TT97
Active Member
If they could get the entire world to adapt that, then the Chinese government can keep track for you how much energy you are using charging your car.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
CCS for Model 3 in North America
- Thread starter Legen---dary
- Start date
If they could get the entire world to adapt that, then the Chinese government can keep track for you how much energy you are using charging your car.
Eno Deb
Active Member
Of course it is. CCS and the proprietary Tesla network will be the only serious fast charging networks in the US, particularly along highway routes.
RTPEV
Active Member
Not sure about this. For sure, at the present moment, the number of Teslas on the road and the number of Supercharger sites (at least in the US) far outnumber anything else.
But even if Tesla is wildly successful (and I hope they are), in about 4-5 years when EVs reach price parity with gas vehicles, and new car sales vastly favor EVs, they will only be capable of supplying the low single digit percent of total EVs. Fine, even assume 20%. That still means the majority of EVs will be non-Tesla.
Until about 2 years ago, taking Tesla out of the picture for a moment, we could have made the same argument about CHAdeMO vs. CCS. At that time the VAST majority of EVs on the road and charging stations in the US were CHAdeMO, and at the very least, you could have concluded that CHAdeMO could easily co-exist with CCS in a dual standard world.
But all it took was one dieselgate settlement and enough funding to jump start what is the closest thing to a true fast charging network (other than Tesla) that focused on CCS, and suddenly things have changed quite dramatically. Nissan either needs to similarly invest in a competitive CHAdeMO network (not likely), or switch the LEAF over to CCS ASAP. Otherwise I think they will face serious difficulty in selling a long range LEAF (or whatever other EVs they end up producing).
And like it or not, Tesla will ultimately be in the same boat. Teslas will eventually be the minority, and while they certainly appear to be committed creating an extensive Supercharger network, if I were at Tesla, I could seriously have to consider whether it would make sense long term to start shifting to CCS.
davewill
Active Member
I don't see why Tesla can't simply rely on an adapter as a long term strategy.
Don't get me wrong, I would greatly prefer that Tesla use a standard connector. However, I don't see them switching to a full-sized CCS connector at this point (absent government regulation, anyway).
Like the iPhone does to support USB. And it works very well for them. I suspect the same would be true with Superchargers. And equally, wireless inductive charging will eventually make this discussion moot.
RTPEV
Active Member
They certainly can, but if they've done the engineering work to create a pseudo-CCS connection for their Superchargers in Europe (not sure exactly what, other than setting up a back-end billing system, would be involved in making it a true CCS compatible charger), and they come to the conclusion that their Supercharger network is a valuable, potentially revenue generating asset, and with more cars coming to the market capable of accepting Supercharger charging rates, then maybe they would see that as a way to make their Supercharger network self-sustaining.
Nissan's problem isn't CHAdeMO, it's that the Leaf isn't good enough or cheap enough to sell at high volume.
As long as Tesla maintains or grows its US sales, it will be fine. 200,000 sales per year would be more than enough to pay for a comprehensive, dense network.
The model 3 is already at price parity with comparable ICE cars - and far cheaper than them on a TCO basis.
It's not that easy for the big automakers to just start making EVs and drown Tesla with volume.
For one thing, where will they get the batteries?
Tesla has been investing big in battery expansion - and batteries are still their limiting factor these days. The others aren't investing nearly as much into batteries yet, so they won't have the capacity to build at Tesla's current rate for a while...
You're also assuming that no one will see the writing on the wall and ask to join Tesla's network - something Tesla said they'd be open to with reasonable terms.
RTPEV
Active Member
No, maybe not at the moment, but I don't think they are as far behind as you might imagine. It's not like the Gigafactory is some kind of portal to a parallel battery universe that only Tesla controls.
Tesla has a great lead, for sure, and this could in fact propel them to a leadership position in the future auto industry.
On the other hand, Tesla is capable of making maybe 500K vehicles per year today. Once Shanghai is ramped up, that may be 1M vehicles per year. Let's even TRIPLE that assuming they build or acquire additional capacity in Europe, the US, and maybe another plant in Asia. 3M vehicles per year, out of an annual new car market of about 80M! Assuming the auto industry finally gets off their @$$#$ and realizes that people aren't going to pay for ICE vehicles any more, Tesla will not command a majority of new car sales in the coming future.
Sure, they might go in that direction. But given the size of the legacy auto industry compared to Tesla in terms of vehicle volume, I think the leverage position is for the legacy automakers to stay the course with CCS and Tesla is more likely to pivot towards adapting their network to CCS, not the other way around.
Eno Deb
Active Member
With the lone exception of Nissan, every single non-Tesla BEV being sold in the US now or coming to the market in the next few years uses CCS. Unless you believe they will all flop, CCS will be the dominant non-proprietary charging system in the US.
Last edited:
One thing that is clear from charging stations at present across the US is that non-Tesla ones are extremely limited in stalls and many of them have equipment that isn't working, and from some user posts on PlugShare the equipment can remain down for a while. While Dieselgate may have added money to pay for the installation of charging stations, I have to wonder how well those stations will be maintained and by whom. The fact that no car manufacturer wanted to invest in charging stations to begin with and only through a financial punishment did the effort take off, can't see many of them stepping forward like Tesla did to provide a reliable source--let others do it instead, except no one wants to take on that burden among the manufacturers. Let some third party do it, and so far we've seen the result of that. My guess is that fuel companies who will see a decrease in their gasoline/diesel sales will jump in and install their own at current gas station locations. At some point they will try to muscle their way into current EV charging station providers like ChargePoint, EVgo etc. Right now, like car manufacturers, they are behind the EV curve.
Eno Deb
Active Member
If we didn't have the Dieselgate settlement here, automakers would probably team up and invest to jump-start the DC charger infrastructure, like they do in Europe. In the long run, charging networks need to be able to sustain themselves anyway.
um... if us market is not moving to CCS, then how come: chevrolet bolt EV, kia niro ev, kia soul ev, hyundai kona electric, bmw i3, egolf etc... all come with CCS on North America? The Koreans are especially interesting because last generation of kia soul ev had Chademo, but current gen is CCS. Everybody except tesla and Nissan (ok also mitsubishi outlander PHEV) here are using CCS in current model cars.
Europeans and their governments want EVs. US auto manufacturers, dealerships, parts companies, gasoline companies don't; and as we can see by how hard they are fighting against Tesla being able to sell and service their small percentage of vehicles in the big picture of cars in general, I think they would/will drag their feet on this as well. They see how production of EVs and all of it's technology from battery, drivetrains to electronic controls is affecting the European manufacturers' bottom line with no assurances that after spending all that money that buyers will want their vehicle and not someone elses that maybe was better designed, optioned and priced. If charging stations remain a bottleneck in the US once consumers find that to travel long distance they encounter fewer stalls available to them and their wait times aren't tolerable, they are not going to be wanting to buy an EV that doesn't have a good universal support system. That kind of fits the manufacturers' purpose of slowing down the adoption of a technology they don't want happening. You still see this resistance in words coming from some of the European manufacturers as they say one thing and then say something contradictory.
Eno Deb
Active Member
Ionity is not funded by governments, but by a consortium of car manufacturers. They know that they need a charging network to be able to sell their EVs, and the same logic applies in the US.
Not sure what you mean by that. If you are referring to the dealership disputes, there are actually good reasons why manufacturers in the US are prohibited from directly selling cars in many states. This isn't a simple issue of "evil dealerships blocking benevolent Tesla". If Tesla is allowed to sell directly (which is certainly open for debate), so should other manufacturers.
I know this is a common conspiracy theory among Tesla fans, but IMO the reason why car manufacturers hesitate to jump into EVs with both feets is simply that it's currently very difficult to make money on them (Tesla is the best proof), and whether you like it or not that is a rational consideration that affects their very survival.
davewill
Active Member
The only valid reasons I'm aware of involve not letting manufacturers undercut or interfere with their own dealer networks. Since Tesla doesn't have a dealer network to interfere with, the fight is just pure obstructionism in my book.
That said, I think the fight comes more from the dealer association than the other manufacturers.
Eno Deb
Active Member
The original reasons for the franchise laws were to promote competition in retail and to level the playing field between large car companies and small local dealers. As I wrote above, it is certainly open for debate whether the reasons are still valid in the age of e-commerce, but in any case the same rules should apply to everyone, including Tesla.
One consideration is that several cities / states are now passing legislation to use public funding and or grants to fund charging stations and or dedicated EV charging parking spaces.
Ideally these sites would use some common or adaptable type of charging.
Ideally these sites would use some common or adaptable type of charging.
pdx_m3s
Active Member
Prediction, Tesla moves to CCS (or whatever the next-generation industry-standard plug is) within 5 years. I'm going to miss the beautiful aesthetic of the Tesla plug and cord.
Similar threads
