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

[jjswan33]

Something must be wrong with that Tesla driver if they'd rather have to whip out an adapter and use that hard to maneuver cable instead of the incredibly superior Tesla connector.

Today I am introducing the EA cable workout routine, typically I start with some cable curls then I move on to the cable press now some lower body with some cable squats and finish off with a set of cable thrusters. I promise you will lose 4" from your waste in 4 weeks... Tesla can't provide that.

Sponsored

 

[Dark-Fx]

Today I am introducing the EA cable workout routine, typically I start with some cable curls then I move on to the cable press now some lower body with some cable squats and finish off with a set of cable thrusters. I promise you will lose 4" from your waste in 4 weeks... Tesla can't provide that.

Bro, do you even CCS?

 

[azbill]

orgive me for this rather basic question, but what makes the CCS connector(and presumably the receptacle) inferior, and the NACS superior? Aren't both simply hunks of plastic with copper studs that transfer current and/or data from charger to vehicle?

Everyone is overlooking the issue that NACS uses the same pins for AC and DC, big safety disadvantage. Because of this the vehicle needs to provide isolation internally between the signals, and thus requires additional safety software. From a safety standpoint NACS is inferior, IMO.

Imagine connecting AC voltage to the DC battery pack (definite hazard), or connecting the DC input to the on-board charger (may or may not be a hazard). The CCS standard solves this potential failure point, without adding additional hardware inside the vehicle.

I think Tesla is not currently selling a NACS to CCS adapter, because what would happen if someone connects the adpater to a destination charger and puts AC voltage on the CCS DC pins. Will the car be smart enough not to turn on the DC charging contactors? I am sure Tesla has this all figured out in their software, because it has been their proprietary design, but I doubt any other manufacturer has considered this.

 

[Tahoe Man]

.

Forgive me for this rather basic question, but what makes the CCS connector(and presumably the receptacle) inferior, and the NACS superior? Aren't both simply hunks of plastic with copper studs that transfer current and/or data from charger to vehicle?

I can understand if, for example the NACS connector has a greater capacity for current transfer, and handles data better, but nothing I read seems to indicate that's the case. And of course, it's easy to understand that Tesla's proprietary charging network (accessed via NACS connectors), with it's better hardware & software, along with [generally] higher transfer capability is superior to the EA and other charging networks that use CCS connectors.

A related issue I can't get my head around is why it is that a simple adapter isn't sufficient to be able to use either connector / receptacle combination. Of course, I may be missing something basic - I'm new to the EV world and whenever my R1S is delivered, it will be my first EV - but it would seem that the Tesla charging network superiority isn't due to their use of the NACS connector.

One handed vs two handed. Easily to align and insert vs awkward to align and insert. Easy to use in cold weather vs not easy on cold weather.

 

[cdub]

In phone terms, I don't want non-iPhones to adopt the Lightning cable, and put these phones at risk at whatever Apple decides to do later. It's much better that all phones adopt the usb3 open standard.

Yes but lightning and usb c are very similar in size and functionality.

To truly compare it to phone terms a Tesla connector is a lightning and CSS is a parallel port.

 

[DuoRivians]

Yes but lightning and usb c are very similar in size and functionality.

To truly compare it to phone terms a Tesla connector is a lightning and CSS is a parallel port.

This has nothing to do with the size of the connector. It's about open v proprietary standards. As said earlier, if Tesla gave up the NACS patents and allowed it to be a truly industry determined protocol, that would be a different conversation.

 

[2025R1S]

I’d pay $5-6k more for a NACS R1S.

Rivian, if you are listening. I would gladly pay you a 4-figure sum for a retrofit NACS port.

 

[Cosmacelf]

Forgive me for this rather basic question, but what makes the CCS connector(and presumably the receptacle) inferior, and the NACS superior? Aren't both simply hunks of plastic with copper studs that transfer current and/or data from charger to vehicle?

I can understand if, for example the NACS connector has a greater capacity for current transfer, and handles data better, but nothing I read seems to indicate that's the case. And of course, it's easy to understand that Tesla's proprietary charging network (accessed via NACS connectors), with it's better hardware & software, along with [generally] higher transfer capability is superior to the EA and other charging networks that use CCS connectors.

A related issue I can't get my head around is why it is that a simple adapter isn't sufficient to be able to use either connector / receptacle combination. Of course, I may be missing something basic - I'm new to the EV world and whenever my R1S is delivered, it will be my first EV - but it would seem that the Tesla charging network superiority isn't due to their use of the NACS connector.

All good questions. The NACS connector is far smaller and easier to handle. The Supercharger network compared to the CCS network is far, far more reliable. It also much easier to use as they are all plug and charge, just drive up, plug in the connector and charging starts immediately. Supercharger stations tend to have many more stalls at them, meaning the chance that a site is either full or not working is much, much smaller. Finally, Tesla has been building the network since 2013, so they have the best locations.

As far as the standards themselves, you are correct, there isn’t much functional difference between them.

Even when the Ford Supercharger to CCS adapter becomes available in early 2024, only Ford vehicles will be able to use them since there is a crypto handshake that identifies the car before charging will start, so Rivians won’t be able to use them unless Rivian inks a similar deal with Tesla.

 

[HaveBlue]

Ford could just add a Tesla port on the front right side of the car. Then SC cables would reach with no other modifications. Rivian could do the same just adding another flip door to the other side.

 

[cdub]

Ford could just add a Tesla port on the front right side of the car. Then SC cables would reach with no other modifications. Rivian could do the same just adding another flip door to the other side.

This is the genius move. Yes.

 

[DuoRivians]

This is the genius move. Yes.

It adds more costs and parts to the car. It's not a smart move, IMO.

 

[Dark-Fx]

It adds more costs and parts to the car. It's not a smart move, IMO.

Make it a $2000 option for all the people who want it.

 

[DuoRivians]

Make it a $2000 option for all the people who want it.

It adds a lot more complexity to manufacturing process than just $2K.

 

[NY_Rob]

Everyone is overlooking the issue that NACS uses the same pins for AC and DC, big safety disadvantage. Because of this the vehicle needs to provide isolation internally between the signals, and thus requires additional safety software. From a safety standpoint NACS is inferior, IMO.

It's really not an issue as the car port current carrying pins go to an isolated contact arm of a DPDT contactor/relay and the handshake and comms with the EVSE determines which way the contact arm in the contactor swings. If it sees a malformed waveform or bad/garbled comms message at the handshake (when you plug the charge handle in to the vehicle port) it doesn't move the contactor to either the DC or AC side. It's pretty much impossible for the onboard equipment to connect a DC supply to the vehicle AC circuit and vice-versa.

 

[srazz]

Leave it up the end user customer. Not force it to the company level.

If I want to use the Supercharger as an end user, let me buy this adapter. But I also want to use ccs to expand my options more.

I totally agree with this comment. Just supply an adapter and call it done. For me, the CSS network isn’t that good and is sparse. Really keeps us from taking the Riv a lot of the time. If I had the adapter, we’d be golden. The SC network is everywhere and reliable with reliability being the important part.

Sponsored