Model 3 Supercharging Capable Discussion

[ttupper92618]

As of today, at SC it is first-come-first served. There are no plans that I have heard to have reserved spots.

As far as "other fast charge" locations, those are generally CHAdeMO and (1) you need to purchase the adapter in order to use them; (2) I believe that their maximum charge rate is at 50A (but someone with better knowledge will be able to confirm or refute this.) At about 30% share of charge, Superchargers start charging at 100A or more and taper downwards. I believe the 50A threshold is somewhere around 75% share of charge, but this is just from recollection.

An easy rule of thumb as it pertains to charging your EV: The power needed to recharge your battery is inversely related to your length of time at the location. A stop on a 500-mile drive will want fast charging; a stop for a day at the zoo can get by with 30A charging for 6-7 hours. Airport parking for several days would only require a 110V/15A level 1.

It's been made pretty clear to me that there are lots of non-Tesla chargers around that can be found through plugshare, and I accept that. And that's a relief.

Still, I wonder how this is really going to go down. You mention charging for 6 - 7 hours while wandering around the zoo. And right now, that sounds ok, because the 3 or 4 charging ports they have can pretty well meet the needs of the EV's showing up because right now EV's are a novelty.

What happens when the number of EV's on the road doubles, or triples, or quadruples? The California PEV Collaborative estimates that there have been a 407,000 PEV sales in the entire US since 2011. Tesla looks set to double that number in just a few years, and if they manage a 500K a year output as they intend, then you have to recognize that the infrastructure we are talking about, here, is not going to be adequate. Having four chargers at the San Diego zoo, as an example, is going to be a disaster if these numbers play out.

My point is, in a general sense, only this: the infrastructure that exists currently is not anywhere near where it needs to be to handle the number of new EV's that will be hitting the road in the next 5 years. I would estimate that this infrastructure needs to grow actually much faster than the rate of increase in EV sales, because of charging time. What happens, for example, when 100 EV's day trip to the SD zoo but there are only 10 spots to plug them in?

Again, this comes back to the need to have lots and lots of superchargers, because the bottleneck is charge speed. From an infrastructure perspective, it will be very, very difficult to ever keep up with EV charging demands without having very fast charging available.

I hope that makes sense.

 

[ttupper92618]

The first suggestion works, but the second suggestion gets into the payment system issue, where it may make more sense to implement pay per use or some other idea like a parking fine. I don't think a reservation system would help congestion anyways (although it gives more peace of mind). Just having charger availability shown in the car would go a long way for peace of mind (Elon mentioned Tesla will have something like this in the near future).


Tesla would have to make every car go through an access control system before allowing charging. Not impossible, but it would be much easier to implement if it is just controlled on the charger side (as with all other charger networks). Also, every car would need network access (wouldn't work well in areas with no signal).

Although to be fair, the pay-per-use schemes suggested would hit similar issues (but at least billing doesn't have to happen in real time; the car can record the amount of kWh or time and then send the information as a batch when connectivity is established).

Virtually every supercharger is located next to restaurants and other facilities. The fact that there are power and services there is a strong indicator that there are also communications facilities; even in podunk they have internet.

 

[SpiceWare]

My point is, in a general sense, only this: the infrastructure that exists currently is not anywhere near where it needs to be to handle the number of new EV's that will be hitting the road in the next 5 years.

1. go to supercharge.info
2. click on Map Options in the upper left
3. click on Way Back at the bottom of the menu
4. Note the very first Superchargers went live on November 19, 2012
5. Click Faster a few times if you'd like, and watch what's happened in the past 3 years and 5 months

If that doesn't allay your concerns about what's going to happen in the next 5 years, nothing will.

 

[Archer]

My point is, in a general sense, only this: the infrastructure that exists currently is not anywhere near where it needs to be to handle the number of new EV's that will be hitting the road in the next 5 years. I would estimate that this infrastructure needs to grow actually much faster than the rate of increase in EV sales, because of charging time. What happens, for example, when 100 EV's day trip to the SD zoo but there are only 10 spots to plug them in?

Again, this comes back to the need to have lots and lots of superchargers, because the bottleneck is charge speed. From an infrastructure perspective, it will be very, very difficult to ever keep up with EV charging demands without having very fast charging available.

I hope that makes sense.

You are correct that the charging infrastructure needs to grow, but Tesla does not have their head in the sand when it comes to this reality. They aim to double the SC network by the time the first M3 is produced. And there is nothing to prevent them from continuing to grow the network to meet demand. What may be hard for non-EV owners to understand is the fact that most people will charge from home and will rarely ever use a SC except for long distance trips. Elon said as much last year when he stated that 90% of owners do not use the SC network at all. 90% are able to meet their driving needs charging solely from home or other non-SC system like at a work place. While this may change when the M3 comes out, you can't assume that M3 owners will drastically change this statistic because they will be a bunch of freeloaders as some have predicted. I believe most will value the convenience of home charging.

If necessary, one incentive I think Tesla can do to encourage home charging is to include a HPWC with the purchase of a Tesla. They could include it for free or raise the base price to cover the cost of the HPWC. But only when and if the big data - NOT anecdotal evidence from a small data set - indicates that the SC network can't be scaled to meet demand, then I would want the beautiful simplicity of the SC network to remain unchanged.

 

[Ben W]

1. go to supercharge.info
2. click on Map Options in the upper left
3. click on Way Back at the bottom of the menu
4. Note the very first Superchargers went live on November 19, 2012
5. Click Faster a few times if you'd like, and watch what's happened in the past 3 years and 5 months

If that doesn't allay your concerns about what's going to happen in the next 5 years, nothing will.

It's dangerous enough to extrapolate linear trends, let alone exponential ones

If the luxury Model S/X fleet were to continue to grow at an exponential rate, then proportional growth of the SC network would be sustainable. But that's not what's happening. The fleet will be rapidly shifting over the next few years to the Model 3. Building out the SC network is roughly a constant cost to Tesla per car; 100k Model 3's will put at least the same amount of strain on the SC network (if not significantly more) as 100k Model S's. But Tesla's revenues/profits per Model 3 will be much less than per Model S/X. This imbalance casts serious doubt (to me) on the sustainability of the current SC pricing model. As I see it, for the Model 3, Tesla has three basic options:

1. Bundle free unlimited supercharging for life into the sticker price of each car. (The current Model S/X approach.)
2. Make SC a ~$2k a la carte option. (The original S60 approach.)
3. Make SC pay-per-use.

Option 1, as I've mentioned, is very likely not sustainable: Tesla won't be getting enough revenue per car to justify redirecting ~$2k from each sale toward the SC network.
Option 2 unduly punishes drivers who view SC as an occasional necessity but intend to use it very sparingly. Some buyers will cover the $2k SC cost by forgoing other high-profit options (e.g. premium audio). Some, particularly those on the fence in the first place, may decide that $2k tips the balance and opt to buy an ICE instead. And some, e.g. livery drivers, will actively profit off of it at Tesla's expense, by using it much more heavily than intended.
Option 3, in my view, is the best solution, both for Tesla and for its Model 3 customers. I've laid out my logic for this ad nauseam in previous posts, so I won't rehash it all here. But I'm just saying. Perhaps a combined approach (e.g. $500 upfront to unlock SC, plus a lower per-minute fee) would actually be best compromise.

 

[Ben W]

Elon said as much last year when he stated that 90% of owners do not use the SC network at all.

I don't believe this is correct. My understanding is that he said that 90% of total driven miles were not supercharged miles. (Implying that 10% are.) This 10% figure actually rose to about 15% last summer, based on extrapolation from Tesla-published statistics.

Furthermore, I believe that the average Model 3 will put measurably more strain on the SC network than the average Model S/X. That's because I suspect a higher percentage of potential Model 3 owners will not have an easy way to install home charging; e.g. they might live in an apartment complex with bureaucratic red tape, or they might have only street parking. I know a few people with Model 3 pre-orders who are in this situation, and though they hope to solve it by then, local supercharging is their backup plan. So they may be reliant on the SC network for much of their local charging. Even if they charge off-peak to avoid congestion, it still costs Tesla money for the electricity (and to a lesser extent, wear and tear). It's also not ideal for the battery to be constantly supercharged vs L2-charged. For all these reasons, I believe Tesla will have to rethink their supercharging pricing model for the Model 3, and I suspect they will.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Virtually every supercharger is located next to restaurants and other facilities. The fact that there are power and services there is a strong indicator that there are also communications facilities; even in podunk they have internet.

I have no doubt they have wired or satellite internet, but I'm not sure if mobile internet would necessarily be available.

 

[Az_Rael]

My point is, in a general sense, only this: the infrastructure that exists currently is not anywhere near where it needs to be to handle the number of new EV's that will be hitting the road in the next 5 years.

Very true, it is already over-taxed now in California. It is getting harder and harder to find open charging spaces every time I go out. I always end up glad I own a Volt. Plugshare is not a reliable way to tell how full a charging station is due to the number of people who don't use it.

Every singe time I have been to this charging station by my doctors office it looks like this:

 

[ohmman]

It's dangerous enough to extrapolate linear trends, let alone exponential ones

Sorry, but this is always required material when someone discusses extrapolation.

 

[EcoHeliGuy]

Very true, it is already over-taxed now in California. It is getting harder and harder to find open charging spaces every time I go out. I always end up glad I own a Volt. Plugshare is not a reliable way to tell how full a charging station is due to the number of people who don't use it.

Every singe time I have been to this charging station by my doctors office it looks like this:

View attachment 173193

Personally the problem with this picture is all the Hybrids ICEing EV's. Thanks GM

 

[EcoHeliGuy]

The non believers keep suggesting that the supercharger cuts into Tesla's profit margin. And that it's not sustainable with the Model 3.


First off: I'm pretty sure Tesla doesn't feel this way as the Superchargers are part of the whole brand package.

And Second: you don't know if Tesla counts the Supercharger as part of the car cost. The supercharger has been included in the cost of EVERY car produced since the Model S 60. And I'm sure they are playing it safe right now until they can for sure include the price in the Model 3.

The whole point in a profit margin is to make a profit.


The Model S needed to produce new supercharging locations and vast area coverage. An example is: in order for the network to function it needed to provide driving coverage for a car to travel long distances, say covering Southern California. Well that car needed multiple chargers in multiple locations.

Now we have pretty good supercharger coverage. We need to fill in a few locations. But you need less chargers built per car.

When the Model 3 comes out there will be large coverage, and they will need to add chargers to locations already established. Not insignificant cost, but a lot less then the first couple thousand Model S needed to support the infant network.

This is just like the Model 3 mass produced model, Economy of scale. Along with lower watt/mile energy usage as a bonus, the amount needed to support the supercharger network drops with more cars on the road. As someone mentioned above 10-15% of driven miles are on the supercharger. That means 8-10 cars cover the cost of 1 cars worth of usage.

 

[EcoHeliGuy]

Have you been following the post chain here?

I don't need to read the miss information, I can easy see and research the reality.

 

[AZ Desert Driver]

The higher power stations are not equivalent to superchargers. They are limited to 50kW (~150 miles of range per hour), while superchargers can go up to 120kW (170 miles in 30 minutes). You can use the CHAdeMO chargers if you buy the $450 adapter:
Tesla — CHAdeMO Adapter


There is no reservation system right now, but there are negatives to setting up one. For example, if someone reserves and is a no show, that will lock up that charger unnecessarily. Also, there needs to be some sort of access control (which so far superchargers supposedly don't have; the access is provided on the car side, not the charger side).

This CHAdeMO link says the adapter is priced at @2,000 - not $450. Ouch.
My question about reservation went sideways---let me rephrase.

Is there a way to know how busy a charging station is at any given time (is it worth hurrying up to get there before rush hour?,,,shall I eat now and try later?...) or is the only practical way is to drive there and look? (Like a gas station)

 

[Az_Rael]

Personally the problem with this picture is all the Hybrids ICEing EV's. Thanks GM

Volts have just as much right to charge at public chargers as BEVs. We aren't hybrids, thank you very much.

 

[EcoHeliGuy]

Volts have just as much right to charge at public chargers as BEVs. We aren't hybrids, thank you very much.

By definition the volt is a hybrid, it's gas assist. The Prius is electric assist.

Non hybrids are Tesla's, a Cruze, Corella ect

 

[AZ Desert Driver]

The higher power stations are not equivalent to superchargers. They are limited to 50kW (~150 miles of range per hour), while superchargers can go up to 120kW (170 miles in 30 minutes). You can use the CHAdeMO chargers if you buy the $450 adapter:
Tesla — CHAdeMO Adapter


There is no reservation system right now, but there are negatives to setting up one. For example, if someone reserves and is a no show, that will lock up that charger unnecessarily. Also, there needs to be some sort of access control (which so far superchargers supposedly don't have; the access is provided on the car side, not the charger side).

I know that PlugShare High Power stations are not the same thing as Tesla Superchargers. The point was that there are places to refuel scattered all over the place, and one does not need to have a SC to travel to that destination. A SC is a preferred, but when preferred is not available, you are not stranded.

 

[Ben W]

The non believers keep suggesting that the supercharger cuts into Tesla's profit margin. And that it's not sustainable with the Model 3.


First off: I'm pretty sure Tesla doesn't feel this way as the Superchargers are part of the whole brand package.

And Second: you don't know if Tesla counts the Supercharger as part of the car cost. The supercharger has been included in the cost of EVERY car produced since the Model S 60. And I'm sure they are playing it safe right now until they can for sure include the price in the Model 3.

The whole point in a profit margin is to make a profit.


The Model S needed to produce new supercharging locations and vast area coverage. An example is: in order for the network to function it needed to provide driving coverage for a car to travel long distances, say covering Southern California. Well that car needed multiple chargers in multiple locations.

Now we have pretty good supercharger coverage. We need to fill in a few locations. But you need less chargers built per car.

When the Model 3 comes out there will be large coverage, and they will need to add chargers to locations already established. Not insignificant cost, but a lot less then the first couple thousand Model S needed to support the infant network.

This is just like the Model 3 mass produced model, Economy of scale. Along with lower watt/mile energy usage as a bonus, the amount needed to support the supercharger network drops with more cars on the road. As someone mentioned above 10-15% of driven miles are on the supercharger. That means 8-10 cars cover the cost of 1 cars worth of usage.

The coverage of infrequently used locations was always considered a separate marketing expense, rather than a per-vehicle cost. But with 10x the number of vehicles on the road, most of these stations will reach capacity, and many will have to be built out further. Still, most of the effort will focus on the higher-traveled routes and cities. It's not clear what economies of scale Tesla can attain; it may depend how their costs are split between land rights, construction, equipment, electricity, maintenance, and so on. Presumably it's cheaper to expand an existing station from 8 to 16 slots than to build a new station with 8 slots, but how much cheaper? Are the current small stations built with efficient expandability in mind? It's important to densify the network as well; ideally there would be charging stations at least every 50 miles or so, or even tighter. Can a single SC location scale up to 50 supercharging stalls? 100? Tesla is apparently building a 20-stall SC just south of Fremont, which I believe will be the largest so far. The UK is dotted with 2-stall and 4-stall superchargers; I would imagine that if there were a big win for doing fewer but larger installations, they would have done it that way instead. It's possible that some locations are helping subsidize the cost, if they perceive it adds value or cachet to their location. Who knows.

The Model 3 will have lower watt/mile energy, but will charge correspondingly slower through most of the pack, so it may not be much of a win overall. (Unless they significantly improve the battery chemistry. If the pack could accept 120kW all the way up to 90%, that would be a game-changer!) Keep in mind the 10-15% supercharged miles statistic is what's currently observed with the S/X fleet -- that fraction is likely to substantially increase with the Model 3 fleet. (for reasons I've outlined in other posts.)

 

[Az_Rael]

By definition the volt is a hybrid, it's gas assist. The Prius is electric assist.

Non hybrids are Tesla's, a Cruze, Corella ect

Well, if we are going to get technical, the 1st generation Volt is actually an Extended Range EV. Just like the BMW i3 REX. The gas engine doesn't actually drive the wheels, just provides power to the electric motor when the battery is depleted. A generator essentially. 2nd gen Volt works a bit differently and is closer to a plug in hybrid.

Hybrids power the wheels with both gas and electric.

 

[MP3Mike]

This CHAdeMO link says the adapter is priced at @2,000 - not $450. Ouch.

If you are looking at that page and seeing the $1,900 figure that is the cost to enable the DC fast charging hardware in a Model S 60 that doesn't have Supercharging enabled. The actual CHAdeMO adapter is $450, but is currently sold out so it defaults to showing the other option.

 

[EcoHeliGuy]

The coverage of infrequently used locations was always considered a separate marketing expense, rather than a per-vehicle cost. But with 10x the number of vehicles on the road, most of these stations will reach capacity, and many will have to be built out further. Still, most of the effort will focus on the higher-traveled routes and cities. It's not clear what economies of scale Tesla can attain; it may depend how their costs are split between land rights, construction, equipment, electricity, maintenance, and so on. Presumably it's cheaper to expand an existing station from 8 to 16 slots than to build a new station with 8 slots, but how much cheaper? Are the current small stations built with efficient expandability in mind? It's important to densify the network as well; ideally there would be charging stations at least every 50 miles or so, or even tighter. Can a single SC location scale up to 50 supercharging stalls? 100? Tesla is apparently building a 20-stall SC just south of Fremont, which I believe will be the largest so far. The UK is dotted with 2-stall and 4-stall superchargers; I would imagine that if there were a big win for doing fewer but larger installations, they would have done it that way instead. It's possible that some locations are helping subsidize the cost, if they perceive it adds value or cachet to their location. Who knows.

The Model 3 will have lower watt/mile energy, but will charge correspondingly slower through most of the pack, so it may not be much of a win overall. (Unless they significantly improve the battery chemistry. If the pack could accept 120kW all the way up to 90%, that would be a game-changer!) Keep in mind the 10-15% supercharged miles statistic is what's currently observed with the S/X fleet -- that fraction is likely to substantially increase with the Model 3 fleet. (for reasons I've outlined in other posts.)

I was meaning that every car they build dilutes the number of needed chargers. When they had 1000 Model S on the road they need more chargers per capita so to speak.

Also there are a lot of factors in the time spent charging vs distance traveled to next charger, not just battery capacity.

Less watts are required to move the car. Meaning less watts are needed to replace capacity to reach the next charger. If the 3 can travel the same distance as a larger battery S on less power. Then it doesn't need to stay connected to the charger as long. remember the superchargers are currently able to supply 120kwh. That's the non veriable at the moment, the model 3 will recover al large percentage of its battery (range) faster then a Model S. Chemistry could help this more but isn't necessary to achieve a quicker turn around.

if I need 150miles to the next charger, and can get 120kwh from the charger (at least for a portion of the lower end). The car needing less KW will finish charging first if both start at 0.

If the Model 3 is unable to use the full charge rate, then yes it will be slower.