Juicebox Charging

[Spirit]

Looking through many threads I can not find any comments if it is more energy efficient to use the Telsa-provided charger or a third party one like the Juicebox. This is for the 32A mid-range

 

[Rocky_H]

Zero difference at all. The external charging equipment is just a relay that connects your house wiring to the car. All of the charging efficiency considerations are done by the onboard charger inside the car.

 

[RScottyL]

Zero difference at all. The external charging equipment is just a relay that connects your house wiring to the car. All of the charging efficiency considerations are done by the onboard charger inside the car.

I agree!

The car will set the pace on how much electricity it will need! Not really a more efficient way to get it in there!

Just like with gas on an ICE car!

 

[srs5694]

The JuiceBox includes a built-in computer and WiFi hardware, which consumes a tiny amount of power 24/7. Tesla's Wall Connector includes no such hardware. Thus, I would expect that a JuiceBox will consume slightly more power than a Wall Connector; however, it's conceivable that some other difference I don't know about (say, if Tesla is secretly using Wall Connectors to mine Bitcoin, or more plausibly some subtle difference in how their electronics work) would counteract this effect. Of course, this effect is about the power use by the EVSEs themselves, not the charging efficiencies of the devices; but either way, it amounts to the JuiceBox using a tiny bit more power -- or at least, that's what I'd expect. I haven't actually measured this draw, so I don't know if it's real, or how much power it uses. I'd expect the difference to be pretty small -- probably akin to running a Raspberry Pi. AFAIK, other posters are correct about actual charging efficiencies -- if the EVSEs provide the same 32A at the same ~240v, then the charging efficiency should be identical.