Ford/Tesla Deal: Access to Superchargers, adapter coming, future EVs will have NACS (Tesla) port

[HaveBlue]

This is one reason why CCS is the better long term option. More vendors to compete, which results in more tech and cheaper prices at the “pump”. If the entire charging network is made up of just 2-3 players, that has ample chance of leading to non-competitive kwh pricing.

Very true although having a dozen payment apps is really ridiculous as well.

Sponsored

 

[Autolycus]

Obviously CharIN is biased towards CCS but I definitely agree with their assessment of a industry standard open design versus one driven from a single manufacturer.

https://www.charin.global/news/char...uncement-to-use-the-nacs-proprietary-network/

From the release:

Early, unconsolidated announcements of changes create uncertainty in the industry and lead to investment obstacles.

This is why I have kept commenting how terrible the Ford announcement is for the industry and for consumers. Investment in charging networks will slow because of it.

Their other points are, I think, also correct. Adapters make the user experience worse. They are things you can lose. They are more likely to break. They add cost. It is far less economically efficient to have millions of adapters being carried around by vehicles instead of having the correct plugs available at the thousands of chargers, let alone compared to a single standard plug on every car and charger.

 

[Autolycus]

Very true although having a dozen payment apps is really ridiculous as well.

The NEVI funding will theoretically eventually require the networks who get any money to allow someone to do Plug & Charge and pay based on just one account with any of the networks.

 

[HaveBlue]

Imagine if every house you bought had different wall plugs from the Type 1 and 2 120v. Bad enough already with 5-15/20 6-20 6-50 14-50 and all the 30amp variations. Now gas stations too.

 

[DuoRivians]

Very true although having a dozen payment apps is really ridiculous as well.

With nevi funding, people can buy via contactless payment or a single app

 

[DuoRivians]

While true, only EA is currently a corridor charging network. The other players are usually very regional or even just found in metro areas. Until we see EVGo start to build out their coast to coast corridor network there really isn't any competition. This is why so many bitch about EA and their shit reliability too. No incentive to keep it functioning even though everyone road tripping has no other options the majority of the time.

Need to give the networks some time.

 

[DuoRivians]

From the release:

This is why I have kept commenting how terrible the Ford announcement is for the industry and for consumers. Investment in charging networks will slow because of it.

Their other points are, I think, also correct. Adapters make the user experience worse. They are things you can lose. They are more likely to break. They add cost. It is far less economically efficient to have millions of adapters being carried around by vehicles instead of having the correct plugs available at the thousands of chargers, let alone compared to a single standard plug on every car and charger.

I don’t mind adapters. Tesla super chargers aren’t going to all change, but if it means having an adapter to access them more readily, I’d gladly pay a few hundred dollars for an adapter

 

[VSG]

This is why I have kept commenting how terrible the Ford announcement is for the industry and for consumers. Investment in charging networks will slow because of it.

This has been a pattern with Tesla - they put out an announcement that has a lot of credibility because, well, they're Tesla, but their main goal seems to be to sweep the leg of the competition.

Cybertruck for example. Announced that it was going to start delivery a few months before Rivian, and have almost twice the range of the R1T, and cost about half as much as the R1T. That caused a lot of potential buyers and investors to pause, because if the 800 lb gorilla was going to get in the ring then Rivian would probably not be walking out the other side. People are still talking that way two years later when R1T is a reality and Cybertruck is still a hash-pipe dream.

The "opening up their network" announcement (and lack of follow-through), the Magic Dock announcement (and lack of implementation), the NACS proclamation, and now the detail-free deal with Ford, all seem to be designed by the pied piper himself to rally the fanbois around the cause and undermine everyone else's efforts to improve the infrastructure for non-Teslas. It sounds like Tesla is afraid of the competition, and afraid that if the Superchargers open to CCS we'll find out they suffer a lot of the same issues when having to deal with 100 different EV models. Perhaps the Emperor has no clothes ...

Again, I welcome Tesla's help and participation - if they want to roll out the Magic Docks (the cheapest, quickest, most efficient, and most effective way to support CCS) or sell adapters (super expensive for consumers, since millions of people will need one vs only 10's of thousands of Magic Docks), then I'm sure they will be effective competitors in the CCS space. I will certainly use Tesla Superchargers if there is a way to charge my R1T there and IF they provide a better experience at a reasonable price or IF they fill missing holes in trips I want to take. But I'm not holding my breath for that to happen anytime soon.

 

[docwhiz]

New management at EA.

https://www.autoevolution.com/news/...w-era-begins-at-electrify-america-215923.html

However, we believe that the charging network born out of the Dieselgate saga will find a way to succeed. And it starts today, with Rob Barrosa taking over as CEO and president.

He has 16 years of EV infrastructure experience. Barrosa previously occupied the Vice President of Technology role at the company, where he oversaw the team of engineers and dealt with implementing technical capabilities. One could argue that he wasn't very good at ensuring that everything ran smoothly charging-wise as VP, but becoming CEO with that much knowledge about the company's operations is poised to be at least a tiny bit helpful in overcoming the current challenges.

 

[Longreach]

I think people underestimate the role of GM as the cause of so many bad CCS deployments.

Of the legacy manufacturers, only GM had the scale and resources to drive/fund a public charging network deployment, or at least drive/fund a common industry effort for a viable national network. They chose to do neither, instead simply saying “not our problem”, even though having the largest non-Tesla fleet. The result is many disparate underfunded inadequate deployments, or deployments based on opportunists spending government penalty money rather than building a viable network.

Ford never had the scale or resources for a significant network deployment plan. They decided to accept the GM approach, as they often do in Detroit. But now they sell in volume it has become abundantly clear the current CCS debacle is not the path to success. The Tesla deal makes long distance driving viable for Ford customers, and they will like the experience.

It also means two large EV manufacturers now have a direct vested interest in ensuring the success and continued deployment of the supercharger network, because it is essential for their manufacturing success.

There is no similar vested interest in the CCS networks by manufacturers. Most of it is driven by just spending government money, which is a business in itself. There isn’t much money in selling kWH. If some manufacturers stepped up with a similar vested interest in making CCS viable at the necessary scale and commonality nationwide, it could be just as viable as the supercharger network. But that isn’t happening. There are no singular drivers for CCS success, no manufacturer directly ensuring they work for their customers when and where needed. (The Rivian adventure chargers are laudable, but small in scale)

We are at an interesting point. If one other major manufacturer sees it like Ford did and embraces the supercharger network, the momentum could very well be unstoppable. If that happens, historians may remember GM’s lack of leadership and action at the critical time as the main cause of a CCS-1 decline.

 

[SoCal Rob]

I don’t mind adapters. Tesla super chargers aren’t going to all change, but if it means having an adapter to access them more readily, I’d gladly pay a few hundred dollars for an adapter

I don’t mind adapters either, in theory. My concern is that there are going to be some people who buy the cheapest adapter they can find. If it causes a problem for their vehicle or the charger they may realize it was a bad way to save some money but by then it’s too late. If NACS was an actual standard then I’m sure there could be some program for certifying adapters with a way to authenticate them as genuine.

As it stands, I wouldn’t be upset with Tesla for forbidding non-Tesla adapters on their chargers, but that isn’t going to be a great look even if it’s for a good reason. I think the Magic Dock setup where Tesla has control over the adapter is probably a good way to go.

I hope I’m wrong, but I could also see Tesla fanatics sabotaging the Magic Docks so only the Tesla faithful can charge at a Supercharger when they start to see lines.

 

[2025R1S]

Having to touch every existing Supercharger and add a Magic Dock is a high friction, slow, expensive, “pause all expansion and redo everything they’ve already done” type solution. It would divert manpower and funding toward servicing V3 250kW 480v Superchargers that are up for replacement. No point in waiting for Magic Dock’s to create mayhem at the Superchargers.

The fastest way to get CCS drivers on the Supercharger network is what Ford is doing. Each CCS car has its own unique port placement - F150 and Lyriq’s need like 10-12ft cables. The Magic Dock will lead to CCS cars parking in weird ways and occupying multiple stalls. Fights and violence will break out. Magic Dock is a solution that creates a bigger problem.

Given the stability and reliability of Superchargers and NACS; it isn’t surprising that Tesla is making access available to Ford - only after years of planning with engineering from both companies involved. Basically Tesla isn’t letting any rando’s hit up the Supercharger network. Until OEM’s move their ports to the corners/back/front of the car and V4 Superchargers arrive - the adapters need to come in variable lengths.

Again, I welcome Tesla's help and participation - if they want to roll out the Magic Docks (the cheapest, quickest, most efficient, and most effective way to support CCS) or sell adapters (super expensive for consumers, since millions of people will need one vs only 10's of thousands of Magic Docks), then I'm sure they will be effective competitors in the CCS space. I will certainly use Tesla Superchargers if there is a way to charge my R1T there and IF they provide a better experience at a reasonable price or IF they fill missing holes in trips I want to take. But I'm not holding my breath for that to happen anytime soon.

I agree. There is a sense of denial when it comes to CCS. There is no patron saint of CCS. It used to be that no business truly depending on CCS succeeding, but EVGo and ChargePoint are examples we can look at now. They show that even those invested in its success are not as well funded or able to design stable, reliable, affordable fast chargers. If all of the legacy auto brands depend on CCS with their EV’s, then they should start to act like it.

That has been the problem with CCS - no one cares if it works, succeeds, provides a better experience, or is designed better. It shows - with everyone passing the buck, and all we see is endless press releases that take literally years to turn into action.

Rivian has done an impressive job with the RAN network - but it is will remain a tiny network for years. I guess the elephant in the room being; is all of this too late for CCS? If we look at 150kW+ CCS charger install count; there isn’t much progress to show for in 2023. Judging by Ford owners reactions with Tesla; they aren’t exactly willing to wait for CCS and would be thrilled to drop it.

I think people underestimate the role of GM as the cause of so many bad CCS deployments.

Of the legacy manufacturers, only GM had the scale and resources to drive/fund a public charging network deployment, or at least drive/fund a common industry effort for a viable national network. They chose to do neither, instead simply saying “not our problem”, even though having the largest non-Tesla fleet. The result is many disparate underfunded inadequate deployments, or deployments based on opportunists spending government penalty money rather than building a viable network.

Ford never had the scale or resources for a significant network deployment plan. They decided to accept the GM approach, as they often do in Detroit. But now they sell in volume it has become abundantly clear the current CCS debacle is not the path to success. The Tesla deal makes long distance driving viable for Ford customers, and they will like the experience.

It also means two large EV manufacturers now have a direct vested interest in ensuring the success and continued deployment of the supercharger network, because it is essential for their manufacturing success.

There is no similar vested interest in the CCS networks by manufacturers. Most of it is driven by just spending government money, which is a business in itself. There isn’t much money in selling kWH. If some manufacturers stepped up with a similar vested interest in making CCS viable at the necessary scale and commonality nationwide, it could be just as viable as the supercharger network. But that isn’t happening. There are no singular drivers for CCS success, no manufacturer directly ensuring they work for their customers when and where needed. (The Rivian adventure chargers are laudable, but small in scale)

We are at an interesting point. If one other major manufacturer sees it like Ford did and embraces the supercharger network, the momentum could very well be unstoppable. If that happens, historians may remember GM’s lack of leadership and action at the critical time as the main cause of a CCS-1 decline.

 

[Autolycus]

The fastest way to get CCS drivers on the Supercharger network is what Ford is doing. Each CCS car has its own unique port placement - F150 and Lyriq’s need like 10-12ft cables. The Magic Dock will lead to CCS cars parking in weird ways and occupying multiple stalls. Fights and violence will break out. Magic Dock is a solution that creates a bigger problem.

Err... an adapter that each car owner has to buy and carry around with them doesn't fix this problem at all. Ford can't abandon all of the current buyers or all of those between now and whoever they actually change the port over. Those vehicles will need the longer cable. The ones with the new port might also need a longer cable.

Given the stability and reliability of Superchargers and NACS; it isn’t surprising that Tesla is making access available to Ford - only after years of planning with engineering from both companies involved. Basically Tesla isn’t letting any rando’s hit up the Supercharger network. Until OEM’s move their ports to the corners/back/front of the car and V4 Superchargers arrive - the adapters need to come in variable lengths.

Wait, you think the adapter is going to be a pig-tail with several feet of cable rather than just a straight adapter? That would be a truly stunning decision by all parties involved. It's a bigger technical challenge, and it would be a terrible user experience--far worse than anybody can paint CCS as being by its own.

 

[cdub]

Just leaving this here for thought

 

[Joel]

It doesn't make the charge port dangerously unusable if the DC charging contactors get welded shut.

I would be interested to know how many times this has happened to a Tesla. If it happened a lot you would think it would be very public.

Sponsored