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

GM announces use of NACS

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Ohh snap!
Everyone else will follow soon. TSLA to the moon!



screenshot-twitter.com-2023.06.08-15_44_55.png
 
This news is fantastic and I'll go as far as to say that if others (legacy makers) don't follow, they'll be at a huge disadvantage with repercussions that will have a great impact on their sales.

I agree with @Talmen in that CCS could very well be on its way to extinction. That would be a huge favor to humanity and the future of EVs to get rid of those bulky useless, poorly designed and hideous CCS plugs. NACS is where it's at and in my opinion if any legacy auto makers want to have the most success, not only do they need to get rid of the filthy dealerships and cheesy sales clowns, but also quickly change to NACS.

Big kudos to Ford and GM for leading the wave. Let's hope that others will be smart enough to follow.
 
I don't think cable length is dictated by NACS. The short supercharger cables were just because only Tesla's could charge at them and the ports were all in the same spot on the car, so they only had to design for one scenario.

V4 chargers have longer cables and I expect any other NACS station operators to have longer cables.

Now the question is... Will existing V3 and V2 stations get retrofitted with longer cables? I have no idea.
Unfortunately, the long cables necessary to almost reach a charge port anywhere on a vehicle is one reason that CCS connectors at so unwieldy and unreliable.
Most likely, the Tesla standard, left rear location, will be adopted by all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mswlogo and SO16
Not terribly surprising that Ford and Tesla went together, as their CEOs seem to be mutually supportive, but it was quite a thing for Bera to swallow her pride and admit the Tesla standard was better. I would have sworn the Japanese would jump first. But, they move in thought patterns that go centuries long. So, in retrospect, I guess GMs move does make sense.

Will the Stellantis be the next domino to fall?
 
Not terribly surprising that Ford and Tesla went together, as their CEOs seem to be mutually supportive, but it was quite a thing for Bera to swallow her pride and admit the Tesla standard was better. I would have sworn the Japanese would jump first. But, they move in thought patterns that go centuries long. So, in retrospect, I guess GMs move does make sense.

Will the Stellantis be the next domino to fall?
If you follow the history of Ford and GM. They both follow what each other does. Never wanting to miss out. This is another example. The meetings with Mary went like this. We have to call Elon Ford did.
 
GM might be a little embarrassed but, two years from now, few will care who won the plug war. When you go to the gas station, there aren't three pump nozzles to choose from and the Tesla plug is easier to use than any gas pump. At first I preferred the idea of the supercharger network being exclusive but, the other folks out there are just fellow EV owners and it's kinda sad watching them struggle with apps, calling support etc. while we just plug in and walk away. The other auto makers should use the cars they build, not charging networks to compete. I think we should welcome them all as it's best for EV adoption overall. Tesla will build more superchargers than ever.
 
Unfortunately, the long cables necessary to almost reach a charge port anywhere on a vehicle is one reason that CCS connectors at so unwieldy and unreliable.
Most likely, the Tesla standard, left rear location, will be adopted by all.
Exactly. Keeping them short was part of the reason for their reliability.
 
Just a mean mind wish to support USA manufacturing and growth. All legacy and Tesla company’s Knew Tesla would be #1 by volume with 2-9 being Chinese import (BYD, Hyundai etc). Would be Nice IF they were setting the stage to only allow US legacy NACS standard and NOT allow import markets on those networks……. Let them use the faults left overs to level the playing field. Just a wish. Not saying they conspired this team up approach but it Certainly would have been a smart play.
 
With the Ford and GM now on board with NACS, CCS1 in north America will now be effectively dead. I predict we will start seeing more auto makers in the US market switch to NACS on new vehicles.

I also believe we'll start to see existing CCS charge posts converted to NACS or new NACS posts installed at existing CCS stations, like EA.
That is effectively stupid decision

Ccs 2 is worldwide standard... why would you opt for proprietary one!? but hey, US is the only country to use F rather than C, so not a surprise..
 
Exactly. Keeping them short was part of the reason for their reliability.
I don't think that is true. It isn't normally the cable that fails, it is the connector. And the Supercharger connectors can fall and hit the ground just like the CCS ones.

The difference is that the Supercharger cables/connector are smaller/lighter so they hit with less force, and they have no moving parts to break. There are two main failures on the existing CCS cables:
  • The latch on the connectors breaks. Most likely from being dropped on the ground.
  • The thermocouples in the handle fail. (No idea why they fail, but obviously a design flaw that Tesla doesn't have.)
The other difference is cost and design life. Yesterday someone mentioned that the CCS cable/connectors are rated for 10k uses before they need to be replaced, but CPOs report that they never last that long. On the other hand the Supercharger cables are only rated for 3.5k uses before replacement and are flagged by the system for replacement automatically. That same person mentioned that Tesla can have one tech do the replacement in 15 minutes, while most CCS chargers take two techs and a couple hours. The Supercharger cable being much cheaper in costs, and labor, allows them to replace it more often ensuring a good customer experience. (I don't know how much a Supercharger cable costs, but reports are that the CCS cables cost $15-20k each.)

So the reason for Tesla's reliability is better design, and pro-active maintenance.
 
That is effectively stupid decision

Ccs 2 is worldwide standard... why would you opt for proprietary one!? but hey, US is the only country to use F rather than C, so not a surprise..
At least in this case, US adopted the “better” option for once. Definitely better for consumers.

Better for manufacturers too due to simplicity as noted here...


Yes, manufacturers now need to handle two “standards” at a higher cost but evidently they feel it’s worth it and probably still a savings overall.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Elektrick
My guess is the passengers front corner. (As it is closer to where they already have the electronics, so the internal cables will be shorter. But it is possible they could do a whole redesign.)
I've paid close attention to the language in the official announcements, and they're phrased so as to not promise that all their vehicles will be using NACS starting in 2025, just that some vehicles will have NACS starting in 2025. Ford referred to their next-generation architecture getting NACS, for instance. This makes me think that both Ford and GM will be delivering some cars with NACS and some with CCS starting in 2025, much as Nissan now delivers both CHAdeMO (Leaf) and CCS (Ariya) vehicles. If I'm right, then we'll see only new or significantly redesigned Ford and GM vehicles with NACS plugs, not just simple swaps on existing designs.

This also may mean a longer run of cars with poor charge-port placement (from a Supercharger design point of view), which will have consequences for years to come. This in turn makes it more likely that Tesla will provide longer cables at Superchargers, and/or provide adapters with built-in extension cables (although that has technical, financial, and ease-of-use issues, so maybe not).
Anyone have concerns about charging locations going to get very busy? They're already pretty full as it is.
It's entirely possible (and I would think likely) that Ford and GM will be providing Tesla with money up-front as part of this deal. That should help Tesla accelerate Supercharger deployments, which will help alleviate such problems.

There may be help on the other side, too. It will be more likely that third-party charging networks will add NACS plugs on their stations. These will initially benefit mostly Tesla owners, but eventually everybody will benefit. Even if you don't want to charge at EA, EVgo, etc., some other Tesla (or other NACS) driver will be willing to do so, thus clearing up a spot at a Supercharger.
At first I preferred the idea of the supercharger network being exclusive but, the other folks out there are just fellow EV owners and it's kinda sad watching them struggle with apps, calling support etc. while we just plug in and walk away.
Keep in mind that Tesla has just bought themselves a huge technical integration headache. One of the many advantages that Superchargers have had over other DC fast chargers is that one company has controlled everything in that network, including the design of the charging stations, the design of the cars, and all the software that lets them work together. Now Tesla will have to support third-party vehicles, presumably using the CCS communications protocols that Tesla did not design, and integrate Tesla's and third-party (Ford and GM) software for billing, etc. This will make the Supercharger network more vulnerable to some of the problems that plague the CCS providers. That said, with Ford and GM now focusing on Tesla as their primary fast charging provider, they're likely to prioritize making their cars work at Superchargers; and of course there are other reliability issues that affect CCS providers that still won't plague Tesla (like problems with screens and credit card readers). Thus, I expect that Superchargers will still be preferable to third-party CCS providers for Ford and GM drivers, particularly after they start shipping with NACS plugs; but their experience might not be quite as good as ours has been. Also, there's the whole charge-port location thing, particularly for CCS-equipped vehicles.
 
Now Tesla will have to support third-party vehicles, presumably using the CCS communications protocols that Tesla did not design, and integrate Tesla's
Tesla has been supporting CCS vehicles for years on their Superchargers in Europe, so I am sure they have worked out most of those issues already. The only issue I have heard is that some of the new Hyundai/Kia 800v vehicles had problems starting sessions on MagicDock, but it seems like Hyundai/Kia have released an update for their cars, available at the dealer, not OTA, that resolves that issue along with adding support for preconditioning.

So I don't really expect that to be a problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RNHurt
At least in this case, US adopted the “better” option for once. Definitely better for consumers.

Better for manufacturers too due to simplicity as noted here...


Yes, manufacturers now need to handle two “standards” at a higher cost but evidently they feel it’s worth it and probably still a savings overall.
North American Charging System standard (formerly the Tesla connector)
Just to note, NACS and Tesla's system are still different. The physical connector is the same however the software protocol is completely different. (NACS uses the same protocol as CCS, Tesla's system is similar to CHAdeMO).

IMO CCS2 is the best.
Here are the big reasons I dislike other plugs:
CCS1:
  • Lacks AC 3-phase support (results in slightly reduced L2 charging speed at commerical buildings and apartments in the US)
CHAdeMO:
  • Lacks AC support altogether (requires a completely separate port for slow charging)
  • Doesn't support as high power as the others
NACS:
  • Lacks AC 3-phase support (results in slightly reduced L2 charging speed at commerical buildings and apartments)
  • Uses a design that allows it to be more compact but introduces an additional risk that a malfunction could cause "Damage to grid-connected devices and possible thermal event" and "Damage to vehicle components rendering the vehicle inoperable" (quotes are from Tesla).
CCS2 doesn't have any of those problems and IMO is the best standard with CCS1 being the 2nd best, NACS being 3rd, and CHAdeMO in last.

If NACS and CCS both use the same communications protocols, then adapters become far cheaper and easier to produce. And Tesla have already mastered CCS protocol for the sake of CCS-2 in Europe. So, there's no reason why they shouldn't put the same hardware and software into all their cars. In fact, they've already done it, for the last couple of years or so. Recent production Teslas (starting in 2020) that can accept the new CCS-1 adapter are, effectively, NACS cars.

So, when will Tesla switch to CCS in America? They're already doing it, stealthy-like. They just want to keep the Tesla physical connector, which I think is perfectly understandable... not better for consumer though.

p.s. Munro is Tesla shareholder. some if his "reports" are a bit biased imho
 
Tesla has been supporting CCS vehicles for years on their Superchargers in Europe, so I am sure they have worked out most of those issues already. The only issue I have heard is that some of the new Hyundai/Kia 800v vehicles had problems starting sessions on MagicDock, but it seems like Hyundai/Kia have released an update for their cars, available at the dealer, not OTA, that resolves that issue along with adding support for preconditioning.

So I don't really expect that to be a problem.
It's a moving target, though. Suppose that Tesla and/or other automakers got everything working perfectly at Superchargers. Then Automaker A comes out with a new model, that breaks something. So somebody needs to fix it. Then Tesla updates their Supercharger protocol (maybe to fix the problem just described), and in the process breaks Model 1 from Automaker B, which requires another fix. Assuming that doesn't break something, Automaker C then comes out with a software update, that breaks something else. It's a dynamic balancing act, not a problem to be fixed and never to cause problems again.

Furthermore, the 800v issue is potentially a big one, and it's one reason that I think the automakers who are big on 800v architectures may be the hardest ones to persuade to join the NACS bandwagon. This 25-minute video details some of the technical issues in supporting 800v vehicles on current V3 Superchargers:
In brief, some method must exist in the car to harmonize the two voltages, and some of the technical solutions in vehicles today are inherently limiting, reducing charging speed. As I understand it, some of these limitations can't be worked around in software. That said, if rumors that Tesla's V4 Superchargers will support up to 1000v are correct, then perhaps that and a promise by EA and others with 350+ kW CCS stations (that do support 800+ volts) to adopt NACS might bring the automakers that use 800v architectures on-board. They wouldn't gain as much by access to V3 Superchargers, but if they aren't giving anything up at EA, EVgo, etc., then the (initially limited) support at V3 Superchargers plus growing support at more-compatible V4 Superchargers could bring them around -- and if CCS fades as a standard, then there'd be little reason to not switch to NACS. Thus, I do think that 800v manufacturers will eventually come around, but I'm not expecting them to be the next ones to jump on the bandwagon. (Then too, I didn't expect Ford's announcement two weeks ago, or that GM would be the second one, so my track record isn't exactly the best.)