Louis and Mike discuss the failures of public EV charging and how a closed system allows Tesla to easily have the best charging network in the entire industry. This is a clip from TMC Podcast #18.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla Beats Public EV Charging With ONE Tactic - Vertical Integration
- Thread starter NoGasNoBrakes
- Start date
-
- Tags
- podcast
Mockingbird
Member
Notice how Plug and Charge wasn’t mentioned.
Do they even know that CCS has Plug and Charge?
Do they even know that CCS has Plug and Charge?
RTPEV
Active Member
I think I would use the term "vertically integrated" instead of "closed" here (although I think they used the term "closed loop" in the podcast, which also is a better term than "closed").
One huge advantage is the fact that Tesla controls the hardware and software stack for the Supercharger system practically down to the component level. This provides tight control over the charging process, and allows for quick updates if a problem is found.
Another advantage is the relative simplicity of the Supercharger architecture. There technically is no need for screens or apps and card readers. Less that can break.
But this can also be a disadvantage as well, and does inhibit scalability (i.e. without going to an app-based (or other) model to enable non-Tesla vehicles to use the network, you've limited it to only Tesla vehicles). And, you are losing an opportunity convey useful information to the user through the screen (or even some simpler status indicators).
But in my opinion, beyond the vertical integration, the key reason the Supercharger network is superior is that it was built out properly with (most of the time) adequate site sizes so as to provide redundancy/reliability, and when something does go wrong, Tesla is on the spot to address the issue. They are treating it like the essentially infrastructure it is. I get the sense that many other providers acknowledge the issue, but then it sits for ages before someone actually gets out to fix it. Part of that is due to the fact that those networks are NOT vertically integrated, so they need to get the right contractor out there to fix it, and maybe partly because the networks are so focused on expansion right now that maintenance and repair is not their top priority.
One huge advantage is the fact that Tesla controls the hardware and software stack for the Supercharger system practically down to the component level. This provides tight control over the charging process, and allows for quick updates if a problem is found.
Another advantage is the relative simplicity of the Supercharger architecture. There technically is no need for screens or apps and card readers. Less that can break.
But this can also be a disadvantage as well, and does inhibit scalability (i.e. without going to an app-based (or other) model to enable non-Tesla vehicles to use the network, you've limited it to only Tesla vehicles). And, you are losing an opportunity convey useful information to the user through the screen (or even some simpler status indicators).
But in my opinion, beyond the vertical integration, the key reason the Supercharger network is superior is that it was built out properly with (most of the time) adequate site sizes so as to provide redundancy/reliability, and when something does go wrong, Tesla is on the spot to address the issue. They are treating it like the essentially infrastructure it is. I get the sense that many other providers acknowledge the issue, but then it sits for ages before someone actually gets out to fix it. Part of that is due to the fact that those networks are NOT vertically integrated, so they need to get the right contractor out there to fix it, and maybe partly because the networks are so focused on expansion right now that maintenance and repair is not their top priority.
There's another major reason: superior electrical engineering.
Original small plug pre-CCS Tesla chargers don't use CCS because its communication protocol is lousy and susceptible to electromagnetic interference, it's built on mid-frequency RF communication taken from a home communication-over-powerline protocol. It's an inappropriate use.
High power switching chargers make lots of EMI.
ChaDEMO and Tesla by contrast use the CANBUS, which is already present and used in the cars anyway, and was designed from the start to be very resistant to EMI, given that it was designed for spark-ignition engine powered cars. Notice: People aren't complaining about reliability of ChaDEMO charging much either. Supposedly Chademo is technically superior but EU manufacturers didn't want to license the standard or patents.
Presumably now Tesla knows about the CCS flaws and has engineered around it on both the charger and the car side---when they match up together.
From what I've read the Tesla (at least traditionally) superchargers handled the billing on the car side, using the car's or the app's internet connection. If the supercharger's internet is down or weak then the car can remember the billing information and transmit it later. Another plus for reliability: the charger doesn't have to wait to connect to its internet to charge.
In an entirely open system that could probably be exploited by malefactors to get free charging so they don't, or can't do that, because they can't control what the car on the other side will do unlike Tesla. Not a big deal for urban areas or probably Europe (dense enough that cell coverage is almost universal) but is an issue for superchargers in distant locations in USA and Canada.
Original small plug pre-CCS Tesla chargers don't use CCS because its communication protocol is lousy and susceptible to electromagnetic interference, it's built on mid-frequency RF communication taken from a home communication-over-powerline protocol. It's an inappropriate use.
High power switching chargers make lots of EMI.
ChaDEMO and Tesla by contrast use the CANBUS, which is already present and used in the cars anyway, and was designed from the start to be very resistant to EMI, given that it was designed for spark-ignition engine powered cars. Notice: People aren't complaining about reliability of ChaDEMO charging much either. Supposedly Chademo is technically superior but EU manufacturers didn't want to license the standard or patents.
Presumably now Tesla knows about the CCS flaws and has engineered around it on both the charger and the car side---when they match up together.
From what I've read the Tesla (at least traditionally) superchargers handled the billing on the car side, using the car's or the app's internet connection. If the supercharger's internet is down or weak then the car can remember the billing information and transmit it later. Another plus for reliability: the charger doesn't have to wait to connect to its internet to charge.
In an entirely open system that could probably be exploited by malefactors to get free charging so they don't, or can't do that, because they can't control what the car on the other side will do unlike Tesla. Not a big deal for urban areas or probably Europe (dense enough that cell coverage is almost universal) but is an issue for superchargers in distant locations in USA and Canada.
bradtem
Robocar consultant
Do most CCS users know it? In another thread TIL that Electrify America doesn't give you the membership rate if you use plug and charge, is that right?
RTPEV
Active Member
I bet more do than don't. I suspect the dealers for the cars that support it make a big deal about it (even though they typically don't know anything else about EVs and charging). At least that's been our experience. The one exception would be cars that didn't originally have Plug & Charge but get it over a software update, but even then I bet the service dept might highlight it. I am specifically thinking of the older ID4s which need to be brought in for the first software update.
I don't know the answer to your second question. I know that with my wife's ID4 you had to use the app to start the charge or else you wouldn't get the free charging that came with the car, but that's a different matter. Intuitively, it seems that since Plug & Charge would need to be tied to an account somewhere, that if that account was set up as a member that you would get the member pricing, but who knows if something to screwed up. Regardless, even if that is the case, it sounds more like a bug, not a permanent policy. I would imagine after several complaints that it would be fixed.
Thanks for the comment! I've changed the title to more adequately reflect that. Also, you're right, and especially right now it's really difficult to find contractors, so because Tesla already has people on-hand, it's a lot easier for them to repair superchargers quickly.
Mockingbird
Member
Ford offers BlueOval Charge Network Electrify America Membership, which is just Electrify America Pass+ Membership except offered through Ford.
You can use Plug and Charger with BlueOval Charge Network Electrify America Membership.
...because almost no one has implemented it.
Do you know that for the most part it doesn't?
Mockingbird
Member
Ford Mustang Mach-E and Ford F-150 Lightning are quite popular vehicles
So you have been able to name ONE brand that has it implemented. Bully for you! That reinforces the point that hardly anyone has it working or available yet. Your earlier indignant questions of why they weren't talking about people using Plug & Charge is equivalent to asking why people aren't using electric airplanes for their travel. Well, check with Southwest, or American Airlines, or United or the other airlines people use and see if they have electric airplanes available yet.
Mockingbird
Member
Porsche has Plug and Charge implemented in the Porsche Taycan.
Mercedes-Benz has Plug and Charge implemented in the Mercedes-Benz EQS.
Your argument is disingenuous.
Ford is the 2nd biggest seller of BEVs in North America (after Tesla) and its products, which are available today, have Plug and Charge.
Last edited:
honoraryorange
Member
Plug and charge isn't really all that lol
When I'm in CA I used Electrify America almost exclusively since Supercharger rates are stupidly expensive. It takes all of 2 seconds to swipe my phone across the scanner, which automatically requests the card from my phone and signs into my account.
Superchargers have the network. Electrify America is usually cheaper and somehow faster. They seem to charge much closer to their rated kW rating than Superchargers do.
When I'm in CA I used Electrify America almost exclusively since Supercharger rates are stupidly expensive. It takes all of 2 seconds to swipe my phone across the scanner, which automatically requests the card from my phone and signs into my account.
Superchargers have the network. Electrify America is usually cheaper and somehow faster. They seem to charge much closer to their rated kW rating than Superchargers do.
Similar threads
