Model 3 Supercharging Capable Discussion

[Chuq]

Agree with both posts above. It's a massive marketing benefit. All the other manufacturers are rushing to announce and get to market their own 200 mile cars. But none of them have anything to match the supercharger network.

 

[metier]

After months of reading your posts, I just noticed the eyes blink in your avatar. Very nice touch.

Not only does he blink. once in a while is eyes move towards you

 

[Genshi]

Not only does he blink. once in a while is eyes move towards you

No kidding? I'm prepared to admit, at this juncture, that the monkey is probably smarter, craftier and more observant than I am...

 

[alseTrick]

The Model 3 may have an extra charge for supercharger access, but I think they will be free to use. I'm beginning to see how Tesla is seeing the supercharger network. The supercharger is the killer app for Tesla vs the competition.

The competition is behind the curve in car design, but they are even further behind in charging network design. With free supercharging vs paid charging for other car brands Tesla has a significant advantage.

If you had a need to make road trips between cities, would you rather have a Model 3 with free supercharging, or a Bolt with on the road charging costing about the same as gasoline for the same trip?

Tesla is taking a page from the software wars.

The Bolt isn't supercharger compatible is it? If Chevy (and other manufacturers) don't make them compatible, then Tesla can't charge them.

All of the Tesla wording makes me believe it's going to be an additional fee for Model 3 users to enable supercharging. Initially I thought it had to be "free" for the Model 3. I thought - and still do - that restricting base-model 3 owners from using the supercharger network would limit sales. It may even cause some current reservation holders to back out. (Some of them may already be stretching to afford a $35,000 car, and that's before being required to spend an additional $1,000 upfront just to be able to drive the family across the state over the holidays to visit family, etc.) But I don't know how to reconcile this with Musk apparently saying superchargers would be "free for life" in the past.

Can Tesla create software that disables supercharging at a local supercharger if it's within 15 miles or so of your home? That way only non-locals could use each supercharger. Is something like that possible? (Most people aren't going to drive 15+ miles out of their way just to get free supercharging are they?)

 

[Red Sage]

The Bolt isn't supercharger compatible is it? If Chevy (and other manufacturers) don't make them compatible, then Tesla can't charge them.

General Motors has already stated quite firmly that they have no interest in providing, building, or taking part in a fast charging network to allow long distance driving for the Chevrolet BOLT.

All of the Tesla wording makes me believe it's going to be an additional fee for Model 3 users to enable supercharging. Initially I thought it had to be "free" for the Model 3. I thought - and still do - that restricting base-model 3 owners from using the supercharger network would limit sales. It may even cause some current reservation holders to back out. (Some of them may already be stretching to afford a $35,000 car, and that's before being required to spend an additional $1,000 upfront just to be able to drive the family across the state over the holidays to visit family, etc.)

There is a possibility that for the Rear Wheel Drive Base Model ☰ with lowest capacity battery pack, there might be a fee to activate Supercharger access. There is a likelihood that for every version of the Model ☰ with a higher capacity battery pack, Supercharger access will be included by default. I would strongly suggest that Tesla Motors simply include Supercharger access on all versions of the Model ☰, but perhaps modify the terms from 'FREE for LIFE!' to be perhaps free for the original buyer only, or free for a limited time after purchase (and reactivated for a fee to be determined later).

But I don't know how to reconcile this with Musk apparently saying superchargers would be "free for life" in the past.

I think of it as 'FREE (of additional fees beyond the purchase of the car) for LIFE (the life of the car)!' If there is a fee to activate the Supercharger feature on the base version of Model ☰, you will pay that when you buy the car. It would be an option that you could choose at the time of order placement. The Supercharger hardware will be part of the car whether you choose the option or not. That way, if you sell the car at some later date, the new owner can choose to activate the feature themselves by paying a fee. Thus, every car would be Supercharger Capable, even if it is not activated to start.

I believe this makes sense, even though I disagree with those who feel there absolutely MUST be a fee to activate Supercharger access for the base version of the Model ☰. I also disagree with those who claim they are so cash-strapped that they would prefer an option to DELETE the Supercharger hardware from the Model ☰ so they could pay less for it. No. Every Tesla Motors product from now on will be Supercharger Capable at the very least. I personally believe that Supercharger access will be included on every Tesla Motors vehicle from now on.

Can Tesla create software that disables supercharging at a local supercharger if it's within 15 miles or so of your home? That way only non-locals could use each supercharger. Is something like that possible? (Most people aren't going to drive 15+ miles out of their way just to get free supercharging are they?)

All of these are concerns that have been brought up many times. The problem with 'geo-fencing' is not that it cannot be done. The problem is that there is no way to determine the intention of a driver. Someone returning home from a long trip, who knows they must turn around and head out again almost immediately, should be able to plug into the Supercharger en route to their house, fill up at 3:00 am, grab a shower and a couple of winks at home, then head out again with a nearly full charge. Sure, they would probably be able to charge at home most of the time, but if they are near empty upon getting home and are unable to wait the six-to-eight hours it would ordinarily take to fill up to a reasonable available range, they should be able to use a Supercharger to 'top off'. Similarly, someone who lives in Los Angeles, but has spent the weekend in San Francisco, may be on his way to San Francisco. So, they might use a Supercharger 'near' their home, even though they are in the midst of a road trip. That same person may only charge at home in any other circumstance.

I do not believe that Superchargers will be 'abused' in any way by the majority of owners. I expect that most of them understand their significance as being a tool or a weapon in favor of EV adoption. I do not believe that a minority of owners will be able to significantly affect the Supercharger network as a whole by being [ICEHOLES] who somehow 'hog' more than their 'fair share'. The system will not run out of electricity because 'locals' use it.

People who do not have some form of home charging are welcome to use Superchargers. They should not be shamed in any way of choosing to drive electric. They should be applauded for making a hard decision and making the right choice. Superchargers exist as much to encourage a switch from ICE as they do to enable long distance driving.

 

[msanborn08]

I think (if that's possible for some of you at this point) for you to turn off the EV early adopter mindset and place yourself back into the normal automotive consumer market consideration for a 2017-2018++ vehicle, that not including super charger access on a main stream market car (that is still the goal on the Model 3 right?) is a huge mistake. What is your position at the point? It is you continuation of a slow evolution of the EV market while your dinosaur competitors eat you up once their gears got turning in the EV trending direction..

It has been stated publicly over and over again that Tesla's end game is to solve the renewable energy transportation industry. You are not going to solve that problem if charging isn't accessible and (\\^or) cheaper then your competitors. You will not deliver millions of cars if the product is harder and cost more to use. Again, put on your normal Jack and Jill from down the fill shoes on here.

IMO, Tesla needs to bundle the cost of super charger access into the price. It shouldn't be a line item.. The mindset should be more of as a line access fee on your phone bill. Even if you don't use it, you pay a share for the upkeep and continued roll out in underdeveloped areas for the greater hive (\\^collective?).

 

[wdolson]

The Bolt isn't supercharger compatible is it? If Chevy (and other manufacturers) don't make them compatible, then Tesla can't charge them.

GM. Ford, Chrysler, and most European auto makers have joined the CCS standard for high speed DC charging, but as it stands now CCS is inferior to Tesla supercharging in speed and locations.

All of the Tesla wording makes me believe it's going to be an additional fee for Model 3 users to enable supercharging. Initially I thought it had to be "free" for the Model 3. I thought - and still do - that restricting base-model 3 owners from using the supercharger network would limit sales. It may even cause some current reservation holders to back out. (Some of them may already be stretching to afford a $35,000 car, and that's before being required to spend an additional $1,000 upfront just to be able to drive the family across the state over the holidays to visit family, etc.) But I don't know how to reconcile this with Musk apparently saying superchargers would be "free for life" in the past.

Can Tesla create software that disables supercharging at a local supercharger if it's within 15 miles or so of your home? That way only non-locals could use each supercharger. Is something like that possible? (Most people aren't going to drive 15+ miles out of their way just to get free supercharging are they?)

It's possible Tesla may have a fee to enable supercharging on some trim versions of the Model 3, but it's becoming a major selling point for Tesla over any competition. Having it available for all cars will be an important selling point.

They may be able to distinguish the difference between the premium Model S/X and the Model 3 by doing something with supercharger access like the S/X remain free for life, but the 3 has some kind of limit on it. The current hassle free nature of supercharging is a major plus among current drivers and they need to keep supercharger use easy.

 

[alseTrick]

GM. Ford, Chrysler, and most European auto makers have joined the CCS standard for high speed DC charging, but as it stands now CCS is inferior to Tesla supercharging in speed and locations.

Uh, what does that mean? Is Tesla CCS compatible? I'm assuming yes since they can use the chademo and j1772 and whatever other outlets. But can't non-Tesla manufacturers continue to make their vehicles in a way that doesn't allow them to work with superchargers, even with increased batteries/battery power?

It's possible Tesla may have a fee to enable supercharging on some trim versions of the Model 3, but it's becoming a major selling point for Tesla over any competition. Having it available for all cars will be an important selling point.

They may be able to distinguish the difference between the premium Model S/X and the Model 3 by doing something with supercharger access like the S/X remain free for life, but the 3 has some kind of limit on it. The current hassle free nature of supercharging is a major plus among current drivers and they need to keep supercharger use easy.

I completely agree. I think it's in their best interest for it to be free to EVERYONE who owns a Tesla. But I'm no longer expecting that with the Model 3 based on Tesla's own wording and non-committal attitude about it. That said, I wouldn't be opposed to an additional fee, as long as it was a simple fee and not some recurring or complicated payment system.

 

[Genshi]

It is possible that Tesla themselves doesn't know. Their vague wording indicates they're considering some type of pay-to-access, but it may be contingent on where the gross margin on the car ends up. That would be my best guess, at this point. We're still 18 months away...

 

[S'toon]

Uh, what does that mean? Is Tesla CCS compatible? I'm assuming yes since they can use the chademo and j1772 and whatever other outlets. But can't non-Tesla manufacturers continue to make their vehicles in a way that doesn't allow them to work with superchargers, even with increased batteries/battery power?

There's some speculation that Tesla joining the CCS standard would allow them to make a CCS adapter, similar to what it does with the Chademo adapter.

 

[wdolson]

Uh, what does that mean? Is Tesla CCS compatible? I'm assuming yes since they can use the chademo and j1772 and whatever other outlets. But can't non-Tesla manufacturers continue to make their vehicles in a way that doesn't allow them to work with superchargers, even with increased batteries/battery power?

Currently Tesla is not CCS compatible, but they may be working on an adapter. Tesla did recently join the organization establishing the CCS standard. Tesla has said they are open to allowing other companies to join the supercharger network, but they need to pay proportionally for their use. So far there have been no takers.

I completely agree. I think it's in their best interest for it to be free to EVERYONE who owns a Tesla. But I'm no longer expecting that with the Model 3 based on Tesla's own wording and non-committal attitude about it. That said, I wouldn't be opposed to an additional fee, as long as it was a simple fee and not some recurring or complicated payment system.

Tesla is difficult to predict. I was pretty sure there was not going to be a Model S refresh this year as it's obvious Tesla's engineering resources are pretty tied up right now. I missed that one pretty thoroughly, though most of the the changes are things ported from the Model X.

 

[stopcrazypp]

There's some speculation that Tesla joining the CCS standard would allow them to make a CCS adapter, similar to what it does with the Chademo adapter.

Given the CCS standard is an international open standard from the beginning (unlike Chademo, which started out proprietary), Tesla does not have to join any group to make a CCS adapter.

Tesla's recent joining of the Charin group as a core member (not just a regular one) can be a signal they want to harmonize with the next version of their standard (CCS 2.0 and beyond) and want at least some input into the future standard (similar to how Tesla pushed for J1772 AC to be 80A). Tesla's current connector will have difficulty hitting the 350kW levels the future CCS levels are aiming at. And even if Tesla keeps their connector proprietary, they would probably want to have input into the direction of the standard so that at least an adapter is still possible.

 

[wdolson]

I believe some European countries are mandating that any new fast chargers be compatible with CCS, so Tesla may figure if they want to install new superchargers in those countries, they will have to be compatible with CCS and they will have to work out a way to charge those people.

It could inadvertently make Tesla the fast charging standard for most EVs. Good news for consumers, but other auto makers don't want to concede anything to Tesla.

 

[stopcrazypp]

I believe some European countries are mandating that any new fast chargers be compatible with CCS, so Tesla may figure if they want to install new superchargers in those countries, they will have to be compatible with CCS and they will have to work out a way to charge those people.

It could inadvertently make Tesla the fast charging standard for most EVs. Good news for consumers, but other auto makers don't want to concede anything to Tesla.

Here's the thread on that. After protesting by Tesla and many EU states, the latest German bill does not mandate private networks (like Tesla) to be compatible with CCS.
German bill requires CCS and L2 plugs at every new fast charge point.

For reference, here is the original protest documents:
German bill requires CCS and L2 plugs at every new fast charge point.

As discussed in that thread, it is pretty obvious who lobbied for the original bill (the German automakers) since if it was passed unchanged, it would greatly hold back supercharger development and/or let other automakers get a free ride.

 

[jkk_]

Agree with both posts above. It's a massive marketing benefit. All the other manufacturers are rushing to announce and get to market their own 200 mile cars.

I get the feeling that marketing material is starting to slowly lean towards 300 mile. Mind you, what reality will be is another story at this point.

I think (if that's possible for some of you at this point) for you to turn off the EV early adopter mindset and place yourself back into the normal automotive consumer market consideration for a 2017-2018++ vehicle, that not including super charger access on a main stream market car (that is still the goal on the Model 3 right?) is a huge mistake.

Well said, I hope also that Tesla changes their mentality towards that way also (i.e., quality becomes more important etc).

On a separate note, many threads seem to cry out for Tesla to come out with reveal part 2 already, so many questions could, and should, be answered. However, I do understand that Tesla wants to keep things close to vest as long as possible in order to not tip competition. And it's fully possible that some details are not finished yet.

 

[wdolson]

Here's the thread on that. After protesting by Tesla and many EU states, the latest German bill does not mandate private networks (like Tesla) to be compatible with CCS.
German bill requires CCS and L2 plugs at every new fast charge point.

For reference, here is the original protest documents:
German bill requires CCS and L2 plugs at every new fast charge point.

As discussed in that thread, it is pretty obvious who lobbied for the original bill (the German automakers) since if it was passed unchanged, it would greatly hold back supercharger development and/or let other automakers get a free ride.

Ah, I missed out on the end result of that situation.

I suspect Tesla is looking to combine with CCS in some way. If they could make superchargers that were CCS compliant and offered a subscription program for people who had cars with other car makers, the superchargers could be subsidized if not a minor profit center. Those people with their compromised EVs would be charging at superchargers next to Tesla owners who would show them their cars and tell them their stories. It would be perfect advertising for Tesla, targeted advertising with enthusiastic people pitching their products for free.

 

[RubberToe]

I do not believe that Superchargers will be 'abused' in any way by the majority of owners. I expect that most of them understand their significance as being a tool or a weapon in favor of EV adoption. I do not believe that a minority of owners will be able to significantly affect the Supercharger network as a whole by being [ICEHOLES] who somehow 'hog' more than their 'fair share'.

The L.A. Zoo has free juice at some newly opened chargers. There are 6 J1772 hookups that have a four hour limit, and one CCS/Chademo that has a 30 minute limit. A couple times I hit the Chademo just to experience it. There is a closer one to where I live and I haven't hit the Zoo in several weeks now. Anyway, while hanging out there waiting for my quick charge, I have on more than one occasion seen people on the J1772 hanging out in their car, waiting while their vehicle charges at 25 miles per hour. In some cases grabbing a nap in the back seat, pillow and all.

My point here being that any time you combine the concept of "free" with the general public (i.e. a socio-economic group different from the average Model S/X driver), you are going to run into a much wider range of behaviors than what you would typically see at the current deployed Superchargers.

So while I would agree with the Sage that "I do not believe that Superchargers will be 'abused' in any way by the majority of owners", it wouldn't take a very large percentage of 500,000 Model 3 owners to exhibit behaviors that might start impinging on the intent of the use of the system envisioned by Tesla (i.e. long distance travel). Lots of gray area here too as many have pointed out.

RT

 

[Garlan Garner]

If Elon Musk is ok with rivals using the super chargers for free....then he must certainly would allow TESLA owners to use them for free. Elon Musk 'Totally Cool' With Rivals Using Tesla's Supercharger Network\

Charged EVs | Elon Musk: Tesla is in talks with other automakers about sharing the SuperCharger network (UPDATED)

 

[stopcrazypp]

If Elon Musk is ok with rivals using the super chargers for free....then he must certainly would allow TESLA owners to use them for free. Elon Musk 'Totally Cool' With Rivals Using Tesla's Supercharger Network\

Charged EVs | Elon Musk: Tesla is in talks with other automakers about sharing the SuperCharger network (UPDATED)

Important point:
"Musk added that for companies looking to gain access to the charging stations, they will have to pay a sum that is proportionate to how much the owners of their respective brands use the Superchargers."

Also, it seems nothing came of the talks, as it has been many months since then and not a peep of another automaker joining the supercharger network.

 

[KJD]

If Elon Musk is ok with rivals using the super chargers for free....then he must certainly would allow TESLA owners to use them for free. Elon Musk 'Totally Cool' With Rivals Using Tesla's Supercharger Network\
Charged EVs | Elon Musk: Tesla is in talks with other automakers about sharing the SuperCharger network (UPDATED)

Wow talk about taking things out of context to give a false impression. Here is a direct quote from the link you provided and chose to ignore.

Musk added that for companies looking to gain access to the charging stations, they will have to pay a sum that is proportionate to how much the owners of their respective brands use the Superchargers.