-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Supercharger - Bend, OR - SW. Industrial Way (LIVE Jun 2023, 8 V3 stalls)
- Thread starter Ml007
- Start date
-
- Tags
- oregon supercharger
IMO, it's clearly a Supercharger. It hadn't been added to supercharge.info not because there was doubt about whether or not it was a Supercharger, but because editors hadn't gotten to it yet. It's on there now.
There have been a few places they have put in hotel Superchargers. Mostly ones that call themselves resorts.
It's Bend, so maybe.
But I do agree that I wouldn't generally jump on a hotel charger installation, especially because there have been multiple indications that Tesla now wants to do large installations of power-sharing HPWCs.
The Tenant is the biggest clue to it being another Supercharger location. It is however worth noting that with HPWC v3, they now have paid L2 capability that will enable for installations of something like 6 or more destination chargers. So it's just conceivable that it's a Level 2 installation that would be managed separately by Tesla. But until something like that happens, I think we assume Supercharger.
Jedibryan
Member
The Yakima SC and the newest Ellensburg SC are both in hotel lots, and both were opened within the last year or so (so relatively recently).
Definitely agree that a north side charger makes more sense but any other option in Bend will be welcome. The current location is pretty bad and is often maxxed out. Would not be surprised to see a 3rd SCer site here within the next two years.
Bend - SW Industrial Way, OR
Host Type: Hotel
Host: SpringHill Suites
Along Primary Interstates: None
Along US Numbered Highways (<=5mi): US-20, US-97
Along Auxiliary Interstates: None
US-20 (Repeating existing Bend distances here. New site will take 0.5 to 1.1 miles off)
From: Start (US-101 Newport, OR) - 185.5 miles
To: Hines - North US-20, OR - 130.2 miles
Diversion: 3.9 miles
To: Boise, ID - 315.7 miles
US-97
From: Bend, OR - 3 miles
To: Madras, OR - 42.5 miles
Diversion: 1.7 miles
From: Klamath Falls, OR - 139.7 miles
To: Yakima, WA - 219 miles
More capacity and v3 in Bend, OR. I remember when some people were clamoring for the first one.
Host Type: Hotel
Host: SpringHill Suites
Along Primary Interstates: None
Along US Numbered Highways (<=5mi): US-20, US-97
Along Auxiliary Interstates: None
US-20 (Repeating existing Bend distances here. New site will take 0.5 to 1.1 miles off)
From: Start (US-101 Newport, OR) - 185.5 miles
To: Hines - North US-20, OR - 130.2 miles
Diversion: 3.9 miles
To: Boise, ID - 315.7 miles
US-97
From: Bend, OR - 3 miles
To: Madras, OR - 42.5 miles
Diversion: 1.7 miles
From: Klamath Falls, OR - 139.7 miles
To: Yakima, WA - 219 miles
More capacity and v3 in Bend, OR. I remember when some people were clamoring for the first one.
Mrbrock
Active Member
Can you point out these indications of Tesla wanting to install large L2 installations? This makes 0 sense. They want to encourage travel. Needing 6+ hours to charge is not going to give new buyers confidence in being able to travel with an EV. The being able to get money for L2 is more to encourage business owners to install them so they can get some payback on top of hopefully gaining more business.
Bend desperately needs this. I've been regularly vacationing in Bend this summer and there are almost always wait times at the 150kW charger at Fred Meyer. Tesla should upgrade the existing Supercharger from 150 to 250kW while they're at it. Two locations for a total of 16 stalls will be fantastic.
I don't think Tesla has upgrade many, if any, V2 sites to V3. (They have added V3 stalls at a V2 site.) That is most likely because an upgrade is actually a tear out and complete rebuild. (Most likely including the power company's transformer.) Such that it really doesn't make sense. Just spend that money to either add V3 stalls at the same site, or to build a new site. (Expand capacity and provide redundancy at the same, or lower, cost than upgrading.)
There have been a handful of wholesale V2 to V3 upgrades (replacements), but it's very rare for the reasons you list. Much more common to add V3 stalls or a new V3 site nearby.
Mrbrock
Active Member
Can you give some concrete evidence that upgrading form V2 to V3 will vastly improve wait times?
Tesla Supercharger Showdown: Is V3 Really Much Faster Than V2?
We charge a 2021 Tesla Model 3 from 0 to 100% on Tesla a 150 kW V2 Supercharger and again on a 250 kW V3 Supercharger and compare the differences
insideevs.com
6.5 minutes saved over a full charge session. Doesn't seem worth it to spend 100s of thousands of dollars to upgrade existing equipment. Looking at the Time vs Charge % graph, both chargers were at 10% about 3 minutes in. If we take 10% to 80% (what Tesla will normally try for in terms of arrival % and automatic limit of a busy station) you see the V2 reached 80% at the 38 minute mark for a 35 minute total time. The V3 reached 80% at about 32 minutes for 29 minutes elapsed or again, 6 minutes saved. The largest gap on that chart is about 10 minutes so there is 0 eveidence that V3 saves significant time over normal charge sessions. This is on a car that can accept the full 250kw, SR M3/Y and most MS/X cannot do the full 250kw so it makes even less sense to replace existing V2 equipment with V3.
While in general I agree with what you said, but at a site that is often full, like Bend is currently, a V2 site is limited to ~72kW per stall. So if you take that into account the V2 would take longer than the test you showed. (Of course V3 in the same conditions is limited to ~90kW per stall, but that is still 25% faster.)Can you give some concrete evidence that upgrading form V2 to V3 will vastly improve wait times?
Tesla Supercharger Showdown: Is V3 Really Much Faster Than V2?
We charge a 2021 Tesla Model 3 from 0 to 100% on Tesla a 150 kW V2 Supercharger and again on a 250 kW V3 Supercharger and compare the differences
6.5 minutes saved over a full charge session. Doesn't seem worth it to spend 100s of thousands of dollars to upgrade existing equipment. Looking at the Time vs Charge % graph, both chargers were at 10% about 3 minutes in. If we take 10% to 80% (what Tesla will normally try for in terms of arrival % and automatic limit of a busy station) you see the V2 reached 80% at the 38 minute mark for a 35 minute total time. The V3 reached 80% at about 32 minutes for 29 minutes elapsed or again, 6 minutes saved. The largest gap on that chart is about 10 minutes so there is 0 eveidence that V3 saves significant time over normal charge sessions. This is on a car that can accept the full 250kw, SR M3/Y and most MS/X cannot do the full 250kw so it makes even less sense to replace existing V2 equipment with V3.
But replacing is very high cost for still not very much gain, as the number of stalls would still be limited. It would be far better to find another site elsewhere in town to add another location.
cpa
Active Member
From my travels:
The Supercharger in downtown Sac has 20 V3 Superchargers and at least a dozen HPWC adjacent to the Superchargers.
The new Supercharger in Barstow -- Tanger Way has 20 V3 Superchargers and another dozen (perhaps more) HPWC adjacent.
The downtown Sac SC is at an outdoor mall with a movie theater. The Barstow Supercharger is at another outdoor retail shopping center with a motel about 50 yards away.
If we assume that frequently the occupancy will be such that idle fees will accumulate or that the 80% limit will kick in, then I think it makes sense to have some L2 charging at 48A if people want to go to a movie and dinner, or spend some time leisurely shopping and walking about. With the motel proximate to the Superchargers at Barstow, it makes sense for an overnight charge instead of rushing to charge first thing in the morning, especially during winter when the temps could be quite low.
We can debate the quantity of HPWC at Supercharger locations, but I think that this is a sensible approach.
I also recall another location with HPWC at Superchargers, but do not remember where exactly.
The v2s are quite slow when they are more than half full.Can you give some concrete evidence that upgrading form V2 to V3 will vastly improve wait times?
Tesla Supercharger Showdown: Is V3 Really Much Faster Than V2?
We charge a 2021 Tesla Model 3 from 0 to 100% on Tesla a 150 kW V2 Supercharger and again on a 250 kW V3 Supercharger and compare the differences
6.5 minutes saved over a full charge session. Doesn't seem worth it to spend 100s of thousands of dollars to upgrade existing equipment. Looking at the Time vs Charge % graph, both chargers were at 10% about 3 minutes in. If we take 10% to 80% (what Tesla will normally try for in terms of arrival % and automatic limit of a busy station) you see the V2 reached 80% at the 38 minute mark for a 35 minute total time. The V3 reached 80% at about 32 minutes for 29 minutes elapsed or again, 6 minutes saved. The largest gap on that chart is about 10 minutes so there is 0 eveidence that V3 saves significant time over normal charge sessions. This is on a car that can accept the full 250kw, SR M3/Y and most MS/X cannot do the full 250kw so it makes even less sense to replace existing V2 equipment with V3.
Mrbrock
Active Member
Good point. V3 stations are that way as well. They still share power, just differently. And there are some V3 sites that are worse than V2 (Santa Rosa, CA). So depending on what power is available, V3 isn’t always the answer.
Mrbrock
Active Member
@Jedibryan I assume you were disagreeing with my V3 can be worse than V2 comment. Everything else was factual.
Please read this last page of this thread. V3 with battery backup, should be able to provide max power at most times, even when site is full, much less when site is empty. Many can attest that is far from the case.
Supercharger - Santa Rosa, CA (LIVE 20 Nov 2019, 20 V3 stalls)
Still a pitiful excuse for a V3 here. Just pulled in at just under 50% SOC and am getting 70kW. Not what I had hoped for. Is it Tesla or PG&E?
teslamotorsclub.com
I have experienced slower charging at crowded v3s, but it is relatively rare. And even then it wasn't nearly as bad as sharing at v2s.
Mrbrock
Active Member
So you agreed that my comment is factually correct and still disagreed with it? I didn’t say V3 is never the answer. I said it isn’t always. That means sometimes (yes, very rare), which you confirmed is true, it isn’t always better.
Similar threads
