JdeMO for the Roadster?

[samcarney]

I thought it was going to be hidden behind a flip up/down license plate. Coudl you send a picture of the chademo connector taken directly behind the car?

The location of the ChaDeMO port has not been finalized. The JdeMo mounting, CAN bus wiring, and ChaDeMO port are still in the Beta prototype stage. Our objective is to get the first JdeMO Roadster on the road for some real world testing, while the final production assembly details are completed.

This charge session provided 135 ideal miles in 45 minutes. I will provide more detailed information on charge sessions, and final production versions of "JdeMO for the Roadster" as we move forward with the project.
Regards

 

[Stefan T]

The charging speed is near 300km/h (288 km/h) (135x1,6/.75)

That's good speed

 

[samcarney]

The charging speed is near 300km/h (288 km/h) (135x1,6/.75)

That's good speed

Stefan, I will provide more detailed info in future posts. I suspect that a 1 hour charging session will provide 150 miles of charge. The the amperage was beginning to decrease as the battery reached >60% (standard rate). Near the end of my 45 minute charge the amperage had decreased from 120 to 45 amps. The last 15 minutes of a 1 hour charge would bring down the 288 km/h figure.

A charge rate of 150/245 mph/kph, is quite good when compared to an HPC's 56/91 mph/kph @ 240 volts/70 amps

 

[Juanmax]

Looks promising. How many degrees did the battery temperature increase ?

 

[samcarney]

Looks promising. How many degrees did the battery temperature increase ?

I did not record temperature for this charge session. Previous tests resulted in a 5-6 degree Celsius increase during a 30 minute session. Ambient temp was 15 C, cell temperatures never went beyond 30 C.

 

[AEdennis]

The guys just posted a Youtube video of them charging a 2.5 and 1.5 Roadster!

Woot!

 

[ecarfan]

And at 106A, no less. Impressive.

 

[Stefan T]

Good to see a 2.5 be chaged by Chademo charger

I'm wait for mine kit so i can charge mine from a public fast charger

 

[AEdennis]

Looks like the JdeMO for Roadster project is getting some press coverage - Transport Evolved - JdeMO for Roadster.

 

[gregd]

So, is the inlet for the 2.x models going to be to the side of the PEM, like it is in the video? They state that the 1.5's inlet was in a temporary location, but never clarified the inlet positioning for the 2.x models. I kind of don't like having the trunk lid open while charging, as I wouldn't be able to leave the car alone.

 

[AEdennis]

So, is the inlet for the 2.x models going to be to the side of the PEM, like it is in the video? They state that the 1.5's inlet was in a temporary location, but never clarified the inlet positioning for the 2.x models. I kind of don't like having the trunk lid open while charging, as I wouldn't be able to leave the car alone.

It's been discussed on the SpeakEV thread, @TonyWilliams has said that the port can be mounted anywhere and that the final locations has not been determined.

I believe the 1.5 was placed there because a lot of folks have indicated that behind the license plate with the ability to flip down is what many requested.

 

[gregd]

It's been discussed on the SpeakEV thread, @TonyWilliams has said that the port can be mounted anywhere and that the final locations has not been determined.

I believe the 1.5 was placed there because a lot of folks have indicated that behind the license plate with the ability to flip down is what many requested.

Right, and I've been following the thread there too. Just looking to see if they've made any decisions about the default location.

Note that the inlet for the 1.5 in the video wasn't behind the license plate, but rather down below. I can tell it's temporary. The 2.x, however, looked a bit like what they did for the Rav4, so the thought about it being a primary site (understanding that customers can direct otherwise) was what I was looking to clarify. My concerns with that location are two: needing to keep the trunk lid open while charging, and service access to the PEM by Tesla. We don't want Tesla to have to deal with an aftermarket gizmo while doing their regular work. It's also kind of a tight spot for cables that thick to be routed around in.

 

[Habious]

My concerns with that location are two: needing to keep the trunk lid open while charging, and service access to the PEM by Tesla. We don't want Tesla to have to deal with an aftermarket gizmo while doing their regular work. It's also kind of a tight spot for cables that thick to be routed around in.

My biggest concern with this project is that Tesla would open the trunk, see this gizmo, and say "We're not going to work on your car until that Gizmo is removed". A less-likely (but still possible) scenario is that Tesla will look at it and say "We've decided that, since you've modified the car so far from our original design specs, we're no longer going to service your car at all. Period. Even if you undo the modifications."

As far as I know, there's nothing keeping Tesla from blacklisting a car for service, because it's been "over-modified".

 

[gregd]

My biggest concern with this project is that Tesla would open the trunk, see this gizmo, and say "We're not going to work on your car until that Gizmo is removed". A less-likely (but still possible) scenario is that Tesla will look at it and say "We've decided that, since you've modified the car so far from our original design specs, we're no longer going to service your car at all. Period. Even if you undo the modifications."

As far as I know, there's nothing keeping Tesla from blacklisting a car for service, because it's been "over-modified".

So I did check with my local SC on this. The service manager told me that it would NOT cause a blanket refusal for them to service and support my car. Now, my car is already out of warranty, which is where the issue would be. If the car were under the original warranty, or a gizmo is attached to a component that is under warranty (including the 1 year warranty that comes with a replaced part), then it would be a source of discussion. Not a blanket "No" - they would presume the device is innocent - but if things looked like there might be an interaction of some kind, they'd likely take a step back and start talking time and materials.

My own opinion is that their stance is quite reasonable in this regard. I just want to be as out-of-the-way as possible, to be fair to them in allowing them do the work I request (e.g. yearly service). I would encourage you to have this discussion with your own SC, as this sort of thing seems to be more of a local decision than we'd perhaps expect.

 

[ecarfan]

And if your local service manager moves and you get a new one who does not adopt such a tolerant attitude...good luck with that. In my opinion there is a significant risk in making such a major modification to a Roadster. Every owner will have to make their own decision as to whether or not it is worth the risk, as you point out. Thanks.

So I did check with my local SC on this. The service manager told me that it would NOT cause a blanket refusal for them to service and support my car. Now, my car is already out of warranty, which is where the issue would be. If the car were under the original warranty, or a gizmo is attached to a component that is under warranty (including the 1 year warranty that comes with a replaced part), then it would be a source of discussion. Not a blanket "No" - they would presume the device is innocent - but if things looked like there might be an interaction of some kind, they'd likely take a step back and start talking time and materials.

My own opinion is that their stance is quite reasonable in this regard. I just want to be as out-of-the-way as possible, to be fair to them in allowing them do the work I request (e.g. yearly service). I would encourage you to have this discussion with your own SC, as this sort of thing seems to be more of a local decision than we'd perhaps expect.

 

[Habious]

And if your local service manager moves and you get a new one who does not adopt such a tolerant attitude...good luck with that. In my opinion there is a significant risk in making such a major modification to a Roadster. Every owner will have to make their own decision as to whether or not it is worth the risk, as you point out. Thanks.

Yup. That's my thoughts as well.

I was thinking about it from the other perspective. I'm considering the possibility of moving from the Washington, DC area to the Raleigh, NC area in the next few years. While the Tyco Rd. TSC might be OK with this (I don't know either way - haven't approached them about it), what happens if I move to Raleigh and the only TSC within driving range says "Sorry, no"?

...and, for those that say "Tesla won't do this", they already have. There are Roadsters on the road right now that Tesla has blacklisted. Damaged cars that, in Tesla's opinion, shouldn't have been repaired (but others disagreed and resurrected them). But, these cars won't ever be touched by Tesla again. Not for annual service, not for recalls, not for firmware updates. Those owners are completely on their own.

Yes, a "battery/charger modification" isn't the same thing as rebuilding a salvaged car but, it shows that such a blacklist does exist. There is a line in the sand somewhere. Cross it, and Tesla will never talk to you (or touch your car) again. Does this cross that line? I don't know. I don't think it will but, until Tesla (corporate) says (in writing) that they're OK with this, I won't be doing it...as much as I love the idea.

 

[dpeilow]

My service centre also said they would be ok with it.

The upgrade is very simple to disconnect: The two battery terminals in the PEM and one connection to the CAN bus diagnostic port. If there was a suspicion that it had or was causing a problem it can be isolated electrically. There are no software mods to the car. It would be churlish of Tesla to object on principle.

 

[gregd]

"Order" placed. I'm in!

This is a game changer for the car, and I think makes an important statement both to the EV community and to Tesla about the importance of the charging network, and the importance of access for all cars to it. Tesla understands this, obviously, with their Superchargers. But the others not so much. And for Tesla, it sets an imporant precident about the next phase of the car's life, with 3rd party improvements. Who knows, maybe the Roadster 3.5 will come with an OEM of Tony's adapter.

 

[Juanmax]

I'm in, but I live in Germany. I've heard of plans to have some jdemo installed in Norway by a Toyota dealership. Norway is way too far. What about UK? Which option do I have?

 

[nikwest]

I'm in, but I live in Germany. I've heard of plans to have some jdemo installed in Norway by a Toyota dealership. Norway is way too far. What about UK? Which option do I have?

I'm in Germany, too. There's an installation meeting planned in London. Or we might find somebody in Germany willing to do the installation.
I think installation should be pretty straightforward. The high voltage being the biggest issue.