TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker and becoming a Supporting Member. For more info: Support TMC

SAE vs CHAdeMO

Discussion in 'Supercharging & Charging Infrastructure' started by TEG, Jan 2, 2013.

  1. Larry Chanin

    Larry Chanin President, Florida Tesla Enthusiasts

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2011
    Messages:
    4,689
    Location:
    Sarasota, Florida
    Thanks for the clarification.

    Tesla's primary objective is to sell EVs and to get others to sell EVs. I don't think that they want to get into the business of marketing Level 2 chargers. I believe that Tesla has the highest performance and most elegant charging design and that if possible they would like to see other manufacturers using it on their EVs. That objective is not advanced by fascilitating the use of their Level 2 chargers on other EVs using the J1772 charging specification.

    Do you agree?

    Regarding the off-topic issue of a household with a Tesla and an EV with a J1772 port, Tony Williams' company makes the Jesla UMC that will handle that niche market.

    Larry
     
  2. Tedkidd

    Tedkidd Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2013
    Messages:
    662
    Location:
    Rochester, New York, United States
    Sorry, hijacked DC thread with AC desires...

    DUH!!! No wonder people are confused - I completely hijacked a DC charging thread. Sorry Larry. No, I don't hope to fast charge my Smart - in fact the best that thing will do is pretty slow. I think the best this car will do is 3.3. (For us this upgrades our GEM rather than replacing a primary vehicle. Going from max 25 mph/20 miles range to 80 mph/80 miles of range is a huge improvement)

    Thanks Stopcrazypp, yes - this is about driving the Tesla charging standard to other manufacturers via gaining market dominance in ALL aspects of things Tesla.


    I disagree with your conclusions that selling EV's has nothing to do with EVSE simplification and quality. I believe driving widespread use of HPWC and UMC is in perfect alignment with Tesla's stated mission.

    Frankly the options for charging all things NOT Tesla pretty much sucks. The cars don't even come with portable EVSE's capable of low level 2 charging (a concept quite foreign to many Tesla owners...). Folks, imagine receiving your Tesla with only 8 mph charging EVSE. All other EV manufacturers are delivering their cars handicapped thusly. It sucks.

    So what now? If you want either a portable or fixed EVSE, the J plug options don't hold a candle to paying $650 for a UMC or $750 for HPWC. I'm not seeing ANYTHING close.

    Yes, Jesla is a Niche market. I think Tony would be wise to stop doing that and just build an adapter. A Tesla female/J1772 male adaptor similar to the slick adaptor HCSHARP made that allows Roadsters to connect to HPWC and UMC would make unadulterated Tesla EVSE's very attractive to non - Tesla buying EV owners like me, and to Tesla owners with other brands.

    Once you see this, you won't unsee it:
    409F8C5D-C5E2-4F99-8659-520537BF7105.jpg 2FD15E0D-CA44-4390-A2B8-8D74BDD55471.jpg IMG_6797.jpg

    Now imagine that connected to your Leaf, VW, or Mercedes! That's what I want!!

    Let's face it, J1772 suck compared to the Tesla connector, and as far as I can tell other brands EVSE suck when put against HPWC and UMC. The Jesla is a brilliant solution, but ultimately you are paying more and getting less. I'd rather pay more and get more. I'd rather pay that extra $350 and get an adaptor.

    If people have unadulterated tesla EVSE, that will encourage other manufacturers to consider making the jump to this superior and more versatile design.

    Driving change requires coming at things from as many angles as possible. I think one path starts with having an adaptor that allows EV buyers to make purchasing Tesla EVSE not just an option, but the obvious choice. All that seems necessary for that to happen is have an adaptor like the one above that goes to J1772 instead of to the Roadster inlet.

    More images of Henry Sharpes awesome adaptor:

    Model S to Roadster adapter - Page 30

    http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=67571&d=1419979025

    http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=54020&d=1405689597

    http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=42801&d=1391835897
     
  3. jerry33

    jerry33 S85 - VIN:P05130 - 3/2/13

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2012
    Messages:
    16,193
    Location:
    Texas
    So what happens when they put their female Tesla adapter on a Supercharger?
     
  4. Cottonwood

    Cottonwood Roadster#433, Model S#S37

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2009
    Messages:
    5,078
    Location:
    Colorado
    Nothing!

    Only some Teslas know how to speak Supercharger...
     
  5. jerry33

    jerry33 S85 - VIN:P05130 - 3/2/13

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2012
    Messages:
    16,193
    Location:
    Texas
    That would certainly be the best case. However, sometimes stuff happens purely by coincidence.
     
  6. scaesare

    scaesare Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2013
    Messages:
    7,567
    Location:
    NoVA
    Having seen the data dumps of the conversations between the Model S and a Supercharger, I can assure you a Roadster will not supercharge "by coincidence".

    Not to mention the rest of the electrical plumbing necessary doesn't exist in a Roadster...
     
  7. jerry33

    jerry33 S85 - VIN:P05130 - 3/2/13

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2012
    Messages:
    16,193
    Location:
    Texas
    I wasn't thinking of the Roadster, I was thinking of other EVs that might try to use the adapter.
     
  8. Dave EV

    Dave EV Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,323
    Location:
    San Diego
    Doesn't matter. Won't work.

    Really like the idea of a J1772 adapter that will let a J1772 car use a Tesla EVSE, though.
     
  9. scaesare

    scaesare Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2013
    Messages:
    7,567
    Location:
    NoVA
    Unless they implement the specific Supercharger protocol, they won't 'coincidentally' be charging either.

    There's no power supplied via the cable's DC pins until the car negotiates with the supercharger via the data link.
     
  10. Larry Chanin

    Larry Chanin President, Florida Tesla Enthusiasts

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2011
    Messages:
    4,689
    Location:
    Sarasota, Florida
    Thanks for clearing that up.

    I guess we are going to have to agree to disagree. We are of course continuing to veer off the main topic which is "Which will be the de facto DC Fast Charging standard".

    I agree that the fact that Tesla's Level 2 and Level 3 ports are the same provides a small advantage over the competition, but at the risk of repeating myself fascilitating another standard, namely the J2772 spec, to connect to Tesla's Level 2 charging equipment is not going to promote Tesla's objective.

    Tesla's objective is to get other manufacturers of long range EVs to install the Tesla charging port in their vehicles. Providing an adapter that permits vehicles with J1772 connect to Tesla Level 2 charging equipment is counter to that primary objective.

    I repeat. The objective is not to sell a lot of Level 2 charging equipment with the Tesla charging connector. The objective is to induce other EV manufacturers of long range EVs to install the Tesla charging port in their EVs. Providing them with an adapter to another specification only makes the job more difficult.

    Larry
     
  11. Tedkidd

    Tedkidd Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2013
    Messages:
    662
    Location:
    Rochester, New York, United States
    I don't WANT to use an adapter. And I don't WANT to use a less elegant j plug. I dont WANT great big ugly plug access doors on cars. But if I don't know or understand these things, I don't create pressure on the market to supply better.

    If I have a Tesla EVSE and 100,000 other non Tesla ev owners have Tesla EVSE's, there is significantly more pressure on other manufacturers to make the jump. If consumers aren't even aware of Tesla's EVSE or plug goodness, where is consumer pressure to either provide a better stock EVSE or jump to Tesla's plug standard?

    The adapter is path to creating consumer side pressure.

    Take a moment and think about this. Not as a tesla owner, imagine you have a Leaf.
    The adapter is an incremental step to accepting the Tesla standard, not a barrier.

    When you break big steps into smaller steps, you get more people taking them.
     
  12. scottf200

    scottf200 Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2013
    Messages:
    2,621
    Location:
    Chicagoland ModelX S603
    If you are not talking about the DC Fast Charging standard can you take/keep the discussion elsewhere (the other thread on this). Why? Because there are people subscribing_to / following the thread related to DC SAE vs chademo. Thanks.
     
  13. tftf

    tftf Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2013
    Messages:
    814
    Location:
    Hop Sing Laundry
    Major news for CCS and DC charging networks lately:

    Audi Commits To Nationwide 150 kW Fast Charge Network In U.S. - Video (NA)

    Faster CCS (150 kW, later 350 kW) coming to Europe as well:

    CharIN e. V. shows next level of EV fast charging[controller]=News&tx_news_pi1[action]=detail&cHash=7277700b75ade535a2c64c832900eca4

    http://www.charinev.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Documents/20151014_PR_CharIN_ELIV_EN.pdf (PDF PR)

    and

    All Major Charging Networks In US Come Together With ROEV - Interoperability Now A Reality

    and

    BMW EVgo Will Add 500 DC Fast Chargers In 25 Major U.S. Markets Under ChargeNow DC Fast
     
  14. Rocky_H

    Rocky_H Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2015
    Messages:
    3,761
    Location:
    Boise, ID
    As far as the two monstrous frankenplugs go, I find CCS to be a little less monstrous. It does have the advantage of having just one inlet on the car, that can take the standard J1772 for AC charging, as well as the CCS for DC. Also, it seems like a bit less cumbersome of a piece of metal that could bang against the car, has a nice built-in handle on the back for pushing/pulling.
     
  15. techmaven

    techmaven Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2013
    Messages:
    3,621
    Lots of press releases, not much action.

    BMW pushing 50 kW CCS Combo 1 is a real waste of money and shows just how short sighted these companies are in relation to Tesla. EVgo is having monetary problems as it stands, so of course, doing more of the same makes sense. < 100 kW DC charging is a complete waste of money that is better spent on J1772 destination charging at 40 amps+ and 100+ kW DC charging.
     
  16. scottf200

    scottf200 Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2013
    Messages:
    2,621
    Location:
    Chicagoland ModelX S603
    Buck-fifty from LA Auto show: Audi Commits To Nationwide 150 kW Fast Charge Network In U.S. - Video

    Image: http://i.imgur.com/XwCtEHy.png
    XwCtEHy.png
     
  17. green1

    green1 Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2014
    Messages:
    4,552
    Location:
    Calgary, Alberta, Canada
    It's a good thing that Audi has such a great track record of implementing all of it's announcements... oh wait...

    That said, their "nationwide network" on the screen looks like 15 or fewer stations, and they said they would give "access to" not that they would build it.

    Beyond that, we've already heard that their "150kw" is at 800v, which means it is only useful for people with battery packs running a much higher voltage than any current production vehicle, for current vehicles it would be no better than about a 50kw charger at a more appropriate voltage.

    So, best case for Audi is that they do everything they claim (never yet happened with any of their many EV announcements over the years) and we end up with a vehicle that can charge at a small handful of stations at about the same speed as Teslas charge at Superchargers, only they are so spread out that people can't get to them, and are useless to any other cars, and are likely still quite a few years away.

    Not exactly progress.

    I find it amazing how far behind Tesla everyone else seems to be!
     
  18. renim

    renim Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2013
    Messages:
    1,120
    Location:
    Oz
    no its not a waste of money, what is happening is that Nissan funded their half of dual standard 50kW DC chargers, but won't allow CCS to be added until a CCS entity also funds their half of the charger.

    example
    Nissan supplies money for 20 chargers in Atlanta, dual standard capable, but only the Chademo cable is connected.
    If BMW wants to turn on CCS chargers, then they need to fund 20 additional chargers in Atlanta, dual standard, Chademo gets turned on.
    result
    20 Chademo chargers becomes.
    40 Chademo and 40 CCS chargers.
    (all for the cost of 20 chargers each for BMW and Nissan)

    its a win win philosophy, Chademo count doubles, CCS count increases to equal Chademo #, Tesla has Chademo adapters and can use Chademo and/or Supercharger.

    what it doesn't change is that with 200mile range EVs, these chargers will mainly be used by out of district EVs and/or local DC capable PHEVs. (ie BMW i3 REX and Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV)
    ohh, and owners of historic 80mile-120mile range EVs.
     
  19. stopcrazypp

    stopcrazypp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2007
    Messages:
    9,454
    That is not what is happening. The Evgo stations were built from the start with dual standard in mind. Practically all of them have prewiring for two separate chargers. Since CHAdeMO came first that was installed first and there is an empty spot saved for CCS. Now Evgo is installing the CCS half. So it is more like 20 CHAdeMO chargers becomes 20 CHAdeMO chargers and 20 CCS chargers. And in cases where the spot is wired for only one charger that charger is converted to a dual standard one, so charger count remains the same.
     
  20. renim

    renim Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2013
    Messages:
    1,120
    Location:
    Oz
    Nissan provided funds for many of the USA's dual standard stations that are not in California. Obviously they are capable of accepting CCS, but until a CCS company coughs up 'matching' money, they don't get the the CCS side activated.
    CC-NRG-BTC-DCFC-422x750.jpg
    perhaps its all rumor, feel free to ignore it. What happens to the money that comes when the CCS side is enabled? I don't know, but its highly likely that one-way or another, its funneled back in installing more dual standard DC chargers.




    Physically Tesla users can readily access these using Tesla's Chademo adapter? but do Tesla drivers want the hassle of subscription based, just in case DC chargers?
     

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Formed in 2006, Tesla Motors Club (TMC) was the first independent online Tesla community. Today it remains the largest and most dynamic community of Tesla enthusiasts. Learn more.
  • Do you value your experience at TMC? Consider becoming a Supporting Member of Tesla Motors Club. As a thank you for your contribution, you'll get nearly no ads in the Community and Groups sections. Additional perks are available depending on the level of contribution. Please visit the Account Upgrades page for more details.


    SUPPORT TMC