GM adopts Tesla's NACS standard! Munro begs Rivian to switch

[scottf200]

I’m sorry but the numbers don’t lie. There are orders of magnitude more Tesla vehicles than Tessa superchargers. You conveniently indicate that the highest population density areas of the country are were existing chargers struggle with demand.

What is your point?

You can do simple division and just assume they are all spread out evenly. That is asinine. Most charge at home and don't charge at supercharges except when they travel!!!
You canNOT take: used_stalls = superchargers_plugs/vehicles ie. 100 plugs / 1000 veh = 0.1

There are 12+ plugs/stalls on average at many new Superchargers.

My point is 90%+ of the supercharger locations have plenty of room for more charging AND any areas that are busy Tesla monitors and builds more Supercharges in that area. Heck on the Tesla app you can pick a Supercharger and see how busy it is through a 24 hr window.

Sponsored

 

[scottf200]

Allow me to put on my tinfoil hat for a second, and I apologize if this was already mentioned in the thread and I missed it, but someone raised the question of why Tesla would care about cars adopting the connector if they can sell adapters to allow for Supercharger access.

Many are making the logical guess that Tesla wants deals like they did with Ford and GM so they can force the them to put the charger on the front-right or rear-left or you end up with vehicles like Rivian taking two stalls.

Current Supercharge growth.

 

[Longreach]

All this IRA money given to these companies to install CCS will be for naught. They will let the network go and it will be broken down and unrepaired while being a money draining expenditure. Since Tesla’s connector is open source and likely 90% or greater of the EVs will use that connector our government needs to switch its funding to be exclusively for the NACS connector to give these charging companies a chance to have a solvent Charging network. The NACS connector is an open source connector that any charging company could adopt without issue. CCS connector is now a wooden wagon wheel

Government policy is generally structured not to pick winners, but let the market decide. Now that the market has decisively decided, the IRA, NEVI and every other related charging infrastructure policy will inevitably be revised to accommodate the market’s decision.

Yes, some money has been wasted, but companies will have to quickly adapt by changing cables. That’s how our market economy woks.

 

[TXR1S]

Yep, all over except the part where they cut off the CCS cables (and probably rip the broken down EA units out of the ground).

 

[SASSquatch]

You can do simple division and just assume they are all spread out evenly. That is asinine. Most charge at home and don't charge at supercharges except when they travel!!!
You canNOT take: used_stalls = superchargers_plugs/vehicles ie. 100 plugs / 1000 veh = 0.1

There are 12+ plugs/stalls on average at many new Superchargers.

My point is 90%+ of the supercharger locations have plenty of room for more charging AND any areas that are busy Tesla monitors and builds more Supercharges in that area. Heck on the Tesla app you can pick a Supercharger and see how busy it is through a 24 hr window.

Your numbers are absurd. Google Tesla owners waiting in line at superchargers.

https://www.thedrive.com/news/tesla...ger-wait-times-now-theyre-opening-to-more-evs

 

[Longreach]

too cheap? The Chevy Equinox is going to be around the same price. I just figured the smart decision would be to ramp down production while their “ultium” line ramps up. The Bolt is still selling relatively well but what do I know when it comes to running a massive business.

And I always thought the Saturn/GM EV1 was a half assed attempt at building an EV. The battery tech was definitely not there at the time.

It may seem to be mystery why GM killed the Bolt, but really it is more likely a manufacturing planning issue. They need the factory for a big Ultium vehicle program. There was no other home for Bolt manufacturing.

Ford did a similar thing with the Edge/Nautilus. They desperately needed to retool the Oakville plant for EVs and there was no other home for the Edge/Nautilus, so they had to kill them. Such is life in the manufacturing world.

 

[MDH]

You can’t be serious. No one is making anyone do anything.

Did you know that Lightning accessories must be certified by Apple? Have you heard of MFi? No one makes anyone use Apple iPhones, but if you do, you have to comply with Apple’s requirements to plug something into an Apple iPhone.

You want to plug your EV in a Tesla supercharger? Then you must comply with the way you are required to park so as not to block two charging stalls. Hence, you have to have the charging port in the proper location on your vehicle. Otherwise, drive to an EA charging location and charge there. You can still use a NACS connector at the EA charging location if you so fancy. Tesla won’t dictate to you what kind of DC charging receptacle you want to have in your EV. If you want to have a NACS one, you can do it without getting a Tesla permission.

Absolutely correct.....I think homeboy just got taken to school!

 

[scottf200]

Your numbers are absurd. Google Tesla owners waiting in line at superchargers,

Your logic is based on doing some crude Google search?

You can't count holidays and some selective busy highways.

Seriously the central and mountain time zones don't get a lot of use. Again these are all networked devices so Tesla knows exactly what is going on where and where to add more.

Example from today. Do the math on the % around me that are being used.
From the Tesla phone app.

From the Tesla phone app on one site:
MOSTLY free. See the white 11 of 16 bar.

 

[DuoRivians]

It’s clear you don’t understand how standards organizations work.

The NACS connector IP is offered under the same FRAND conditions as the Yazaki and Mennekes connector IP that underpins CCS-1/2. Licensing is assured as part of adoption, including for adopted functionality evolutions. Further, adoption of connector standards by no means dictates charging network ownership. They are unrelated.

If your creativity allows, let’s fast forward 5-8 years to see what is the likely scenario we will experience:

1) All new EVs come equipped with the easy to use NACS connector
2) Multiple NACS plug equipped charging networks exist, including:
A) Manufacturer curated networks, like the Supercharger network
B) Independent networks run by 1 or more players like EA, EVGo,… , likely the result of existing player consolidation
C) En Route funded DCFC networks, subsidized by commercial locations where you might spend some money whilst charging; Examples include Buckees, Flying J, Loves, Walmart,….
D) Many Level 2 convenience chargers set up by various SMEs, municipalities and others who see some client benefits
3) Home chargers with an NACS connector, or in some cases a J1772 AC only adapter if you have an old charger

Many of these network models already exist and will continue to grow as they migrate to NACS connectors.

Your fears are emotional and unfounded.

This is reminiscent of the last time you use garbled references in an attempt to sound intelligent. Remember the time you were adamant nevi funding wasn’t dependent on CCS compatibility?

If your creativity allows, imagine that you cannot trust Elon, because well, his past behavior and erratic acts.

Imagine we all want an EV world where true competition results in cheapest to deliver pricing for energy to power our cars.

5-8 years from now, I would prefer a world where no one company determines any standard or aspect of EV tech. Do I trust Elon to play a fair game? Absolutely not.

I especially don’t trust these closed door agreements in place between Tesla, Ford, and GM. If they’re straightforward, why not tell the public what the arrangements are? Perhaps then, we can all make more informed assessments?

As stated before, this is my stance on this issue:
https://www.rivianforums.com/forum/threads/gm-too-gm-adopts-teslas-nacs-standard.15890/post-344560

 

[SASSquatch]

Your logic is based on doing some crude Google search?

You can't count holidays and some selective busy highways.

Seriously the central and mountain time zones don't get a lot of use. Again these are all networked devices so Tesla knows exactly what is going on where and where to add more.

Example from today. Do the math on the % around me that are being used.
From the Tesla phone app.

From the Tesla phone app on one site:
MOSTLY free. See the white 11 of 16 bar.

Why do you keep harping on central and mountain time super chargers????
They don’t get much use because there aren’t that many EVs in that part of the country.

You can’t extrapolate charger usage from the deadest parts of the US for EV adoption or sales or usage to make a point about the entire network. To borrow your own phrase, that’s asinine.

 

[Donald Stanfield]

Allow me to put on my tinfoil hat for a second, and I apologize if this was already mentioned in the thread and I missed it, but someone raised the question of why Tesla would care about cars adopting the connector if they can sell adapters to allow for Supercharger access.

I can't help but wonder if Tesla is looking to scale back Supercharger deployment. I do not know the economics of DCFC infrastructure, but I've seen it repeatedly said that the charging is low margin, especially compared to producing cars. Maybe Tesla isn't interested in continuing to grow the Supercharger network at the pace it has been going. They certainly wouldn't want to scale back now, and then lose ground to CCS charging availability over time. By getting everyone to adopt NACS, they push other charging providers to do the same. They can then guarantee that their own vehicle customers will have access to easy charging even if they stop or limit buildout of the Supercharger network.

Hopefully that isn't the case, because while the plug is nicer ultimately the reliability of the Supercharger network is the real game changer. There's no guarantee that other charging providers will replicate the same reliability by implementing NACS.

From what I understand Teslas can ALREADY fast charge on any CSS charger with an adapter that is provided free with every Tesla.

 

[DuoRivians]

From what I understand Teslas can ALREADY fast charge on any CSS charger with an adapter that is provided free with every Tesla.

The DCFC CCS to NACS adapter is available but not free. The AC charging J1172 to NACS is pretty much free

 

[Donald Stanfield]

The DCFC CCS to NACS adapter is available but not free. The AC charging J1172 to NACS is pretty much free

Okay. So Tesla can use every charger if they buy an adapter but that isn't true going the other way. Am I thinking of that right?

 

[DuoRivians]

Okay. So Tesla can use every charger if they buy an adapter but that isn't true going the other way. Am I thinking of that right?

Yes

 

[Zorg]

This is reminiscent of the last time you use garbled references in an attempt to sound intelligent. Remember the time you were adamant nevi funding wasn’t dependent on CCS compatibility?

If your creativity allows, imagine that you cannot trust Elon, because well, his past behavior and erratic acts.

Imagine we all want an EV world where true competition results in cheapest to deliver pricing for energy to power our cars.

5-8 years from now, I would prefer a world where no one company determines any standard or aspect of EV tech. Do I trust Elon to play a fair game? Absolutely not.

I especially don’t trust these closed door agreements in place between Tesla, Ford, and GM. If they’re straightforward, why not tell the public what the arrangements are? Perhaps then, we can all make more informed assessments?

As stated before, this is my stance on this issue:
https://www.rivianforums.com/forum/threads/gm-too-gm-adopts-teslas-nacs-standard.15890/post-344560

Because companies never make their business agreement public.

Sponsored