-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla Supercharger network
- Thread starter dsm363
- Start date
dhanson865
Well-Known Member
HillCountryFun
Member
Well, based on Elon's tweet, I think v3 will exceed (significantly) the CCS max of 350KW. Exactly how they will do that remains a mystery, however I suspect that PowerPacks will be involved.
I also believe that the v3 stations will support a small increase in speed for existing Model S's and X's, but to handle the new (much higher) power of the v3 station will require new equipment within the vehicle (e.g. cooling systems, cells, etc.). So, only Model 3 and newer S's and X's will work with the new v3 stations higher output. That doesn't mean that existing vehicles won't be able to use the new v3 stations...just at a reduced power rate.
IMHO...
The following is a list of the superchargers which opened in the last month and upcoming superchargers TMC has heard about. Sites with a known location are shown at supercharge.info; details of all sites are at the Supercharger Progress wiki. Eight new North American stations opened last month, and hopefully we'll get about 6 new openings this month.
| Location | Site Known? | Status |
| Little Rock, AR | no | unknown |
| Fremont (Kato Road), CA | yes | under construction hiatus |
| South Lake Tahoe, CA | no | unknown |
| Milford II, CT | yes | under construction |
| Naples, FL | yes | awaiting power on / testing |
| Kuttawa, KY | yes | operational |
| Aberdeen, MD | maybe | in permitting? |
| Cumberland, MD | maybe | in site negotiations |
| Alexandria, MN | no | unknown |
| Lima, MT | yes | operational |
| Statesville, NC | yes | in permitting |
| Fargo, ND | no | searching for site |
| Grand Island, NE | yes | operational |
| Lincoln, NE | yes | operational |
| Santa Fe, NM | yes | under construction |
| Las Vegas (L.V. Blvd.), NV | yes | awaiting power on / testing |
| Victor, NY | yes | in permitting |
| Waterloo, NY | yes | awaiting transformer or testing |
| Klamath Falls, OR | yes | under construction? |
| Moosic, PA | yes | operational |
| Myrtle Beach, SC | yes | awaiting construction |
| Arlington, TX | yes | awaiting construction |
| Austin, TX | yes | in permitting |
| Dallas, TX | yes | in permitting |
| El Paso, TX | yes | in permitting |
| Flatonia, TX | yes | in permitting |
| Fort Stockton, TX | yes | in permtitting |
| Junction, TX | yes | operational |
| Ozona, TX | yes | operational |
| Van Horn, TX | yes | awaiting testing |
| Wichita Falls, TX | no | in site selection |
| Green Bay, WI | no | unknown |
| Stevens Point, WI | no | unknown |
| Morgantown, WV | no | unknown |
| Wheatland, WY | no | unknown |
| Merritt, BC | yes | operational |
| Lévis, QC | no | unknown |
Chuq
Active Member
I've always thought this was the best idea for handling high demand locations. It's the natural progression of a few ideas...
First, having waiting cars line up behind the charging cars.
Second, having the waiting cars line up on the "other side" of the stall, so the cable can connect to the waiting vehicle easily.
Third, having two cables on each pedestal so that the second car can start automatically after the first is finished.
Fourth, having the second car ramp up as the first slows down, like paired stalls do now.
And since the stalls are already two to a SC, this just makes them four to a SC. The layout doesn't matter - it doesn't have to be two pairs of stalls backing onto each other, they can have them all in a row if that suits the site.
Overall power supply to the site doesn't need to change, vehicles which have finished charging (or are slowly charging at 95%+) won't really hold other vehicles up since the energy output of the SC is still available to three other stalls. It would be bad luck if you end up with four cars at 95% on one SC and four cars at 10% on another, but this can happen with paired stalls anyway.
I have no idea how much the pedestals cost but I'd imagine most of the cost is the supercharger cabinets and the civil works, so this is a cheap way to expand the number of stalls on an existing site.
To start with the charge port on the car should have been in the front to make all of these easy to implement.
Wherever you place the port, it's a compromise. Having it in the back means that the high voltage cable run to the charger is shorter and lighter. I imagine that Tesla wasn't too keen on having an HV cable running most of the length of the car. I'd guess they would need a tunnel to do that safely. I've not found a problem with it in the back during my four years and 84K miles of ownership.
If the ports were in front, all you would have to do is nose into a parking spot, which is actually easier for most people to do than back into a spot like you have to do now for older superchargers. I think Tesla missed a good opportunity by not putting the charge port in the middle. My last car was one of the last cars built with the gas cap under the back license plate. I never had to worry which side of the car the gas port was on.
Let's see, need to have a cryogenic plant at every supercharger to make liquid nitrogen... What could possibly go wrong?
Nose in parking means you back out, which has poor visibility and leads to a lot of, usually, minor accidents, with the odd kid being run over. back in or pull though parking is far safer.
Not true. That used to be true when cars didn't have backup cameras, but with backup cameras, it's the opposite. If you are backed in and pulling out forward with two large vehicles on either side of you, you just can't see past them until the front hood of the car and the A pillar is halfway out into the aisle, where you can get a line of sight. With the car pulled in forward, the backup camera with fish eye lens gives you a view all the way left and right down the aisle before the car even begins to move.
...and how is it then that that backup camera doesn't make backing IN to a slot also that much easier?
To me, it both provides that...as well as offering the benefits jerry33 presented.
To me, it both provides that...as well as offering the benefits jerry33 presented.
If the steering wheels were at the back of the car, it would. Having the steering wheels trailing the direction of movement is slower feedback adjustment and less precise control.
Really?
I'm happy to believe there's some or even many, but _all_ seems a big stretch, given I've not seen any (neither in the metal over here in the UK, nor on several sets of plans of sites in the US (including all their conduit work) that were made public as part of permit applications).
Nothing stopped Tesla from designing the charger in the front. I guess you might have had a smaller frunk, but then maybe a bigger trunk. I read here somewhere the choice in the back was dictated by the aesthetics and <drum roll> familiarity with gas cars. Result - one stupid design.
Not at all true with the wide clear backup cameras we have today. Teslas owners are the laughing stock in our angled parking spots in our office, where the driver struggles to reverse park - because the parking is angled and you will be away from the traffic direction when reversed with very little space to maneuver - to get to the Charge Point chargers. 'Here comes another idiot Tesla guy holding up traffic' is what I am sure folks who are stuck behind are saying.
And I don't even attempt to back in, because I don't need the charge.
Any design decision has tradeoffs. The benefits of the approach Tesla took include much shorter lengths of high voltage wiring (somewhat offset by the wiring added for dual drive models,) ability to make productive use of the space under the rear seats, convenience/aesthetics of integrating the charge port into the rear light housing, and getting the door out of the driver's way (with the Volt or Leaf approach, I was always having to walk around the driver's door to plug/unplug. Now I don't have to,) and keeping all of the high voltage stuff away from the main crumple zone.
On the other hand, as you say, it means less convenient placement of charge stations - especially for street parking or while towing, and while nothing is in the front crumple zone, the charger on the X and the port for all of them are squarely in the rear ending zone.
The one "stupid" thing here is not the design of the cars, but that they did not from the start design the supercharger stalls in the same way as gas pump stalls are designed - that you park beside it, and not have to reverse in or out of the stall. In some new supercharger stations they seems to have understood this.
To be fair to Tesla, they have a lot of restrictions placed on them by the owners of the parking lots in which the stations are installed. Additionally, at least in the initial rollout, there were cost considerations to running power through the middle of the lot instead of down the curbside. I do hope they continue to consider more flexible layouts. Situations at Service Centers where they own the property seem to done in a more convenient fashion.
Similar threads
- Poll
