Wiki Superchargers Visited

**** NOTE: We have transitioned to a new platform ****
More Info: Supercharging.Life database​

This is a friendly contest for Tesla owners to track the number of unique public Superchargers where they have charged

- "Supercharger count" is the number of unique public Superchargers where you have charged (just being there does not count), whether or not you were the person plugging in the vehicle (such as a Valet Parking garage or a Passenger) and whether or not it was your own personal vehicle (such as a rental, a loaner, or a friend's Tesla) as long as you were the one who drove >50% of the distance to reach the charger(s).
- The list of chargers in the supercharging.life database are the ones included in the game. If you think one should be added or removed from the list, let us know.
- Only chargers available to the public without special permission are included in the game.
- Chargers not connected to the grid are not counted.
- Doublet locations like the North/South Supercharger 'pairs' in CT, ME, NH, etc. count as individual locations.
- More than 1 charger at the same address, such as Lenox Square Mall (Atlanta, GA) or Montgomery Mall (Bethesda, MD) count as individual locations when they appear as a separate location on the Tesla Nav screen.
- Inactive competitors will be archived and removed from the leaderboard. Just post an update to be reactivated.

See Supercharging.Life database for info on how to post your own visits to the database (preferred), or post your locations with date visited to this thread and one of the admins will update your list for you. All visits must be posted to this thread - not just entered in supercharging.life. If you are the first in the game to visit a supercharger location, please post to the thread as soon as you can so others know it has been visited.

 

[Bighorn]

I've updated PLUS EV - counted both Santana Rows since there are two entries on the spreadsheet. Total updated to 646. I updated Bighorn for Florida: Riverview & Orlando Alafaya
I'm a little confused though - the spreadsheet shows 684 for Bighorn which is already the total in the Wiki. Did someone update the Wiki total but not the spreadsheet?

Thanks. Yes, I updated the wiki when I got home last night , but my iPad would not navigate to the spreadsheet, so 684 is correct.

 

[JSergeant]

Thanks. Yes, I updated the wiki when I got home last night , but my iPad would not navigate to the spreadsheet, so 684 is correct.

Ah, OK, that explains it.

 

[Bighorn]

This may be a case of reducio ad absurdum by dropping all logic and counting pins on the Tesla map, which is not following any rhyme or reason. There may be merit in allowing the first competitor to arrive at a new station to establish precedent. If I’d driven cross country to visit all my “Not yet visited” flags, never to return again, I’d be pretty upset that a flag was added to the map later in the absence of any change to reality. There was no flag there yesterday nor when I visited several weeks ago and now there is. For me, it’s moot because I visit regularly, but it would have been patently unfair to change rules midstream to someone who might never make that journey again.

 

[Bighorn]

I'm assuming we're just waiting for Tableau to populate the map after recently adding the Santana valet spots. Not showing on my Not visited key yet.

 

[juliusa]

If I’d driven cross country to visit all my “Not yet visited” flags, never to return again, I’d be pretty upset that a flag was added to the map later in the absence of any change to reality.

Good point.

The competitors that have visited are:
@Bighorn, @PLUS EV, @NKYTA, @bmah, @Randy Spencer, and @EVie'sDad.

@PLUS EV visited both, so not impacted. You are mountain and others are west, so at least they did not travel cross-country to get there.

We could give "provisional credit" to the 5, and when they actually visit the valet charger either remove the "provisional" status and keep the date, or change the date to be the actual date of visit.

We had a similar challenge when we decided the pairs should count as two - many people visited only one, and had travelled long distances. Maybe @Darren S remembers what we did - I think we may have given credit for just the one actually visited.

 

[juliusa]

I'm assuming we're just waiting for Tableau to populate the map after recently adding the Santana valet spots. Not showing on my Not visited key yet.

Probably just waiting for the update. I looked and the gps coordinates are not exactly the same, so that should not be an issue.

Both show elevation of 41ft. Supercharge.info gets that based on the street address. If someone tells me the elevation of the self-park chargers and the valet chargers relative to the elevation of the roadway, I'll update them in supercharge.info.

 

[PLUS EV]

Like I said, I don't really care how they get classified. I wasn't trying to gain an advantage. I didn't even realize Bighorn had already been to Santana Row. But I already stated my case as to why I think it should be treated like Lennox Square. Kind of waiting for others to chime in at this point. I'm surprised we haven't heard from @Darren S yet!

 

[theflyer]

We shouldn't eliminate hard-to-access superchargers just because the leader of the competition doesn't want to go through the hassle of getting to them. I'm proud to have notched up the lower Manhattan chargers. Getting them was an exercise in patience, negotiation, arriving when they were open, and a few dollars. Why should we be dinged for making the effort because someone doesn't want the hassle?

The Lenox locations are indeed in the same mall but in distinctly different lots. The ones on the east side are in a valet area but you do not need to use valet to get to them. Getting the second location cost me more than an hour of time when we went through because of the atrocious traffic. There are two pins on the map.

I understand that @Bighorn is ultra-competitive but why should we make special dispensation for the leader just because a pin didn't come online before he came through. I missed the Wheatland, WY supercharger opening by hours, but I'm not complaining that I now need to find some way to get back there. Should I get dispensation for that?

Bighorn has also argued to keep Alpharetta as "in play" even though it has limited hours and is clear that Tesla does not want people using that location generally.

Bighorn made the choice to do Mexico. That isn't on my to-do list for many reasons. No one has tried to make the argument that those locations are too dangerous and therefore should be out-of-play.

I say keep the rules simple. If there is a pin that clearly articulates the rules for the use of those chargers, it is fair game. People can choose whether to make the effort. Or not.

I've pushed an update to Tableau so you will now see a pin for the Valet at Santana Row based on the spreadsheet data, which, as @tes-s said, is based off supercharge.info, which itself largely takes its queue from Tesla.

Oh, and I added a new filter to everyone's tableau map to search/filter by supercharger type. We currently list urban chargers, V2, and V2. It will be fun to see V3s start to show up.

The photo below is Lenny being taken up to the superchargers at the Mott Street Garage in lower Manhattan. There are only two others who pulled this one off. I say kudos to @PLUS EV for getting the valet at Satana Row.

 

[Bighorn]

We shouldn't eliminate hard-to-access superchargers just because the leader of the competition doesn't want to go through the hassle of getting to them. I'm proud to have notched up the lower Manhattan chargers. Getting them was an exercise in patience, negotiation, arriving when they were open, and a few dollars. Why should we be dinged for making the effort because someone doesn't want the hassle?

The Lenox locations are indeed in the same mall but in distinctly different lots. The ones on the east side are in a valet area but you do not need to use valet to get to them. Getting the second location cost me more than an hour of time when we went through because of the atrocious traffic. There are two pins on the map.

I understand that @Bighorn is ultra-competitive but why should we make special dispensation for the leader just because a pin didn't come online before he came through. I missed the Wheatland, WY supercharger opening by hours, but I'm not complaining that I now need to find some way to get back there. Should I get dispensation for that?

Bighorn has also argued to keep Alpharetta as "in play" even though it has limited hours and is clear that Tesla does not want people using that location generally.

Bighorn made the choice to do Mexico. That isn't on my to-do list for many reasons. No one has tried to make the argument that those locations are too dangerous and therefore should be out-of-play.

I say keep the rules simple. If there is a pin that clearly articulates the rules for the use of those chargers, it is fair game. People can choose whether to make the effort. Or not.

I've pushed an update to Tableau so you will now see a pin for the Valet at Santana Row based on the spreadsheet data, which, as @tes-s said, is based off supercharge.info, which itself largely takes its queue from Tesla.

Oh, and I added a new filter to everyone's tableau map to search/filter by supercharger type. We currently list urban chargers, V2, and V2. It will be fun to see V3s start to show up.

The photo below is Lenny being taken up to the superchargers at the Mott Street Garage in lower Manhattan. There are only two others who pulled this one off. I say kudos to @PLUS EV for getting the valet at Satana Row.

View attachment 393032

I haven’t argued to eliminate valet chargers or make any rule changes after the fact. I was not in favor of adding valet (or urban chargers) originally, but the consensus allowed it and I’ve accepted that and chosen not to gather them despite having passed within blocks on several occasions. Not because they were too hard, but that they were too easy.
I went to Alpharetta on the day they opened. Got it fair and square, but if you want to pull it from the list going forward, go for it.

My issue with Santana is it is chargers on two different levels of the same parking garage. There are examples of this in other CA garages that do not get their own map pin treatment. Should they count double or does Tesla need to add a pin? As you’ve noted, they’re not remotely comparable to Atlanta.
Not sure where you come up with this virulent competitiveness you attribute to me. Your assertions about demanding special dispensation are way off base. I was simply putting out the facts that made me think Santana Row is a single location. If other garages put 10 pedestals on Level 2 and another 10 on Level 3, are we going to start counting both locations? Of course not. I see no difference at Santana Row aside from the fact you have to let a teenager drive your car and collect $8 for the privilege. I thought it was another April Fools joke after the Mexico stunt last year, but it was a few hours off.

 

[ThortsMD]

Can the powers that be add 2 more for me....Cle Elum and Leavenworth. Thanks! Unfortunately, doesn't move me up.

 

[theflyer]

I went to Alpharetta on the day they opened. Got it fair and square, but if you want to pull it from the list going forward, go for it.

I think Alpharetta is settled for now. I argued to pull it. It stayed. That's fine. If Tesla decides to deny access, even after hours, we'll call it closed.

My issue with Santana is it is chargers on two different levels of the same parking garage. There are examples of this in other CA garages that do not get their own map pin treatment. Should they count double or does Tesla need to add a pin? As you’ve noted, they’re not remotely comparable to Atlanta.

Where are these others? I can't think of any but I'm only at about half your count. I agree these are odd situations. However, with one part being open access and another being valet, it does change the scenario a bit. I lean towards keeping them separate but won't push further if a different decision is made.

Not sure where you come up with this virulent competitiveness you attribute to me. Your assertions about demanding special dispensation are way off base. I was simply putting out the facts that made me think Santana Row is a single location. If other garages put 10 pedestals on Level 2 and another 10 on Level 3, are we going to start counting both locations? Of course not. I see no difference at Santana Row aside from the fact you have to let a teenager drive your car and collect $8 for the privilege. I thought it was another April Fools joke after the Mexico stunt last year, but it was a few hours off.

Apologies. @tes-s suggested giving credit. But, also, come on. How can you say you aren't hyper-competitive given the lengths you go to rack add to your count. I mean this in a friendly and somewhat jealous way. I look forward to being able to hit the road like you do but normal people don't do those kinds of drives. ;-)

And, yes, again, I do think Santana puts us in a bit of a quandary as to how to count it for the reasons you articulate.

 

[juliusa]

I seriously question the mental health of someone going to a pay location where they definitely don't need the charge. This one seems like the ultimate in insanity. Just confirmation of the lunacy of this game. Serious question: When you are taking an 18-hour swing through Canada, and the border agent asks the purpose of your visit, do you tell the truth? I rest my case.

Now that we have established the mental health status of the competitors, I am for simple and suggest we go by the Tesla pins and thereby defer to a disinterested party and let them make the arbitrary decision on what should count. We'll stick with that rule until they do something so capricious as to herd the cats in this game unanimously in the same direction of opposition, and then we'll make up a new rule - arbitrary and capricous in itselt, of course.

 

[juliusa]

Can the powers that be add 2 more for me....Cle Elum and Leavenworth. Thanks! Unfortunately, doesn't move me up.

Have you been reading the past few posts?? Clearly, there be no powers....

You are updated.

 

[Darren S]

<snip> Kind of waiting for others to chime in at this point. I'm surprised we haven't heard from @Darren S yet!

@PLUS EV, I've been reading along and waiting to see what others decided before lobbing a response.

@tes-s also asked what was decided when the "pairs" were split up in New England and for those spots the "North" or, I believe, "East" location was chosen for anyone who did not specify the location they visited but if they indicated they visited the "South" location of a pair than they were credited with the "South" location.

The "pairs" decision impacted very few people though (10 or 15?) as most folks indicated which location they visited. It seemed like the most fair way to put a stake in the ground for a decision. It made me go revisit all of the "pairs" since I was under the impression they originally both counted from a single visit so I wasn't all that pleased to have to make another trip but I planned it to include a romp through Quebec and/or NYC to at least make the most of it.

The photo below is Lenny being taken up to the superchargers at the Mott Street Garage in lower Manhattan. There are only two others who pulled this one off. I say kudos to @PLUS EV for getting the valet at Santana Row.

I'm one of the few others who snagged the Mott St garage.

 

[juliusa]

I look forward to being able to hit the road like you do but normalsane people don't do those kinds of drives.

Fixed if for ya. Clearly another card-carrying asylum inmate.

 

[Bighorn]

Where are these others? I can't think of any but I'm only at about half your count. I agree these are odd situations. However, with one part being open access and another being valet, it does change the scenario a bit. I lean towards keeping them separate but won't push further if a different decision is made.


Apologies. @tes-s suggested giving credit. But, also, come on. How can you say you aren't hyper-competitive given the lengths you go to rack add to your count. I mean this in a friendly and somewhat jealous way. I look forward to being able to hit the road like you do but normal people don't do those kinds of drives. ;-)

And, yes, again, I do think Santana puts us in a bit of a quandary as to how to count it for the reasons you articulate.​

Riverside has a couple stalls on the lower level that is for valet and 22 on the roof. I read of another similar situation yesterday at a CA charger, but I can’t remember which one.

My quest to visit superchargers was more a compulsion and a much needed break from a stressful profession. I fancied myself a resource for Tesla travel and felt compelled to be aware of as many charging situations as possible. I’ve been assisting those wanting to venture out on the road for 5+ years now over at Tesla.com forums. It began before there was a competition here. Sure, I’m competitive, but most people try to stay ahead of the pack when they start getting chased​

 

[Bighorn]

I seriously question the mental health of someone going to a pay location where they definitely don't need the charge. This one seems like the ultimate in insanity. Just confirmation of the lunacy of this game. Serious question: When you are taking an 18-hour swing through Canada, and the border agent asks the purpose of your visit, do you tell the truth? I rest my case.

Now that we have established the mental health status of the competitors, I am for simple and suggest we go by the Tesla pins and thereby defer to a disinterested party and let them make the arbitrary decision on what should count. We'll stick with that rule until they do something so capricious as to herd the cats in this game unanimously in the same direction of opposition, and then we'll make up a new rule - arbitrary and capricous in itselt, of course.

I’ve always told the border agents what I was up to—much to the chagrin of cars in line behind me because it usually started lengthy conversations about the car as most had not seen a Tesla the first few times.

Perfectly willing to go along with the pin method, however illogical it may be.

 

[Darren S]

I seriously question the mental health of someone going to a pay location where they definitely don't need the charge. This one seems like the ultimate in insanity. Just confirmation of the lunacy of this game. Serious question: When you are taking an 18-hour swing through Canada, and the border agent asks the purpose of your visit, do you tell the truth? I rest my case.

Now that we have established the mental health status of the competitors, I am for simple and suggest we go by the Tesla pins and thereby defer to a disinterested party and let them make the arbitrary decision on what should count. We'll stick with that rule until they do something so capricious as to herd the cats in this game unanimously in the same direction of opposition, and then we'll make up a new rule - arbitrary and capricious in itself, of course.

<-- Guilty

Funny question about the Border crossing but I did exactly that the last time. I was at the Sweet Grass, MT gate to Canada and was asked how long I would be visiting and what the purpose of my trip was.

I said that I was visiting locations where I could plug in my car as a sort of a "scavenger hunt" and would be heading to Calgary, Edmonton, Whistler, and Vancouver and that I'd be visiting for a mere 2 days.

The Officer looked at me blankly and asked, "You DO realize how far it is to all of those cities, right?" I stated that I knew the distances to cover and the Officer said what most of them do is they have never heard of somebody attempting something like this meaning visiting the country just to drive around and find places to plug in their car and he wished me good luck and sent me on my way.

That was at 5:25 AM on Sep 2. If only that Officer was in Vancouver for my arrival. I made it out of the country at Vancouver at 9:45 PM on Sep 3 or just over 40 hrs for 1,515 miles (37.5 mph avg including charging and sleeping and eating and traffic). Not too bad. I was pleased that I beat my estimate of 2 days to visit all those areas by a full 8 hrs.

I would have preferred visiting the Canadian Rockies and other places but didn't have that luxury on the trip so I just needed to make tracks.

 

[JSergeant]

I seriously question the mental health of someone going to a pay location where they definitely don't need the charge. This one seems like the ultimate in insanity. Just confirmation of the lunacy of this game. Serious question: When you are taking an 18-hour swing through Canada, and the border agent asks the purpose of your visit, do you tell the truth? I rest my case.

Now that we have established the mental health status of the competitors, I am for simple and suggest we go by the Tesla pins and thereby defer to a disinterested party and let them make the arbitrary decision on what should count. We'll stick with that rule until they do something so capricious as to herd the cats in this game unanimously in the same direction of opposition, and then we'll make up a new rule - arbitrary and capricous in itselt, of course.

I have no strong opinion one way or the other on this issue, so your suggestion sounds like a reasonable solution.

 

[PLUS EV]

Serious question: When you are taking an 18-hour swing through Canada, and the border agent asks the purpose of your visit, do you tell the truth?

Never. But as a professional gambler, it's just second nature for me to never reveal the purpose of anything I'm doing to strangers, let alone people in positions of authority