Model X has single 72A charger

[GSP]

1. 100A twist lock connectors are unwieldy. Imagine a CHAdeMO, but larger. Good luck finding a single phase one, too.
2. The Tesla onboard chargers are about the size of two large/old laptops put together and they weigh even more.
3. 72A x 240VAC = 17kW. If this portable charger is 98% efficient, it's going to be giving off ~350w of heat that needs to be dissipated. That comes to about 1200BTUs. The components needed to safely remove that heat from the charger adds weight and bulk, and will need to draw even more watts to operate.



It would be neat to have a "half SC" that can do ~60kWh. It would be similar to a CHAdeMO. If that's the case, why not just have destination charger location install a CHAdeMO and have a Tesla adapter at the front desk for use. This wouldn't be needed at a hotel since overnight stays should be able to fill a drained battery overnight with the HPWCs. There are options here, for sure.

Making an 80 A portable charger like bwa requested would take two Tesla chargers and a coolant tank, radiator, fan, and pump. It would be big and awkward. The lack of 100 A outlets or plugs means it would have to be hard wired, not convenient even for people with the skill to do so. Therefore, designing for the most common 3-phase outlets would be the way to do it (just as Tesla designed the UMC for the most common single-phase outlets). Using two of Tesla's European chargers would provide a 22 kW 3-phase charger.

The BRUSA 22 kW charger used in the European Smart ED would be great for this. It is very compact, smaller than two Tesla chargers. You still need the coolant tank, radiator, fan, and pump, which is why it is best to have any portable charger integrated into the vehicle by design.

GSP

 

[harrisonjs]

It looks to me like TM is doing a market assessment of the charger situation, probably centered on this forum. The easter egg approach is the most unusual part of this and presents the possibility that early purchasers who are not part of this forum or who do not conduct thorough research could end up with a production X that could have been made "better" in the mind of a range-anxious consumer. Remember that CA consumer fraud laws apply to manufacturers who treat consumers "unfairly", and that a jury is given the task of defining unfair. But given that no MX's have been delivered (it's clear the car is still under development) it's easy to fix that before production with a simple phone call or e-mail to fully inform the purchaser once the final design chargers decisions and options are in place. I know the hope is for a fully fleshed-out SC network, but the entrenched interests have their backs up and are not going to make it easy. This is why SC alternatives, which require robust on board chargers, are really essential. The Tesla community is informed and creative and as I dip my toe in the EV world I greatly appreciate all your thoughtful insights.

 

[wdolson]

It looks to me like TM is doing a market assessment of the charger situation, probably centered on this forum. The easter egg approach is the most unusual part of this and presents the possibility that early purchasers who are not part of this forum or who do not conduct thorough research could end up with a production X that could have been made "better" in the mind of a range-anxious consumer. Remember that CA consumer fraud laws apply to manufacturers who treat consumers "unfairly", and that a jury is given the task of defining unfair. But given that no MX's have been delivered (it's clear the car is still under development) it's easy to fix that before production with a simple phone call or e-mail to fully inform the purchaser once the final design chargers decisions and options are in place. I know the hope is for a fully fleshed-out SC network, but the entrenched interests have their backs up and are not going to make it easy. This is why SC alternatives, which require robust on board chargers, are really essential. The Tesla community is informed and creative and as I dip my toe in the EV world I greatly appreciate all your thoughtful insights.

Your definition of "under development" must differ from mine. Just because they haven't delivered any Signature or regular production Model Xs does not mean that the car is still under development. From Tesla's history with the Model S and the Roadster, development never quite ends. They are always tweaking the design to some extent. So by a broad definition of the term, the Model S is still under development and production is near max planned capacity.

There was a thread here a week or so back where the OP saw a number of Xs at the factory including 6 undergoing final inspection. A number of people speculated Tesla might be building the first batch of Model Xs intended for the demo models at the stores. I think that might be possible. There is also this article:

http://www.teslarati.com/tesla-factory-may-have-a-nitric-oxide-nox-problem/

The article speculates that this problem might be on the Model X production line and is causing delays in spinning up production.

Whatever the issue, building a mass production car is one of the most difficult things to make. The transition from making a handful of cars by hand to making close to 1000 a week is going to run into problems. There is a whole branch of engineering called Industrial Engineering which focuses on the issues with mass production. Something as little as one part 0.1mm out of tolerance on the production line can bring production to a standstill. Bringing thousands of parts together to make a car is tough, doing it repeatedly day in and day out without errors is even tougher.

The Roadster had horrible production problems when it first went into production. The Model S was a very slow ramp up from initial Founders deliveries to full production. The Model X is no different. Elon Musk has admitted the Model X is more complex than it should have been. He also went on to say something like 95% of the car is easy to build, 4% is tough to build, and 1% is excruciatingly tough to build. IMO, the development on the Model X is done, or as done as Tesla cars are ever done. Right now they are ironing out the production problems which don't surprise me at all. This is only the third car they have ever produced (second from the ground up), it's a very complex design, and they are still new to manufacturing.

 

[CmdrThor]

The Home Charging Installation page has been updated with the Model X charger specs: https://www.teslamotors.com/support/home-charging-installation

Model X charger options:

• Standard: 12 kW onboard charger, capable of drawing 48 amps AC power.
• Upgrade: 18 kW onboard charger, capable of drawing 72 amps AC power. This option can be installed at the factory by special request, contact your sales advisors for details.

 

[JST]

"Installed at the factory by special request." Isn't that the definition of an "option?"

 

[esk8mw]

The Home Charging Installation page has been updated with the Model X charger specs: https://www.teslamotors.com/support/home-charging-installation

So, it looks like they publicized the option. Everyone happy now?

 

[Zaxxon]

The Home Charging Installation page has been updated with the Model X charger specs: https://www.teslamotors.com/support/home-charging-installation

Cool. But sheesh, the 'thinking about solar power?' section at the bottom needs some work. Has a typo (watts hours rather than watt-hours) and then the wrong unit (3600 kW when they mean 3600 kWh). They really need some copy editors on their web team.

 

[TexasEV]

So, it looks like they publicized the option. Everyone happy now?

It's a step in the right direction, but it really belongs on the Model X options page and not just the home charging installation page. Most people who would want the 72A charger are wanting it for occasional destination charging, not necessarily home charging. I also think it's unlikely that a mainstream buyer would study the home charging installation page before ordering the car.

 

[mknox]

It's a step in the right direction, but it really belongs on the Model X options page and not just the home charging installation page. Most people who would want the 72A charger are wanting it for occasional destination charging, not necessarily home charging.

Absolutely. I didn't even think twice about getting the dual chargers on my Model S even though at the time all I had was 20 amps at home. (I now have my HPWC on a 50 amp/40 amp delivered circuit). It's all about saving precious time on the road.

 

[Rodolfo Paiz]

So, it looks like they publicized the option. Everyone happy now?

No. Dear Lord, no. Mentioning it on the home charging space is not, by any stretch of the imagination, the equivalent of simply putting the option clearly and visibly on the page where one orders the car.

I would 100% want the 72A option. I would not have known about that option if I weren't active on TMC. And I know enough about home charging already that I would never have checked that page before ordering my car... I've already prewired the new 100A circuit for my Model X's HPWC.

 

[ecarfan]

At least this clearly lays out the various charger options, but in an obscure location on the website, so it is not an excuse for hiding the X "upgrade" option on the X configuration page. I hope Tesla fixes that issue.
And as one who bought the 20kW Model S charger option in 2013 when it was a factory installed item like all the other options, I still think that Tesla should have kept it that way.
-------------------------------------------
Model S charger options:
Standard: 10 kW onboard charger, capable of drawing 40 amps AC power. Referred to as a Single charger.
Upgrade: 20 kW onboard charger, capable of drawing 80 amps AC power. Referred to as Dual Chargers, this option is only available to be installed after delivery through a Tesla service center.
Model X charger options:
Standard: 12 kW onboard charger, capable of drawing 48 amps AC power.
Upgrade: 18 kW onboard charger, capable of drawing 72 amps AC power. This option can be installed at the factory by special request, contact your sales advisors for details.

 

[vandacca]

The more interesting question is, why is Tesla trying so hard to obscure this option?

 

[ecarfan]

I don't know why, and see no point in speculating about it, but if that floats your boat then feel free to do so. Tesla isn't saying, and everyone outside the company is just guessing as to the reason.

 

[vandacca]

I don't know why, and see no point in speculating about it, but if that floats your boat then feel free to do so. Tesla isn't saying, and everyone outside the company is just guessing as to the reason.

The reason why I think it's important to know Tesla's reasons for obscuring the 72A charger is as follows:
- up until now, Tesla has always tried to reduce charging times, and this departure is concerning (may lead to other cut backs?)
- Tesla may be trying to "kill" the 72A charger, so in the near future it will not even be an 'obscure' option
- is there a problem with the 72A charger that Tesla isn't telling us (e.g. reducing battery longevity)?
- will selecting the 72A charger delay the production of your vehicle (e.g. due to production constraints)

If one would like to make a truly educated choice on configuring the Model-X, this answer would need to be provided.

 

[wdolson]

The reason why I think it's important to know Tesla's reasons for obscuring the 72A charger is as follows:
- up until now, Tesla has always tried to reduce charging times, and this departure is concerning (may lead to other cut backs?)
- Tesla may be trying to "kill" the 72A charger, so in the near future it will not even be an 'obscure' option
- is there a problem with the 72A charger that Tesla isn't telling us (e.g. reducing battery longevity)?
- will selecting the 72A charger delay the production of your vehicle (e.g. due to production constraints)

If one would like to make a truly educated choice on configuring the Model-X, this answer would need to be provided.

It is a mystery, but they have also sort of demoted the dual chargers for the Model S by moving the option to the accessories page instead of having it on the main ordering page. They seem to be discouraging fast AC charging for some reason.

There may be a technical reason behind this, but they aren't telling anyone.

 

[ecarfan]

If one would like to make a truly educated choice on configuring the Model-X, this answer would need to be provided.

I agree. Problem is, we have no reliable information available to answer those questions.
If I were ordering an X today I would definitely order the 72A charger. I would not be concerned about its reliability or quality since it would be covered by the 4 year factory warranty, and I do not believe that Tesla would offer it as an option if there was any risk of damaging the vehicle while using it.
To me, faster charging is better so it is a worthwhile option.

 

[Gwgan]

Maybe it's not the charger but the cable from the wall? There seems to be a problem with UMC cable sheath quality, perhaps the same can be seen with the HPWC?
Split UMC cable - Page 2

 

[jeffreys]

I asked inside sales why this option was offered, but hidden. His response was that there was a dispute between "the two top people in the company" over whether to offer it or not, and this was the resolution of that dispute. Take it with a grain of salt.

 

[Cosmacelf]

That's ... awful. It's a good thing Tesla has a good product 'cause their management seems to suck.

 

[FlasherZ]

I've heard some inside sales people repeating what they've heard from customers, not internal. It's like believing what you hear from the sales staff in the stores about non-public information... you shouldn't.