CCS1 to Tesla Adapter is being developed by Tesla Korea Club.

[Saghost]

Because Tesla won’t let other cars use Tesla supercharger network. Imagine different gas pumps existed for Toyota because Toyota has more cars than any other company. Toyota owners will have to only go to Toyota pumps while other brands share gas pumps.

Tesla saw a need, so they built a system, knowing it was the only way to get BEVs adopted anytime soon. And they’re right - without the supercharger network, I’d still have my Volt, and I’m sure I’m not the only one.

Elon has said on various occasions that they’d be open to partners in the network, provided the partners paid to support and expand the network in proportion to their usage. So far no one has taken them up on it.

 

[wws]

Because it involves connecting to 3rd party's hardware in non-spec ways, which is something none of your examples do.

Properly done, the third party hardware can't tell the difference between a Tesla adapter and Bolt EV. Just like it can't really tell the difference between a Tesla CHAdeMO adapter and a Leaf. (Other than duty cycle... )

And it is unlikely that there will be much help given relevant body. The whole rationale behind CCS in North America was to freeze Tesla out, and hope they died, and slow walk BEV development to the pace that all the ICE manufacturers were more comfortable with and keep control away from the Crazy Guy that wanted BEVs now.

True. And to freeze Nissan and the Japanese out.

There is some handwaving in the spec about all sorts of future potential payment options, but that is all vapourware and normally those sorts of specs end up needing to be amended anyway when you go to try implement anything based on them.

As an old saying in the computer biz goes - "G-d created heaven and earth in six days - but he didn't have an installed base." There is a huge base of existing EVs that will never support Tesla-like automagic payment options.

The only reason those chargers exist right now in any sort of numbers is because VW got caught defrauding the EPA and were forced to put that money out there. Giving Crazy Guy's cars direct access to the chargers lends value to Crazy Guy's cars. Sure it lends a lot of value to their network, but anything to try to slow the walk......

At this point, it isn't in the third party networks best interests to prevent Tesla owners from using their charging networks. I mean - if I were a VC and looking at the business plans for a charging network, one of the first questions I'd ask is "how do you plan to support the vast majority of EVs out there - which, like it or not, are Teslas?"

 

[jpfive]

Because Tesla won’t let other cars use Tesla supercharger network. Imagine different gas pumps existed for Toyota because Toyota has more cars than any other company. Toyota owners will have to only go to Toyota pumps while other brands share gas pumps.

Helpful, and informative. Thanks.

 

[SammichLover]

Because Tesla won’t let other cars use Tesla supercharger network. Imagine different gas pumps existed for Toyota because Toyota has more cars than any other company. Toyota owners will have to only go to Toyota pumps while other brands share gas pumps.

Musk tried to put a deal in place to make it multivendor, but got turned down. No car manufacturer wants to give Tesla any more air that they can help, to the point of self-harm.

EDIT: There appears to have also been a serious conceptual mismatch between Musk and the other manufacturers. VW execs have for example been vocal about their expectation that charging will be a profit center, they want the slice of the gasoline industry's revenue that represents the difference between ICE and EV energy costs. Where as Tesla has always seen it as a break-even, as they are motivated more-so to have gasoline use disappear and want the least economic pressure in the way of that.

This naturally creates a lot of friction. A key Musk publicly stated requirement for partnership in the SC network at the time was that the break-even pricing philosophy had to stay in place.

 

[SammichLover]

Properly done, the third party hardware can't tell the difference between a Tesla adapter and Bolt EV. Just like it can't really tell the difference between a Tesla CHAdeMO adapter and a Leaf. (Other than duty cycle... )

"If you can't see me sneaking onto your property as I do it it isn't trespassing."

 

[qingshan]

I think an adapter to charge from a CCS charger would sell a lot better than the current CHAdeMO adapter. Yes the supercharger network is great. But it is also great to have options for charging and a CCS adapter could allow the same charging speeds as the supercharger network. I would buy one if available.

I would too

 

[EV3_]

EDIT: There appears to have also been a serious conceptual mismatch between Musk and the other manufacturers. VW execs have for example been vocal about their expectation that charging will be a profit center, they want the slice of the gasoline industry's revenue that represents the difference between ICE and EV energy costs. Where as Tesla has always seen it as a break-even, as they are motivated more-so to have gasoline use disappear and want the least economic pressure in the way of that.

This naturally creates a lot of friction. A key Musk publicly stated requirement for partnership in the SC network at the time was that the break-even pricing philosophy had to stay in place.

I've seen endless discussion on a CCS to Tesla adapter. It always boils down to two questions. Is it in Tesla's interest to do this, and is it feasible from a technology standpoint? On the surface it seems to make perfect sense, and if it was less that $600 I'd fall all over myself to buy one. I know I'm not alone. But if it makes such obvious sense, why do we get no feedback from Tesla on this issue? I guess I direct you back to the two questions above...

 

[SammichLover]

I've seen endless discussion on a CCS to Tesla adapter. It always boils down to two questions. Is it in Tesla's interest to do this, and is it feasible from a technology standpoint? On the surface it seems to make perfect sense, and if it was less that $600 I'd fall all over myself to buy one. I know I'm not alone. But if it makes such obvious sense, why do we get no feedback from Tesla on this issue? I guess I direct you back to the two questions above...

There's a 3rd question. Is it feasible from a legal standpoint?

That seems a bit murky. One of the issues in trying to understand and assess that, if it is just a misunderstanding or a myth, is that it is very hard to get hold of the bedrock CCS documents, they are behind a high paywall.

As for why Tesla doesn't talk about it is because they aren't or don't want to be in a position to commit. We didn't really hear much about the Chademo on the Model 3 until it happened, too.

 

[SammichLover]

At this point, it isn't in the third party networks best interests to prevent Tesla owners from using their charging networks. I mean - if I were a VC and looking at the business plans for a charging network, one of the first questions I'd ask is "how do you plan to support the vast majority of EVs out there - which, like it or not, are Teslas?"

The largest, by far, actual installed 100kW+ CCS network in North America is Electrify America. Before them CCS was a scrub league compared to Chademo. EA is theoretically independent but it was funded by VW's 'voluntary' settlement with the EPA and the core of the executives team are transplanted VW execs.

It isn't really supposed to be, but with a wink and a nod their priority at this point isn't revenue today or tomorrow. Or charging revenue at all at this point. Plus ultimately every extra Tesla sold cuts into their future potential leverage on pricing, because that customer can just as easily (more easily, most of the time) use a SC instead.

Also their current actual stall count on paper is low compared to Tesla's. On top of that in the actual there is this "letter of the law" thing with the settlement commitment where they have twice as many cables as they can charge cars at once. It is also a dodge allowed them to satisfy the Chademo requirement without committing a dedicated stall or charging gear to that, as one of the chargers at each site has one cable for the Chademo and one for CCS, and if the CCS one is being used there's no Chademo there. If demand was created locally somewhere it would be pretty easy for the Tesla fleet to swamp most current EA sites, impacting the experience of native CCS users (such that they exist).

 

[swegman]

Some EVgo CCS chargers support Tesla vehicles by providing the required Tesla head with their chargers.

Tesla vehicles can soon be charged at EVgo charging stations in the US

 

[FMinMI]

I would purchase one even if it needed to be capped at 50kW, and at the same price point as the CHAdeMO one Tesla now offers. It would be an option for fast charging in a pinch and CCS is growing much faster than CHAdeMO in the US.

 

[Jim in Houston]

As has been posted elsewhere, there is a demand for CCS1 adapters in USA. Tesla has NOT been interested. Yes there is a large amount of Super Chargers here is USA. However, there are a lot of areas right now in USA where there are more CCS chargers than Super Chargers.

 

[theothertom]

Some EVgo CCS chargers support Tesla vehicles by providing the required Tesla head with their chargers.

Tesla vehicles can soon be charged at EVgo charging stations in the US

You probably meant to say "Some EVgo chargers support Tesla vehicles by providing the required Tesla head with their chargers."

 

[SammichLover]

However, there are a lot of areas right now in USA where there are more CCS chargers than Super Chargers.

What size of area, where? Outside of maybe a curious cluster in eastern OK/western AK I'm not really seeing anything on an admittedly casual scan. And nothing not already covered by ChaDemo support.

There are parts of Canada off the #1 highway, if we expand the scope to North America (I don't know about Mexico, because the insurance coverage to drive there exceeds my budget).

EDIT: Or are you talking about CCS, via EA's deal with Walmart and some other retailers, is in some areas of the country now getting lots of little stuff dispersed rather than the more purpose designed, high stall count nodes of the SC network?

 

[swegman]

You probably meant to say "Some EVgo chargers support Tesla vehicles by providing the required Tesla head with their chargers."

The Tesla head is provided on EVgo’s fast chargers according to the article. From the article “EVgo says its new Tesla-supported chargers can provide up to 90 miles of charge in about 30 minutes “at one flat per minute rate, with no additional fees.”

 

[talononeguy]

OK, I'm a little confused. Becoming more normal at my age. I had thought the J1772 adapter worked on CCS chargers. I know it works at the local Everman Grocer, which I thought was CCS. How about for Chargepoint? First trans-continental trip coming up, Pensacola to San Diego. What other kind of adapter would be prudent for a trip like this? Thanks, and forgive me if this drifts us a little bit off-topic.

Everman is J1772 not CCS. BTW, make sure to try to always use the charger on the right (as you're facing it). I don't think the left one works well. As for your trip, just follow the supercharger route, and you'll be fine. The J1772 adapter can be used in a pinch, but you won't charge nearly as fast as at superchargers.

 

[AlexanderAF]

Without permission or a licensing agreement with Tesla, it will probably not work on a Tesla car. The car is likely not equipped to handshake with CCS fast chargers, and will not initiate the charge.

 

[TroyOrPhyllis]

We are using an X to tow an Airstream Nest trailer. It works great other than the range loss, which is expected. We plan accordingly but between Kennewick and Ellensburg is slightly too far with the trailer. No supercharger in Yakima, darn it. There were a few CCSs, which I could not use. We had to charge for hours at a ChargePoint. Here is the CCS charger map of the area around here... only CCSs being shown. We have some superchargers but CCS-ability would make things much easier for towing.

 

[SammichLover]

We are using an X to tow an Airstream Nest trailer. It works great other than the range loss, which is expected. We plan accordingly but between Kennewick and Ellensburg is slightly too far with the trailer. No supercharger in Yakima, darn it. There were a few CCSs, which I could not use. We had to charge for hours at a ChargePoint. Here is the CCS charger map of the area around here... only CCSs being shown. We have some superchargers but CCS-ability would make things much easier for towing. View attachment 546109View attachment 546110

Those are already covered for you with a CHAdeMO adaptor, as they are all dual standard. No difference in speed either, that I can see. The CCS is all 50kW.

The only single standard L3s I see around there are some CHAdeMO ones.

 

[jpfive]

Everman is J1772 not CCS. BTW, make sure to try to always use the charger on the right (as you're facing it). I don't think the left one works well. As for your trip, just follow the supercharger route, and you'll be fine. The J1772 adapter can be used in a pinch, but you won't charge nearly as fast as at superchargers.

Thanks, neighbor!