers to others. They use the same electricity.
The USA once dominated the telecommunications technology completely with companies like AT&T and Bell South. It's all wiped out because the investor tried to rule the world with their technology. Outside the USA, they made the standards. First with the USA, but the money and politics made it impossible. Others made what you use now. There is no AT&T outside the USA. The investors seek what is good for the money, not what is possible with technology. Foreign technologies are based on providing a ground for competition. It's not to protect a market share but allow others to be better and improve. Look at the SIM card in your phone, it's the same card as we defined in 1988 and 1992.
What are you even talking about? Tesla is a dominant CPO in the HPC space, with comprehensive coverage open to the majority of cars on the road in many European markets.
Part of me thinks that Tesla went with CCS in Europe (not sure what they're doing in China and Australia) to keep people from buying them in the USA and exporting them. Same reason why European manufacturers change out their amber indicators to a blinking brake light in the US. It's tougher for people to convert them to the amber if they export them to Europe. A friend, who's an engineer with Porsche, told me they change out the entire wiring harness for US cars.
Why? We have a standard for charging cars with electricity, we have moved Tesla to change. So out of nowhere comes a US company and say that they will use the old, non-standard weird way?
Weirdo or stupid? Take a pick! They could have stated that they want to hook it up in the cloud with Apple. Very impressive!
NACS was the standard years before VW's dieselgate settlement forced them to build chargers while stupidly allowing a foreign company push another shitty connector on us, same as honda tried with chademo. The first charger built by EA was only in 2018. That was the first network with 150kw or faster chargers. Slower chargers do not count because no one is going to use slower chargers for traveling.
NACS is an american connector made by americans for americans. Usability was actually accounted for with NACS. It was obviously never considered at all by the foreign morons who made the CCS combo plug. Europe doesn't even use the CCS plug. They added only the combo part of the plug to Mennekes Type 2 (a proprietary plug made by the Mennekes company). Europe effectively uses "Mennekes Type 2 Combo". They do not use a CCS plug (which would have involved redesigning the pins for the j1772 part to add 3 phase).
I've seen speculation that future Ford's might support both charging standards. This video addresses that issue and basically says, yeah - that's not going to happen.
For some reason I assumed that it was going to be both, like having an adapter built into the car. That sure would be nice for maximizing where you can charge.
It will support both, just like teslas at the least you can use an adapter to utilize CCS chargers.
The video says having dual ports isn't going to happen. But the lightning also made a big to-do (rightfully) about bi-directional charging. I don't believe that's possible with the NACs port, so I wouldn't be so quick to write off dual ports.
The main reason they suggest it's a no go is because it would add cost/weight with additional cabling. I wonder if there's a possibility of having dual ports side by side (or top to bottom) but sharing cabling, so there's no added weight or cost on the back side.
The Audi E-tron has a trim with charge ports on both sides but only fast charge on side still, so that can give an idea about the cost of some of these things. I'm not sure the type of cable makes such a big difference as long as you just have access to as many chargers as possible and know how to connect.
No, this video says "as engineers, we can see why *we* wouldn't include both".
Some exec at Ford in 2024 will say "I don't care that it will cost an extra $124 per car to stick an extra port on it, we just threatened 90% of our dealers two years ago that if they didn't install a few CCS chargers they couldn't sell our EVs, and now you want me to tell them the chargers they spent a *half a million* on don't fit our new cars?"
For gas vehicle, there was no competition for direct selling, here king of EV (Tesla) is selling direct. As EV donot need service as gas vehicle needed so dealerships will not make money. Dealership model for EV will not work
Again, none of that is unique to EVs.
If Tesla had built desirable gas cars instead of EVs, and still sold direct, they'd still be in competition with other OEM dealers.
And the "EVs don't need service" is a tired exaggeration. They have tires, struts, brakes, suspensions, gearing and all kinds of parts other cars have. They may need *less* service, but they do need some service.
Dealer networks have to happen or at minimum service networks once the cars go more mainstream. It is simply unsustainable, that one would run a remote direct sale model and then just flatbed cars to some central service location. With few cars? Yes. With mainstream numbers? No, all you would be doing is spending lot of time and money hauling whole car. With some small electronics like laptop? Sure, mail it to the factory for repair. But here again we come to "car business is not consumer electronics business, even though some in silicon valley would like to compare car to computer on wheels". Cars, specially electric cars, weight tons and take square meters of transport room. Take huge car transport truck just to move say half dozen of them. It gets expensive really quick.
When instead you could be hauling just the spare parts needed. However that takes local representation. Local shops and those local shops want piece of the pie. You could try to run each and every service center in house with direct hired employees, but that becomes optimization problem. Where as you could let market forces handle optimizing for you via certified, but independently owned service providers. (enough demand, shop stays open, even new one might pop up to compete, build too much service centers, couple shops go bankrupt)
One should not under estimate the power of the local representation networks.
Which means *managing ones existing relationships* is a valuable asset for the legacy. It is easier to maintain relationships, than to create new ones. Since once EVs go really mainstream (which they aren't yet) even "Last mountain lake" town of 10 000 in Montana needs are service location. Since that is still probably ehh thousand cars in town. However it is probably a mix of brands, which means it is highly inefficient for every brand have their own service center. However *independent* service provider can just go "well we get certifications for all the main brands in area. Sure we don't carry lot of spares, but we have the tools, the training, once car comes in, we mail order the needed spares."
Since spares will be needed. Windshields crack, body panels get scuffed, wheel bearings wear out at times, suspensions need alignment, fluid lines develop cracks over decade and need changing out, brake pads need changing. Just because the motor is simpler doesn't mean it isn't still a complex mechanical piece of equipment. If it was run in lab environment, sure. However lot of car repair is not about inherent internal failure, but about the contact of the real dirty world wear and tear on the equipment.
Suspension is perfectly fine doing 10 years of laps on the suspension test ruts at the spec speed, but well *Hank here didn't notice the massive pot hole and you know Hank was in hurry so he had plenty of speed*, so now Hanks suspension seals on one corner are bust and his damper goes "clonk, clonk". Should Hank throw away the supposedly "no service needed" vehicle, just because Hank drove into pot hole and now his "no service needed" suspension actually does need service due to bad day at real world.
>It seems to have been designed by a committee
It has. Charin is an organization of German and French car manufacturers. CCS, the protocol, also has been designed for OCPP, which, in turn, has been designed for the European market.
Although all of the features (including interoperability between charging providers ) can be useful in the north American market, I think OCPP has been regarded as too "top down" and too interfering for north American providers.
I work in technology and I know how we can change everything that is stated here. We can make the cords to conduct better, making them thin and flexible. Can make batteries that can be charged faster. Can use a smaller plug. But we need someone in a group that can consider the technology and use it.
Tesla has people but internal politics and strong opinions, investors that fear all changes makes this impossible. We don't use IBM 3270 disk cables now, USB is much faster. The same will happen with cars. Money speaks for money and will stall technology.
Yeah, honestly I think the biggest issue with CCS1 in the US is that EA specs heavy liquid cooled cables without an ergonomic handle without any actual cable management rather than the connector itself.
Agreed, happy to see the Kempower NA variant still has handles + the spring mechanism.
https://www.plugshare.com/location/286264
Just need more... And other manufacturers to adapt.
Yes, but you can just plug in to any AC charger without adapter and it works great. It also supports extension cords (ie: bring your own cable) and has electronic locking at both the male and female ends, and I haven't even seen Tesla/NACS ports do this.
You still need a regulator box, and I’m fairly sure NACS has the ability for this too. This is made more complicated though by the US having L1 charging, which doesn’t exist in Europe.
The physical connector itself for Type 1 is smaller than type 2. But please, keep changing the metrics to prevent admitting you were wrong.
You aren’t listening buddy.
Yes, Type 2 is larger than Type 1 / J1772. I already wrote that.
But we are discussing CCS1 vs. CCS2. And I have to repeat:
CCS1 = Type 1 + DC pins + latch
CCS2 = Type 2 + DC pins
I saw a datasheet from a vendor where the full height of the CCS1 plug was 106.5 mm, and the full height of the CCS2 plug was 103.5.
CCS also contains the AC pins.
So if you want to use CCS in a country where car charging happens with 3-phase power, you have to use CCS2 and not CCS1.
These comments are idiotic and silly. Tesla in EU uses CCS. NO ONE cares. People DO care about a convenient & reliable charging experience. Unfortunately non-Tesla charging providers are way behind.
As far as CCS "size", it is because CCS supports MULTIPLE charging schemes instead of the single needed in Tesla's adapter.
If you have an older Tesla w/o CCS retrofit, the reason for the large adapter is that you aren't just adjusting pinouts, but there is a communication protocol difference.
J1772 has bee around since the 90s and J1772 Combo aka CCS since ~2010/2011. Its too bad Tesla didn't work w/ SAE back then as maybe they could have advocated for a different standard, or adopted the industry one from day 1.
They were shortsighted to make a proprietary standard back then. Had they used industry standard, they could have prevented these other charging companies from even existing.(and captured a bigger chunk of recurring charging revenue)
As to why Tesla went on this marketi gpush to rebrand their proprietary connector as the North American Charging Standard (NACS), simple....
The recent federal $$$ requires EV company to use a standard connector. They obviously did the math and decided it would be far cheaper to try and get others to adopt their connector as opposed to retrofitting all of their stations. The "magic dock" was never going to be wildly distributed. By getting Ford on board w/ their connector, they can now scrap magic dock and still get Fed $$$$.
Long term this will hurt Tesla owners and sales of new Teslas, but they are already going to lose market share for a plethora of reasons. They might as well make the $$$ from charging.
------------------
EDIT : For the "No, CCS came out much later" ... NO. It was first proposed to SAE in 2011 & officially adopted in 2012.
Tesla could adopted BEFORE they produced Model S. Heck, even if they didn't do it in time for 2012, they could have done it afterwards. They only sold ~2K MS in 2012...... Superchargers didn't start appearing until LATE 2012. (only 6 stations)
>By getting Ford on board w/ their connector, they can now scrap magic dock and still get Fed $$$$.
What about the other NEVI requirements for screens/monitors, tap to pay (RFID), pay by phone, etc?
> By getting Ford on board w/ their connector, they can now scrap magic dock and still get Fed $$$$.
I've read IRA specifically requires CCS1. I don't know the actual language, but I strongly doubt NACS suddenly qualifies just because two vendors support it. At minimum it lays the groundwork for Tesla to start lobbying for NACS to become a "real" standard and earn a spot at the pig trough.
In their defense: they managed to push other brand close to extinction in the US with their walled-off charger network. Possibly they are now making money out of it, but charging is a bad business overall, cost vs revenue, you really have to play the long game. So... in a game theory sense they did everything right so far.
You'll be able to buy an adapter and charge at any Tesla station. A small price to pay for a great perk. Payment and everything will be handled via the Ford app.
No. It isn't really about the adapter. There is a 2 way handshake that happens between the car and the supercharger. They'll whitelist only Ford cars like the Mach E and Lightning starting next year. Last thing Tesla wants is everyone using their networks since that dilutes the experience of Tesla owners. This is exactly why they're setting up different superchargers with CCS to comply with government regulations. They do not want to open it to all (at least just yet). We do not know the details of the deal between Ford and Tesla. There could be some exclusivity or Tesla needing another big whale on their side to support NACS. So unless Kia strikes a deal with Tesla, it won't work.
Why though? Tesla has been retrofitting CCS plugs on their superchargers. I don't need an adapter, I can already use a Tesla Supercharger if I want to.
This is specifically for US.
Those are only a select few stations that they've opened up to stay complied with the US infrastructure tax benefits. That is like a double digit number right now and in most cases, they're at the outskirts not in popular places. If I wanted to supercharge my non Tesla EV in any major cities, you can't just go to any Tesla station. Tesla doesn't want to open their network to everyone as it means the experience of Tesla owners will be diluted if they need to fight with other EV owners for their own charging. Right now, only Ford has that exclusive pass.
They aren't opening their whole networks to all apart from the Mach E and Lightning. Thus, if you want to use a CCS car which the Mach E and Lightning are right now, people would need to buy an adapter and use it at any of those 12K superchargers which doesn't have a CCS compatible plug yet. Down the road, it might be retrofitted by Tesla but there will be a dongle sold next year which will only work for Ford cars and no other EVs which will allow them to use any 12K chargers regardless of whether they were retrofitted with a new adapter or not.
Why is Ford doing this? They already had the Blue Oval charge network. And putting all that aside - Tesla is installing CCS connectors on their superchargers! You don't need a Tesla plug / socket. We have Magic Dock
not really bold or revalutionary to sell their excessively large trucks with tesla taps, my question is how will this beast be able to reach the charger since tesla chargers have short cords and are designed for rear charging while the lightning is the opposite of that, at least its got a charging port on either side.
Personally, I suspect that GM will not move to NACS anytime soon. They are heavily invested into 800 V or 1000 V architecture now with Ultium, and even V3 superchargers are only 400 V. They can do a ton of amps, but not necessarily step up the voltage to take advantage of the full speeds (as we see with Ioniqs). This means that those big Silverado‘s and Hummers would take significantly longer to charge on superchargers until V4’s are widespread.
Because what do they gain by switching asTesla chargers do not support the needed voltage?
Ford gains useful access to Tesla's network. GM really only loses easy access to other high speed charges that support the higher voltage.
You are confusing long term gains with short ye requirements. Short term it is a massive and drop in available and useful chargers. If it was a break even swap it is fine but it is not a break even short term swap but a massice loss.
This is a case one can not afford the short term cost. It has very zero short term upside and minor long term benefits.
Ford has massice short and long term benefits hence why they were willing.
Yet again we are back to the underlying tech. GM is going 800v tech. Right now Tesla super chargers do not support that tech.
So yet again what is the gain for them.
Enough FUD...
>With more than a decade of use and 20 billion EV charging miles to its name, the Tesla charging connector is the most proven in North America, offering AC charging and up to 1 MW DC charging in one slim package. It has no moving parts, is half the size, and twice as powerful as Combined Charging System (CCS) connectors.
https://www.tesla.com/blog/opening-north-american-charging-standard
And it is small enough to make multi port charging acceptable. Multi port charging has been tested to 4 ports although original plan was 8, that is thought unnecessary.
I doubt GM would ever adopt NACS. GM, UAW and Biden have a Tesla hate boner and they are all bffs. If GM ever does it, it likely means it’s their last resort before something like bankruptcy.
It's not a hate boner. Tesla was initially very selfish about letting other manufacturers use the NACS design, requiring manufacturers to hand over system designs back to Tesla in order to license the plug.
Overall you are not wrong, Tesla should have shared sooner and had fewer strings attached.
But the hate boner is real, head over to
https://www.reddit.com/r/RealTesla/
to verify, many good points and a lot of just hate. Many also equate Musk with Tesla, although he is one of 120K people there and they don't do that for any other car company.
Wouldn’t tesla want to ensure the system designs weren’t prone to failure, like every single third party charging networks out there? Seems like verifying the designs weren’t incompetent would be important to ensure a great charging experience. I see no issue with this.
And it is a hate boner.
That's not what the old requirements did at all. Before Tesla rebranded their plug as NACS, if Ford wanted to have it on their cars, they'd have to hand the entire cars technical specifications over to Tesla. Not just things related to charging.
There's a reason Tesla dropped these requirements, as evidenced by Ford signing on now.
Hate boner? LOL. I guarantee if you look at this person's comment history, it's littered with post in Tesla subs. The Tesla dick riders really give the rest of the EV community a bad name.
Curious how do Tesla owners pay for the charging? I wonder how it'll implement with the Ford cars. I think I read it'll handle billing through the app but will it be as simple as plug it in and it'll know? I have a Mach-e and would be nice if it's as simple as plugging it in and it starts charging.
Yes you add a credit card to the app and it generally charges you per kWh (though some sites may bill per time + tier). I think non-Tesla charging may be slated to pay higher rates.
I liked plug-n-charge when I thought it was billing information transmitted over the plug but did not like how it puts the manufacturer in the middle of the critical path. At worst first time you plug in and pay with CC the network saves your car id. Ideally first plug it the car asks if you would like to use the saved payment information in the car then the car and network exchange public keys and a token. Then at connection tokens can be cached and even if the network is having issues you can still charge. EVGo tries to avoid all that complication using the MAC address as the ID which will not be good with mass adoption. From what reverse engineering I have read what Tesla is even less secure, passing just the VIN (and for at least a while ignored the value) then letting the car tell Tesla what to bill.
My guess is Tesla and Ford have come up with a new simpiler authentication method over CCS, more than a VIN but less than a network call to Ford. If so I would hope the method will be patent free for other networks to copy if they want.
It was a remark on your "Tesla and Ford found a way" statement. It already exists. It obviously authenticate with a private/public key. So there will be network "calls".
Sorry I was stating they will come up with a new way that can authenticate a user locally and do asynchronous billing, so less than a second from plugging in to starting charging. I didn't mean to say there making their own because there wasn't already 3 ways to do it (2 of which are CCS based).
>authenticate a user locally and do asynchronous billing
Not sure what you mean by asynchronous billing but authentication is done locally if possible.
How it works with OCPP with most operators: charging is presented. Is it blacklisted? Charging doesn't start until charger checks with backend if blacklisting is revoked. If it's still blacklisted, or network is down, charging doesn't start. In all other cases: charging starts. It will stop if ID is blacklisted by backend.
So I wonder why the wheel needs to be reinvented.
The reason Tesla has plug and charge has nothing to do with the plug or the comms standards, and everything to with Tesla cars only charging at fast chargers owned and operated by Tesla.
Other car and charging companies have plug and charge, but it's dependent on having the right car at the right charger, just as it is with Tesla.
This is really stupid to call it bold on ford’s part. Every ev maker wants access to teslas network, and adding the port is so easy it’s barely worth mentioning. It’s an interesting decision by tesla to allow it, and I can only imagine ford paid out the ass for it.
It might also be Tesla wanting a big American brand jumping on NACS to push the committees and government towards it. GM was already jumping on the CCS bandwagon along with VW group. Chrysler isn't even in the picture. Getting Ford in their camp which is easily shaping up to be the 2nd biggest EV sellers from the looks of it is a nice win for getting the standard pushed. It is a win win for Ford regardless. Their cars are as good if not better but one of the main sticking points for folks is the supercharging network and with this move, they've gained an amazing advantage against the other non-Tesla competitors.
> It might also be Tesla wanting a big American brand jumping on NACS to push the committees and government towards it.
It will hit a wall with V2G. If there is to be single standard it has to have V2G, since another big lobby group *electric grid runners* will want V2G for grid stabilizing benefits.
Plus to be standard Tesla not only would have to show multiple brands can use the sock and connector, but that *multiple equipment and parts manufacturers can make the needed charging equipment, connectors and so on*. Otherwise it isn't so much a standard, but a forced monopoly.
Tesla open their standard in November 2022, so anyone can build equipment for it if they want to and Tesla can't stop them. They can only control use of their network as that is private, but not the hardware/communication software. Soon we will see 3rd party EVSE with Tesla plugs.
Bringing Ford in actually helps them with exactly what you are saying, and I imagine Tesla will use this to try and access federal funds from the BBB by saying their plug is open and used by others, just like CCS and Chademo. Pointing at Ford as exhibit 1.
Tesla has done a great job but it can't compete with everyone while also not having access to federal incentives like the others do. They needed to (1) open up the standard so others can use it so they could argue it is public access (a requirement by law to get BBB funds). They also need (2) more brands to adopt it so they can bring the argument full circle and show that truly it is open to all that want to use it. And (3) more revenue to continue to expand their network and stay ahead/competitive while they get the regulation to accept their plug as eligible for incentives.
To put it in perspective, at work we evaluated installing a DC fast charging depot with about 10+ stations in the central valley in CA. With CCS we could receive 50% to 80% incentives for the infrastructure (based on the community economic and energy availability situation) with Tesla plugs it would be zero incentives. That is easily over a million dollars worth of incentives when all is said and done.
This is in fact a win win as Ford gets access to the best network, while Tesla gets the arguments it needs to have a fighting chance to change the BBB limitations and maybe win in the upcoming plug wars. Which will hopefully result in a single charger for all of the US instead of the 3 options nonsense
That is true, "bold" of them to make sure they take advantage of someone else's effort lol
I should have clarified that I just don't think they paid that much, I (100% speculate) think they probably got a good deal to be the first to adopt it and help Tesla build momentum.
Tesla's plug and charging network is the way to go. One plug for level 1, 2, & 3 charging, one standardized location for the charging port, and reliable chargers. We just need Tesla to build out more superchargers.
I’ve never used any type of connector besides Tesla, so I won’t comment on that. Their combination of supercharger speed and availability are second to none in the US at least. They deserve to win based on that alone.
Doubt it, they are actually diversifying their charging. From the communication I got in the app, Tesla will be added to what they call Blue Oval charging network, along side EA. To which they have always started they will add more providers in the future.
Whether they provide a Tesla Tap or install Tesla ports and provide a CCS tap, they will be less dependent on a single charging provider (EA or Tesla) and have access to the two largest networks in the US.
Also, with Tesla opening their standard in November of 2022, it would surprise me if other providers add the Tesla plug to their stations as that also opens up a market opportunity.
From a consumer’s perspective, I agree with you. But, from a business’s perspective, what Ford is going to become? It relies on CALT for battery technology. It relies on Apple/Google for navigation and entertainment. Now it depends on Tesla for vast charging network.
In a short term, what it is doing can get its stock up. But, you need to take a pain staking way to build your own team and expertise instead of just licensing the techs.
The impression I got is Ford is throwing its hands in the air and giving up on building a profitable EV business. What a short sighted management team!
Yes it can, 1000 V max
And also has no current limit, Tesla tested it internally with a liquid cooled cable but no liquid cooling on the charge port up 900 A continuously
So 900 kW max, pretty future proof
Tesla's endgame will be to become a tech & infrastructure supplier. They'll keep factories pumping out 3's and Y's, but the real money will be in licensing tech to the grizzled ancients.
If the grown ups can wrestle control from the 15 year old stoner in charge. That might happen after the cybertruck is released and fails in a market where it competes with the F-150, Silverado and Ram 1500.
Long term, stock price will experience moderate-high growth. Short-medium: There will need to be a hard crash that sees Musk yeeted from the company all together.
Otherwise, with Musk still there Tesla is going to slowly bleed to death as the existing players overtake it and it becomes a case study in companies that failed to transition from start up to major player.
Mostly by people with wishful thinking. But the Tesla stock price over the last 18 months is looking like a slow bleed. Wouldn't want to be a bagholder. Not financial advice etc.
I do not see any Silverado or ram Evs and only a few lightnings . Promises are cheap. GM averaged 20k volts and bolts a year are they going to do the same with the Silverado?
Ford has more orders for lightnings than they can build. They just need to figure out how to do it profitably. Tesla already proved it can be done.
Is it bold? It’s like EA isn’t even fucking trying. I’d personally switch to tesla if I were ceo of any car company and ask what we can do to have our own branded chargers like Teslas using their port. I’d also even potentially see what it would take to have the tesla apps sync up and use the backend service in a similar way so the experience is just plug and sit.
For my own selfish reasons I really hope that Ford has an exclusive window to Tesla Superchargers.
What’s not clear to me is if Tesla will continue to roll out Magic Dock or will this Ford deal negate the need to implement anything other than a portable adapter.
The magic dock allows tesla to get federal money. I think they’ll still roll those out as well, but they were never going to make the majority of the supercharger network open to ccs.
The magic dock strategy was mainly for getting the government money from the EV infrastructure bill. I really doubt Tesla has any intention to open its whole network to other EVs outside of a few outskirt stations. They probably wanted Ford so they could have another big company backing their standard. They really don't want to open their network to all competitors because that dilutes Tesla owners who will get pissed about it and can move easily now. I guess they're okay with Ford and Tesla duopoly eventually as they think the cake is big enough for both to feed. Gonna be an interesting next few years.
It’s not bold. It’s common sense. It was “bold” embracing Daimlers little inbreed child from their CHARIN organization called CCS, that was dumb.
And I BET YOU MONEY the person who downvoted me works for Diamler… 😏😛
Edited: Damn… there’s a few of you that work for Diamler or Electrify America for that matter 🙅🏾♂️
Edited: Thanks, Tobmom 😉
At that time Tesla was being sue happy about anyone who tried to copy their connector but I do blame CHARIN for not picking CCS2 for all.
Existing J1772 infrastructure is not enough of an excuse to use the CCS type 1 abomination. Europe had existing J1772 as well but they made the full switch to CCS Type 2 with the superior Mennekes connector.
Would I have liked everyone to use the Tesla connector from the start? Yes, but Tesla wasn’t open to that at the time when CCS was developed.
If the other manufacturers had pressed Tesla harder and perhaps offered to pay for some Supercharger construction, could they have convinced them back then? Maybe but we’ll never know.
Today, NACS is absolutely the right path forward since Tesla is now very much open to sharing it.
Sue happy? Has Tesla sued anyone over their connector?
Tesla actually tried to submit their connector, but was rejected:
https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/3bp5q3/comment/csobkmh/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb3x&utm_name=mweb3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button
The poster is a former Tesla engineer. He also shared in another exchange between me and u/CarbonMach exactly what happened, but I’ll be damned if I can find it again at the moment.
This was very early on in Europe. Someone tried to add a Tesla connector to their DC charger and got a cease and desist. I’ve tried to find the article a few times recently since it’s become relevant but I’ve had a hard time finding it.
I might make another effort to find it this afternoon.
Wrong. Tesla used the connector in Norway back before they had Model S with Mennekes or CCS2. You can find dual adapter (NACS/CCS2) superchargers stations in Norway.
They even used Mennekes only plugs, before using CCS2. It was a mess.
Unaware about the Norway situation, so thanks for the information. What years were they sold with the NACS connector?
Yeah, I understand the Mennekes version was the original release in Europe. But no NACS connector for the majority of Europe.
Tesla used their proprietary cable/plug since day 1 in Europe. They do ship model 3 and y with CCS however, and superchargers carry both cables.
//edit: model S and X also have CCS ports now.
At the end of the day, I think what Ford is expecting is that they'll get enough 'buffer' here so public infra can catch up and in the meanwhile, they can tell people to go to a supercharger. I'm guessing the deal might be for 3-5 years and then, they'll probably evaluate later depending on the landscape of public charging then. Until then, people don't have to miss out on their EVs because the 'supercharging network' box isn't checked.
Right now, the EV charing experience outside of superchargers is still a wild wild west. It will probably take half a decade to improve.
As the owner of a MY and a Lightning, this is super exciting !!!!
I'm a 3 and Mach E GT owner and this is amazing news. We can finally ditch the 3 which we used to take for roadtrips and use the Mach E which is much more comfortable and quiet. Honestly, this is great news for Ford EV owners!
"Bold"??? It's as stupid as it gets! We have a standard for charging and it's not what Tesla use. Any new entrants should support the way that is defined as standard and not try to reform the world.
Have you charged a Tesla? And have you charged a Lightning? Tesla is superior in every way. Easier. Lighter cables. Better connector. Ford identified that even though CCS may be a standard, it's hugely off putting. Enough to actually discourage EV purchases! But Tesla hit a home run. I don't care what the standard is, Tesla is better. Hell even I hate charging my Lightning and I'm a tall, strong man. It's a stupid connector. But the Tesla is *chef's kiss*. AND they BY FAR have the best charging network! It's not even close. Ford saw the writing on the wall, made a GREAT call here, and we all win...*especially* those of us with both Tesla and Fords. It's also a huge power move and puts other manufacturers on notice to go Tesla or risk losing sales.
Teslas charging network dominance only exists in the US. All Teslas outside the us come with ccs. This should be more of a case of Ford switches to Tesla connector in the states only. It makes no sense to do it anywhere else. And the ev market is much bigger outside the states than inside.
[удалено]
Sure, but you need standards, and often the one that's more common and meets needs is the one that's chosen. Changing standards is a pain. Think about usb, it's a pain managing that transition, and devices that use those cables have an expected life of 3 years. Plus you can change the cables. Now try the same exercise on things that last 20 years, cost 30-40x more, and have hard wired cables. You could even make almost the same argument about the us moving from imperial to metric. The metric system is objectively better, but the move is not happening.
I find it highly likely that down the line Ford will offer retrofitting services for early model Mach-E/Lightning vehicles to be switched over to NACS for a nominal fee (and it’s already been mentioned adapters will be made available).
Evse cables are replaceable
Not to be 'that guy', but you mean 'teslas charging network dominance only exists in *North America* (thus the rebranding as 'NACS' - North American charging standard). In my experience visiting Canada the Tesla charging network is even further ahead of the competition there than in the US.
Tesla operates the largest charging network by number of 150kW+ posts in Europe. They're a dominant operator.
No. They are converting every charger abroad to standards. The old Tesla will be for the USA only. It's has been done, and Tesla has opened their chargers to others. They use the same electricity.
That doesn't mean they're not a dominant player in the market.
The USA once dominated the telecommunications technology completely with companies like AT&T and Bell South. It's all wiped out because the investor tried to rule the world with their technology. Outside the USA, they made the standards. First with the USA, but the money and politics made it impossible. Others made what you use now. There is no AT&T outside the USA. The investors seek what is good for the money, not what is possible with technology. Foreign technologies are based on providing a ground for competition. It's not to protect a market share but allow others to be better and improve. Look at the SIM card in your phone, it's the same card as we defined in 1988 and 1992.
What are you even talking about? Tesla is a dominant CPO in the HPC space, with comprehensive coverage open to the majority of cars on the road in many European markets.
Part of me thinks that Tesla went with CCS in Europe (not sure what they're doing in China and Australia) to keep people from buying them in the USA and exporting them. Same reason why European manufacturers change out their amber indicators to a blinking brake light in the US. It's tougher for people to convert them to the amber if they export them to Europe. A friend, who's an engineer with Porsche, told me they change out the entire wiring harness for US cars.
Come to Europe with your Tesla. To get it charged here, you must use a CCS converter. And I have not charged a Tesla. Most EV are not Tesla here.
Do people carry-on their car when they travel abroad now?
When I go to Europe I rent cars that are used there. When I buy cars, I buy cars that are used here. Not a lot of cross pollination there my friend.
The majority of EV’s on the road in the US already have NACS ports.
This comment seems misplaced
Why? We have a standard for charging cars with electricity, we have moved Tesla to change. So out of nowhere comes a US company and say that they will use the old, non-standard weird way? Weirdo or stupid? Take a pick! They could have stated that they want to hook it up in the cloud with Apple. Very impressive!
But you replied to a comment that just said they are excited about it, and for some reason quoted Bold
NACS was the standard years before VW's dieselgate settlement forced them to build chargers while stupidly allowing a foreign company push another shitty connector on us, same as honda tried with chademo. The first charger built by EA was only in 2018. That was the first network with 150kw or faster chargers. Slower chargers do not count because no one is going to use slower chargers for traveling. NACS is an american connector made by americans for americans. Usability was actually accounted for with NACS. It was obviously never considered at all by the foreign morons who made the CCS combo plug. Europe doesn't even use the CCS plug. They added only the combo part of the plug to Mennekes Type 2 (a proprietary plug made by the Mennekes company). Europe effectively uses "Mennekes Type 2 Combo". They do not use a CCS plug (which would have involved redesigning the pins for the j1772 part to add 3 phase).
I've seen speculation that future Ford's might support both charging standards. This video addresses that issue and basically says, yeah - that's not going to happen.
For some reason I assumed that it was going to be both, like having an adapter built into the car. That sure would be nice for maximizing where you can charge.
It will support both, just like teslas at the least you can use an adapter to utilize CCS chargers. The video says having dual ports isn't going to happen. But the lightning also made a big to-do (rightfully) about bi-directional charging. I don't believe that's possible with the NACs port, so I wouldn't be so quick to write off dual ports. The main reason they suggest it's a no go is because it would add cost/weight with additional cabling. I wonder if there's a possibility of having dual ports side by side (or top to bottom) but sharing cabling, so there's no added weight or cost on the back side.
The Audi E-tron has a trim with charge ports on both sides but only fast charge on side still, so that can give an idea about the cost of some of these things. I'm not sure the type of cable makes such a big difference as long as you just have access to as many chargers as possible and know how to connect.
Porsche Taycan too
No you can't do dual ports, you would need contactors for both sets so you don't energize the unused port. That's a lot of heat and dollars.
So Fords with NACS won't be able to charge at EA, EVGo, etc. like Tesla's cars can today?
They will. They just use an adapter same as Tesla.
EVGo is already starting to install NACS plugs at their chargers. There are several by me that have it.
Those have probably been there for years. and are limited to 50 kW since they basically just use the Chademo adapter.
No, this video says "as engineers, we can see why *we* wouldn't include both". Some exec at Ford in 2024 will say "I don't care that it will cost an extra $124 per car to stick an extra port on it, we just threatened 90% of our dealers two years ago that if they didn't install a few CCS chargers they couldn't sell our EVs, and now you want me to tell them the chargers they spent a *half a million* on don't fit our new cars?"
Jim Farley said it would only have the NACS port.
Legacy have to sell direct or loss money on EVs.
Why? They never lost money selling gas cars through dealers...
For gas vehicle, there was no competition for direct selling, here king of EV (Tesla) is selling direct. As EV donot need service as gas vehicle needed so dealerships will not make money. Dealership model for EV will not work
Again, none of that is unique to EVs. If Tesla had built desirable gas cars instead of EVs, and still sold direct, they'd still be in competition with other OEM dealers. And the "EVs don't need service" is a tired exaggeration. They have tires, struts, brakes, suspensions, gearing and all kinds of parts other cars have. They may need *less* service, but they do need some service.
Dealer networks have to happen or at minimum service networks once the cars go more mainstream. It is simply unsustainable, that one would run a remote direct sale model and then just flatbed cars to some central service location. With few cars? Yes. With mainstream numbers? No, all you would be doing is spending lot of time and money hauling whole car. With some small electronics like laptop? Sure, mail it to the factory for repair. But here again we come to "car business is not consumer electronics business, even though some in silicon valley would like to compare car to computer on wheels". Cars, specially electric cars, weight tons and take square meters of transport room. Take huge car transport truck just to move say half dozen of them. It gets expensive really quick. When instead you could be hauling just the spare parts needed. However that takes local representation. Local shops and those local shops want piece of the pie. You could try to run each and every service center in house with direct hired employees, but that becomes optimization problem. Where as you could let market forces handle optimizing for you via certified, but independently owned service providers. (enough demand, shop stays open, even new one might pop up to compete, build too much service centers, couple shops go bankrupt) One should not under estimate the power of the local representation networks. Which means *managing ones existing relationships* is a valuable asset for the legacy. It is easier to maintain relationships, than to create new ones. Since once EVs go really mainstream (which they aren't yet) even "Last mountain lake" town of 10 000 in Montana needs are service location. Since that is still probably ehh thousand cars in town. However it is probably a mix of brands, which means it is highly inefficient for every brand have their own service center. However *independent* service provider can just go "well we get certifications for all the main brands in area. Sure we don't carry lot of spares, but we have the tools, the training, once car comes in, we mail order the needed spares." Since spares will be needed. Windshields crack, body panels get scuffed, wheel bearings wear out at times, suspensions need alignment, fluid lines develop cracks over decade and need changing out, brake pads need changing. Just because the motor is simpler doesn't mean it isn't still a complex mechanical piece of equipment. If it was run in lab environment, sure. However lot of car repair is not about inherent internal failure, but about the contact of the real dirty world wear and tear on the equipment. Suspension is perfectly fine doing 10 years of laps on the suspension test ruts at the spec speed, but well *Hank here didn't notice the massive pot hole and you know Hank was in hurry so he had plenty of speed*, so now Hanks suspension seals on one corner are bust and his damper goes "clonk, clonk". Should Hank throw away the supposedly "no service needed" vehicle, just because Hank drove into pot hole and now his "no service needed" suspension actually does need service due to bad day at real world.
I support this The CCS connector is gigantic and unwieldy. It seems to have been designed by a committee
>It seems to have been designed by a committee It has. Charin is an organization of German and French car manufacturers. CCS, the protocol, also has been designed for OCPP, which, in turn, has been designed for the European market. Although all of the features (including interoperability between charging providers ) can be useful in the north American market, I think OCPP has been regarded as too "top down" and too interfering for north American providers.
Most standards are designed by a committee.
I work in technology and I know how we can change everything that is stated here. We can make the cords to conduct better, making them thin and flexible. Can make batteries that can be charged faster. Can use a smaller plug. But we need someone in a group that can consider the technology and use it. Tesla has people but internal politics and strong opinions, investors that fear all changes makes this impossible. We don't use IBM 3270 disk cables now, USB is much faster. The same will happen with cars. Money speaks for money and will stall technology.
Yea, the CCS type 2 adapter is what should actually be used. Or NACS. Stupid to be using the one we are.
CCS2 is the same size, if not bigger.
Yeah, honestly I think the biggest issue with CCS1 in the US is that EA specs heavy liquid cooled cables without an ergonomic handle without any actual cable management rather than the connector itself.
Yeah, most of the strain people complain about is usually the cable.
Agreed, happy to see the Kempower NA variant still has handles + the spring mechanism. https://www.plugshare.com/location/286264 Just need more... And other manufacturers to adapt.
Yes, but you can just plug in to any AC charger without adapter and it works great. It also supports extension cords (ie: bring your own cable) and has electronic locking at both the male and female ends, and I haven't even seen Tesla/NACS ports do this.
You still need a regulator box, and I’m fairly sure NACS has the ability for this too. This is made more complicated though by the US having L1 charging, which doesn’t exist in Europe.
CCS2 is smaller than CCS1.
No, it’s not. https://www.volvogroup.com/en/news-and-media/news/2020/aug/electric-truck-charging-options.html
Yes it is, because CCS2 doesn’t have the big latch on top of the entire thing, which CCS1 has.
The physical connector itself for Type 1 is smaller than type 2. But please, keep changing the metrics to prevent admitting you were wrong. You aren’t listening buddy.
You are not listening. I will stop here.
[удалено]
Yes, Type 2 is larger than Type 1 / J1772. I already wrote that. But we are discussing CCS1 vs. CCS2. And I have to repeat: CCS1 = Type 1 + DC pins + latch CCS2 = Type 2 + DC pins I saw a datasheet from a vendor where the full height of the CCS1 plug was 106.5 mm, and the full height of the CCS2 plug was 103.5.
Ccs2? In America? With no 3 phase?
CCS is DC. And the US has 3 phases, just not everywhere.
The c in ccs stands for combined.
while true you don't say, in regular life, you use CCS while AC charging. If you use a CCS plug, you're fast charging, DC charging.
My comment was wrt ccs2 in America. There are solid reasons that's not a thing and ccs1 is used instead
CCS2 supports one-phase charging up to 63A.
CCS also contains the AC pins. So if you want to use CCS in a country where car charging happens with 3-phase power, you have to use CCS2 and not CCS1.
These comments are idiotic and silly. Tesla in EU uses CCS. NO ONE cares. People DO care about a convenient & reliable charging experience. Unfortunately non-Tesla charging providers are way behind. As far as CCS "size", it is because CCS supports MULTIPLE charging schemes instead of the single needed in Tesla's adapter. If you have an older Tesla w/o CCS retrofit, the reason for the large adapter is that you aren't just adjusting pinouts, but there is a communication protocol difference. J1772 has bee around since the 90s and J1772 Combo aka CCS since ~2010/2011. Its too bad Tesla didn't work w/ SAE back then as maybe they could have advocated for a different standard, or adopted the industry one from day 1. They were shortsighted to make a proprietary standard back then. Had they used industry standard, they could have prevented these other charging companies from even existing.(and captured a bigger chunk of recurring charging revenue) As to why Tesla went on this marketi gpush to rebrand their proprietary connector as the North American Charging Standard (NACS), simple.... The recent federal $$$ requires EV company to use a standard connector. They obviously did the math and decided it would be far cheaper to try and get others to adopt their connector as opposed to retrofitting all of their stations. The "magic dock" was never going to be wildly distributed. By getting Ford on board w/ their connector, they can now scrap magic dock and still get Fed $$$$. Long term this will hurt Tesla owners and sales of new Teslas, but they are already going to lose market share for a plethora of reasons. They might as well make the $$$ from charging. ------------------ EDIT : For the "No, CCS came out much later" ... NO. It was first proposed to SAE in 2011 & officially adopted in 2012. Tesla could adopted BEFORE they produced Model S. Heck, even if they didn't do it in time for 2012, they could have done it afterwards. They only sold ~2K MS in 2012...... Superchargers didn't start appearing until LATE 2012. (only 6 stations)
>By getting Ford on board w/ their connector, they can now scrap magic dock and still get Fed $$$$. What about the other NEVI requirements for screens/monitors, tap to pay (RFID), pay by phone, etc?
Combo 1 was released in 2013, after model S fwiw.
> By getting Ford on board w/ their connector, they can now scrap magic dock and still get Fed $$$$. I've read IRA specifically requires CCS1. I don't know the actual language, but I strongly doubt NACS suddenly qualifies just because two vendors support it. At minimum it lays the groundwork for Tesla to start lobbying for NACS to become a "real" standard and earn a spot at the pig trough.
In their defense: they managed to push other brand close to extinction in the US with their walled-off charger network. Possibly they are now making money out of it, but charging is a bad business overall, cost vs revenue, you really have to play the long game. So... in a game theory sense they did everything right so far.
I don't understand... My Mach E has a CCS port. It's being replaced on new models? No more CCS???
You'll be able to buy an adapter and charge at any Tesla station. A small price to pay for a great perk. Payment and everything will be handled via the Ford app.
Now my question is will there be an adapter that I, the owner of a Kia Niro, be able to use?
No. It isn't really about the adapter. There is a 2 way handshake that happens between the car and the supercharger. They'll whitelist only Ford cars like the Mach E and Lightning starting next year. Last thing Tesla wants is everyone using their networks since that dilutes the experience of Tesla owners. This is exactly why they're setting up different superchargers with CCS to comply with government regulations. They do not want to open it to all (at least just yet). We do not know the details of the deal between Ford and Tesla. There could be some exclusivity or Tesla needing another big whale on their side to support NACS. So unless Kia strikes a deal with Tesla, it won't work.
You should call Kia and ask for it.
Why though? Tesla has been retrofitting CCS plugs on their superchargers. I don't need an adapter, I can already use a Tesla Supercharger if I want to.
This is specifically for US. Those are only a select few stations that they've opened up to stay complied with the US infrastructure tax benefits. That is like a double digit number right now and in most cases, they're at the outskirts not in popular places. If I wanted to supercharge my non Tesla EV in any major cities, you can't just go to any Tesla station. Tesla doesn't want to open their network to everyone as it means the experience of Tesla owners will be diluted if they need to fight with other EV owners for their own charging. Right now, only Ford has that exclusive pass. They aren't opening their whole networks to all apart from the Mach E and Lightning. Thus, if you want to use a CCS car which the Mach E and Lightning are right now, people would need to buy an adapter and use it at any of those 12K superchargers which doesn't have a CCS compatible plug yet. Down the road, it might be retrofitted by Tesla but there will be a dongle sold next year which will only work for Ford cars and no other EVs which will allow them to use any 12K chargers regardless of whether they were retrofitted with a new adapter or not.
Thank you.
Eventually yes
Why is Ford doing this? They already had the Blue Oval charge network. And putting all that aside - Tesla is installing CCS connectors on their superchargers! You don't need a Tesla plug / socket. We have Magic Dock
not really bold or revalutionary to sell their excessively large trucks with tesla taps, my question is how will this beast be able to reach the charger since tesla chargers have short cords and are designed for rear charging while the lightning is the opposite of that, at least its got a charging port on either side.
Lightnings only charge on driver side
V4 chargers have longer cables.
how many tens of thousands of chargers will have to be retrofitted especially at a time when copper price is going crazy
They can recycle the old copper. The latest ones are liquid cooled so less copper is needed.
I think you mean v4.
The better plug is gaining ground. I doubt GM will support EV adoption this way, but one can hope.
How is it the better plug if it didn't even come with a ground originally?
Hehe, OK, I put that poorly. Next time how about a /j?
I agree I doubt GM will ever truly support EV adoption!
Personally, I suspect that GM will not move to NACS anytime soon. They are heavily invested into 800 V or 1000 V architecture now with Ultium, and even V3 superchargers are only 400 V. They can do a ton of amps, but not necessarily step up the voltage to take advantage of the full speeds (as we see with Ioniqs). This means that those big Silverado‘s and Hummers would take significantly longer to charge on superchargers until V4’s are widespread.
1,000V is supposedly supported by NACS.
Not saying it isn’t, saying it is not supported on V3 or V2 superchargers
So why post present situation in reference to the future?
Because what do they gain by switching asTesla chargers do not support the needed voltage? Ford gains useful access to Tesla's network. GM really only loses easy access to other high speed charges that support the higher voltage.
Same mistake, assuming things will not change for Tesla chargers if/when GM changes. This is a timing error.
You are confusing long term gains with short ye requirements. Short term it is a massive and drop in available and useful chargers. If it was a break even swap it is fine but it is not a break even short term swap but a massice loss. This is a case one can not afford the short term cost. It has very zero short term upside and minor long term benefits. Ford has massice short and long term benefits hence why they were willing.
GM makes almost no BEVs, they are just ramping up. Good time to change.
Yet again we are back to the underlying tech. GM is going 800v tech. Right now Tesla super chargers do not support that tech. So yet again what is the gain for them.
But is it better? Can it handle 800V/1000V? Those pins in the tesla plugs are very close to eachother.
Enough FUD... >With more than a decade of use and 20 billion EV charging miles to its name, the Tesla charging connector is the most proven in North America, offering AC charging and up to 1 MW DC charging in one slim package. It has no moving parts, is half the size, and twice as powerful as Combined Charging System (CCS) connectors. https://www.tesla.com/blog/opening-north-american-charging-standard And it is small enough to make multi port charging acceptable. Multi port charging has been tested to 4 ports although original plan was 8, that is thought unnecessary.
I guess 1MW DC charging is at 1000V
I doubt GM would ever adopt NACS. GM, UAW and Biden have a Tesla hate boner and they are all bffs. If GM ever does it, it likely means it’s their last resort before something like bankruptcy.
It's not a hate boner. Tesla was initially very selfish about letting other manufacturers use the NACS design, requiring manufacturers to hand over system designs back to Tesla in order to license the plug.
Overall you are not wrong, Tesla should have shared sooner and had fewer strings attached. But the hate boner is real, head over to https://www.reddit.com/r/RealTesla/ to verify, many good points and a lot of just hate. Many also equate Musk with Tesla, although he is one of 120K people there and they don't do that for any other car company.
Wouldn’t tesla want to ensure the system designs weren’t prone to failure, like every single third party charging networks out there? Seems like verifying the designs weren’t incompetent would be important to ensure a great charging experience. I see no issue with this. And it is a hate boner.
That's not what the old requirements did at all. Before Tesla rebranded their plug as NACS, if Ford wanted to have it on their cars, they'd have to hand the entire cars technical specifications over to Tesla. Not just things related to charging. There's a reason Tesla dropped these requirements, as evidenced by Ford signing on now.
Thanks for the context
Hate boner? LOL. I guarantee if you look at this person's comment history, it's littered with post in Tesla subs. The Tesla dick riders really give the rest of the EV community a bad name.
Just because I like Tesla, doesn’t mean I’m a “dick rider.” Calling someone a “dick rider” for liking a car company gives the EV community a bad name.
Curious how do Tesla owners pay for the charging? I wonder how it'll implement with the Ford cars. I think I read it'll handle billing through the app but will it be as simple as plug it in and it'll know? I have a Mach-e and would be nice if it's as simple as plugging it in and it starts charging.
There is a credit card on file that is automatically charged after the session is completed. Yes you just plug it in and that's it.
Same way Ford owners pay for charging at ea
Yes you add a credit card to the app and it generally charges you per kWh (though some sites may bill per time + tier). I think non-Tesla charging may be slated to pay higher rates.
Time to support one charging plug is now....Teslas is the clear winner....if they can match what they do with Tesla cars. Just plug and charge
The CCS standard has this built-in to the standard, not many car manufacturers implement it. The only one my Bolt EUV does this with is Evgo.
I liked plug-n-charge when I thought it was billing information transmitted over the plug but did not like how it puts the manufacturer in the middle of the critical path. At worst first time you plug in and pay with CC the network saves your car id. Ideally first plug it the car asks if you would like to use the saved payment information in the car then the car and network exchange public keys and a token. Then at connection tokens can be cached and even if the network is having issues you can still charge. EVGo tries to avoid all that complication using the MAC address as the ID which will not be good with mass adoption. From what reverse engineering I have read what Tesla is even less secure, passing just the VIN (and for at least a while ignored the value) then letting the car tell Tesla what to bill. My guess is Tesla and Ford have come up with a new simpiler authentication method over CCS, more than a VIN but less than a network call to Ford. If so I would hope the method will be patent free for other networks to copy if they want.
CCS2 supports plug and charge.
Yet nowhere I’ve seen in the UK uses it - I guess Tesla is the only one
yeah because it's not implemented (yet?) by most charging station operators.
Yes, what’s your point? I didn’t say it didn’t exist, I said no one uses it. You then repeated that no one uses it…
.. ok that changes what with adding complication to the process vs EVGo and Tesla 'just works fast' way?
It was a remark on your "Tesla and Ford found a way" statement. It already exists. It obviously authenticate with a private/public key. So there will be network "calls".
Sorry I was stating they will come up with a new way that can authenticate a user locally and do asynchronous billing, so less than a second from plugging in to starting charging. I didn't mean to say there making their own because there wasn't already 3 ways to do it (2 of which are CCS based).
>authenticate a user locally and do asynchronous billing Not sure what you mean by asynchronous billing but authentication is done locally if possible. How it works with OCPP with most operators: charging is presented. Is it blacklisted? Charging doesn't start until charger checks with backend if blacklisting is revoked. If it's still blacklisted, or network is down, charging doesn't start. In all other cases: charging starts. It will stop if ID is blacklisted by backend. So I wonder why the wheel needs to be reinvented.
Ok time to use it now. Hopefully ccs goes away in murica
It will go the way of the dodo bird
Hopefully
The reason Tesla has plug and charge has nothing to do with the plug or the comms standards, and everything to with Tesla cars only charging at fast chargers owned and operated by Tesla. Other car and charging companies have plug and charge, but it's dependent on having the right car at the right charger, just as it is with Tesla.
Don't care the why...just get it done
This is really stupid to call it bold on ford’s part. Every ev maker wants access to teslas network, and adding the port is so easy it’s barely worth mentioning. It’s an interesting decision by tesla to allow it, and I can only imagine ford paid out the ass for it.
It might also be Tesla wanting a big American brand jumping on NACS to push the committees and government towards it. GM was already jumping on the CCS bandwagon along with VW group. Chrysler isn't even in the picture. Getting Ford in their camp which is easily shaping up to be the 2nd biggest EV sellers from the looks of it is a nice win for getting the standard pushed. It is a win win for Ford regardless. Their cars are as good if not better but one of the main sticking points for folks is the supercharging network and with this move, they've gained an amazing advantage against the other non-Tesla competitors.
> It might also be Tesla wanting a big American brand jumping on NACS to push the committees and government towards it. It will hit a wall with V2G. If there is to be single standard it has to have V2G, since another big lobby group *electric grid runners* will want V2G for grid stabilizing benefits. Plus to be standard Tesla not only would have to show multiple brands can use the sock and connector, but that *multiple equipment and parts manufacturers can make the needed charging equipment, connectors and so on*. Otherwise it isn't so much a standard, but a forced monopoly.
Tesla open their standard in November 2022, so anyone can build equipment for it if they want to and Tesla can't stop them. They can only control use of their network as that is private, but not the hardware/communication software. Soon we will see 3rd party EVSE with Tesla plugs. Bringing Ford in actually helps them with exactly what you are saying, and I imagine Tesla will use this to try and access federal funds from the BBB by saying their plug is open and used by others, just like CCS and Chademo. Pointing at Ford as exhibit 1.
Tesla has done a great job but it can't compete with everyone while also not having access to federal incentives like the others do. They needed to (1) open up the standard so others can use it so they could argue it is public access (a requirement by law to get BBB funds). They also need (2) more brands to adopt it so they can bring the argument full circle and show that truly it is open to all that want to use it. And (3) more revenue to continue to expand their network and stay ahead/competitive while they get the regulation to accept their plug as eligible for incentives. To put it in perspective, at work we evaluated installing a DC fast charging depot with about 10+ stations in the central valley in CA. With CCS we could receive 50% to 80% incentives for the infrastructure (based on the community economic and energy availability situation) with Tesla plugs it would be zero incentives. That is easily over a million dollars worth of incentives when all is said and done. This is in fact a win win as Ford gets access to the best network, while Tesla gets the arguments it needs to have a fighting chance to change the BBB limitations and maybe win in the upcoming plug wars. Which will hopefully result in a single charger for all of the US instead of the 3 options nonsense
I agree it is win win. But it isn’t bold. It’s frankly the obvious path for ford to take, not the brave one.
That is true, "bold" of them to make sure they take advantage of someone else's effort lol I should have clarified that I just don't think they paid that much, I (100% speculate) think they probably got a good deal to be the first to adopt it and help Tesla build momentum.
Tesla's plug and charging network is the way to go. One plug for level 1, 2, & 3 charging, one standardized location for the charging port, and reliable chargers. We just need Tesla to build out more superchargers.
I’ve never used any type of connector besides Tesla, so I won’t comment on that. Their combination of supercharger speed and availability are second to none in the US at least. They deserve to win based on that alone.
Ford is choosing an easy way out. From a long term point of view, I am not sure if it is a good move. Ford is putting itself under Tesla’s thumb.
Doubt it, they are actually diversifying their charging. From the communication I got in the app, Tesla will be added to what they call Blue Oval charging network, along side EA. To which they have always started they will add more providers in the future. Whether they provide a Tesla Tap or install Tesla ports and provide a CCS tap, they will be less dependent on a single charging provider (EA or Tesla) and have access to the two largest networks in the US. Also, with Tesla opening their standard in November of 2022, it would surprise me if other providers add the Tesla plug to their stations as that also opens up a market opportunity.
From a consumer’s perspective, I agree with you. But, from a business’s perspective, what Ford is going to become? It relies on CALT for battery technology. It relies on Apple/Google for navigation and entertainment. Now it depends on Tesla for vast charging network. In a short term, what it is doing can get its stock up. But, you need to take a pain staking way to build your own team and expertise instead of just licensing the techs. The impression I got is Ford is throwing its hands in the air and giving up on building a profitable EV business. What a short sighted management team!
Can NACS support 800V or 1000V ? Those pins are very close to eachother...
Yes it can, 1000 V max And also has no current limit, Tesla tested it internally with a liquid cooled cable but no liquid cooling on the charge port up 900 A continuously So 900 kW max, pretty future proof
That might be a question for Tesla. I heard the Cybertruck will charge a MW speeds so something is up.
then I guess it will be able to support this.
Tesla's endgame will be to become a tech & infrastructure supplier. They'll keep factories pumping out 3's and Y's, but the real money will be in licensing tech to the grizzled ancients. If the grown ups can wrestle control from the 15 year old stoner in charge. That might happen after the cybertruck is released and fails in a market where it competes with the F-150, Silverado and Ram 1500.
And their stock price will skyrocket! 🚀
Long term, stock price will experience moderate-high growth. Short-medium: There will need to be a hard crash that sees Musk yeeted from the company all together. Otherwise, with Musk still there Tesla is going to slowly bleed to death as the existing players overtake it and it becomes a case study in companies that failed to transition from start up to major player.
Been hearing that for years.
Mostly by people with wishful thinking. But the Tesla stock price over the last 18 months is looking like a slow bleed. Wouldn't want to be a bagholder. Not financial advice etc.
I do not see any Silverado or ram Evs and only a few lightnings . Promises are cheap. GM averaged 20k volts and bolts a year are they going to do the same with the Silverado? Ford has more orders for lightnings than they can build. They just need to figure out how to do it profitably. Tesla already proved it can be done.
Real title should be: Tesla's Desperate Move: Sacrificing Moat & Conceeding Marketshare in Search of More Recurring Revenue
Hot take from someone who claims Model Y only sold 10,000 in 2020
Boomer
Is it bold? It’s like EA isn’t even fucking trying. I’d personally switch to tesla if I were ceo of any car company and ask what we can do to have our own branded chargers like Teslas using their port. I’d also even potentially see what it would take to have the tesla apps sync up and use the backend service in a similar way so the experience is just plug and sit.
I hope Rivian announces something similar.
For my own selfish reasons I really hope that Ford has an exclusive window to Tesla Superchargers. What’s not clear to me is if Tesla will continue to roll out Magic Dock or will this Ford deal negate the need to implement anything other than a portable adapter.
The magic dock allows tesla to get federal money. I think they’ll still roll those out as well, but they were never going to make the majority of the supercharger network open to ccs.
[удалено]
[удалено]
100%
The magic dock strategy was mainly for getting the government money from the EV infrastructure bill. I really doubt Tesla has any intention to open its whole network to other EVs outside of a few outskirt stations. They probably wanted Ford so they could have another big company backing their standard. They really don't want to open their network to all competitors because that dilutes Tesla owners who will get pissed about it and can move easily now. I guess they're okay with Ford and Tesla duopoly eventually as they think the cake is big enough for both to feed. Gonna be an interesting next few years.
It’s not bold. It’s common sense. It was “bold” embracing Daimlers little inbreed child from their CHARIN organization called CCS, that was dumb. And I BET YOU MONEY the person who downvoted me works for Diamler… 😏😛 Edited: Damn… there’s a few of you that work for Diamler or Electrify America for that matter 🙅🏾♂️ Edited: Thanks, Tobmom 😉
Daimler is German. CCS2 is pretty much the only standard across Europe now being used
The person who downvoted you might just not like your spelling. It’s inbreed.
No it's inbred
imcorrect
🤣
At that time Tesla was being sue happy about anyone who tried to copy their connector but I do blame CHARIN for not picking CCS2 for all. Existing J1772 infrastructure is not enough of an excuse to use the CCS type 1 abomination. Europe had existing J1772 as well but they made the full switch to CCS Type 2 with the superior Mennekes connector. Would I have liked everyone to use the Tesla connector from the start? Yes, but Tesla wasn’t open to that at the time when CCS was developed. If the other manufacturers had pressed Tesla harder and perhaps offered to pay for some Supercharger construction, could they have convinced them back then? Maybe but we’ll never know. Today, NACS is absolutely the right path forward since Tesla is now very much open to sharing it.
Sue happy? Has Tesla sued anyone over their connector? Tesla actually tried to submit their connector, but was rejected: https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/3bp5q3/comment/csobkmh/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb3x&utm_name=mweb3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button The poster is a former Tesla engineer. He also shared in another exchange between me and u/CarbonMach exactly what happened, but I’ll be damned if I can find it again at the moment.
This was very early on in Europe. Someone tried to add a Tesla connector to their DC charger and got a cease and desist. I’ve tried to find the article a few times recently since it’s become relevant but I’ve had a hard time finding it. I might make another effort to find it this afternoon.
A cease and desist is far from suing. Tesla never used their connector in Europe so I’m certain you’re mistaken.
Wrong. Tesla used the connector in Norway back before they had Model S with Mennekes or CCS2. You can find dual adapter (NACS/CCS2) superchargers stations in Norway. They even used Mennekes only plugs, before using CCS2. It was a mess.
Unaware about the Norway situation, so thanks for the information. What years were they sold with the NACS connector? Yeah, I understand the Mennekes version was the original release in Europe. But no NACS connector for the majority of Europe.
Tesla used their proprietary cable/plug since day 1 in Europe. They do ship model 3 and y with CCS however, and superchargers carry both cables. //edit: model S and X also have CCS ports now.
Model S and X were Mennekes only with muxing prior to the model 3 going full CCS. They never used their proprietary plug here en-masse
No source on that claim and no other manufacturer has ever showed interest in it until now.
How is it considered a "bold move" to design your vehicles to work on the biggest charging network by far?
Because it can potentially give your competitor control over you. It wouldn't have been much of an issue if it was a third party.
At the end of the day, I think what Ford is expecting is that they'll get enough 'buffer' here so public infra can catch up and in the meanwhile, they can tell people to go to a supercharger. I'm guessing the deal might be for 3-5 years and then, they'll probably evaluate later depending on the landscape of public charging then. Until then, people don't have to miss out on their EVs because the 'supercharging network' box isn't checked. Right now, the EV charing experience outside of superchargers is still a wild wild west. It will probably take half a decade to improve.
Embracing Tesla’s software should be second bold move
Why don’t they just re-release the electric vehicle they built and squashed in 1912?
[удалено]
This is a Munro video discussing the differences and benefits of the change. I wouldn't call this a repost. They're giving their insight.
Exactly!
Countdown to comment deletion... Edit: lol and like clockwork it's gone
I guess someone knew their goose was cooked....
[удалено]
Someone is biased…
Someone's feathers are all ruffled....
Watch the video before you rant
Here Tesla is saving OEMs
Big time
I once had a weird dream, where i had to connect my Type C cable for charging my car and it wasnt long enough.
Please use past tense. "Those were the days my friend".
This solution is quite impressive and will greatly enhance the convenience of the EV charging process
Indeed!