Anyone else dreading the day they open superchargers to other OEMs? I think that’s gojng to really suck and make Tesla ownership a lot less special..
Routers: Open Superchargers to Unlock Billions
Routers: Open Superchargers to Unlock Billions
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla forced to open superchargers to unlock billions
- Thread starter Sambub
- Start date
No. Isn’t the goal to make EV’s and the charging infrastructure available to the masses?
Or are you more concerned with being a member of the Tesla club?
Yes, the goal is to make charging infrastructure open to the masses.
I myself am not impressed by my being a member of the Tesla club. At the same time, when superchargers instantly get double, triple, or quadruple the eligible user base there will be far more horror stories of two hour waits to get to grandma's house on Thanksgiving, and that will reflect negatively on the EV experience.
IMHO, not opening the Tesla connector specification until now was a major strategic blunder on the part of Tesla. It could easily have become the industry standard and they pissed away that chance.
ElectricIAC
Good-Natured Rascal
Charge double rate for non Tesla and we should be good.
This could also be seen as more heavy handedness toward TSLA. It would be fair if incompetent charging providers were forced to meet a min down-time/quality standards before qualifying for new government funding.
As others have said before, some TSLA supercharging stations already have high demand and this change will only make things worse. And part of the TSLA premium is having a TSLA network of superchargers. Depending on supercharger site demand, I'm ok with opening it up for an extra fee. There should also be a requirement for standardized connectors for simplicity and keeping costs down - maybe we need to wait for the EU to force the issue.
As others have said before, some TSLA supercharging stations already have high demand and this change will only make things worse. And part of the TSLA premium is having a TSLA network of superchargers. Depending on supercharger site demand, I'm ok with opening it up for an extra fee. There should also be a requirement for standardized connectors for simplicity and keeping costs down - maybe we need to wait for the EU to force the issue.
Not worried. Like everything Tesla says, I will believe it when it happens.
Still waiting for my 2018 Model 3 to turn itself into a robo-taxi any day now.
srs5694
Active Member
Minimum reliability requirements are part of the recent Federal subsidies for DC fast-charging sites.
You're assuming that Tesla will open up all their sites to non-Teslas. This doesn't seem likely, at least not immediately. Even in Europe, where plug compatibility isn't as much of an issue (almost everything recent, including newer Teslas, uses CCS2 in Europe), Tesla has been doing a phased opening -- they open a handful of stations in Country X, then another handful in Country Y, and so on. I haven't looked into the details, but presumably this is done to help manage demand, by excluding sites that are already busy and to enable Tesla to monitor demand changes and make necessary adjustments (like planning to expand sites or open new ones). AFAIK, in no European country are all Tesla Superchargers yet open to non-Tesla vehicles.
This is also already part of the new Federal subsidies. The details depend on whether you look at the law (which is broad) or the interpretations by the agencies tasked with implementing the law (which, the last I heard, explicitly pushed CCS1 as the standard, since it was the only connector that met the definitions laid out in the law). Some speculate that Tesla opening NACS is a play to get Federal subsidies without having to install CCS1 plugs, but I'm skeptical of this, for various reasons. Instead, I tend to believe reporting about Tesla developing a "Magic Dock" to enable Tesla and CCS1 vehicles to charge off a single cable. That said, Tesla is keeping annoyingly quiet about their plans, which encourages speculation.
They may retrofit stations with low demand to make them more profitable, but otherwise it will just be new stations that get the federal $. If that means we get a 16 stall station instead of an 8 or a 4 stall station where we would have got none, I'm all in favor of it.
That being said, I think there should be an additional per minute fee for charging below 30kW at highly congested chargers, to discourage Leafs/Bolts and other sinners (cold soaked/ >80% SoC) from hogging stalls.
That being said, I think there should be an additional per minute fee for charging below 30kW at highly congested chargers, to discourage Leafs/Bolts and other sinners (cold soaked/ >80% SoC) from hogging stalls.
henderrj
Active Member
If I am correct Tesla still sells more EVs in the US than everyone else combined. So, there are probably four times as many Tesla's as any other road trip capable vehicles. (None of the old Leafs being relevant.). So, it wouldn't seem possible that there will suddenly be vast crowds of other brands queuing up at superchargers. At least in North America.
ElectricIAC
Good-Natured Rascal
As long as you exempt non-commercial use Tesla from that I can go with that.
I still want double per kWh cost for non tesla.
Floating rate. Same as for Teslas between midnight and 7 am is fine, but 5x the Tesla rate during peak hours if that's what it takes to make sure the stalls aren't congested. And based on the occupancy of the charging stalls at any given moment. Over 50% occupancy should be 50% more than the Tesla rate. 75% occupancy, double the Tesla rate. 100% occupancy with a short line, triple. Medium line, quadruple. And so on.
No exemption for cold soak sinners, but if the nav says you need to go >80% to make it to the next charger, then that's fine.
What possible good would come from charging non-Tesla's double? I personally want more chargers in more places and there are a lot of routes in the short-medium term that need CCS revenue to be viable.
Purely from the standpoint of taking government $, it would never fly to begin with other than perhaps a token monthly fee similar to EA's pass+
RayK
Active Member
Double the normal Supercharging rate might be a bit too much in some cases. I'd be happy if it were 25-35% higher than the average local cost for equivalent CCS chargers. Non-Tesla drivers would then need to decide if they are willing to pay the premium.
Isn’t that what the billions in government subsidies are for? To build out the infrastructure?
All other EV makers will add like what? 250-450k EV cars next year in the US? while Tesla adds another 1+ million. Not sure we have to worry about other EV’s at the superchargers for awhile.
ElectricIAC
Good-Natured Rascal
It’s already bad enough in major metros with Uber drivers and hertz rental places hogging the chargers and in some cases cutting in line.
The only way this works is to charge significantly higher rates for cars out of network and or as well as a monthly base sub.
Or Tesla could just, you know, not take the money and not have to do it.
What people are suggesting with tiered pricing makes zero sense.
When the funds are released, Tesla can ramp up the infrastructure. And none of the fanbois need to worry about the small percentage of other manufacturers’ vehicles “taking” their spots at the charger.
Similar threads
