V4 Tesla Supercharger looks more user friendly + magic dock connector and display (spotted photos)

[WorldComposting]

This is really what separates Tesla charging locations from EA.

12-16 is on Tesla's smaller side for new sites, and with EA their smaller sites are like 4 where half of them don't work.

A larger site for Tesla is 40+ stalls.

You are right I'm not sure why EA and EVgo think putting in 4 chargers is a good idea with no thought they might need more later. They should be putting in a minimum of 15 as the number of EVs are going to grow quickly and people will need fast chargers.

Granted I'm wondering why Rivian is also doing only 6 chargers? Unless they have room to expand these are going to get swamped as they ramp up production and especially if they open up the network to other vehicles!

Sponsored

 

[azbill]

The RAN in Quartzsite is a great location for the I-10. The one in Gila Bend, AZ is an odd spot. They need Yuma/El Centro and/or like you said one of the Casinos' (preferably Golden Acorn) on the 8.

Dateland is useful for travel between Tucson and SD. The Arizona NEVI plan has that on the list. For I10 I think there will be a Pilot/Flying J site between Buckeye and Quartzsite. GM and EVGO are already building the one in Winslow. There is also a Pilot and Flying J in Quartzsite. Need chargers in between to meet NEVI funding. Also Quartzsite to Indio is too big of a gap, 120 miles.

 

[Mark_AZR1T]

Dateland is useful for travel between Tucson and SD. The Arizona NEVI plan has that on the list. For I10 I think there will be a Pilot/Flying J site between Buckeye and Quartzsite. GM and EVGO are already building the one in Winslow. There is also a Pilot and Flying J in Quartzsite. Need chargers in between to meet NEVI funding. Also Quartzsite to Indio is too big of a gap, 120 miles.

Are you saying a RAN in Dateland? We thought that was pulled. It's only 30 minutes from Gila Bend RAN.

 

[WSea]

You are right I'm not sure why EA and EVgo think putting in 4 chargers is a good idea with no thought they might need more later. They should be putting in a minimum of 15 as the number of EVs are going to grow quickly and people will need fast chargers.

Granted I'm wondering why Rivian is also doing only 6 chargers? Unless they have room to expand these are going to get swamped as they ramp up production and especially if they open up the network to other vehicles!

Most RANs are designed for 3 more chargers added in the future

 

[azbill]

Are you saying a RAN in Dateland? We thought that was pulled. It's only 30 minutes from Gila Bend RAN.

Sorry, I meant Gila Bend.

 

[Throwdown]

Tesla has 40 in Dateland AZ, but zero magic docks. They had 36 in Quartzsite AZ, and just added a second site with 84 chargers. Zero magic docks. Each of those locations have 4 EA chargers with basically half operational most of the time.

I feel like this has been said before but it seems like EA wants people not to drive EVs. But with my large knowledge of how the Volkswagen group operates I know that what it really is, is the Germans never admitting fault when something doesn't work right or is planned wrong.

 

[KrakenLand425]

Where are you seeing that? I have not found a map I can filter on supercharger version.

I found it embedded into the Tesla app, when I signed up and loaded my car info, their map filtered, or showed you where you could currently charge with a "non Tesla vehicle".

 

[SANZC02]

I found it embedded into the Tesla app, when I signed up and loaded my car info, their map filtered, or showed you where you could currently charge with a "non Tesla vehicle".

yes, those are the ones with the Magic Dock. Be interesting how they handle it once the adapters are distributed.

 

[RivianRunner]

It's commendable how quickly they can react and execute changes. It's also remarkable how small their units are compared to all other networks. The way the units are placed in relation to the parking spots... it's still confusing which you're OK to park in, w/o being "that asshole". Why not put them center-aligned and use a longer cable?

I love the speed at which the Supercharger Network has built out, and this year it has accelerated like never before. Tesla has the ability to do that in a capital efficient manner that is second to none. A significant part of that is the way Tesla is optimizing charging station design to reduce buildout costs. Just as important as buildout costs are the on-going maintenance and repair expenses that are built into the cost of electricity sold. The most common repair is to replace the cable and plug. A longer cable and plug is more likely to get dropped and/or run over so Tesla optimizes charge port locations to reduce cable length to only that which is needed. Any unnecessary length is waste that doesn't stop after the chargers are commissioned due to increasing the chance they are run-over or damaged. This is one reason why the third-party charging stations have trouble keeping them on-line.

The other aspect to this is keeping the cables neat, orderly and off the ground. A wet, dirty cable is no fun to pick up and it can transfer the dirt to your hands and clothing. The short cables are super nice that way, they just go from the holder to your car with no manhandling required and almost zero chance of dirt transfer to your clothing.

Ultimately, the cost to manufacture and maintain fast chargers is paid by the users, so cables of appropriate length last longer, have lower and less frequent replacement costs and they reduce the cost of charging. The fact that they are so easy to use without transferring dirt to your clean clothes shouldn't be underestimated either.

The position of the charger is likely selected to maximize the number of vehicles that can be charged without excessively long charging cables. Tesla couldn't make other manufacturers locate their charge ports in a standardized location, so they are working with what they were given to accommodate other brands in the most efficient manner practical.

I think it's sad how incredibly ungrateful so many other EV drivers are, considering Tesla's commendable efforts to abandon the moat of their previously walled garden and accommodate all EV's, regardless of whether those owners contributed to the cost to build out the best fast charging network in the world or not. The transition to EV's would be in a much poorer place, and I mean much poorer, if not for the herculean efforts of Tesla at showing others what EV's were capable of, and what a cost-effective and convenient fast charging network looks like.

The fact they are willing to open it to all in a non-discriminatory manner is above and beyond any normal call of duty. Any other manufacturer would likely have maintained their competitive moat to sell more cars at higher profit margins. Cheers, not jeers, are in order.

 

[azbill]

Thank you for the update, I was just looking for any Magic Docks between Phx and San Diego, either I8 or I10. That saved me some time. Surprised the new Dateland and Quartzsite locations don't have some....

Here is an update you should like, an alternative to Quartzsite:

This closes the gap between Quartzsite and Buckeye, this is the second GM/EVGO/Pilot site in AZ, the other one is in Winslow, which has an EA station, but soon an alternative. We need more competition and choices.

 

[RivianRunner]

They're V3 chargers so I'd expect them to add magic docks at some point.

Currently there are zero large (>20 stall) Supercharger sites with magic docks in the US.

The large Supercharger sites are in well-travelled routes that already have reasonable CCS coverage. Tesla is bringing CCS compatibility to outlying areas first, many of which have very poor CCS coverage in order to maximize capital efficiency.

 

[scottf200]

I love the speed at which the Supercharger Network has built out, and this year it has accelerated like never before. Tesla has the ability to do that in a capital efficient manner that is second to none. A significant part of that is the way Tesla is optimizing charging station design to reduce buildout costs. Just as important as buildout costs are the on-going maintenance and repair expenses that are built into the cost of electricity sold. The most common repair is to replace the cable and plug. A longer cable and plug is more likely to get dropped and/or run over so Tesla optimizes charge port locations to reduce cable length to only that which is needed. Any unnecessary length is waste that doesn't stop after the chargers are commissioned due to increasing the chance they are run-over or damaged. This is one reason why the third-party charging stations have trouble keeping them on-line.

The other aspect to this is keeping the cables neat, orderly and off the ground. A wet, dirty cable is no fun to pick up and it can transfer the dirt to your hands and clothing. The short cables are super nice that way, they just go from the holder to your car with no manhandling required and almost zero chance of dirt transfer to your clothing.

Ultimately, the cost to manufacture and maintain fast chargers is paid by the users, so cables of appropriate length last longer, have lower and less frequent replacement costs and they reduce the cost of charging. The fact that they are so easy to use without transferring dirt to your clean clothes shouldn't be underestimated either.

The position of the charger is likely selected to maximize the number of vehicles that can be charged without excessively long charging cables. Tesla couldn't make other manufacturers locate their charge ports in a standardized location, so they are working with what they were given to accommodate other brands in the most efficient manner practical.

I think it's sad how incredibly ungrateful so many other EV drivers are, considering Tesla's commendable efforts to abandon the moat of their previously walled garden and accommodate all EV's, regardless of whether those owners contributed to the cost to build out the best fast charging network in the world or not. The transition to EV's would be in a much poorer place, and I mean much poorer, if not for the herculean efforts of Tesla at showing others what EV's were capable of, and what a cost-effective and convenient fast charging network looks like.

The fact they are willing to open it to all in a non-discriminatory manner is above and beyond any normal call of duty. Any other manufacturer would likely have maintained their competitive moat to sell more cars at higher profit margins. Cheers, not jeers, are in order.

It is pretty wild. They have like 100 under construction (crowd-sourced known) in the yellow below. And over that with permit work in blue below.

There is also just like 55 entries of activities SO far in October here:
https://supercharge.info/changes

 

[UnsungZero_OldTimeAdMan]

think it's sad how incredibly ungrateful so many other EV drivers are, considering Tesla's commendable efforts to abandon the moat of their previously walled garden and accommodate all EV's, regardless of whether those owners contributed to the cost to build out the best fast charging network in the world or not. The transition to EV's would be in a much poorer place, and I mean much poorer, if not for the herculean efforts of Tesla at showing others what EV's were capable of, and what a cost-effective and convenient fast charging network looks like.

The fact they are willing to open it to all in a non-discriminatory manner is above and beyond any normal call of duty. Any other manufacturer would likely have maintained their competitive moat to sell more cars at higher profit margins. Cheers, not jeers, are in order.

Ungrateful? Excuse me? It's not like they are doing it fully out of charity and goodness of their heart. At the end of the day, it's additional cash revenue, to hedge against the day when they are no longer as dominant in the BEV space. It's business. It's future growth and a part of their roadmap all along. As an early TSLA investor, I remember that roadmap being spoken of.

 

[s4wrxttcs]

The large Supercharger sites are in well-travelled routes that already have reasonable CCS coverage. Tesla is bringing CCS compatibility to outlying areas first, many of which have very poor CCS coverage in order to maximize capital efficiency.

I think Tesla has three main objectives.

• Maximize capital efficiency
• Avoid charger Wait times
• Take advantage of any federal or State money like the NEVI program -> Why these chargers have a screen on them for payment.

I'm not sure existing CCS coverage really matters. There is no CCS coverage that even compares to the likes of >20 stall supercharger locations. Like if your around Dateland, AZ you only have a single 4 stall location to charge. That's going to iffy especially in the summer heat.

I need to find a CCS US map that allows me to filter based on stall # to see which areas are viable now without Tesla magicdocks.

 

[RivianRunner]

Ungrateful? Excuse me? It's not like they are doing it fully out of charity and goodness of their heart. At the end of the day, it's additional cash revenue, to hedge against the day when they are no longer as dominant in the BEV space. It's business. It's future growth and a part of their roadmap all along. As an early TSLA investor, I remember that roadmap being spoken of.

Given the sparseness and unreliability of the CCS fast charging network, the wait times at heavily used locations, and the fact that the various third-party charge point providers have not worked together effectively to create a cohesive network in terms of location or spacing, the Supercharger Network becomes quite a competitive moat. People have been hoping the CCS network improves in reliability, charging speeds and density to avoid having to cue up to charge for a long time now but the changes don't seem to be coming. This impacts which EV people will buy, and how much they are willing to pay for it.

Given the situation, it was very generous of Tesla to let their competitors join the Supercharger Network at zero cost, because eliminating this moat reduces the premium Tesla can charge for their EV's over their competitors. It's like handing a larger share of the EV market to their direct competitors. Charging revenues are but a tiny fraction of Tesla's total revenues, it's almost insignificant. And Tesla is spending considerable money with the necessary longer charge cords and Magic Docks to accommodate a minority of EV's on the road. Tesla is still growing EV sales in N. America faster than all the rest combined! This means non-Tesla will remain in the minority for as far as they eye can see.

There is little question that Tesla would have been more profitable, over any reasonable timeframe, had they maintained the walled garden approach to their crown jewel so they could sell more EV's, and at higher prices, and reduced the cost of their Supercharger buildout. But they did not want to be the only real player in the EV game, their very mission statement is to accelerate the adoption of EV's, not just Tesla. I've seen the anti-Tesla crowd poo-poo Tesla's mission statement but, with this generous move, Tesla has really put their money where their mouth is.

Those who say Tesla did this out of profit motive have serious misunderstandings about the economics of auto manufacturing and profits from running and maintaining fast charging networks. Tesla did this to give a sales boost to their competitors and to put EVs in a better light. The CCS networks are so atrociously bad that they are giving EVs a black eye.

Sponsored