I've an inbound M3 LR and am doing the rounds calling electricians. A couple of them said just installing NEMA 14-50 wouldn't pass code in Oregon. Another one said with the GFCI, it can cause breaker trips if used for EV charging. Bit confused on which approach to take. Seems like I've to go with a WC. Anyone made a decision recently on WC vs 14-50?
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
NEMA 14-50 requires GFCI breaker?
- Thread starter xpdveej21
- Start date
I think you're referring to the title: "NEMA 14-50 requires GFCI breaker?" And yes that is true. An update was made in the 2017 version of the National Electrical Code that states that ANY outlet being installed for the purpose of charging an EV MUST use a GFCI breaker. I checked the maps, and Oregon has already adopted up to the 2020 version of NEC, so definitely has that requirement. I think the 2020 updated added even more kinds of outlets that require GFCI too. Hard wired charging equipment doesn't have that requirement.
Learn where the National Electrical Code® (NEC®) is enforced. | NFPA
Discover which edition of the NFPA 70, National Electrical Code (NEC) is enforced in your state.
www.nfpa.org
Yes, that is also true. Electric vehicle charging equipment does a test of the ground pin to make sure it's tied down, by leaking a little bit of current through it to make sure it's being pulled down to 0V. Well, funny thing about that is that it's the exact thing that GFCI systems are trying to detect and prevent! There is supposed to be enough margin where the tiny bit of current used for the ground test is supposed to be small enough, it's below the detection threshold the GFCI breaker uses for its trip point. But unfortunately, they seem to be very close, so what happens with some annoying regularity is that the breaker is a little out of spec or drifts out of spec within a couple of years and starts tripping from that ground test. It sucks, and I think the NEC requirement is a pain in the ass.
That decision used to be a little simpler back before the 2017 update, when the GFCI breaker wasn't required. Doing the outlet was cheaper and easy. But now, there isn't much cost difference between what is required to do the outlet versus what's required for a wall connector. It's only around $200 or so more do do the wall connector, and that gives you an EXTRA charging device, so it's a pretty good deal now.
Saw this which may be of interest to others. Sharing as seen. NEMA 14-50 Tesla Response | Seahurst Electric
This is so typical of government. Come up with a policy that actively prevents use. The GFCI requirement for 240V plugs that are installed for EVs is just a bad idea as Tesla explains, yet they change the code for everyone.
I would install the wall charger I suppose even though it's more expensive. Although now that Tesla has moved to software limiting the amperage that has caused all sorts of new code issues.
All levels of government talk about expanding EV ownership, then all of them put roadblocks in the way preventing it. It's really amazing.
I would install the wall charger I suppose even though it's more expensive. Although now that Tesla has moved to software limiting the amperage that has caused all sorts of new code issues.
All levels of government talk about expanding EV ownership, then all of them put roadblocks in the way preventing it. It's really amazing.
Wow, will ya look at that! That looks like it was written by the collective wisdom of this forum over the years.
Jeremy3292
Active Member
I’ve said it multiple times and I’ll say it again, everyone should just buy the Tesla wall connector. Fastest charging speeds available, hardwired and safer, less code regulations, and no GFCI breaker.
Keep the mobile charger in your car for road trips and don’t worry about it. I have had zero problems with my Tesla wall connector and it makes life much easier.
Keep the mobile charger in your car for road trips and don’t worry about it. I have had zero problems with my Tesla wall connector and it makes life much easier.
It's not a bad idea, as evidenced by Tesla chargers doing their own ground fault test. We should not be relying on the end device to make sure our in wall wiring is done correctly. The breaker panel and outlets should be handling that.
National Electric Code standards are written in blood and fires. They come up with these standards based on field data pointing to real problems that have already occurred in the past.
ATPMSD
Active Member
Another advantage of the Wall Connector is you get to keep the Mobile Connector in the car, which means it will not be accidentally forgotten when you hit the road or park at the airport in a lot with power.
I'm 100% in the every-new-installation-should-use-the-Wall-Connector camp.
Years ago, when the Wall Connector was ~ $1500 dollars, and the ~ $500 UMC could charge at the 40A max charge rate of most Teslas at the time, and there was no GFCI breaker requirement for EV charging outlets...then it made perfect sense to install a 14-50. That's why I have a 14-50 in my garage, with a gen1 UMC permanently plugged in. Saved $1000 minus the cost of a quality 14-50 outlet.
Now with Wall Connectors priced at $500, newer UMC limited to 32A charging, and the GFCI breaker requirement...there is no reason install a new 14-50 for daily EV charging. A Wall Connector is faster, safer, cheaper (vs outlet + GFCI breaker + extra UMC), and physically more convenient.
Years ago, when the Wall Connector was ~ $1500 dollars, and the ~ $500 UMC could charge at the 40A max charge rate of most Teslas at the time, and there was no GFCI breaker requirement for EV charging outlets...then it made perfect sense to install a 14-50. That's why I have a 14-50 in my garage, with a gen1 UMC permanently plugged in. Saved $1000 minus the cost of a quality 14-50 outlet.
Now with Wall Connectors priced at $500, newer UMC limited to 32A charging, and the GFCI breaker requirement...there is no reason install a new 14-50 for daily EV charging. A Wall Connector is faster, safer, cheaper (vs outlet + GFCI breaker + extra UMC), and physically more convenient.
Last edited:
Gauss Guzzler
Safety Score = 42
Wow. First of all, Tesla chargers work just fine on GFCI circuits. Just because some people have loose screws or faulty breakers doesn't mean that the government is to blame. If anything, the government should be putting tighter regulations on electrician training and breaker manufacturers to prevent this danger/hassle/expense.
Second, Tesla never said it's "a bad idea". Some jackass electrician who works for Tesla wrote that in a private email expressing his pathetically uneducated opinion some unknown number of years ago. And that guy's *one job* was to install wall chargers, he probably didn't even know what a 14-50 was.
But you're right, the software-selected power setting in the latest wall chargers sure confused the regulators in your town. I thought they came to their senses a year or two ago?
Jeremy3292
Active Member
This is very good context for those of us who didn’t have Tesla’s long ago. I always wondered why everybody seems so set on installing a 14-50 outlet today or had one installed already. The price difference really isn’t there anymore but I can definitely see how it was at $1500(!) for the HPWC. I now think Tesla is selling them at roughly a break even point (cover their selling and distribution expenses at least) based on how expensive other non Tesla chargers are also.
ATPMSD
Active Member
Not sure what you are suggesting here as a GFIC breaker is required by code, not just for an EV.
This has gone through a few changes with multiple code version updates, and it depends on what year of NEC code each particular state is on.
The 2014 version didn't require them much, except for outdoor and wet locations. The 2017 version added the requirement for EVs, which @davelv was referring to. But then the 2020 updated required it for MUCH more, but I'm not sure of the details of how extensive that goes.
Initially, my 14-50 install required GCFI breaker per inspection, but after having problems with nuisance tripping of the 50 amp breaker, and since the mobile connector has built in GFCI, my electrician agreed to swap out the GFCI breaker for non-GFCI at a later time. I ended up keeping the GFCI breaker in my toolbox just in case. No more nuisance tripping after the swap.
DeltaOne
Member
That is largely due to how "touchy" GFCI circuits are in the breakers... GFCI is great in theory, but the implementation varies as to how well they do their job. If you get a good one, you're set. If you don't, well, you have to play the GFCI breaker lottery and swap them out until you find one that works or you give up in frustration and install a non-GFCI so you can use your outlet.
GFCI breakers cost a LOT more than non-GFCI, so it magnifies the frustration when you get one that is overly sensitive.
Similar threads
