CCS Adapter for North America

[e of pi]

Did they get the adapter first? Was it the Tesla one, or the Ukraine one? I thought when I saw the posts on the retrofit, they got the ECU assembly first, to try to get it to say CCS enabled? (Genuinely curious, I don't know.) Either way, I don't think they are limiting orders anyways, as people have said they were able to order more than one. Even the proxy service folks said you can order multiple.

At least one here seems to indicate they've already ordered the Tesla Korea adapter, and are still working on even getting a new ECU, much less doing the DIY fix:

Retrofit CCS compatibility onto earlier (NA) Model 3 - DIY approach

I've been trying for 2 weeks to get the new gen 4 "00" ECU without any sucess. My local shop said they didn't have any when I went there in person, and they won't return my calls. I've tried just about every Texas SC number, and no one answers the phone, they all say to leave a message. Finally...

teslamotorsclub.com

It really seems to me they're not using the VIN for any kind of filtering other than, "Has a VIN on their account": not car model/compatibility, not quantity allowed to be ordered provided only one at a time, etc.

 

[e of pi]

So with that said, the reality is Tesla Supercharger network is the largest in the US by a significant 58% with EA following at 14.4%. Plus it is growing faster than CCS so all this might soon be like owning a Chademo adapter in another year.

I'm curious where you're getting those numbers from, and if it's stalls or stations? My own tracking shows that of >70 kW stations in North America, CCS is present at about 49% and rising, and of the 261 new sites added so far this year as of my last data update 4/25, 66% were CCS. Tesla's larger per-station stall count means the rate of stall construction is probably pretty even or slightly in Tesla's favor, but with more infrastructure spending on CCS charging coming I wouldn't gamble on that staying that way.

 

[MSHampton]

At least one here seems to indicate they've already ordered the Tesla Korea adapter, and are still working on even getting a new ECU, much less doing the DIY fix:

Retrofit CCS compatibility onto earlier (NA) Model 3 - DIY approach

I've been trying for 2 weeks to get the new gen 4 "00" ECU without any sucess. My local shop said they didn't have any when I went there in person, and they won't return my calls. I've tried just about every Texas SC number, and no one answers the phone, they all say to leave a message. Finally...

teslamotorsclub.com

It really seems to me they're not using the VIN for any kind of filtering other than, "Has a VIN on their account": not car model/compatibility, not quantity allowed to be ordered provided only one at a time, etc.

Yep, I ordered the Korean adapter and Tesla Korea shows it has shipped. Still working on getting the updated ECU to work with it.

 

[kishkaru]

What the spec says and what a device provides/implements can be two different things tho. For example, HDMI spec specifies 55mA @ 5v. But many HDMI dongles are able to pull more than that... Also, USB 2.0 specs specify maximum 500mA @ 5v. Many TVs will still happily provide more than 500mA, but it isn't required to. I know bjorn had a video where he mentioned that Tesla took some shortcuts with CCS on their superchargers, such that if it knows it is talking to a Tesla, it makes certain assumptions and bypasses certain CCS things, that it does not do, when you plug in a non-tesla CCS car. (I vaguely remember him talking about this when talking about the 500A limitation of CCS)

While the default USB power supply may be 500mA max, USB actually has something called "Battery Charging" (not to be confused with USB-PD) which provides up to 1.5A of power on the port. Many TVs and other modern devices implement BC nowadays on all ports.

In any case, we're talking about 40A here, not mA level. At the maximum 950V of the charger, that's 38kW of extra power!
I don't think IEC 62196-3 would consider that a simple "rounding error".

 

[avs007]

While the default USB power supply may be 500mA max, USB actually has something called "Battery Charging" (not to be confused with USB-PD) which provides up to 1.5A of power on the port. Many TVs and other modern devices implement BC nowadays on all ports.

I'm well aware of that... However the Battery Charging spec came out AFTER USB/2.0, and it's also not mandatory for logo compliance. But yes, many TV's will support this, but MANY do NOT... Disclaimer: I used to work with folks in USB SIG, as well as many of the TV OEMs in various other standards bodies... I could go on another rant about issues I had working with these same folks when it came to interop/compliance/certification, so I know how/why many of these issues come about. Just to tease one of the issues... I tried to get one of them to add a 5 cent BOM cost addition to address one of their issues with their power delivery, and they flat out refused saying that in the volumes they are shipping, it would eat into their margins too much...

 

[bradtem]

Since Elon did say the adapter would be made available to US in April,

I also would like to know the source for this, even though Elon's predictions are not exactly gospel.

 

[avs007]

In any case, we're talking about 40A here, not mA level. At the maximum 950V of the charger, that's 38kW of extra power!
I don't think IEC 62196-3 would consider that a simple "rounding error".

I totally agree with you on that... One thing I always ran into working in standards bodies, was that we found that many many companies would cut corners to implement a spec "just well enough" to pass certification/logo tests. And depending on the standard's body, sometimes these certification tests were made by the same company that made the products seeking certification! In others, an unbiased third party makes the certification test, etc. So often times you'll find that for logo/certification may not actually test all the right criteria, especially if they aren't fuzzing the inputs. Protocols that used XML was notorious for this. Vendors would skip namespace resolution, and expect particular tags, without validating the namespace, etc. Or they "assume" the control point did input validation, etc... So if the controller asked for "X", the device would oblige, because the controller probably knows what it's doing, etc, lol. But anyways, I could write books on this stuff, hahaha.

 

[acarney]

How is the car pulling 538A through the CCS adapter from the charger if the CCS spec is limited to 500A on the connector?
Or is the 500A limitation at the battery pack level, and the charger is able to deliver slightly higher than that to account for charging losses?

Looks like on the EVgo charging screen it shows "Max 950V"/"Max 540A", so EVgo themselves is breaking the CCS spec by providing a more than 500A-capable DCFC
Wouldn't it be cool if the charger can max out both its voltage and amperage, 950V * 540A = 513 kW! Too bad it's capped at "349 kW".

(IIRC from Kyle's videos, other 400V/500A cars like Mercedes EQS and Rivian R1T stayed right at the 499A limit, so Tesla is breaking all kinds of specs here!)

These also may be “continuous” rating. I don’t know what the duration would have to be for continuous, but maybe it’s one hour, or literally continuously for as long as it was delivering power etc.

I think Tesla has always pushed above specs because they know the charge profile and that you may only be at 500amp for 6 minutes max or something. I’m surprised they’ve allowed that same aggressive tactics when using an adapter, but it appears they’re confident that they can handle it and hopefully the stations can as well.

They may also know that the stations have enough safety in place that if a cable was overheating or showing too much resistance then the station would back down the power…

 

[STS-134]

These also may be “continuous” rating. I don’t know what the duration would have to be for continuous, but maybe it’s one hour, or literally continuously for as long as it was delivering power etc.

I think Tesla has always pushed above specs because they know the charge profile and that you may only be at 500amp for 6 minutes max or something. I’m surprised they’ve allowed that same aggressive tactics when using an adapter, but it appears they’re confident that they can handle it and hopefully the stations can as well.

They may also know that the stations have enough safety in place that if a cable was overheating or showing too much resistance then the station would back down the power…

They may have a thermal sensor in the cars' charge ports and if the connector gets too hot, they can always throttle back. This would protect the adapter too.

 

[TravelFree]

I'm curious where you're getting those numbers from, and if it's stalls or stations? My own tracking shows that of >70 kW stations in North America, CCS is present at about 49% and rising, and of the 261 new sites added so far this year as of my last data update 4/25, 66% were CCS. Tesla's larger per-station stall count means the rate of stall construction is probably pretty even or slightly in Tesla's favor, but with more infrastructure spending on CCS charging coming I wouldn't gamble on that staying that way.

My data comes from EVAdoption.com which published their data for end of year 2021. They parse the data in several ways. What is your source showing CCS has expanded to 66% by 4/25? I'd like to have a source that is more current too.

Considering that when L2 plugs are included in the number Tesla still wins because Tesla has adapters to charge at all the connection plugs, Tesla, CCS Chademo, J1772 so only Tesla is compatible with all charging plugs with proper adapters they make plus 3rd party adapters.

With the government's subsidizing pro Union it's anyone's guess which will win out but considering adapters, my bet is on Tesla since they have the most compatibility and reliability. If you don't support Tesla you are in the wrong club.

 

[TravelFree]

These also may be “continuous” rating. I don’t know what the duration would have to be for continuous, but maybe it’s one hour, or literally continuously for as long as it was delivering power etc.

I think Tesla has always pushed above specs because they know the charge profile and that you may only be at 500amp for 6 minutes max or something. I’m surprised they’ve allowed that same aggressive tactics when using an adapter, but it appears they’re confident that they can handle it and hopefully the stations can as well.

They may also know that the stations have enough safety in place that if a cable was overheating or showing too much resistance then the station would back down the power…

There are only a few EV's that will push these high amperages and they are not constant. Most EV owners are well aware of the taper curves, but I have seen reports on the Rivian R1T, the Porsche Taycan and the Lucid Air hold the charge speed the highest on CCS 350KW but that's because the supply can put out higher voltage. Most of the other EV's never achieve the high current at the lower voltage like Tesla. My Model Y can peak at 250KW only for a second and in just a minute or two is already tapered down to below 200KW. The cable and plug on these high power stations are liquid cooled. The adapter is not but the high current time is short. I've never seen a Tesla maintain high rate of charge for very long period of time. The Mustang Mach E can't seem to get much above 125KW on CCS connected to a 350KW station.

What's more important than peak rate is total time to achieve range to make it to the next charger.

 

[e of pi]

My data comes from EVAdoption.com which published their data for end of year 2021. They parse the data in several ways. What is your source showing CCS has expanded to 66% by 4/25? I'd like to have a source that is more current too.

I've pulled data on station counts and Plugscore from Plugshare manually every week or three for the last three years or so, starting just with EA and then branching out to grab it for Electrify Canada (EC), EVGo's high power, multi-pedestal network expansion over the last year or so, and recently all other CCS stations over 70 kW. Here's the current state for 2022 to date, as of my update this afternoon (your post reminded me I hadn't pulled data since 4/25). Note that counts for EVGo and "All Others" is taken with the 70kw-and-up filter set, EA and EC are basically all 150 to 50 kW if they're DCFC at all, so I don't bother with the filter on those. Tesla data is taken from the current total on supercharge.info, and thus I have no composite network plugscore.

	EA	EC	EVGO	Other CCS	Total CCS	Tesla	%Tesla
Start of Year	707	29	87	450	1273	1412	47.4%​
Today	761	30	121	532	1444	1510	48.9%​
Weighted	8.863	9.000	6.785	6.748	7.91	4/30/2022​
>0 Weight	9.066	9.000	7.894	8.407	8.72
Change Year-to-Date	54	1	34	82	171	98	63.6%​
Current Projected End of Year	869	32	189	713	1802	1732	51.0%​

I'll note with today's update, the year-to-date station fraction is only 63% CCS, not 66% CCS, but that's the line I was pointing at. And I will note, as I did earlier, that Tesla's probably installing as many or slightly more stalls so far, but at fewer individual locations. However, with infrastructure money, I expect the stall install rate statistic to swing in CCS' favor in a year or so as well.

 

[bro1999]

My adapter shipped from Korea! Or at least a FedEx shipping label has been created. Updated timeline:

• 26 April - submitted initial inquiry and replied to email from Harumio asking if I wanted to be invoiced, providing my Tesla login info (PW changed to temp PW)
• 27 April - received invoice, paid $318.50 via PayPal
• 28 April - received email from Tesla (in Korean) after the proxy Harumio uses placed the order via my account
• 28 April - received another email from Tesla Korea with the invoice for the CCS adapter order. My name is listed in the purchaser section, though a South Korean address in Seoul is listed.
• 4 May - received shipment notice from Harumio (FedEx shipping label created)

 

[TravelFree]

I've pulled data on station counts and Plugscore from Plugshare manually every week or three for the last three years or so, starting just with EA and then branching out to grab it for Electrify Canada (EC), EVGo's high power, multi-pedestal network expansion over the last year or so, and recently all other CCS stations over 70 kW. Here's the current state for 2022 to date, as of my update this afternoon (your post reminded me I hadn't pulled data since 4/25). Note that counts for EVGo and "All Others" is taken with the 70kw-and-up filter set, EA and EC are basically all 150 to 50 kW if they're DCFC at all, so I don't bother with the filter on those. Tesla data is taken from the current total on supercharge.info, and thus I have no composite network plugscore.

	EA	EC	EVGO	Other CCS	Total CCS	Tesla	%Tesla
Start of Year	707	29	87	450	1273	1412	47.4%​
Today	761	30	121	532	1444	1510	48.9%​
Weighted	8.863	9.000	6.785	6.748	7.91	4/30/2022​
>0 Weight	9.066	9.000	7.894	8.407	8.72
Change Year-to-Date	54	1	34	82	171	98	63.6%​
Current Projected End of Year	869	32	189	713	1802	1732	51.0%​

I'll note with today's update, the year-to-date station fraction is only 63% CCS, not 66% CCS, but that's the line I was pointing at. And I will note, as I did earlier, that Tesla's probably installing as many or slightly more stalls so far, but at fewer individual locations. However, with infrastructure money, I expect the stall install rate statistic to swing in CCS' favor in a year or so as well.

Plugshare is really good for determining what's working, where, the time you need it and I've been using it for that purpose since I started driving an EV. However your data may not be accurate because Plug share relies on social media posting to add to their listings. I know this because locally, I added 3 new Tesla stations that Plug share had no listing for. Additionally Plugshare has listings for some postings where the station is still under construction, but going to that station in the app you would know this because it would offer that from social media postings maybe but not always. Plugshare is my go to for what's working when I need one. The downside of my source is not updated daily as you prefer to know. EVadoption.com is only good for trending population of connections.

Here's the DCFC listing from EVAdoption that shows the station and plug count you referenced you were not sure of.:

Network	Level 1 Locations	Level 1 Ports	Level 2 Locations	Level 2 Ports	DCFC Locations	DCFC Ports	Total Locations	Total Ports
ChargePoint Network	152	157	14,155	47,114	1,147	1,675	15,454	48,946
Tesla			4,436	14,677	1,246	12,580	5,682	27,257
Non-Networked	343	984	4,924	10,519	605	909	5,872	12,412
SemaConnect Network			1,908	5,802			1,908	5,802
Blink Network			1,340	3,158	76	154	1,416	3,312
Electrify America			134	152	717	3,112	851	3,264
EV Connect			686	2,774	61	183	747	2,957
Greenlots			821	2,309	279	477	1,100	2,786
Volta			913	2,199	18	19	931	2,218
EVgo Network			295	464	849	1,711	1,144	2,175
POWERFLEX			33	626	3	5	36	631
FCN			29	85	114	545	143	630
OpConnect	12	38	142	563	15	28	169	629
FLO			259	440	1	2	260	442
EVCS			21	141	30	175	51	316
LIVINGSTON			29	188			29	188
AMPUP	1	1	42	174			43	175
Webasto			59	60	56	56	115	116
EVGATEWAY			18	81	3	29	21	110
ZEFNET			4	8	2	4	6	12
FPLEV					2	10	2	10
CHARGELAB			3	5			3	5
Electrify Canada					1	2	1	2

More specific for just DCFC port count ranking:

Rank	Charging Network	DC Fast Chargers (ports)	% of Total
1	Tesla	12,580	58.0%
2	Electrify America	3,112	14.4%
3	EVgo Network	1,711	7.9%
4	ChargePoint Network	1,675	7.7%
5	Non-Networked	909	4.2%
6	Francis Energy	545	2.5%
7	Greenlots (Now Shell Recharge)	477	2.2%
8	EV Connect	183	0.8%
9	EVCS	175	0.8%
10	Blink Network	154	0.7%
11	Webasto	56	0.3%
12	EVGATEWAY	29	0.1%
13	OpConnect	28	0.1%
14	Volta	19	0.1%
15	FPLEV	10	0.0%
16	POWERFLEX	5	0.0%
17	ZEFNET	4	0.0%
18	Electrify Canada	2	0.0%
19	FLO	2	0.0%

So where does EVAdoption.com get their data? US Department of Energy- Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Resources

 

[mnev]

Ordered an adapter from Korea via Harumio as I have been waiting like all of you for months and months. I did not give them my primary account information due to several concerns but created a second account and linked it. No need to provide VIN or anything else as the Tesla Korea shop site verifies what car you have when you login with the second account. Once I receive the adapter I plan to delete the second account.

Looking forward to being able to visit remote places and also using EA where V3 Superchargers are not present.

Thanks to everyone who figured all of this out.

 

[STS-134]

I did not give them my primary account information due to several concerns but created a second account and linked it. No need to provide VIN or anything else as the Tesla Korea shop site verifies what car you have when you login with the second account. Once I receive the adapter I plan to delete the second account.

Are you sure this will work?

 

[mnev]

So far it seems to be. Harumio used the account last night to order it. Got an order acknowledgement and then invoice from Tesla.

 

[avs007]

These also may be “continuous” rating. I don’t know what the duration would have to be for continuous, but maybe it’s one hour, or literally continuously for as long as it was delivering power etc.

Just yesterday I was watching an out of spec motoring video where kyle was driving the either a Rivian or a Mach E, I can't remember which video. He mentioned that at a few of the places, he was pulling more current than the rated max of the charger... He was pulling like 170kw at a 150kw charger a couple times. He was excited at first, but then after like a few minutes, he said he suspected the charger went into a limp/overheat/etc mode, as it cut back to 50kw and wouldn't ramp any more... He tried the charger right next to it, and it did the same thing. Pulled 170 for like a minute, then it dropped to 50 and stayed there.

 

[Mockingbird]

Just yesterday I was watching an out of spec motoring video where kyle was driving the either a Rivian or a Mach E, I can't remember which video. He mentioned that at a few of the places, he was pulling more current than the rated max of the charger... He was pulling like 170kw at a 150kw charger a couple times. He was excited at first, but then after like a few minutes, he said he suspected the charger went into a limp/overheat/etc mode, as it cut back to 50kw and wouldn't ramp any more... He tried the charger right next to it, and it did the same thing. Pulled 170 for like a minute, then it dropped to 50 and stayed there.

Everything you said is, well, wrong.

You could pull more than 150 kW on "150 kW chargers" because they are limited by the current and not the rated power.

The names "150 kW chargers" and "350 kW chargers" are misnomers.

Also, the throttling would be from the vehicle, not the charger.

 

[Jeff N]

Just yesterday I was watching an out of spec motoring video where kyle was driving the either a Rivian or a Mach E, I can't remember which video. He mentioned that at a few of the places, he was pulling more current than the rated max of the charger... He was pulling like 170kw at a 150kw charger a couple times. He was excited at first, but then after like a few minutes, he said he suspected the charger went into a limp/overheat/etc mode, as it cut back to 50kw and wouldn't ramp any more... He tried the charger right next to it, and it did the same thing. Pulled 170 for like a minute, then it dropped to 50 and stayed there.

I haven’t seen that video yet, but the ABB chargers often used by EA are actually specified to support up to 175 kW although EA labels them as 150 kW. This is because the ABB chargers use a single cabinet while the 350 kW chargers use two of the same cabinet connected together. It’s possible that some non ABB chargers that use a similar dual-cabinet strategy May also really be capable of 175 kW. Note that the peak output power is likely only seen during “800V” charging.