The SC team at Tesla has opened >100 superchargers across, now, three continents. In the United States they have linked the coasts and enabled N/S travel along those coasts. While there are certainly improvements to be made ... the Canadian routes have been delayed significantly ... I'd say they have done quite a good job. I'd love more convenience for my NE skiing adventures, you'd like easier access to Yosemite. There's no way they will satisfy everyone. If they told me two years ago that this was what they'd accomplish by this summer I would have been thrilled.
-
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
I think it could be considered "clueless", or maybe it's just selfishness or arrogance, to call Tesla "clueless" in placement of superchargers because you can't get to a particular destination with superchargers. Coming from someone in California where more trips can be made by supercharger than anywhere else in the country, that charge is even more outrageous. It's a big world out there, Tesla is a young company without unlimited resources, and I think it's amazing how far the supercharger network has come in a year.
Remember the primary purpose of the supercharger network is for marketing. Perhaps Tesla thinks it will have a better return by putting the next superchargers elsewhere than it would by opening up the route from Menlo Park to Yosemite.
hans
P631
I was responding to a post that said "Trouble is that the further you get from Palo Alto the less understanding there is about regional routing". My examples were meant to be counter-examples, that show that there is a lack of understanding of regional routing near Palo Alto as well.
I was not trying to say that California needs more superchargers or that chargers in Yosemite are needed more so than those in Texas, or from Toronto to Montreal, or anywhere else.
And while I am clarifying my comments, I should be clear that I don't think that Tesla is clueless. Bad choice of words.
Last edited:
bollar
Disgruntled Member
And within Texas, there are more Model S's registered in Dallas / Fort Worth than there are in Houston, or Austin / San Antonio, even without a Gallery here. I hope Tesla recognizes this and is able to help us get to Little Rock, Atlanta, Memphis and New Orleans without major detours before 2016.
As cool as Superchargers on I-10 west of San Antonio will be, I would actually use Superchargers on I-20 & I-30 in East Texas much more frequently.
MartinAustin
Active Member
Texarkana would be a great place for a supercharger, currently missing from the plan. It looks a little hard to get across Arkansas, say from Texas to Tennessee.
dhanson865
Well-Known Member
"stuck". To quote that movie again, "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
Last I heard Tesla vehicles come with a thing called a UMC and it can be used to charge all over the country even when there isn't a supercharger on your route. Oh and if you think that is too plebeian you can use the included J1772 adapter on a public L2 charging station.
While I'll grant you that a supercharger route from Texas to West, North, or East supercharger routes would be a vast improvement over the current island*, I just can't agree to calling those vehicles "stuck".
*yep I'm OK with calling it an island, it's an island of extremely high powered charging stations in a sea of mediocre L2 and weak L1 charging opportunities. But the boundries of the "island" are invisible and your car will happily drive right past them. The ground doesn't change to quicksand outside of the supercharger bubble.
Last edited:
bollar
Disgruntled Member
I'm amused you addressed your comments to the guy who has probably done more long trips outside the island than any other Texan. I'm sure Jerry33 could name every NEMA 14-50 between Dallas and Chicago by heart -- and he will likely be able to, at least through 2016.
caddieo
Member
OK. Time to cut TMC some slack and view what they have accomplished thus far in some type of perspective. How many decades did it take, starting in 1900 before there were enough gas stations to allow coast to coast travel? Time was when you had to carry your own oil and gas if you wanted to go any significant distance. As late as the 30’s I can remember my father telling me he had to carry his own gas anytime he had to do rural house calls. Whereas what we have now was accomplished in two years. Not perfect, I agree, but the northern coast to coast route, the western coastal route and the eastern coastal route are basically complete. And I am not being a Pollyana either as I have given TMC more than a piece of my mind for neglecting a big chunk of the Midwest.
bollar
Disgruntled Member
The answer is 1912 and impressively, also included building the road itself. Automotive manufacturers realized it was hard to sell cars without roads, so funded the Lincoln Highway for coast-to-coast travel. Lincoln Highway - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Doesn't mean there weren't still lots of people carrying around gas cans...
Hmm...sounds like what Tesla is accomplishing with the SC network and the first US transcontinental high-speed charging route.
bollar
Disgruntled Member
Yes!
Also, different highways were foundered by different associations, creating what I would call competing standards, until these roads became part of the Federal highway system. Also seems familiar.
This is me at the newly built Supercharger-station outside Arboga, in Sweden. I found 3 Teslas charging there, only norwegian plates. Very nice spot to charge, we had a nice bite at Dinners about 30 meters away from the chargers. Maybe I should work as a walking banner for Tesla? lol
caddieo
Member
My bad! I meant TM. :crying:
- - - Updated - - -
Although the plan was hatched in 1912 and the proposed route dedicated in 1913, a paved highway as we know it did not exist. The well-publicized transcontinental Army convoy of 1919 took 2 months to reach San Francisco, what with all the dirt and mud sections they had to traverse resulting in broken axles.
Yosemite, Mendecino and Napa are destinations which properly not an SC function.
For the I-86 corridor (E-W) Erie/Dunkirk would also serve (N-S) ONT and Binghamton would serve (N-S) Watertown NY, ONT and Allentown. So the corridor is actually serving a grid pattern. Extra points.
Rescuing Texas would appear to require a three-deep solution from any direction. If Limon existed then maybe just two more to complete Amarillo/Denver, but then Amarillo is an outpost anyway. Seems TM should just arbitrarily march across I-10 with SCs every 160 miles from CA to FL and say: "This is what you're getting - deal with it!"
--
For the I-86 corridor (E-W) Erie/Dunkirk would also serve (N-S) ONT and Binghamton would serve (N-S) Watertown NY, ONT and Allentown. So the corridor is actually serving a grid pattern. Extra points.
Rescuing Texas would appear to require a three-deep solution from any direction. If Limon existed then maybe just two more to complete Amarillo/Denver, but then Amarillo is an outpost anyway. Seems TM should just arbitrarily march across I-10 with SCs every 160 miles from CA to FL and say: "This is what you're getting - deal with it!"
--
Similar threads
- Poll
