Tesla's ambitions apparent from Supercharger network -- No comparison

[dgpcolorado]

Today, the Supercharger network is superior. No contest.

Tesla's disadvantage is that they're building the Supercharger network by themselves. Numerous partners (yes, including government) are contributing the the growth in CHAdeMO/CCS.

Long term, I think the Supercharger advantage will diminish, not widen.

Part of the problem with the Chademo and CCS "networks" (I use the term loosely) is that nobody is really in charge. There is no strategic planning of the networks nor for the positioning and maintenance of the chargers, and no one entity is responsible for them. The growth in Chademo/CCS is just a hodgepodge with no overall vision or eye toward facilitating long distance travel.

And I just don't see that changing in the foreseeable future.

 

[Breezy]

Part of the problem with the Chademo and CCS "networks" (I use the term loosely) is that nobody is really in charge. There is no strategic planning of the networks nor for the positioning and maintenance of the chargers, and no one entity is responsible for them.

Sure. That's the flipside of not having one organization centrally planning locations. Nationwide/continent wide, I don't think anyone can argue that Superchargers are currently far superior in terms of planning, positioning/amenities and maintenance.

OTOH, not having a centralized planning, funding and construction authority removes the bottlenecks of centralized planning, funding and construction.

 

[realdb2]

Part of the problem with the Chademo and CCS "networks" (I use the term loosely) is that nobody is really in charge. There is no strategic planning of the networks nor for the positioning and maintenance of the chargers, and no one entity is responsible for them. The growth in Chademo/CCS is just a hodgepodge with no overall vision or eye toward facilitating long distance travel.

And I just don't see that changing in the foreseeable future.

I agree with this. GM doesn't want to sink millions and millions into a charging network their competitors can use without investing a dime. I suppose you could somehow limit the access with RFID cards but they are not really in that game.

As far as non-Tesla manufacturers using Superchargers there are two sides to that coin. Yes the others might not want to use Superchargers in order to save face but the other side is Tesla would not let other manufacturers use it for free, nor should they. They have always said they are open to sharing as long as the partners share cost. We don't know the details of that cost sharing.

Ultimately I agree it's disappointing to see GM sitting on the DCFC infrastructure sidelines. Here's hoping they have a deal or plan in the works and are simply not ready to announce anything yet. Wishful thinking I suppose.

 

[dgpcolorado]

...Ultimately I agree it's disappointing to see GM sitting on the DCFC infrastructure sidelines. Here's hoping they have a deal or plan in the works and are simply not ready to announce anything yet. Wishful thinking I suppose.

Disappointing? Yes. Surprising? No. I'd have been astonished if GM showed the slightest interest in making the Bolt a practical long distance car. The Bolt is an afterthought to GM, sort of a "me, too" car to pretend that they are serious about EVs. They are not. (IMO.)

 

[McRat]

I'd agree the Bolt is not targeted at interstate travel. Like most Americans, it would one of the cars at the home. We tend to have more than 1 car.

GM sells 2 vehicles that run off of juice in California:

A limited range (82mi EPA BEV) low cost urban commuter that can be had for well under $17k after rebates but including all taxes. It sells poorly.

An unlimited range (53mi EPA PHEV, ~400mi more on gas) mid-priced compact sedan that is $25k after rebates including all taxes. It sells poorly.

The Cadillac model is being dropped, which redefined poor sales.

Soon, they will add Bolt, which will be ~$29k. Best guess, sales will be poor.

Are you starting to see a pattern yet?

Low cost cars that sell poorly, high priced model that didn't sell at all.

Extended, effectively unlimited range (furthest two gas stations in USA is 245mi IIRC) did not sell. Cheap effective Urban cars didn't sell either. Even with huge rebates.

Anyone seriously believe that GM adding a grid of interstate charging stations will change that?

"Oh, with the new GM grid, I can drive 2 models of the GM EV coast to coast now, and the price is low, NOW suddenly I'll consider it! One model was not enough, but 2 models changes EVERYTHING!"

The problem is not actual range, it's perceived range. Most Volt owners seldom use the gas extender. People don't drive as far as they think they do. However, amazingly enough, one of the major complaints about the Volt is Range Anxiety, even though it doesn't actually exist.

Tesla sells a lot of EVs and the SuperCharger network is prime marketing tool. However, Tesla doesn't sell a lot of cars, just a lot of EV cars. All EV sales combined is a small sliver of the US auto pie. It's all about perception.

As soon as you mention Range and Charging Times you alienate potential buyers. Range is never even mentioned with ICE vehicles, nor is refueling time. However, most drivers in the real world, neither would affect them by getting an EV. First, you don't drive as far as you think. Second, is "refueling" an EV is normally done while you are sleeping or working. It actually takes less time to refuel an EV than a gas car, since the time is virtually zero. You hop in and the "tank" is always full.

For GM to set up a grid would be counter-productive. Their lineup is low-priced second cars. Marketing that "you can go coast to coast now" is unlikely to increase sales, but only reinforce the idea that EVs are a PITA to use.

Perception conflicts with reality.

 

[pvogel]

I'll speak for myself here. I've wanted a BEV since the EV-1, but I don't want to own and maintain two cars for one driver (me) in the family. I understand the vast majority of my driving is within 25 miles of home (50 miles round trip) BUT I also have regular occasions to go further than that with friends or family. Originally things like regular visits to Monterey Bay or Muir Woods (lots of altitude gain and at least 100 miles round trip) now more varied with trips all around CA, AZ, OR. What made the difference for me when I put the money down on the model X was fundamentally the supercharger network announcement and the roadmap for those chargers that made the trips I do make on a regular basis feasible. Without that I would not buy a BEV. I would have considered a Volt but it lacks the cargo space/length I need.

 

[flankspeed8]

If you're interested to know the GM CEO's position on contributing to a Level 3 infrastructure to support the Bolt, check out the big middle finger she gave any potential customers last week.

I agree to some point, but I don't see any of the old guard auto manufactures ever getting into the fueling business for their EV's, even if it is built into the initial purchase price. Good on Tesla for what they have done and their innovation, but once millions of Tesla's are on the road getting "free power" I hate to think what kind of long term liability this will be on their balance sheet regardless of the $2000 hold back per car. A well cared for EV could last for decades. Is Tesla really going to foot the power bill for the long term? Should we ever expect them to? I think people should pay per their use as it will be the most equitable solution and prevent overuse of the resources be a relative small few.

 

[CTemp222]

If you're interested to know the GM CEO's position on contributing to a Level 3 infrastructure to support the Bolt, check out the big middle finger she gave any potential customers last week.

Ha!

- - - Updated - - -

I agree to some point, but I don't see any of the old guard auto manufactures ever getting into the fueling business for their EV's, even if it is built into the initial purchase price. Good on Tesla for what they have done and their innovation, but once millions of Tesla's are on the road getting "free power" I hate to think what kind of long term liability this will be on their balance sheet regardless of the $2000 hold back per car. A well cared for EV could last for decades. Is Tesla really going to foot the power bill for the long term? Should we ever expect them to? I think people should pay per their use as it will be the most equitable solution and prevent overuse of the resources be a relative small few.

I think that after 5-10 years of owning your car you no longer get free supercharging, or they could give you 5,000 miles of free supercharging per year to discourage daily refills. Or just increasing the price of the cars would work too. Also, once their supercharging network is fully established I don't think they will pay any power bills. This would be because ultimately superchargers will have solar panels and battery storage. But that could be 10 years away from know for all we know...

- - - Updated - - -

I can charge at nissan dealerships without immediately buying leaf.

yea... but Teslas look sooooo much better

 

[Chris TX]

Ha!

- - - Updated - - -


I think that after 5-10 years of owning your car you no longer get free supercharging, or they could give you 5,000 miles of free supercharging per year to discourage daily refills. Or just increasing the price of the cars would work too. Also, once their supercharging network is fully established I don't think they will pay any power bills. This would be because ultimately superchargers will have solar panels and battery storage. But that could be 10 years away from know for all we know...

Agreed. Tesla's vision is for Superchargers to have solar panels and grid batteries where it makes sense. The Supercharger network is on schedule to be a profit center for Tesla, generating power and not incurring power spike penalties where they are billed. I keep seeing naysayers that rant and rave about Superchargers being a huge money pit for Tesla, when it's actually been well funded by Model S and now Model X purchases.

 

[cpa]

Another significant advantage for the Supercharger network is that all locations have multiple charging stalls. I believe that the smallest is Madison, Wisconsin with three. Older, more rural installations vary between four and six generally. Newer ones like Fresno are receiving ten. Unless one is traveling along popular highways at peak travel times, there generally will not be a wait, or a very short one.

Other charging locations frequently do not have more than one or two plugs. If one shows up and they are taken, well, that is just too bad, or unlucky.

And also stated above, many places do not take responsibility for the charging apparatuses. They could be out of service and may take a long time before they are repaired.

 

[jerry33]

Other charging locations frequently do not have more than one or two plugs. If one shows up and they are taken, well, that is just too bad, or unlucky.

And also stated above, many places do not take responsibility for the charging apparatuses. They could be out of service and may take a long time before they are repaired.

These are the two big problems with other chargers (and sometimes destination chargers as well). If you can't have a reasonable expectation that there will be a working charging spot available, then they might as well not have put it in. I've been to a number of events that had chargers and the Leaf owners, who were counting on being able to charge, couldn't because the charger was on the blink.