Oh, I asked Tesla charging support about this twice in the past 10 days via email and have yet to receive a reply.
I have a 60 amp circuit and no more room on my panel for a dedicated run. :-/ Maybe I can look into setting them both to 30 amps.
Yes, that part is true.
No, that is not true, but I keep seeing people state this over and over and over here in this forum. The gen 3 do not require individual dedicated circuits. Dedicated seems to be indicating a straight run all the way back to the main panel, and they don't require that.
You say the keyword here is "individual circuits", but that obviously would not work with NEC if you considered them literally like that. You could have a 60A supply to a sub and then 16 breakers for a total of 960 amps worth of circuits in there. That would never fly by code if they were considered separate circuits with separate appliances. They only way that is allowed is precisely because they are not separate circuits.
Of course! But you are assuming the sub-panel is just for G3 chargers and if you do that, you would be right. But many times sub-panels handle loads other than exclusively EVs. That's just electrical design with regards to standard capacity planning. That applies to a main panel or a sub-panel.
I suppose we are referring to different aspects of it. Physically, as you are referring to, yes, the connections are made to look the same way as if they were normal separate branch circuits.
Huh--that's weird that he would install them that way then, since they can't load balance to share a circuit.
They don't manage that through your home wi-fi internet connection. The units provide their own hotspot of their own mesh network. So they are all supposed to be communicating directly with each other, not through your home router. And I think if their communication fails, they will default to some much lower level while reporting an error. Still not implemented, anyway, to be sure though.
When the gen3 first became available, people asked Tesla if there would be backward compatibility for that, and they said no, and they never plan to either. It's an inconvenient situation and not ideal, but doesn't have to be expensive. You can just put them on separate breakers and run them as two separate 30A circuits. Or a 40A and a 20A if one of the cars normally does less miles. I know it's not what you wanted, but that is a cheap and easy solution to use both.
This is your main issue. If they installed it like that without reading the obvious instructions, with the possibility over overload on a 240V circuit I would think is against code. The fact that it burned your hand is not just a human hazard, but a REAL fire hazard. I don't think Tesla has done anything wrong here, but surely your electrician has. They are the ones who "assumed" it would work, and since they are the professionals and paid to RTFM, they are at fault, at least IMHO. At the very least, they should come out and re-wire the G3 charger to it's own breaker so you don't overload that 60A breaker, causing it to heat to potentially the point of fire. If you have the spare capacity in your main panel, there should be no issue.
You're being generous with this. There's no question. That is definitely against code. In the 2017 updates, they made this iron-clad. An EVSE must be on its own circuit unless it is part of a load sharing setup, and since that is not set up here, having them share a breaker is not allowed.
Yeah, if you already have 60A allocated, you can always split that up however you want. When you say no extra space in the subpanel, that would be a pretty small bit of work to replace that with a slightly bigger subpanel with more slots.
