72 kW urban chargers vs 120 kW chargers

[tjhmax]

Here are some observations using 72 kW urban chargers vs 120 kW chargers. I have a Model S 100D. At a 72 kW charger charged from 29% to 80% = 168 miles. Got a nice constant 74kW, at close to 80% it tapered down.
Whole charge took 42 minutes. Unlike the 120kW chargers these are not paired, so you get full current.
At a 120kW charger this would take about 32 minutes. So, at 72 kW it was just 10 minutes more.
At Qualcomm with their 120kW chargers if your neighbor is already charging, this would also take 40+ minutes for you.

 

[SR-75]

Here are some observations using 72 kW urban chargers vs 120 kW chargers. I have a Model S 100D. At a 72 kW charger charged from 29% to 80% = 168 miles. Got a nice constant 74kW, at close to 80% it tapered down.
Whole charge took 42 minutes. Unlike the 120kW chargers these are not paired, so you get full current.
At a 120kW charger this would take about 32 minutes. So, at 72 kW it was just 10 minutes more.
At Qualcomm with their 120kW chargers if your neighbor is already charging, this would also take 40+ minutes for you.

For busy locations, Urban Superchargers are not so bad with only 72KW.

Only saving 5-10 minuets if that Supercharging site is not very busy and or you find a spot not paired or both A & B not in use.

Charging at any very busy Supercharger (120KW) can end up being much slower than charging at Urban Supercharger (72KW).

Several times at a very busy Supercharger (120KW) at Qualcomm end up paired with another already sucking up most of that 120KW and I end up with only 35KW for a while.


If I was at a busy Urban Supercharger I would still have been most likely be getting at least the max of 72KW, since it is split even 72KW and 72KW with it’s pair, until it starts to a normal taper.



So the Urban Supercharger 5-10 minutes slower? I not only had to wait line for a charging slot, but also had to waste much more time not getting at least 82-83KW at a Supercharger (120KW). Only the first person in that pair gets to full charge and the second person gets what is left of that 120KW.


So at a very busy Supercharger site, I do not mind it being a Urban Supercharger with a max of 72KW which will be likely quicker to charge and hopefully get a better turnover of Tesla’s charging here.

 

[dipper]

I understand Urban charger after visiting the one in Carlsbad. This will give a few more minutes for people to eat/shop and get back. Cheaper for Tesla to install and maintain. This location is not next to the freeway, so not everyone will be in a rush to get back on their road trip. And maybe just slow enough to have less cheapskate from using as much.

 

[tjhmax]

Guess what? I am at Qualcomm right now charging while being paired. 168 mile fill up took 43 minutes...1 minute longer than at Carlsbad (see my earlier post).
How busy Qualcomm is there is no advantage to go there and possibly stand in line too.
Only reason why I am here is I saw 3 open stations and I was close by. Turns out 2 were broken. At least I did not have to wait in line.
Being paired at 120 kW stations will average exactly 72 kW!
Finished my 203 mile charge in 53 minutes.

 

[ctiomico2003]

I love the 72kW superchargers. I found that the ones in Downey CA are better for me than the paired V1 supercharging. It definitely makes more sense in "urban" areas to use them for space considerations but also that it is a "predictable" experience for the end user since we have no way to get information from Tesla about when a car is charged or what spot should be taken up next for the most "efficient" charging.

Like Qualcomm, many of the SoCal locations are just so busy its not worth it at the moment. Unless I was going to shop for an hour or so, it really makes no sense. I am hoping the newer locations on supercharge.info are urban ones (like Huntington Beach, Santa Monica, etc) since they should be a faster install and will provide much needed relief for the other stations.

Maybe if they decide to expand a few sites like Qualcomm or Fountain Valley they can add the Urban ones instead of the paired. With space at a premium, that would definitely make sense.

Is Qualcomm still one of the few stations where the Model 3 does not get charged? Maybe that station will always be busy with Model 3s/nearby workers due to it.

 

[ewoodrick]

Here are some observations using 72 kW urban chargers vs 120 kW chargers. I have a Model S 100D. At a 72 kW charger charged from 29% to 80% = 168 miles. Got a nice constant 74kW, at close to 80% it tapered down.
Whole charge took 42 minutes. Unlike the 120kW chargers these are not paired, so you get full current.
At a 120kW charger this would take about 32 minutes. So, at 72 kW it was just 10 minutes more.
At Qualcomm with their 120kW chargers if your neighbor is already charging, this would also take 40+ minutes for you.

Come on, this ain't the way that it works.
Best case, You pull into second port and first port has been there 40 minutes. You get about, let's say 20kW. But you get it for only 5 minutes, at which you become #1 and pull full charge. Added charge time about 3-4 minutes.

Worst case, First port pulls in minutes before you, You get 20 kW for 40 minutes and then full power. That ends up taking you about 70 minutes to charge.

Your average is going to be in-between the two, about 60 minutes.

When you look at the urban charger, the average time is actually going to be the SAME number.

The difference is that a road charger, can allow a faster charge, whereas a urban charger cannot.

Most chargers, outside the California area are sized appropriately, so that the average usage is less than half the number of chargers, allowing most users to charge fast.

The problem is California, where too many people are using too few Superchargers. Part of this is the number of cars, but a bigger part is the number of people not charging at home or office. And for those that don't charge at home or office, they end up clogging the chargers for everyone.

The different between the two chargers is that the classic road charger allows the opportunity for faster charging, while an urban charger doesn't.

And it's also one of those things that people outside of California look at and well, wish they would have a charger within 100 miles of them.

 

[Rocky_H]

Come on, this ain't the way that it works.
Best case, You pull into second port and first port has been there 40 minutes. You get about, let's say 20kW. But you get it for only 5 minutes, at which you become #1 and pull full charge. Added charge time about 3-4 minutes.

But as you say, that isn't the way that works. If the primary car has been there for 40 minutes, it's mostly full and taking very little power, so it will have already shifted most available power to the secondary side. The secondary stall won't be limited to 20kW. It will probably be around 70-90kW.

 

[ljbad4life]

Come on, this ain't the way that it works.
Best case, You pull into second port and first port has been there 40 minutes. You get about, let's say 20kW. But you get it for only 5 minutes, at which you become #1 and pull full charge. Added charge time about 3-4 minutes.

Worst case, First port pulls in minutes before you, You get 20 kW for 40 minutes and then full power. That ends up taking you about 70 minutes to charge.

Your average is going to be in-between the two, about 60 minutes.

When you look at the urban charger, the average time is actually going to be the SAME number.

The difference is that a road charger, can allow a faster charge, whereas a urban charger cannot.

Most chargers, outside the California area are sized appropriately, so that the average usage is less than half the number of chargers, allowing most users to charge fast.

The problem is California, where too many people are using too few Superchargers. Part of this is the number of cars, but a bigger part is the number of people not charging at home or office. And for those that don't charge at home or office, they end up clogging the chargers for everyone.

The different between the two chargers is that the classic road charger allows the opportunity for faster charging, while an urban charger doesn't.

And it's also one of those things that people outside of California look at and well, wish they would have a charger within 100 miles of them.

There a good deal more variations to charging that could put the supercharger taking longer to charge than an urban charger. If you plug into a paired charger and the other tesla is under 35% (labeled Car A) battery and your charge is over 20% (Car B) it will take longer than if you had simply gone to a Urban charger.

It would take about ~30 minutes for car A to get to 60% where tapering enough to give Car B improved charging speed. But in that same time frame car B would be approaching ~45%. By the time the car A starts to taper enough to give the car B anywhere near full charging , car B will begin tapering as well. In this case it would take car B ~65 minutes to go from 20% to 80%. If Car B was at an urban charger it would take ~50 minutes. Is 15 minutes going to derail a road trip? no not at all, but if there is a congested supercharger that's not along a highway, an urban charger would be more beneficial to install. It's about using the right tool for the right job.