The whole "free unlimited lifetime supercharging" idea was so dumb that its hard not to grin when Tesla finally realized how much it cost them. These cars will be repaired for the next 40 years.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Massive SC subsidizing by new owners?
- Thread starter Zybane
- Start date
The whole "free unlimited lifetime supercharging" idea was so dumb that its hard not to grin when Tesla finally realized how much it cost them. These cars will be repaired for the next 40 years.
smatthew
Active Member
Repaired you say? *evil grin* I'm not sure those Teslas are safe to supercharge unless they've had a $2000 HV inspection ;-}
israndy
Supercharger Hunter
I am interested to hear what Tesla thinks about the health of batteries that are either charged too fast or too slow. If I am at the Supercharger every time I charge and I charge to 100% have I screwed myself? My capacity has been eaten away by overheating? Or vice-versa, if I am charging from 120V at 8 amps, is this bad for my car's longevity?
Certainly it wouldn't be bad for Tesla to cap all Supercharging at 80%, especially for any Supercharger you visit 10x more than most other chargers. If you need to top it off, move to a destination charger, get out of the fast lane. At least make them unplug the car and wait for 2 minutes before charging again if they NEED 100%, then the rest of us can nag them why are they are plugging in again. "People are waiting for you"
Certainly it wouldn't be bad for Tesla to cap all Supercharging at 80%, especially for any Supercharger you visit 10x more than most other chargers. If you need to top it off, move to a destination charger, get out of the fast lane. At least make them unplug the car and wait for 2 minutes before charging again if they NEED 100%, then the rest of us can nag them why are they are plugging in again. "People are waiting for you"
I'm sure people on this site will be more than happy to answer all those questions, they are not open questions that people have doubts about.
I think charging to 100% at SC is a little inconvenient because the charge rate is slower. If you are on a trip, it makes sense to charge only to 80% (plus any extra personal time), and then pick up at the next supercharger. Charging to 100% at a supercharger is for people who really need it.
Do have no clue that businesses exist to make money and have a lot of costs besides raw materials? Would hope most adults grasp this.
What are the installation costs, potential ongoing property lease/use costs, maintenance of equipment. Even just developing and maintaining the billing system costs money, then there are CC fees, how about taxes not just on the power but on the earnings?
These things on top of all the other good points others have made.
Gas stations are subsidized by the convenience store. Superchargers only have one product.
What are the installation costs, potential ongoing property lease/use costs, maintenance of equipment. Even just developing and maintaining the billing system costs money, then there are CC fees, how about taxes not just on the power but on the earnings?
These things on top of all the other good points others have made.
Gas stations are subsidized by the convenience store. Superchargers only have one product.
Tesla controls the rate at which the battery charges. At some point they could decide that the maximum safe rate is 7.68kW.
srs5694
Active Member
I disagree, at least as a general rule. Most of the Superchargers I've visited have been well under 50% occupied when I've been there, so the sort of draconian restrictions you're suggesting would be pointless at best and annoying at worst. If I'm on a road trip in cold weather in a Model 3 SR, particularly in an area with long distances between Superchargers, then I may well need over 80% charge to reach the next Supercharger station. There may be no nearby Level 2 station for many such locations, and requiring me to unplug and re-plug the car would be an annoyance if I was trying to eat a meal while my car charges. This is the type of annoyance that could deter sales of EVs. Can you imagine a news report along the lines of the highly-criticized NY Times piece from June in which the reporter gripes about having to move the car five miles after having eaten half a meal?
That said, I seem to recall hearing that Tesla has implemented a less-draconian version of the rules you've suggested, but only at crowded Supercharger stations -- the target SoC is set to 80% at stations with heavy use. IIRC, that limit can be overridden manually, but it at least serves as a gentle reminder to users to not be jerks about hogging the Supercharger.
Ultimately, of course, there are different issues in different areas. I see you live in California, where most reports of crowded Superchargers originate. I, by contrast, live in Rhode Island, and to date, I've driven my Model 3 on road trips to Ohio and back, via Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania, and smaller bits in West Virginia and New Jersey. What works for you would be an unnecessary pain for me, and I understand that what works for me may cause problems for you.
For a more nuanced policy to deter Supercharger misuse by drivers charging to 100% unnecessarily and hogging slots that are in desperate need by others, try this: Keep charging policies as they are now, but when a Supercharger station rises to near-capacity use, raise the price to charge above 80% by a significant amount -- say, 4x the normal rate. Be sure that owners get alerts on their phones and in-car screens, both when they plug in (or when the station's use rises to the trigger level) and shortly before their cars reach the 80% point. Tesla adding some free or low-cost Destination charging capacity at the Supercharger site could help a bit, too, since owners who really do need >80% charge could move their cars to the L2 EVSEs to avoid the >80% surcharge. Of course, what would really help those crowded California Supercharger sites is greater capacity, but they seem to be having problems expanding Supercharger capacity quickly enough in a few areas. With any luck this problem will be short-lived.
Residential electricity is much cheaper than commercial electricity. I pay about double the residential rate for my cabinet shop.
Limit "free" supercharging to 80% .. it's still unlimited/free for life, but if you want that last 20% you have to pay.
remember there is a roughly 2-3% charge to Tesla for paying via a credit card, not to mention billing and such
israndy
Supercharger Hunter
Excellent response. Cannot stand it when people use thumbs down w/o any reason. The problem with the suggestion I see is that the people who are LIVING at the Superchargers are those charging Xs and Ss, it takes SO LITTLE time to charge a TM3, plus almost all of us have to pay, so we do it at home where it's cheaper. But when I NEED to charge quickly, like on a road trip, and I see a station full of people charging for free to 100% I am annoyed, like the person who started this thread. Quadrupling their FUSC cost wouldn't help, it would still be free. And even my suggestion of preventing them from staying twice as long to get that last 20% goes against the Unlimited part of their free deal.
Now that we have the ability to sit and watch movies while we charge it will probably only get worse. And all the new V3 Superchargers that are going up won't make those old incompatible FUSC users get done any faster. And as reliable as these cars are, we are probably going to have to stare at those people slowly charging for decades to come.
Maybe we can get Tesla to subsidize their home electricity so they charge at home...
mikes_fsd
Banned
I always wondered why people value their time so little.
Just thinking of going to charge somewhere else (when home charging is available) seems completely silly.
Your time is worth more then 12 to 30 cents/kWh
doghousePVD
My grandfather’s car
I suspect those S & X owners are second or even third generation. The original purchasers were well to do, buying cars for $100k+, own their own homes, and paid to put in a fast wall charger. They have now sold their cars to get newer ones, and the second owners are perhaps cheap, or rent, or generally financially less well off.
In New England, 90% of the cars I see at SC are 3s. I regularly see 3s charging at the free J-1772 chargers next to the SC in Freeport ME. Cheap has no bounds.
In New England, 90% of the cars I see at SC are 3s. I regularly see 3s charging at the free J-1772 chargers next to the SC in Freeport ME. Cheap has no bounds.
I don't believe that people will be using free supercharging for decades, just because I don't think the Supercharger network is going to last for decades. If EVs are the future, the only way we're going to get there is ubiquitous charging. It doesn't make sense to make heterogeneous networks with different access points, price points and connectivity. There will be a single universal charging standard in the same way that there is a single gasoline. Tesla is only in the charging business because it helps them sell cars. It seems reasonable that they would seek to divest this business, as long as it doesn't impact their core business of selling cars.
doghousePVD
My grandfather’s car
Fueling is not heterogeneous now. Premium, diesel, full service, and very significant differences in pricing. Tesla's charging infrastructure is a huge moat, and none of the other car or energy companies are doing 0.1% of what they need to do to compete effectively. I am sure Tesla intends to keep their charging network until cars are obsolete.
Yeah, getting the land leases, routing power, building the chargers, and maintaining the chargers all cost. Additionally, you aren't charging your car directly with AC power. The utility power is fed into giant array of batteries and then pushed DC to DC to your vehicle. These on site battery packs have costs, maintenance, etc.
A while back I heard $400,000 per site being thrown around. Not sure how accurate that is these days, or what size charging station it would build. But given the number of chargers they have in the US alone, this costs them billions to setup, never mind maintenance. Something no automaker has had the balls to do in the past.
When you consider Tesla's size and how little free cash they have had (they almost went bankrupt prior to the 3 hitting it out of the ball park), the complaints about supercharger cost is pretty small minded. No one complaining has run a business.
Common gas stations
- 3 fuel tanks
- 2 different fuels, 2 different types of 1 fuel
- 2 or 4 different fuel nozzles each stall.
Large highway gas stations:
- An additional type of nozzle used for a subset of vehicles.
Nobody ever says "We need all ICEVs to use the same fuel type and the same nozzle."
That's because we don't.
All that matters is that there is sufficient volume to support the network. At Tesla's current rate of sales it's not a problem.
nwdiver
Well-Known Member
Why not >20 miles from where your car sleeps it's free. <20 miles and you pay. That way free unlimited supercharging is used for its intended purpose...
Similar threads
