-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
RichAZ/CapeCod
Member
Would it not be more logical for ALL EVs in the States to go to CCS2?? I mean, if you're going to switch over, let's come into sinc with most of the rest of the world.
Rich
I handle the charging plug twice every day, I want it to be the nicest plug out there, the TPC. The adaptor is for the times there is no TPC.
Always go 240/208V if you can, as 120V is just too slow and not quite as efficient. Tesla offers a 6-15 adapter (240V 15A) for the mobile connector, but most J1772 EVSEs seem to do 6-20 (240V 20A), so depending on the office mix, choose plugs accordingly (6-15 fits in a 6-20 outlet, so if you're not power limited, always go 6-20).
srs5694
Active Member
Why? The incremental benefit of CCS2 vs. CCS1 is minor at best. Because it's not (currently, or likely within several decades) possible to drive from CCS1 to CCS2 territories or vice-versa, there will be extraordinarily little benefit of interoperability. Basically, it would simplify things for manufacturers and make it easier to transfer used cars between markets (which is a niche activity, AFAIK).
OTOH, switching now would create more confusion in a market that's already got too many standards -- instead of three standards in North America (Tesla, CHAdeMO, and CCS1) there would then be four standards (Tesla, CHAdeMO, CCS1, and CCS2), at least temporarily -- and by "temporarily" I mean "for two decades," the expected lifetime of a modern car. (This is just for DC fast charging; Level 1/2 plugs are different again!) At EV events, I already field questions from people who are confused by the number of charging standards, and switching from CCS1 to CCS2 now would make it worse. In other words, this is what you're suggesting:
This might have been a reasonable suggestion several years ago, before we got multiple entrenched competing standards; but now it will just make matters worse. We need fewer charging standards, not more of them. Fortunately, CHAdeMO is dying in the US, so we'll be down to two (Tesla and CCS1) soon, at least for new cars, and that's probably manageable.
srs5694
Active Member
This is possible, too, but the longer Tesla waits to do this, the more pain it will cause, both for Tesla and for existing Tesla owners. I've seen no indication that Tesla is seriously considering such a move in the North American market, but of course that means very little; Tesla as a corporation tends to keep a lot of its decision-making out of the public eye, except when Musk wants to create buzz by Tweeting about something.
I'd like that. Just use an adapter for j1772 or ccs1. I used a ccs1 connector for the first time recently, and that latch mechanism is really awkward. The ccs2 setup seems better.
The Tesla ccs1 adapter also isn't bad at all.
As an unintended consequence, the flow of stolen vehicles into Africa and Asia may be disrupted somewhat until they can figure out a cheap way to convert them, or just start stealing entire DCFC stations and shipping them over too.
Well, there's the whole 3 phase thing with CCS2, which is a huge benefit for commercial buildings that only have 208V split phase. Tesla's CCS2 vehicles do have 3 phase OBCs in them so...
Just watch, we're going to get another one. We're going to need faster DC charging very soon, once batteries are developed that can charge up in 5-10 minutes. And with it will come yet another connector...OTOH, switching now would create more confusion in a market that's already got too many standards -- instead of three standards in North America (Tesla, CHAdeMO, and CCS1) there would then be four standards (Tesla, CHAdeMO, CCS1, and CCS2), at least temporarily -- and by "temporarily" I mean "for two decades," the expected lifetime of a modern car. (This is just for DC fast charging; Level 1/2 plugs are different again!) At EV events, I already field questions from people who are confused by the number of charging standards, and switching from CCS1 to CCS2 now would make it worse. In other words, this is what you're suggesting:
This might have been a reasonable suggestion several years ago, before we got multiple entrenched competing standards; but now it will just make matters worse. We need fewer charging standards, not more of them. Fortunately, CHAdeMO is dying in the US, so we'll be down to two (Tesla and CCS1) soon, at least for new cars, and that's probably manageable.
Exelion
Member
Hopefully not that soon- the question then becomes, have we maxxed out the capabilities of either CCS1 or TPC (Tesla)? How much more kW can they safely push into the car? Think 400v or 800v cars-how much faster can we get with what infrastructure we have now?
At 350 kW, which is doable at 800 or 900 volt architectures and the 400-500 amp capabilities of CCS1, a 75 kWh car could be charged from 10% to 80% in 9 minutes if it could take 350 kW the whole time. So I think it'll be a while before we need more than CCS1 can offer, and the limit is much more about the car side than the plugs.
My bad, I actually meant J1772 at the workplaces in Burbank.
We're going to need to charge a 130-150 kWh battery in 5 minutes, not a 75 kWh battery in 12-13 minutes. That's going to require about 1.5 megawatts of power and a lot more current (about 1.6-1.9kA) even if they're using the 800-900V architecture. The Cybertruck and all of these pickup truck EVs aren't going to use dinky 75 kWh batteries because their range will suck if they do.
Exelion
Member
Then there’s even a possibility of twin-charge, where one 150kW vehicle takes up two spots and uses two cables to charge-one cable charges half the battery and the other cable charges the other half. Essentially charging two 75kW vehicles!
CCS2 is a plus in business and apartment buildings as the mckenzie/j1773 part of the CCS2 plug supports 3-phase power.Why? The incremental benefit of CCS2 vs. CCS1 is minor at best. Because it's not (currently, or likely within several decades) possible to drive from CCS1 to CCS2 territories or vice-versa, there will be extraordinarily little benefit of interoperability. Basically, it would simplify things for manufacturers and make it easier to transfer used cars between markets (which is a niche activity, AFAIK).
OTOH, switching now would create more confusion in a market that's already got too many standards -- instead of three standards in North America (Tesla, CHAdeMO, and CCS1) there would then be four standards (Tesla, CHAdeMO, CCS1, and CCS2), at least temporarily -- and by "temporarily" I mean "for two decades," the expected lifetime of a modern car. (This is just for DC fast charging; Level 1/2 plugs are different again!) At EV events, I already field questions from people who are confused by the number of charging standards, and switching from CCS1 to CCS2 now would make it worse. In other words, this is what you're suggesting:
This might have been a reasonable suggestion several years ago, before we got multiple entrenched competing standards; but now it will just make matters worse. We need fewer charging standards, not more of them. Fortunately, CHAdeMO is dying in the US, so we'll be down to two (Tesla and CCS1) soon, at least for new cars, and that's probably manageable.
Mockingbird
Member
No.
That would just be creating a mess by introducing another connector that currently doesn't exist (or have marginal existence) in North America at the time that we should be standardizing.
CCS is already a bad enough user experience having to handle such a bulky connector and now you're talking about people handling two bulky connectors? Just euthanize CCS and switch to something better!
jabloomf1230
Minister of Silly Walks
Then why not just adopt the Chinese existing charging standard GB/T? Or China's proposed standard, ChaoJi? Seriously, the charging standards are okay if done by continent.
srs5694
Active Member
Unless I'm very much mistaken, 3-phase power is an AC thing, not a DC thing. CCS (1 or 2) is a DC fast-charging standard, so it does not, per se, support 3-phase power. (If I'm wrong, please enlighten me.) If Tesla's CCS2-equipped vehicles support 3-phase power, that's because they're sold in Europe, where 3-phase power is common, and it'd be the Level 2 support in those vehicles (via the Type 2 connector, which is associated with CCS2 much as J1772 is associated with CCS1) that works with 3-phase power. Sure, they're associated, but in this case, if I understand the standards correctly, it's the Type 2 connector that you want for 3-phase support, not the CCS2 connector per se. In theory, a car could support CCS1 DC fast charging and Type 2 Level 2 AC charging. This would require two plugs, similar to CHAdeMO/J1772, so it would be an ugly and awkward solution, and I do not anticipate any manufacturer producing such a vehicle, but AFAIK there's no technical reason it wouldn't work. Of course, in practice a CCS2 car is almost certain to also support Type 2 AC charging, but they aren't quite the same thing.
I'm being nit-picky about this because it raises another problem with a proposed shift from CCS1 to CCS2. If that shift also entailed a shift from J1772 to Type 2 for Level 1/2 AC charging (as it almost certainly would), then that would make the shift all the more painful, because it would require additional adapters (for EVs and plug-in hybrids that don't support DC fast charging, if nothing else) and changes to AC charging infrastructure, including home EVSEs (when current EV drivers bought new CCS2/Type-2 EVs).
For all these reasons, I don't think such a shift is in the cards. I'd be very, very surprised if it got more consideration than idle talk in EV forums like this one. The XKCD comic I embedded earlier is funny, but it's also serious. Once standards are set, they shouldn't be changed or expanded upon willy-nilly. It does tend to happen in the computer industry, but that's something where an adapter cable costs maybe $5 or $10. In the automotive industry, the cost of changes is much higher. Like it or not (and I realize some here are in the "not" category), CCS1/J1772 is the standard in North America for most EV manufacturers, and that won't change without a compelling reason. I see no compelling reason for it to change to CCS2/Type 2, and AFAIK, no automaker has even hinted that it might possibly happen, so talking about it as if it were a real possibility is pointless, IMHO.
I still don’t see the need for or utility of a 3 phase plug in N America. Essentially no one has it at home. Condos, businesses that do have 3 phase simply use 2/3 phases for each EVSE, just like they use 2/3 phases for almost everything else.
3 phase is ideal for drive motors, for EVSE it just means you need to budget extra conductor (4awg?) for every charging spot.
