-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Setec CCS to Tesla Adapter
- Thread starter Boeingpilot
- Start date
Sounds like it's going to become a cat and mouse game between Setec and Tesla. I understand the flash arc issue. From a liability point of view, I get it, if Tesla knows the adapters are out there, and can be used, they are the deep pocket that gets sued (not like anyone can go after Setec in China).
That said, the adapter has been out for over a year, and no issues noted so far. Unfortunately, there is no way for the Setec adapter to be modified, and even if they do, no way they're going to retrofit all the ones they shipped. It's a shame. Once they got the firmware to work reliably, it's a good product. Unfortunately, we have to protect people from themselves (like who is going to remove the CCS plug while it's charging for crying out loud!).
Right now, if I don't upgrade my S's firmware, I can use the Setec (although dumbed down to 50kw from its previous 77kw). I use it in emergencies (or when the only SC at the airport is full (as usual) while there are 10 unused EA stations down the block). Plus, as a 'pre-order' last November, I paid over $600 for the thing.
Will be interesting to see how this plays out. The S probably won't be supported on the Tesla adapter (and I doubt they will even retro the older S like mine any way for any amount of money). This was a great solution. Oh well.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
I'm a co-owner of a CHAdeMO adapter we bought recently for $150 ($50 each.) Since my Supercharger lite trips are mostly into S. Colorado where CHAdeMO has been built alongside CCS, I'm in pretty good shape until the Tesla CCS adapter is available.
^^ This is not meant to annoy, but to suggest that CHAdeMO might be a reasonable transition or emergency tool for some people.
Last edited:
Today I was to charge successfully my Y (software: 2021.36.8.5 FSD Beta 10.4) using this ABB charger at my local Mercedes Benz dealership.
I trade my model 3 here to the Y and they told that I came to charge whenever I want.
I trade my model 3 here to the Y and they told that I came to charge whenever I want.
Let us not neglect the fact that multiple people have had the charging systems in their cars destroyed from using this adapter. So I think that would qualify as "issues".
MSHampton
Member
Those people were knowingly trying out an experimental firmware to charge at higher speeds. That was a risk they chose to take. To my knowledge, no damage has been caused by normal use.
Consider yourself fortunate. Used they tend to go north of $500 if you can find one.
Let us not also neglect that the two (at least that's all that has been reported) had been using admittedly 'experimental' versions of the firmware. Not as if they were not aware of the possible risks.
I was already fully aware of that. But to say that there have been literally no issues at all is just flat-out dishonest. Your continuing to support that falsehood is not helpful.
I thought at least one of them, that reported via GreenTheOnly, said that they weren't running the experimental firmware.
Yep: They said it was the "safe" firmware:
masotime
Member
It sounds to me like you've read about anecdotes where non-experimental firmware has caused "the charging systems in their cars [to be] destroyed from using this adapter". I'm interested to learn more to better understand the risk - could you link to these cases?
I never said that; please don't put words in my mouth.
Someone said there were "no issues".
I pointed out there have been issues.
Then two people replied with: Oh, but the issues were because of ________. (excuses)
masotime
Member
Ah ok - I misread and apologize. I’m actually genuinely concerned here - but in that case it sounds to me like there aren’t any issues if you don’t use experimental firmware?
No, again, there is one report of someone having their car fried when not using the experimental firmware:
masotime
Member
It’s actually not clear to me what happened in that tweet.
it sounds like they attempted an experimental firmware, charged, then switched to a “safe” one? From my read of it, it seems possible that just attempting the experimental firmware caused the actual damage, not the “safe” one.
Are there incidents where only a “safe” firmware was used and it caused an issue?
Nothing in that Tweet says they ever tried the experimental firmware. They were just describing the adapter and its limits.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
Define 'experimental.'
SETEC is obviously using its customers for alpha software testing. I understand why, but anybody who does not see the risk is being a fool and/or hoping that Tesla will cover when things go wrong.
masotime
Member
I had to re-read the Tweet again to fully get the context - to me that's a really badly worded tweet because it talks about experimental firmware then talks about charging with safe firmware. I think just mentioning that the adapter out of the box failed, without talking about experimental firmware would have been crystal clear about how it caused a port malfunction. To me, it's now unclear how exactly the car got disabled through using that charger.
I personally don't find that tweet credible, but thanks for clearing that up.
Whatever's available on their website to download. I don't think there's zero risk, but I've not heard about severe incidents (apart from the tweet which doesn't seem credible to me)
masotime
Member
Similar threads
- Article
