Dual Motor Performance - Single On-Board Charger?

[SXXR]

Hello All,

My family recently took delivery of a fully-loaded Dual Motor Performance Ludicrous mode X and was amazed to learn that it only came with the standard 48A on-board charger. This was not listed anywhere on the website and there is no factory option to "upgrade" to the dual 72A charger. The Tesla sales team was shocked to learn this too.

We also have a 2013 P85 S and a 2018 100D X with the 72A chargers - it was an option on the S but came included on the 100D. The issue is not our HPWC as the S and other X charge at home at 72A but the 2019 X only charges at 48A. We are very disappointed that a new, top of the line Model X, doesn't contain features that the lesser models do.

Will any 2019 model X owners confirm that their car also only charges at 48A at a HPWC?

Anyone with a 2019 Dual Motor Performance Ludicrous model X that can also confirm?

Thanks,
Eddie

 

[Big Earl]

Hello All,

My family recently took delivery of a fully-loaded Dual Motor Performance Ludicrous mode X and was amazed to learn that it only came with the standard 48A on-board charger. This was not listed anywhere on the website and there is no factory option to "upgrade" to the dual 72A charger. The Tesla sales team was shocked to learn this too.

We also have a 2013 P85 S and a 2018 100D X with the 72A chargers - it was an option on the S but came included on the 100D. The issue is not our HPWC as the S and other X charge at home at 72A but the 2019 X only charges at 48A. We are very disappointed that a new, top of the line Model X, doesn't contain features that the lesser models do.

Will any 2019 model X owners confirm that their car also only charges at 48A at a HPWC?

Anyone with a 2019 Dual Motor Performance Ludicrous model X that can also confirm?

Thanks,
Eddie

48 amps has been the largest available onboard charger since late 2018 (?). The 72 amp version is no longer available.

 

[jdw]

Back in the day, the model S had either single 40A or dual 40A chargers. When they went to 72A, there were three 24A chargers. Recently they switched to 48A, which is three 16A chargers.

 

[Chickenlittle]

Hello All,

My family recently took delivery of a fully-loaded Dual Motor Performance Ludicrous mode X and was amazed to learn that it only came with the standard 48A on-board charger. This was not listed anywhere on the website and there is no factory option to "upgrade" to the dual 72A charger. The Tesla sales team was shocked to learn this too.

We also have a 2013 P85 S and a 2018 100D X with the 72A chargers - it was an option on the S but came included on the 100D. The issue is not our HPWC as the S and other X charge at home at 72A but the 2019 X only charges at 48A. We are very disappointed that a new, top of the line Model X, doesn't contain features that the lesser models do.

Will any 2019 model X owners confirm that their car also only charges at 48A at a HPWC?

Anyone with a 2019 Dual Motor Performance Ludicrous model X that can also confirm?

Thanks,
Eddie

I doubt your assertion that employees are shocked. But I am shocked you made the purchase without reading the spec sheet on the car

 

[commasign]

IIRC, November 2018 is when they eliminated the 72amp charger. Agree, it’s a nice feature to have.

 

[SXXR]

@Chickenlittle Can you please send me a link to the spec sheet you are referring to? I searched all over to verify and couldn't find it - it was easy to find our selected options but could not locate the "standard" features document.

Thanks, all! My mother's X was built in November with the 72A charger so this is starting to make some sense.

 

[ewoodrick]

I believe that Tesla decided that number of people actually charging at the speed were very minimal. Adding 72A in most homes is a significant issue. Also, while some may have charged at 72A, very few needed to.

30-40A charging really should cover 99.9% of your charging needs. Unless your daily commute is 300+ miles.

 

[SXXR]

Thanks, @ewoodrick Agreed.

It is more than enough for our commutes but I guess we are a bit of an anomaly with three Tesla's and only a single HPWC at 72A.

Might be time for us to add a second HPWC or plan ahead and prioritize the 2019 X as it takes a bit longer to charge than the others,

 

[EVDRVN]

Thanks, @ewoodrick Agreed.

It is more than enough for our commutes but I guess we are a bit of an anomaly with three Tesla's and only a single HPWC at 72A.

Might be time for us to add a second HPWC or plan ahead and prioritize the 2019 X as it takes a bit longer to charge than the others,

Dual chargers is a waste and it adds weight to the car. You are even better off with three small circuits and three 32A units. You must have an insane commute if that is not adequate. Most people have far larger EVSE units than needed.

 

[Rocky_H]

I think it was halfway through December 2018 that this change was made, and it was very quiet. They did not make any announcement that they were making that change.

I do really wish that they still offered it as an option. I agree most people don't need it, but for people who do need it, they really do. I think the less useful places are for at home use, but there are still places that are off of the common Supercharger network that can be served pretty well with a business offering a destination wall connector on a high amp circuit. There are two very commonly used routes out of my city of Boise that still don't have Supercharger coverage (Boise to Bend, OR and Boise to Winnemucca, NV). There are helpful businesses that have those high power wall connectors available with 70 or 80 amps available, but most Tesla cars can't take advantage of that speed, because of their lower power onboard chargers and no option to get better.

 

[Big Earl]

Thanks, @ewoodrick Agreed.

It is more than enough for our commutes but I guess we are a bit of an anomaly with three Tesla's and only a single HPWC at 72A.

Might be time for us to add a second HPWC or plan ahead and prioritize the 2019 X as it takes a bit longer to charge than the others,

You might want to consider installing an additional wall connector on your existing circuit. The two will share the available power between the two vehicles. When one finishes charging, the other one will bump up to full speed.

If your existing breaker is 90 amps, each car will get 36 amps when they're charging together. When one finishes, the remaining car will get full power, either 72 amps or 48 amps, whichever it's capable of.

 

[ewoodrick]

Thanks, @ewoodrick Agreed.

It is more than enough for our commutes but I guess we are a bit of an anomaly with three Tesla's and only a single HPWC at 72A.

Might be time for us to add a second HPWC or plan ahead and prioritize the 2019 X as it takes a bit longer to charge than the others,

I'd recommend stepping back and look at your charging needs. I'd dare say that at least 1 or 2 of those Teslas would be extremely happy just charging off of 120V 15A. My wife's car is. Every once in awhile she needs more. Then she plugs into the faster plug.

 

[EVDRVN]

I'd recommend stepping back and look at your charging needs. I'd dare say that at least 1 or 2 of those Teslas would be extremely happy just charging off of 120V 15A. My wife's car is. Every once in awhile she needs more. Then she plugs into the faster plug.

That's a horribly inefficient way to charge and not the safest. One huge circuit could easily be two -three 30A. 10-30 adapters charging at 24A on three units one for each car or some other combo.

 

[ewoodrick]

That's a horribly inefficient way to charge and not the safest. One huge circuit could easily be two -three 30A. 10-30 adapters charging at 24A on three units one for each car or some other combo.

Definitely don't agree. This efficiency thing is quite overrated in my book.
I have NO idea why you would call safety into question. Quite to the contrary, 50A @240V is a pretty dangerous thing.

Adding/splitting the exiting circuit isn't a cheap thing, probably well north of $1000. (definitely would offset your "efficiencies")

My point, is that maybe the third car could get access to a slower charger. This would minimize the amount of shuffling need to get all the cars in front of the single charger. Makes it much easier on the users. Not everyone needs 72A charging, not 32A, nor even 240V. Range anxiety is what causes the allusion of the faster charging, the better. For someone with 3 Teslas, they've probably gotten pass range anxiety and realize (although it is easy to forget) that slower charging is indeed an option.

I'll admit, while my wife's car is on 120V 15A, I plugged in this afternoon to my 14-50. This was the first time this week that I plugged in, I was down to "only" 130 miles (about twice what my older Leaf could do) and it finished charging a few hours ago. It would have been absolutely no big deal if it charged for another 12 hours. The 14-50 was way overkill for me. But it's been there for 5 years and with a 88 mile Leaf, 120V 15A is sometimes an issue, especially in the winter.

 

[ajdelange]

Back in the day, the model S had either single 40A or dual 40A chargers. When they went to 72A, there were three 24A chargers.

There was a single charger with 3 boards capable of 24 A each. Given that I wonder how you concluded that...

Recently they switched to 48A, which is three 16A chargers.

Not saying it isn't so - just wondering how you determined that.

 

[jdw]

Mostly from looking at the standard & mid range Model 3, which is 32A likely with two 16A modules as when they fail, charging is reduced to 16A. So it makes sense that the setup in the current 48A chargers (post the three board 72 amp unit) is 3x16A boards. Of course there *could* be two 24A boards, but why make two different units *and* two different boards, plus, I think the move to using 3 charging boards (in both the 72 and 48A versions) reflects making a charger that could also easily work on 3 phase power in Europe. Pic of the 72A charger, haven't found one of either the 32 or the 48,

Also this thread here on TMC

And this one

 

[ajdelange]

OK. My thinking is equally speculative. It is that if you have got production set up to make a 72 A charger with three boards and are motivated by the desire to reduce cost the quickest and cheapest path would be to simply populate only two of the slots. Such a move would also protect you from any liability stemming from the stricter installation requirements when the EVSE can draw more than 60A and give the owner of the car better battery degradation if slower charging has a benefit from that POV. If the latter two were your more than cost cutting you could also increase reliability by populating all three slots but only using two boards at a time with the 3rd on standby in the case of failure of a board. You can still use the same case, same stock of rectifier/booster boards, connectors, firmware etc. There was a rumor flying about at one point that these same modules are at the heart of the super charger rectifiers. But again this is all speculation. I've seen a video in which the guy autopsied and older X rectifier but never one in which one of the 48A max units is opened up.

 

[jdw]

The order of the changes also led me think they had gone from 24A modules to 16A modules. From the original 40+40 options, they went to a 72A charger standard, then to a 48A charger with a software upgradeable 72A option ($1900?). Then the Model 3 with 32A and 48A chargers came out and shortly after, the upgrades to the S were no longer available, it was 48A only. The 72A had three modules, so it made a certain amount of sense that they had gone to 16A modules everywhere. The chargers are physically different, around the time of the possible change to 16A, they also moved the HVJB inside the charger units - but I have been anable to find a picture of an open Model 3 charger or one from a newer S.

 

[EVDRVN]

Definitely don't agree. This efficiency thing is quite overrated in my book.
I have NO idea why you would call safety into question. Quite to the contrary, 50A @240V is a pretty dangerous thing.

Adding/splitting the exiting circuit isn't a cheap thing, probably well north of $1000. (definitely would offset your "efficiencies")

My point, is that maybe the third car could get access to a slower charger. This would minimize the amount of shuffling need to get all the cars in front of the single charger. Makes it much easier on the users. Not everyone needs 72A charging, not 32A, nor even 240V. Range anxiety is what causes the allusion of the faster charging, the better. For someone with 3 Teslas, they've probably gotten pass range anxiety and realize (although it is easy to forget) that slower charging is indeed an option.

I'll admit, while my wife's car is on 120V 15A, I plugged in this afternoon to my 14-50. This was the first time this week that I plugged in, I was down to "only" 130 miles (about twice what my older Leaf could do) and it finished charging a few hours ago. It would have been absolutely no big deal if it charged for another 12 hours. The 14-50 was way overkill for me. But it's been there for 5 years and with a 88 mile Leaf, 120V 15A is sometimes an issue, especially in the winter.

240V is not more dangerous it is safer for EV charging as the outlets are better designed for continuous loads. Anything at 20A would be a crummy outlet and since the capacity is there it makes sense to use it. Splitting would be easy with a sub box and three circuits and three outlets will not be $1000 and it would add great utility not having to mess with sharing and using off peak charging. It would be very convenient and a potential huge cost savings. 120V outlets are the number one cause of EV charging failure and fires. I know I have been in the industry 20 years and see the issues all the time. I would really like to hear how a more robust 240V outlet is more dangerous than a 120V outlet, point by point. Lastly if you charge in 1/5 the time with three cars and the parasitic load is even 200 watts per car that adds up to some huge savings over a year depending on the rate plan. This is a no-brainer based on the existing circuit and the solution as is for one car is complete overkill.

 

[ajdelange]

Well 240 V with 50 A behind it certainly has more potential to do a person or thing a mischief than 120V with 15 but either is capable of cleaning someone's clock under the right (or should I say "wrong") conditions.

Now it only dawned on me fairly recently that in a normal residential panel you have 240V but it is between two circuits each of which measures 120 to ground. A phase to ground fault (in which I include someone touching a hot) is much more likely that a phase to phase (have to touch both red and black) and so I have stopped thinking of 240 V (biphase) as being more dangerous that 120V.