A ton of commercial buildings and even apartment buildings use 3 phase power, and a lot of the high voltage appliances there use 208V split phase from 2 of the 3 phases instead of 240V split phase from a center tapped neutral. Switching to J3068 would allow vehicles to easily get more than 10 kW of power from such a system without the need to go all the way to 48A. Just make a J3068/CCS2 to J1772/CCS1 adapter for cars that use the latter, change over to the former on all new infrastructure, and be done with it.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
At the time it was created, that was the max of CHAdeMO.
It is already in South Korea. Why launch an adapter when they have done fine without it and if Tesla's main goal was to maintain a walled garden? Not following the logic.
Why would they need plausible deniability? Again, the status quo for every other manufacturer is supporting only 1 DC charging standard per region.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
For residential use, the advantages are very limited. And to get higher 3 phase power from a OBC, you need to have a different OBC architecture and typically sacrifice some of the max split phase power (which is practically what all residential homes use, especially with garages). Maybe some commercial fleet cars may benefit, but doesn't make sense for a vast majority of passenger cars.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
Well Tesla sold the Roadster in Japan without CHAdeMO support. The CHAdeMO adapter actually was released in 2013 first in NA, before they sold a single car that supported it in Japan (first Model S sales occurred in late 2014). If Tesla wanted to maintain a walled garden, and they needed CHAdeMO support in Japan, they could have easily limited that adapter to Japan (or added a CHAdeMO connection elsewhere in the car like other manufacturers did). There was no reason to sell it first in NA market, and certainly zero reason to also come up with one for Europe (on the Type 2 connector). All that does it make a hole in the walled garden. Sorry, not buying this logic.
Same thing with the CCS adapter. Why release one when it punches a huge hole in your walled garden, especially given Tesla has done fine without it for so long?
The most straightforward explanation for releasing either is the same reason why they provide so many Nema options: to make charging more flexible for their owners.
Last edited:
Correct, I have run into multiple occasions now where Superchargers are backed up OR the superchargers were screwed up (ran into two superchargers where every stall was ramping up and down the kW so it would have taken 3 hours to do any significant charging) on a long road trip. My choice was to wait for a supercharger, or go a few miles down the road and use my chademo adapter.
I purchased the CC1 adapter from evhub. Hopefully the updated version works as expected. Yes, it cost me an extra $200 compared to what Tesla will charge but I have no idea when Tesla will release theirs. One of my common routes has a nice Electrify America station on the route that I will be able to use the CC1 adapter instead of the chademo. That will cut 40 minutes off a 3 hour trip because I don't have to drive 20 minutes each way off my path to a supercharger. With chademo, it was a wash since it was slower charging.
Fwiw, in this very thread I showed CCS + 400ish volt systems doing 218W. I agree with the spirit of what you're saying, but CCS has room to expand, amperage-wise where the Tesla handle has less. Tesla's liquid cooling in V3 is able to push very high amperages for short time periods, but it is tbd how well that will work over longer charging sessions at higher rates.
I agree that the top lock design of ccs1 isn't ideal, but I also am just indifferent to the whole thing. I hate needing to carry an adapter, and there are very valid reasons both Tesla's proprietary handle and CCS1 exist, and the installed base of Tesla connectors may keep the US from ever moving to a universal standard.
After using full speed CCS for a while now, I just value the option to charge wherever I want. I live close to one of the busiest superchargers in the country, the one in Santa Monica. Seeing 'short wait' or 'medium wait' is par for the course, and the next closest supercharger is 10 miles (aka 2 hours in traffic
) away. Meanwhile, there is an EVgo station 5 blocks from that overbusy supercharger with 6 350kW stalls, and I'm livin' the high life while Tesla owners sit in a queue.What would the point of that be? Then the Tesla vehicles could still not use the installed CCS chargers without an adapter. And you would also need an adapter for all of the installed Tesla Destination chargers.
MontyFloyd
Member
Yes, I know, I even contributed 3 to that list.
But some of the comments in there clearly say put in Tesla connectors.
damonbrodie
Member
It is only a matter of time before CCS outnumber TPC in north america. It might be 5 years or it might be 10 - dunno, but it will inevitably happen. More entrants into EV charging will come as the growth in EVs climbs, the US and Canadian governments will likely continue funding the infrastructure which will push it forward. Tesla will be the only vendor installing TPC and ALL of the rest of the EV ecosystem (dozens and dozens of vendors) will be installing CCS.
The Tesla ecosystem is very cozy right now. Its super reliable (comparatively speaking) and the way the payments for charging work is very slick. So I get why everyone WANTS the Telsa TPC to win, but its salmon against the stream. Eventually CCS will catch up and pass TPC in # of deployed chargers. It has to or non Tesla EV adoption will fail.
As much as I like the TPC and how well supercharging is integrated with my car, I would still prefer to have a single charging standard and the only reasonable choice is CCS. Adapters are a crutch that should be eliminated as soon as possible. They add points of failure to an already somewhat flaky ecosystem.
The Tesla ecosystem is very cozy right now. Its super reliable (comparatively speaking) and the way the payments for charging work is very slick. So I get why everyone WANTS the Telsa TPC to win, but its salmon against the stream. Eventually CCS will catch up and pass TPC in # of deployed chargers. It has to or non Tesla EV adoption will fail.
As much as I like the TPC and how well supercharging is integrated with my car, I would still prefer to have a single charging standard and the only reasonable choice is CCS. Adapters are a crutch that should be eliminated as soon as possible. They add points of failure to an already somewhat flaky ecosystem.
MontyFloyd
Member
MontyFloyd
Member
Damn. I am reluctant to accept this, but I think that you unfortunately are correct. I just wish that what will apparently become the standard - CCS - were less clunky and more robustly designed. But it seems likely that CCS, with its flaws, will indeed take over for now (though in the long run, I imagine that it too will be replaced by some new, improved general standard, which will lead to further transition issues). In the meantime, I am happy to stay within the Tesla North America supercharging ecosystem while occasionally using a CCS adapter when one is officially released or endorsed by Tesla. Indeed, Tesla supercharging on its own has so far met my needs.
Mockingbird
Member
...and Tesla hasn't updated it ever since
The CHAdeMO adapter was out-of-stock 99.99%.
Even if someone bought it, they are still limited to 50 kW.
That gives a lopsided advantage to the Supercharger, which tops out at 250 kW.
Tesla wants part of that $7.5 billion pie and it requires CCS.
It would look really bad to regulators if Tesla forces Tesla users to only charge at the Supercharger.
With the CHAdeMO adapter, Tesla can deny that it's a walled garden.
In reality, the adapter was out-of-stock 99.99% of the time and limited to 50 kW, which gives a lopsided advantage to the Supercharger.
In addition, there is the cost of the adapter itself, which again, tilted the field in favor of the Supercharger.
There's not that much infrastructure now compared to how much we'll need to transition everyone from ICE to EVs. Most of the EVs that will be sold have yet to be sold, and most of the chargers that will be installed have yet to be installed. Plus, Tesla did it in Taiwan:
Tesla will switch to CCS2 (from proprietary connector) in Taiwan starting Q3 2021
Looks like Tesla will be switching away from their proprietary connector to CCS2 in Taiwan. The move doesn't make a whole lot of sense practically, given Taiwan is similar to the USA in that other than Tesla proprietary, they mainly use J1772 and CCS1 (and Taiwan's standards authority seems to...
teslamotorsclub.com
J1772 maxes out at 80A with advanced contacts. That's 19.2 kW @ 240V. J3068 maxes out at well over 100A, and can deliver almost as much power as an urban supercharger on AC @ 208Y/120:
It can also do 120V and 240V split phase. There's nothing J1772 can do that J3068 can't do; there's a lot that J3068 can do that J1772 can't. J3068 is just technologically superior and it's way better to bite the bullet now and retrofit vehicles or use adapters than it is to install a bunch of inferior equipment that hampers EV charging.
Apparently J3068 is supposed to be used for commercial vehicles. Staying with J1772 for passenger cars would be a mistake, as this means that people will have to be carrying around adapters forever, instead of only until the existing generation of chargers is replaced. Static partitioning of resources is never good. And if Tesla does stick with its proprietary connector, are we all supposed to carry two adapters instead of just one? In 5-10 years, I'd be willing to bet that very few of the currently installed EVSEs and DC fast chargers will still be operating using their present cables/connectors.
Sure. Any new chargers installed from this point on should be CCS2/J3068. If any chargers or public EVSEs break, they should be replaced with CCS2/J3068. Any vehicles with a different port should get a retrofit or use an adapter. If Tesla wants to stick with the proprietary port, it can, and it can just offer a J3068/CCS2 to Tesla adapter for non Tesla EVSEs and chargers.
Last edited:
You mean other than plug in to the hundreds of thousand, or maybe even millions, of vehicles that are already on the road with the equipment/port that they already have?
I get it CCS2/J3068 are better standards, but I would guess that there is about a 1% chance that North America will switch. That ship has sailed and isn't likely to come back.
EVs still only make up what, 2-4% of US sales, and probably 1-2% of the entire fleet? Most of the EVs that will be sold have yet to be sold, and most of the EVSEs that will be installed, have yet to be installed. It's far better if we early adopters need to use adapters for the time being or retrofit our vehicles so that the vast majority of people in the future have an easier time.
Sure. And if this were 25 years ago, and there weren't any infrastructure at all in this country, and we were starting completely from scratch, that might be a reasonable idea to start off with that.
But it's not, and we didn't.
J1772 is what we have. So it makes no sense for Tesla to switch their cars to something else that doesn't work with the existing infrastructure and will always need adapters.
They're not going to be replaced. Cars with the CCS1 ports on them don't have to use any adapters at all, now or in the future, because they can accept both the J1772 plugs and the CCS1 plugs. Tesla considering going to CCS1 in North America at some point might be reasonable. CCS2 isn't.
IIRC, So far we've seen Tesla respond to requirements like this by putting one CCS station off to the side and claiming great success. Until I see a dual-plug pedestal, I'm gonna be very hesitant to believe their approach is changing.
Which ... suggests that we're still going to be majority Tesla fast-charging plugs for a few more years before the ability of a single company to parallelize sufficiently hits, and CCS plugs materially overtakes Tesla plugs.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
Well you are in a semi-exclusive nirvana at the moment in terms of having a high power CCS adapter (with the car playing a part also, Model 3/Y owners and older Model S/X are unlikely to see the same speeds), so I understand your feelings. But I think that will change rather quickly when Tesla releases their adapter and as more long range CCS cars get released (although it may take a few years while the industry works through the supply chain issues).Fwiw, in this very thread I showed CCS + 400ish volt systems doing 218W. I agree with the spirit of what you're saying, but CCS has room to expand, amperage-wise where the Tesla handle has less. Tesla's liquid cooling in V3 is able to push very high amperages for short time periods, but it is tbd how well that will work over longer charging sessions at higher rates.
I agree that the top lock design of ccs1 isn't ideal, but I also am just indifferent to the whole thing. I hate needing to carry an adapter, and there are very valid reasons both Tesla's proprietary handle and CCS1 exist, and the installed base of Tesla connectors may keep the US from ever moving to a universal standard.
After using full speed CCS for a while now, I just value the option to charge wherever I want. I live close to one of the busiest superchargers in the country, the one in Santa Monica. Seeing 'short wait' or 'medium wait' is par for the course, and the next closest supercharger is 10 miles (aka 2 hours in traffic
Last edited:
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
I know, I started that thread! But if you look at the details you would see a lot of owners in Taiwan opposed it and thought switching to CCS1 would make more sense than CCS2. The reasons for Tesla picking CCS2 was already laid out, Tesla already had that being manufactured for export (both the cars with the ports and the dual head superchargers), and given the short deadline provided, they had no other options.There's not that much infrastructure now compared to how much we'll need to transition everyone from ICE to EVs. Most of the EVs that will be sold have yet to be sold, and most of the chargers that will be installed have yet to be installed. Plus, Tesla did it in Taiwan:
Tesla will switch to CCS2 (from proprietary connector) in Taiwan starting Q3 2021
Looks like Tesla will be switching away from their proprietary connector to CCS2 in Taiwan. The move doesn't make a whole lot of sense practically, given Taiwan is similar to the USA in that other than Tesla proprietary, they mainly use J1772 and CCS1 (and Taiwan's standards authority seems to...
But even in Europe where there was a push for high power AC charging and 3-phase is more common in residential homes, they have given up on it. Renault used to support 43 kW AC charging, but have given up trying to push it. DC charging made it largely irrelevant for public charging and speeds that fast is unnecessary at home. Basically having high power DC makes more sense than having powerful OBCs in every car.J1772 maxes out at 80A with advanced contacts. That's 19.2 kW @ 240V. J3068 maxes out at well over 100A, and can deliver almost as much power as an urban supercharger on AC @ 208Y/120:
It can also do 120V and 240V split phase. There's nothing J1772 can do that J3068 can't do; there's a lot that J3068 can do that J1772 can't. J3068 is just technologically superior and it's way better to bite the bullet now and retrofit vehicles or use adapters than it is to install a bunch of inferior equipment that hampers EV charging.
Others have pointed out that the ship has sailed for passenger cars in the US. Tesla trying to push this alone would be going against the tide and making it more difficult for owners (which may ending up needing even more adapters between the three standards). The US is even worse than Taiwan in Type 2 adoption, while in Taiwan there are a few passenger EVs that use CCS2, there are literally none in the US.
