Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Concerns about Tesla to non-Tesla charging adapters

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Most of the "destination" locations seem to be hotels where overnight charging would be the norm. In that case, I would expect guests to essentially reserve a charging dock as part of the room reservation - in the past when we've driven our EV to overnight accommodations, we've always made sure to concretely confirm that we will be able to charge. At that time, a non-Tesla-owning, HPWC-using guest should be informed that, to allow for the possibility of a Tesla vehicle needing to charge, they will need to allow their vehicle to be unplugged and/or leave their keys with the front desk so that their vehicle can be moved on short notice.

So I'd take that a bit further...

If I owned the location I wouldn't put type of car preference into the mix. You are a customer, you called and I committed the resource to you, you show up I'm going to fulfill. You show up with a Leaf and someone else shows up with a Tesla, you get to charge because I committed MY charging resource to YOU, period.

Elon has been clear over and over again, the mission is to accelerate transition to electric.

At shorter-stay "destination" locations like restaurants, it might be easiest to simply disallow non-Tesla EVs at HPWCs unless there is a clear abundance of unused HPWCs or an EV owner is in a particularly desperate situation with respect to charge. Or, if there is an abundance of adjacent, unused parking spots, an "OK to unplug" note on the dashboard should suffice.

Again, if I owned the location I would have basic rules of EV etiquette apply and might even post them. One basic rule would be to hangtag if you are opportunity charging.

I had 2000 opportunity/necessity charging (ok to unplug) hang tags printed that I give to other ev owners - particularly PH EV owners...

This new announcement about HPWC being networkable makes this adapter even more important. HPWC's are now a super versatile, attractive solution for having 4 charge spots for all kinds of commercial and residential locations - if there is a way to adapt them to any car...
 
  • Like
Reactions: GSP
So I'd take that a bit further...

If I owned the location I wouldn't put type of car preference into the mix. You are a customer, you called and I committed the resource to you, you show up I'm going to fulfill. You show up with a Leaf and someone else shows up with a Tesla, you get to charge because I committed MY charging resource to YOU, period.

Elon has been clear over and over again, the mission is to accelerate transition to electric.



Again, if I owned the location I would have basic rules of EV etiquette apply and might even post them. One basic rule would be to hangtag if you are opportunity charging.

I had 2000 opportunity/necessity charging (ok to unplug) hang tags printed that I give to other ev owners - particularly PH EV owners...

This new announcement about HPWC being networkable makes this adapter even more important. HPWC's are now a super versatile, attractive solution for having 4 charge spots for all kinds of commercial and residential locations - if there is a way to adapt them to any car...
Facilitating charging of short range crappy EVs is not going to accelerate the transition to electric cars. Only when people see they don't have to be charged all the time will they become mainstream. Destination charging is to market Tesla. If Tesla isn't successful there won't be EVs.
 
And all the while Tesla is encouraging the move to sustainable transport, and wanting to move other manufacturers towards EV's, they also have a business to run. They can't be expected to subsidize every manufacturers car with destination charger HPWC's any more than they can be expected to subsidize all maker's cars with Superchargers.

They've done MORE from a practical perspective to move things along than any other maker:

- Free supercharging infrastructure
- Free destination charging equipment
- Free patent usage offering

Now on the first two, there's material outlay... and they designed the system to get some return on that investment (advertising, vehicle selling points, brand awareness, etc...). On the latter, the primary outlay is intellectual property, and they are willing to forego licensing fees in order to spur other folks along.

But a financially healthy Tesla 10 years from now taking care of it's own customers first is in everybody's best interests, as opposed to a flagging Tesla in 5 years trying to solve everybody else's charging problems.

Solution: GM/Nissan/etc... ALSO offer a destination charging program, or license Tesla's connector implemtation and share the cost of the program.
 
Last edited:
And all the while Tesla is encouraging the move to sustainable transport, and wanting to move other manufacturers towards EV's they have a business to run. They can't be expected to subsidize every maker's destination chargers with HPWC's any more than they can be expected to subsidize all maker's cars with Superchargers.

You seem to be confused about who pays for destination charging, and completely unable to put yourself in the shoes of those who might want to install destination charging.

So imagine you are a winery in the finger lakes. Imagine you have 50-100 amps available for EV charging. Now look at the new HPWC - which will allow you to have 4 chargepoints without electrical upgrade.

Do you want to exclude all EV's but Tesla's? I don't think so, I think you don't care what car people drive, you want to provide a service that makes visiting you achievable. An adapter not only makes destination charging significantly more appealing to business owners, it dramatically accelerates spread of Tesla's charging standard.
 
Facilitating charging of short range crappy EVs is not going to accelerate the transition to electric cars. Only when people see they don't have to be charged all the time will they become mainstream.

Master of the obvious award winner!!

Destination charging is to market Tesla. If Tesla isn't successful there won't be EVs.

In your opinion, which btw, contradicts Musk's stated values. He has been very clear about "more the merrier", willingness to share patents and willing to share charging.

Being tribal about this seems really selfish thinking.
 
You seem to be confused about who pays for destination charging, and completely unable to put yourself in the shoes of those who might want to install destination charging.

Nope. Notice the part of my post you opted to not quote:

scaesare said:
- Free destination charging equipment

Tesla supplies the equipment. They also will help offset the cost of installation. The local host supplies the electricity.

This provides Tesla with mindshare, incentives their customers to purchase cars, and removes an obstacle for destination travel. This provides the host with another amenity to offer a potentially upscale customer to attract business.

So imagine you are a winery in the finger lakes. Imagine you have 50-100 amps available for EV charging. Now look at the new HPWC - which will allow you to have 4 chargepoints without electrical upgrade.

Do you want to exclude all EV's but Tesla's? I don't think so, I think you don't care what car people drive, you want to provide a service that makes visiting you achievable. An adapter not only makes destination charging significantly more appealing to business owners, it dramatically accelerates spread of Tesla's charging standard.

Nothing prevents them from purchasing an J1772. Tesla offering something for free doesn't prevent them from instead choosing another option, either instead of the HPWC, or in addition to.

Just don't expect Tesla to dedicate funds to options that don't also provide them some ROI.
 
Elon has been clear over and over again, the mission is to accelerate transition to electric.
Elon has never said that he wants to accelerate the transition to electric by enabling all the other lazy automakers to ride on Tesla's back. In fact he has consistently said otherwise. He wants the other automakers to step up to the plate and offer better EVs including contributing to the charging infrastructure.

Facilitating charging of short range crappy EVs is not going to accelerate the transition to electric cars. Only when people see they don't have to be charged all the time will they become mainstream. Destination charging is to market Tesla. If Tesla isn't successful there won't be EVs.
Well said.

Solution: GM/Nissan/etc... ALSO offer a destination charging program, or license Tesla's connector implementation and share the cost of the program.
This. It doesn't facilitate the transition to sustainable transport if Tesla is the only company expanding the charging network. And Tesla is likely to be the only company doing it if the other automakers are able to shirk their responsibility by simply using Tesla's network.

You seem to be confused about who pays for destination charging, and completely unable to put yourself in the shoes of those who might want to install destination charging.
Wait, who's confused? Perhaps you're unaware that Tesla pays for destination charging. They pay for the equipment and most of the installation as well. And if that isn't enough, they also often pay for additional charging stations for other brands of EVs.

Now putting myself in the shoes of a hotel owner, I would start thinking pretty highly of Tesla owners, given that they are the only EV drivers who are willing to pay (indirectly) to have free charging equipment installed at my hotel, and be happy to give them priority over other EVs who haven't done cr@p for my business.

Being tribal about this seems really selfish thinking.
Wait, has the manufacturer of your EV contributed anything to a destination network? I thought so. Maybe Tesla should just give their cars away too. After all, that would spread the adoption of EVs much faster! Anything less would be, well, just "selfish.":rolleyes:
 
  • Love
Reactions: SW2Fiddler
So to me this just seems like the attitude of entitlement/exclusion created by the Supercharger network which is bleeding over into the AC charging map. Tesla is paying for infrastructure so it will exist - if they didn't make the deal attractive installation growth would slow to a trickle. Some Tesla owners seem to be imputing entitlement from this the same way some stockholders think Tesla should place share value as top priority.

I don't think Elon has any intention of looking at the world this way. If you are a shareholder he is not going to subvert his mission for your short term desires. Of course I could be wrong about charging just as easily as you could, this is philosophical at this point, but if his philosophy is consistent as I believe it is, it is not his intention these charge stations be exclusive. If he hadn't been forced to build a non-standard charge set up this discussion would be mute. And the premise that a shared destination charging network is going to slow car sales is an absurd straw man.

Inability to step back and see that what is best for the CLIENT rather than looking at it from the us-them of the manufacturers actually creates unnecessary barriers to adoption that ultimately loops back to Tesla.

In all of Elon's language - including his willingness to share assets - he is expressing this. Those unable to step outside a worldview of scarcity, of "there's barely enough for me and mine", are understandably going to be unable to see how this attitude of "me instead of we" will slow transition of EV adoption by early majority, and definitely won't be able to see how that will be of benefit to us all.
 
Based on the events of the past week, none of this may matter. Looks like the vast majority of EVs are going to be made by Tesla anyway. Who is going to by a 200 mi Chevy or Nissan when Tesla has all the fueling stations? Other manufacturers need to be working deals to use Tesla's charging infrastructure. The new networked HPWC may also make creation of a simple adapter impractical. From what I've seen of the documentation, the new HPWC may use Tesla's proprietary digital communication instead of the analog J1772 PWM pilot signal. If that's true then only Tesla compatible vehicles will work with the new HPWC. I'll buy a new HPWC and give it a try with my adapter.
 
Of course I could be wrong about charging just as easily as you could, this is philosophical at this point, but if his philosophy is consistent as I believe it is, it is not his intention these charge stations be exclusive. If he hadn't been forced to build a non-standard charge set up this discussion would be mute. And the premise that a shared destination charging network is going to slow car sales is an absurd straw man.
No, he didn't expect these locations to be exclusive, but he expects Tesla vehicles to have priority and the non-Tesla vehicles to use the J1772 stations that Tesla provides in addition. Tesla installs HPWC vs J1772 in a 2 to 1 ratio for the destination charger program (if the location owner opts for it).

Inability to step back and see that what is best for the CLIENT rather than looking at it from the us-them of the manufacturers actually creates unnecessary barriers to adoption that ultimately loops back to Tesla.
The client in this case are Tesla owners (and perhaps shareholders). This is where the money is coming from to install the destination chargers. While being altruistic is a nice thing (installing J1772 in addition to HPWC is an example), in the end, the clients expect the bulk of the money goes toward servicing them (the Tesla owners/shareholders). A Tesla owner or shareholder pulling up to a destination charging location and seeing them full of non-Teslas charging via adapters isn't going to go over well (it is a similar thing to supercharger abuse).

It is a different case if other automakers come together and pool money to install these chargers, but that is not happening.
 
Last edited:
Facilitating charging of short range crappy EVs is not going to accelerate the transition to electric cars. Only when people see they don't have to be charged all the time will they become mainstream.
As a driver of one (actually two) of these "crappy" short-range EVs, it seems to me that short-range EVs so far have collectively outsold the Model S. It also seems that a 300-mile, or even a 200-mile EV is overkill for what the majority of drivers need every day.

Also, these EVs don't need charged all the time. I probably plug in my 62-mile EV the same number of times as the average Model S driver. Charging stations are largely vacant most of the time where I live. Even during events at the convention center, which only has two charging stations, my car can sit there and be plugged in all day, and no-one bothers to call/text me, either at the number on my windshield or my check-in on Plugshare. Only twice in the last 3 years have I been denied charging because all stations were in use.

But, therein also lies the Catch-22. People complain that EVs need to charge all the time, but they also complain about stations not being used.

After reading all 22 pages of this thread, I can't help but wonder how a dozen EVs have 4 different connectors, how a Tesla can use 3 out of 4, either directly or via adapters, but the company behind the most robust network won't let anybody else use their network. Has anybody actually asked Tesla if a TSL02 --> J1772 is in the plans, with or without access to the Superchargers? If SC utilization is the worry, non-Tesla EVs using DCQC charge just as fast or even faster than the Model S. My i-MiEV will charge to 80% in 20 minutes, or 100% in 1 hour. So, while I don't recover as many miles per minute, I'm not tying up a SC any longer than a Model S. The same is also true for AC charging. A full recharge takes my car 5.5 hours. A Model S takes roughly the same time. If the other automakers would get their act together and at the least put a 10 kW charger in the car, my car would charge in 2 hours.

If Tesla wants their connector to be the new standard, then why don't they submit their plug standard to the SAE so it becomes a public standard and we can get rid of this 4-plug nonsense? J1772 used to be the Avcon connector, so it can change again to use the TSL02 connector. If Tesla drivers don't want people fabricating their own adapters, then why don't we petition Tesla collectively to offer OEM adapters for non-Tesla vehicles, the sale of which go to fund the network instead of or with Tesla wanting automakers to join their network? Perhaps folks go one step further and replace the actual port on their car with a female port from a wrecked S or X?

Destination charging is to market Tesla. If Tesla isn't successful there won't be EVs.
There will still be EVs, but they won't be mainstream.
 
My i-MiEV will charge to 80% in 20 minutes, or 100% in 1 hour. So, while I don't recover as many miles per minute, I'm not tying up a SC any longer than a Model S. The same is also true for AC charging.
Not true because on a long trip you would have to visit way more superchargers (or AC chargers) and consequently tie up far more resources and charging time than the Model S.

A full recharge takes my car 5.5 hours. A Model S takes roughly the same time. If the other automakers would get their act together and at the least put a 10 kW charger in the car, my car would charge in 2 hours.
I agree. But what incentive do the other automakers have to do anything to expand infrastructure if their drivers can just leech off Tesla's efforts? It doesn't help EV promotion when nobody except Tesla is significantly expanding infrastructure. Nobody else will do anything if Tesla just gives it to them for free. Have you asked Mitsubishi why they're being lazy? Instead you want to ask Tesla if you can use their large network to which you and your car manufacturer have contributed nothing.
 
It shouldn't be up to the automakers to install a charging network outside of their dealerships/stores. This is the same as it is entirely 3rd parties that provide the fuelling network for gasoline, diesel, CNG, and Propane.

Why is Mitsubishi being lazy? Great question. I don't know why they can't be bothered with running a simple TV ad for the i-MiEV. It's infuriating because this is such a great little car. I've shared my frustrations with a corporate rep several times. The owners have done way more advertising than Mitsubishi has.

Instead you want to ask Tesla if you can use their large network to which you and your car manufacturer have contributed nothing.
If Tesla markets an official adapter, buying that adapter would put funds towards the network, meaning I would've contributed to the network's health. By fabricating an unofficial adapter, then nothing has been contributed to the network. With Tesla wanting the automakers to buy into the network, which is a great idea with one bad side effect, this leaves the rest of us at the mercy of the automakers. I can buy a car directly from Tesla, why can't I buy directly into the charging network without buying a car? Even though I haven't bought a car, I am still a customer of Tesla, having bought several items of clothes and an R/C Roadster from their store. Ultimately, it is the host of the station paying for the usage, and with that, it should be up to the host whether or not a non-Tesla with an adapter can use the HPWC. The exceptions to this are SCs and Tesla stores, but the purchase of an official adapter should validate usage of these locations.

I like a lot of what Tesla is doing, and I find their connector functionally superior to all other connectors, but they are going to have a very difficult time getting others to buy-in. Nissan, Mitsubishi, and Kia are going to stand firm with their homeland CHAdeMO standard. GM, VW, BMW, and others are going to comply with the "standard" connector and use SAE Combo. What incentive do they have to switch over to a different plug? Even if people refuse to buy their cars, they win out and can say that nobody wants to buy EVs. BMW and Mitsubishi are really the only ones that seem to be embracing electric drive, but it's all talk for now.
 
I like a lot of what Tesla is doing, and I find their connector functionally superior to all other connectors, but they are going to have a very difficult time getting others to buy-in.

I don't think Tesla needs them to. They did an end-run around the charging infrastructure mess (multiple plug standards, lack of charge points, insufficient power delivery) by addressing it on all 3 fronts.

At this point, it's the other manufacturers who need to step up if they are serious about selling EV's above simply a compliance-car exercise.
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
Reactions: hcsharp
Well, the Model S J1772 adapter costs $95, enabling SC used to be $2,500. Although, at this point, Tesla would be making 3 different adapters (J1772, SAE Combo, CHAdeMO). So, make the CHAdeMO/CCS adapters $3,500 each, with the J1772 costing $1,000.

What price point did you have in mind?
 
Well, the Model S J1772 adapter costs $95, enabling SC used to be $2,500. Although, at this point, Tesla would be making 3 different adapters (J1772, SAE Combo, CHAdeMO). So, make the CHAdeMO/CCS adapters $3,500 each, with the J1772 costing $1,000.

What price point did you have in mind?
That would probably be a fair price point. However, given Tesla is making J1772 chargers available already at the same locations (if the location owner opts for it), it'll be far easier to just use those stations and stop trying to circumvent what Tesla has set up.

And I bet that price point will not be acceptable (esp. the J1772) to many of the people making the adapter themselves (and many others). The demand may be so low it's not even worth it to develop.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hcsharp
True. It's the SC access that people want, not so much the HPWC.

Ultimately, the standard charging network needs standardized and built out. I've been thinking a lot about this lately, and I would say that standardizing on ChargePoint's equipment would be a great start. There are currently at least 5 charging networks. The ones I know of are:

1. NRG EVGo
2. Semaconnect
3. Greenlots
4. ChargePoint
5. Aerovironment

Of the ones that I've researched, ChargePoint has the most equipment on the ground. Their equipment also has the best appearance, with the level 2 stations having automatic cord management, meaning the cords never touch the ground and stay clean, and their Express 200 has some awesome lighting (picture attached. There is another picture on PlugShare showing this unit at night, and they do a good job of lighting up the area around the unit). They also support reservations and recently released their Waiting List feature, which will allow drivers to queue their spot receive a notification when a port opens up (when someone using the station returns and unplugs their car and leaves). Also, being networked units, station availability is shown real-time in the app and on the website. One doesn't have to gamble on station availability like with non-networked stations.

Of course, this will all likely be based on J1772/CCS, as these are the "official standard" connectors. This keeps Tesla's network open for their cars, and it lines up with their goal to have a full, non-Tesla specific network built out, though it won't be built by the automakers outside of the dealers. This will still totally rely on 3rd parties, because you know mainstream buyers aren't going to park at a dealer and walk to their destination. Some early adopters don't even like doing this, and some of us have been chased off by dealers (including myself, but luckily the quick charger was faster than the salesman).

Building out a CCS network will end up supporting more cars down the road than CHAdeMO. Currently, only the LEAF, i-MiEV, and Soul EV natively support CHAdeMO. However, the i3, eGolf, Spark EV, Bolt, and the future Focus Electric all have CCS. Even though the LEAF is the most popular non-Tesla EV, I am starting to see a lot of i3s on the road. And yes, even though I drive a CHAdeMO car, it'll also screw me out of a lot of charging possibilities.
 

Attachments

  • Chargepoint DCQC.jpg
    Chargepoint DCQC.jpg
    186.1 KB · Views: 62
  • 82052.jpg
    82052.jpg
    316.2 KB · Views: 41
Last edited:
True. It's the SC access that people want, not so much the HPWC.
The SC, I don't see Tesla sharing with an adapter though. They need to ensure the car is able to charge at minimum 90kW, has enough range to reach between stations, and they want the automaker to directly work with Tesla on paying for installation of infrastructure (which would be happening ahead of adapter sales). An adapter doesn't fit well with the current payment model of the SC network and makes it easy to tie up resources with slower charging cars.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: hcsharp