Ford will add NACS to next gen EVs!

Next gen Ford EVs will include NACS port. Also will have a NACS to CCS adapter for existing Ford EVs and will be made compatible with Tesla Superchargers via software update.

Honestly never thought any other automaker would take up NACS so this is very surprising.

https://media.ford.com/content/fordmedia/fna/us/en/news/2023/05/25/ford-ev-customers-to-gain-access-to-12-000-tesla-superchargers--.html

Moderator note: The first couple pages of this thread are a merge of two different threads on the same topic.

 

[Exelion]

I only care about legitimate concerns and the only one I’ve heard worth thinking about is that it doesn’t support 3 phase power.

Trying to guess what 3-phase power is, is it the one where:

J1772, plugged into a charger at work, and get only 208V vs 240V at home? If it is, that's not a big deal either. 208V vs 240V is only a tad slower on L2. Hardly enough to make a difference on the charging end.

 

[smogne41]

Trying to guess what 3-phase power is, is it the one where:

J1772, plugged into a charger at work, and get only 208V vs 240V at home? If it is, that's not a big deal either. 208V vs 240V is only a tad slower on L2. Hardly enough to make a difference on the charging end.

Google is your friend:

Three-phase electric power - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The guy in your profile photo was one of the people who invented it

The reason it charges slower for you is because North Ameircan EVs don't have 3-phase AC-DC converters, so it is only using one phase.

 

[israndy]

Some also hate the idea of Tesla "winning" (or Tesla fans being "correct") and despise Tesla largely because they have a distain for the fans (claiming too many are under a "reality distortion field," similar to how many people say they dislike Apple for a similar reason), even if objectively they admit Tesla's connector is a superior design.

If you like watching crow being eaten

 

[SageBrush]

If you like

That fellow is technically competent but he has an axe to grind and it affects his reporting. He spent the first 5 minutes physically comparing the NACS connector to the J-1772, when he should have compared the NACS and CCS1 connectors. Then he misses the rather obvious points that adapters (while a whole lot better than nothing) will suffer from the same CCS handshaking woes as the originals, and peak power will be lower than native ports.

I watched half of the video you linked. That is enough of him for me.

 

[israndy]

And he compared the size of the J1772 plug on the one end of the adapter to the size of the Tesla *port* on the other side. Those are not the same, a plug is smaller than the port it goes into

His Technology Connections YouTube series is amazing, takes the most tiny detail about stuff and does a whole video full of learning. Just a bit too much of an Anti-Tesla FanBoi sometimes

 

[ddimit]

Access to SpCs doesn't stop Fords from charging slower than modern Teslas, having worse efficiency, worse navigation, worse autopilot, dealers that actively fighting against selling them and offering you oil changes 'at a discount'.

As someone who has been a Model S owner since 2015, let me unwrap a bunch of this. My 85 will hit 120kw on an empty battery and then drop within couple of minutes to 80kw and the drop pretty rapidly to 40-50kw range for the remainder of the session. "Worse Navigation." may be onboard systems, but with Ford, you have the options of CaryPlay or Andriod Auto, which tesla doesn't support.

Dealer issues is subjective. If I had a dealer treat me like that, I walk out the door and go to another. Don't get me started on my Tesla service experiences and waiting months to get things repaired. As a buyer, you are the customer, and the customer is always right.

I don't get the oil change comment and what it has to do with EV discussions.

I ordered an F150 Lightning this week, and part of the decision was based on access to Tesla's network.

On a related issue about people "worrying" about Superchargers being full and waiting. When I bought my S to drive from Norcal to Socal several times a year, my supercharger stops at Tejon and Harris Ranch had 6 Stations! at each location. I had more issues with Teslas waiting than I think we will have with other automakers' vehicles.

 

[houstonian]

Access to SpCs doesn't stop Fords from charging slower than modern Teslas, having worse efficiency, worse navigation, worse autopilot, dealers that actively fighting against selling them and offering you oil changes 'at a discount'.

@israndy - this is not meant to take away from the valid points you make but I’ll note Tesla, or at least the Tesla of 2023, is different from the Tesla circa 2017 when I bought my first S. The current version on Tesla feels far more akin to the encumbent manufacutres then a dynamic start up.

I’m not saying this is inherently a bad thing as I think Tesla needed to scale up to survive, but would caution against being to quick to cite the flaws of the established auto manufactures and to slow to note Tesla‘s growing pains.

On a related issue about people "worrying" about Superchargers being full and waiting.

When it became clear the NA market was switching to NACS I started this thread: Will Tesla Buildup Superchargers to Accommodate Anticipated Demand from Ford, GM, Rivian, and whoever else, Adopting NACS circa 2024/2025?

…biggest take away for myself was realizing the biggest ‘clog’ were people like myself: FUSC, particularly those who’s batteries were unable to sustain 250kw+, deep charging up to 100%.

Even though I’ve recently jumped into a 2023 X, my preference when road-tripping is to charge less (i.e. spending the 1h5m to go from 5% → 100%) then more frequent stops. Granted my 5% → 100% is quicker than my 2017 S - it needs ~1h40m to do the same - and the larger capacity of the batter on the X means less stops, but nevertheless I look at my own charging habits as realize the FUSC on my X, even if time bound, creates an inherent incentive to use it and in so doing means I am a source of the demand many rightly worry may impact SCing for all.

Setting FUSC aside, I do think it’s a net plus to see Tesla opening up their network…if you build it they will come, no? Bottom line is this allows for more stations/stalls to be rolled out by Tesla and presumably others will roll out their own ‘nonTesla SCs’ which will serve to further increase charging capacity for all.

 

[cdswm3]

As someone who has been a Model S owner since 2015, let me unwrap a bunch of this. My 85 will hit 120kw on an empty battery and then drop within couple of minutes to 80kw and the drop pretty rapidly to 40-50kw range for the remainder of the session. "Worse Navigation." may be onboard systems, but with Ford, you have the options of CaryPlay or Andriod Auto, which tesla doesn't support.

Dealer issues is subjective. If I had a dealer treat me like that, I walk out the door and go to another. Don't get me started on my Tesla service experiences and waiting months to get things repaired. As a buyer, you are the customer, and the customer is always right.

I don't get the oil change comment and what it has to do with EV discussions.

I ordered an F150 Lightning this week, and part of the decision was based on access to Tesla's network.

On a related issue about people "worrying" about Superchargers being full and waiting. When I bought my S to drive from Norcal to Socal several times a year, my supercharger stops at Tejon and Harris Ranch had 6 Stations! at each location. I had more issues with Teslas waiting than I think we will have with other automakers' vehicles.

Good news is not all superchargers will be open to Non-Tesla's. Looks like about 50%. That should keep the more popular/busy chargers for Tesla's only.

 

[ChrisInVegas]

Good news is not all superchargers will be open to Non-Tesla's. Looks like about 50%. That should keep the more popular/busy chargers for Tesla's only.

I think I remember reading that the 150 KW chargers will remain Tesla only. But... I could be remembering that wrong.

 

[E90alex]

I think I remember reading that the 150 KW chargers will remain Tesla only. But... I could be remembering that wrong.

V2 stations will be Tesla only because they are not CCS capable

 

[stopcrazypp]

Good news is not all superchargers will be open to Non-Tesla's. Looks like about 50%. That should keep the more popular/busy chargers for Tesla's only.

I think I remember reading that the 150 KW chargers will remain Tesla only. But... I could be remembering that wrong.

You didn't remember wrong, only V3 or newer superchargers are CCS compatible, so Fords will only be able to charge on those, not the older V2s. It has nothing to do with if the chargers are more popular or busy.
"Note: V2 Superchargers are not capable of charging non-Tesla EVs and will continue to be unavailable."
https://www.ford.com/support/how-tos/search/can.i.use.a.tesla.supercharger

 

[ChrisInVegas]

You didn't remember wrong, only V3 or newer superchargers are CCS compatible, so Fords will only be able to charge on those, not the older V2s. It has nothing to do with if the chargers are more popular or busy.
"Note: V2 Superchargers are not capable of charging non-Tesla EVs and will continue to be unavailable."
https://www.ford.com/support/how-tos/search/can.i.use.a.tesla.supercharger

Thank you for finding the source! I can't wait to be able to use the Tesla network with both of our vehicles (MYLR and Lightning). Road trips are rough when you have to trust the EA chargers to work. And.... what was EA thinking generally only putting 4 in at most locations?!

I just wish Tesla was rolling out the V4 chargers here (US) with the longer charging cables. I don't want to block two stalls when in the Lightning.

 

[chinney]

You didn't remember wrong, only V3 or newer superchargers are CCS compatible, so Fords will only be able to charge on those, not the older V2s. It has nothing to do with if the chargers are more popular or busy.
"Note: V2 Superchargers are not capable of charging non-Tesla EVs and will continue to be unavailable."
https://www.ford.com/support/how-tos/search/can.i.use.a.tesla.supercharger

Is there any history of Tesla swapping out V2 hardware for V3 at charging sites, or any indication that is something they plan to do in the future?

 

[MP3Mike]

Is there any history of Tesla swapping out V2 hardware for V3 at charging sites, or any indication that is something they plan to do in the future?

Nope. It wouldn't be an equipment swap, it would require an entire site rebuild including the utility feed and transformer. It is better to leave the V2s alone and either expand them or build new V3/V4 elsewhere.

 

[Earl]

Nope. It wouldn't be an equipment swap, it would require an entire site rebuild including the utility feed and transformer. It is better to leave the V2s alone and either expand them or build new V3/V4 elsewhere.

Not necessarily. They could just swap out some of the control circuitry with some that could handle the V3 signaling. I don't know if that would make sense for them but it is technically possible.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Is there any history of Tesla swapping out V2 hardware for V3 at charging sites, or any indication that is something they plan to do in the future?

Not really (at least in the US). The sites I have seen personally that have been expanded, they just add more V3 hardware nearby, while keeping the V2s as-is.

 

[MP3Mike]

Not necessarily. They could just swap out some of the control circuitry with some that could handle the V3 signaling. I don't know if that would make sense for them but it is technically possible.

But V3 isn't just about control signaling. It outputs up to 66% more power to an individual stall, which requires larger wires, new grid feed/transformer/etc... Also, V2 is wired one cabinet per two stalls, while V3 is one cabinet per 4 stalls.

Or are you just saying to make them CCS compatible, but leaving them at the current power levels? (Which is only ~75kW/stall if the site is full.) I just don't think there is any way that they would do that.

I think V2 sites will pretty much be left as-is while they are still have a lease and are functional, once equipment fails, or lease expires, the site will either be completely re-done with the then current Supercharger version, or will be abandoned. (Site hosts may not want to renew the lease, or may demand higher payments than Tesla wants to pay.)

 

[BitJam]

Nope. It wouldn't be an equipment swap, it would require an entire site rebuild including the utility feed and transformer. It is better to leave the V2s alone and either expand them or build new V3/V4 elsewhere.

Agreed. Out of Spec provided a good example of this in the middle of the desert in Baker California:

The site was expanded several times with new chargers while not getting rid of the old ones. I imagine they might start replacing the old ones someday when we are saturated with chargers but I don't think that will be soon.

 

[Earl]

Or are you just saying to make them CCS compatible, but leaving them at the current power levels?

^^^^ This ^^^^

I just don't think there is any way that they would do that.

While I agree that it is not likely, for the right incentive (external government or industry funding, perhaps), I could see it, especially in remote areas where it can be very expensive to install and maintain equipment.
I doubt that any of the already-overrun urban V2 stations would ever be modified.

 

[ChrisInVegas]

Even before Tesla decided to share their charging network, I noticed a tendency to expand V2 sites with new V3 chargers. If you have chargers that are working well, why go through the added cost/complexity to upgrade them to V3? The only time I could see making a case for an upgrade is when a space constraint exists in more populated areas.

Also... for all the folks crying about sharing the chargers with non-Tesla, this would leave quite a few still in the Tesla walled garden.