Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Tesla making HUGE mistake with Superchargers

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
So, it appears that Tesla is slowly moving to open their Supercharger network to all brands of EV's worldwide.

On the surface, this is a logical way for Musk to enrich himself further on the EV boom, by charging other EV owners for both adaptors, and supercharger time.

I believe, however, that he's making a HUGE mistake. In a rapidly growing EV market, soon the ONLY thing that will differentiate themselves from the competition IS that very network. Those who have a bit of range anxiety purchase Tesla because of that vast network of readily available chargers. I know it's what swung my own purchase away from Audi, and to Tesla.

Take that advantage away, and create supercharging situations like those that exist in California, with wait times common, and you take away the one great advantage that Tesla has in the competition. With range from the competition now matching and exceeding Tesla, technology outstripping Tesla, better build quality, and vastly better interiors, the competition, especially Hyundai and VW are already offering superior EV's at better price points than Tesla, and the list will explode soon. Take away the exclusive supercharger network... and just watch what happens to that "Tesla Loyalty".

All my opinion, of course. Backed only by numerous conversations with other Tesla owners near me. Larger business empires have fallen on much smaller mis-steps.
 
So, it appears that Tesla is slowly moving to open their Supercharger network to all brands of EV's worldwide.

On the surface, this is a logical way for Musk to enrich himself further on the EV boom, by charging other EV owners for both adaptors, and supercharger time.

I believe, however, that he's making a HUGE mistake. In a rapidly growing EV market, soon the ONLY thing that will differentiate themselves from the competition IS that very network. Those who have a bit of range anxiety purchase Tesla because of that vast network of readily available chargers. I know it's what swung my own purchase away from Audi, and to Tesla.

Take that advantage away, and create supercharging situations like those that exist in California, with wait times common, and you take away the one great advantage that Tesla has in the competition. With range from the competition now matching and exceeding Tesla, technology outstripping Tesla, better build quality, and vastly better interiors, the competition, especially Hyundai and VW are already offering superior EV's at better price points than Tesla, and the list will explode soon. Take away the exclusive supercharger network... and just watch what happens to that "Tesla Loyalty".

All my opinion, of course. Backed only by numerous conversations with other Tesla owners near me. Larger business empires have fallen on much smaller mis-steps.


One thing I always find amusing is people talking about how superchargers are in CA when they dont live here, like all superchargers are always crowded with wait times perpetually here.
 
At the risk of propagating a topic that has been discussed many times before, and also taking what is a somewhat (but not universal) unpopular opinion, I have to ask whether you are upset with Tesla opening up Giga Texas and Giga Berlin, and Giga Shanghai, or expanding Giga Shanghai? Because the opening of those factories will create an influx (at least in the next 2 years) of EVs that WILL be able to use the Supercharger network even without supporting CCS that will dwarf the number of non-Tesla vehicles that would potentially be using them. So if you were looking for some kind of private, exclusive charging network, then maybe you should be upset with Tesla expanding their own production and selling vehicles to all these heathens that are going to be clogging up your Superchargers?

I know that sounds harsh (no hard feelings, just trying to emphatically make a point), but you have to realize that with or without opening up Superchargers to other vehicles, Tesla does have an implied obligation to keep up with demand at Superchargers, and their own production expansion is going to drive as much additional usage as even non-Tesla vehicles. So either you need to trust that Tesla will do their best to keep up with that additional demand (albeit it will probably be painful at times since, even though they are in fact rapidly expanding the Supercharger network), or you need to fault Tesla for creating their own problem by shipping too many vehicles.

Personally, I think that Tesla can manage this just fine. First of all, in the US, enabling CCS at Supercharger sites is not going to be as easy as downloading new software to them like they can in Europe. It will take hardware upgrades, and even then we don't know whether that will consist of opening up all stalls to CCS, or more likely, just some. And it likely will be rolled out like it was in Europe: start with a small pilot and see how that goes, and gradually open it up to larger numbers if things appear to be going well. And by the way, the revenue they bring in from CCS vehicles can/will be used to further grow the network. If they set prices to make it economically beneficial to allow CCS vehicles to charge, why wouldn't they expand the network to support a wider customer base? The mistake would be NOT to.

The last thing I like to point out is the following scenario: fast forward 10 years into the future. The CCS adapter exists so Teslas can charge at CCS stations anywhere, but Tesla does NOT open up Superchargers to CCS. The number of non-Tesla EVs from other carmakers that finally got off their @$$es and started making EVs (as well as Chinese and other startups) eventually overtakes the number of Teslas on the road (yes, this is bound to happen!) Convenience stores, hotels, grocery stores and everyone else realizes they need to provide fast chargers to draw in customers to keep up with their competitors that are doing the same thing. The put the project out to Tesla and other network providers to bid. Tesla's proposal is to install Superchargers that 40% (the Teslas) of the EVs on the road can use. The CCS network's proposal is to install CCS chargers that 100% of the EVs on the road can use (Teslas with the use of a now widely available CCS adapter). Which do you think they are going to pick? And maybe you don't care...let them put in the CCS stations--you can just use your CCS adapter. But then why were we getting so upset in 2022 about Superchargers remaining exclusive to Tesla if the end game was we were just going to be using mostly CCS stations in the future anyway?
 
Tesla does not operate the supercharger network to make money selling electricity. (In fact, almost all public charger networks are not operated to make money selling electricity.) They operate it to sell cars. However, in Europe, regulations enforced the CCS2 standard, and Texas has subsidies available but only for charging stations that have "standard" charging connectors and are open to all cars. As such, Tesla is faced with being less competitive because the others are subsidized, or welcoming all cars.

If I were in their position, I would do it to get the subsidies, but possibly only allow Teslas when the charger is >90% full. If it fills up, Teslas could line up but it would be a waste of time for CCS cars to do so. And their Tesla charging app (which of course they would have to have) would remind them of this and point them elsewhere. I suspect in this or some other way, Teslas will be advantaged at Tesla superchargers unless the subsidy rules carefully forbid it.

In fact there is not too much harm to Tesla if they let CCS cars use "spare" slots in superchargers, and even stop charging on them and warn them of idle fees if they don't leave when Teslas are waiting. That will leave the Tesla as still the best car for road trips. However, if a CCS car comes upon a low utilization supercharger, you can let them charge. It makes the difference between buying a Tesla and a CCS car smaller, but does not eliminate it.
 
Last edited:
@bradtem

This would not work and likely result governments intervention. We also need more availability and competition, and this would likely backfire on Tesla owners who might like to use CCS charging stations. Either you open up your network or you don’t.
 
@bradtem

This would not work and likely result governments intervention. We also need more availability and competition, and this would likely backfire on Tesla owners who might like to use CCS charging stations. Either you open up your network or you don’t.
In what sense "not work?" You think the subsidy would no longer be given if you did this? That's not out of the question, but is it so wrong? Shouldn't a carmaker that builds a charging station get to give some priority and advantage to their own customers? Why do we want to ban that? It would still be quite valuable for CCS drivers to use Tesla stations. As you know, almost all the time I go to a supercharger there are spare stations they could use. I even find them nearly empty fairly often.

Certainly Tesla will charge CCS users more per kwh than they charge Tesla owners, or would you forbid that? Tesla runs their stations break-even so they definitely will want to make a profit on the CCS users. Would the old model S that have lifetime free supercharging be forbidden?

Consider a few options:
  1. CCS users are last in line, as described above, if the station fills up
  2. CCS users pay more all the time, and pay a lot more if the station fills up.
  3. At paired chargers (A/B) the Tesla is always given the priority part of the available wattage regardless of whether it got there first. However, if the station is half-full then of course, like everybody, go for an empty pair and get all the power.
Do you think the rules would be changed to forbid all of this? Of course, Tesla is the only carmaker that runs its own network, other than the old Nissan free to charge program.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ArtK
Image in Shell stations gave priority to Ford cars, you would raise bloody hell. We need more charging opportunities not less. Restrictions are a very bad idea, especially with so few locations.
Why would I raise hell? Or more to the point, why would I raise hell if Ford stations gave priority to Ford cars is the actual question to ask.
But if there were Ford stations and I drove a different brand, I would not be surprised if they gave priority and better prices to Fords, and I would probably pick them last if they were not a good place to get gas.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kayak1
Its easy:
Electricity price:
- $0.50*/kWhr without a club card for Tesla funded Superchargers
- $0.35*/kWhr without a club card for fully government funded Superchargers
- $0.25*/KWhr with club card.
Club card:
- Free for life with purchase of a Tesla. Ownership transfers to new owner upon sale.
- $50/yr for anyone

This lets anyone use and help pay to maintain the infrastructure.
* actual price probably varies with location and whether government subsidy of electricity.
 
Many car dealerships restrict charging to their brand of car. Nothing to complain about here. plugshare.com even indicates these with brown labels.
And that just restricts the available population, that is bad for everyone with an electric car, assuming we think electric cars are a good idea of course. The Tesla plug, J1772, Chademo, CC1, CC2 all resulted because everyone did their own thing. Restrictions will just make this worse. We need open standards and wider availability in order for EVs to take-off.
 
Its easy:
Electricity price:
- $0.50*/kWhr without a club card for Tesla funded Superchargers
- $0.35*/kWhr without a club card for fully government funded Superchargers
- $0.25*/KWhr with club card.
Club card:
- Free for life with purchase of a Tesla. Ownership transfers to new owner upon sale.
- $50/yr for anyone

This lets anyone use and help pay to maintain the infrastructure.
* actual price probably varies with location and whether government subsidy of electricity.
I am sure they will do something like this (no card needed though perhaps one could be created if the rules forbade it.)
I propose something grander, which is the price keeps going up higher for "non-card" customers as the station gets full, and starts getting ridiculously high if it gets a line, and obscene if the line has too many Teslas in it.

Yes, Tesla can know about the length of the line because almost all of us have entered the supercharger for navigation in order to precondition the battery, and the cars also tell Tesla where they are, and it knows what order people arrived and when they charge and when they stop charging and when they leave. (I actually wish Tesla managed a virtual line so one didn't have to wait physically at the charger.)

In fact, I could even see them doing this for Tesla drivers (not as badly) if they calculate that the driver has enough energy to reach another charger along their route. In fact, if I attempt to route to a charger that has a line, my car should say, "We really recommend you detour slightly to this closer charger because of bad line predicted for your arrival at that charger." Or even better, when it plots a route for me, factor in the estimated wait time when deciding what is the quickest route.

Non-Tesla drivers will obviously need to download a Tesla charging app to authenticate at these superchargers (they don't have card readers or NFC unless they add them.) So that app can guide them and tell them about lines and prices too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: israndy
It also occurs to me that if Tesla wanted to be nasty about it, they could equip the chargers with CCS cords the same length as the supercharger cords, which can really only charge your car if the charger is exactly on the driver-back or passenger-front corner of the car. Which is not the case in many CCS cars. They would still comply with the rules if they did that, they just say you have to have a CCS or CdM on every station.
 
I see both sides of this. I love Tesla's well placed, well maintained stations.

What they seem to be doing is reacting to deals where it makes huge fiscal sense to accept government/public money for access, and then use that money to expand the stations. Done right, this could be win-win.

But yeah, I will cry a bit if/when we get the first Mustang slurping away at a US Supercharger :)
 
And that just restricts the available population, that is bad for everyone with an electric car, assuming we think electric cars are a good idea of course. The Tesla plug, J1772, Chademo, CC1, CC2 all resulted because everyone did their own thing. Restrictions will just make this worse. We need open standards and wider availability in order for EVs to take-off.
I think you're missing that American value: Freedom.
If a private company pays to install chargers on land they own or pay for rights to, they can let whomever they want use them and block anyone they want.
It's another thing, of course, if public funds pay for the installation of the chargers.
Note that, in CA, there is a law stating that any chargers installed with state funding must have a standard credit card reader and accept any credit card as payment. This would levy some changes to Superchargers if Tesla takes public money.
I also think you'll find that EVs are taking off in the US. Just not a quickly as many of us may want. They biggest limitation now, IMHO, is that there aren't enough different kinds of models available and purchase prices are still high because demand outweighs supply, and there aren't enough battery factories to enable sufficient economy of scale. Charging is not the biggest problem, although it does significantly hamper EV adoption by some people who live in multi-tenant dwellings but, fortunately, we have an acceptable slow charging standard.
All those standards listed were developed with different motivations. Nobody knew, or knows, what the right solution is. My first charger was an LPI (Large Panel Inductive). The charger cost $3,000 and weighs about 50 lbs. It maxed out at about 5 KW. It would easily charge a GEN2 EV1 overnight who would need anything more? Here's a website that describes how to make it portable:
tal_complete.jpg
Should we have stopped there? Don't you like your Tesla mobile connector a bit better?
If we had locked down CHAdeMO, probably the first DCFC standard, road trips would be a problem for EVs: it would take over an hours to get 200 miles of charge. It wasn't designed for that use case. It was designed for somewhat fast charging in the city if one accidentally exceeds one's range from home.
You may note that, only now, after personal computers have been around for over 40 years, we finally have a single plug standard that can connect to chargers, and high-speed and low speed data devices such as keyboards, monitors, mice, LANs, etc. It takes a long time for some things to happen.