-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
For computer read PIC controller costing pennies.
What might be more of a problem is the insertion force of the CHAdeMO into and exertion out of a small box or adapter. And live 50kW plugs on the ground.
What might be more of a problem is the insertion force of the CHAdeMO into and exertion out of a small box or adapter. And live 50kW plugs on the ground.
you'd be waiting for hours to charge a Model S using this power level.... I just don't see a family doing this after traveling just ~200 miles
I am visualizing a box with a padded back and an appropriately shaped coated hook to slip into those spokes of the back wheel...
That is very wise, in my experience. Most people can't imagine how they would use a new product, and give bogus answers based on past experience that isn't applicable.
Well one would hope they would not blindly follow the data, either. You can't assume the data will remain the same if you change some of the input variables!
My Model S will be used much like my Roadster, only I would take more road trips with it. That's a bias. I would take more road trips with it because it has more trunk capacity, more comfort, more passenger capacity, more range. Also charging infrastructure is currently nonexistent here, and I expect it will get better (fast DC chargers on the 401!).
The data from my Roadster shows that I charge at 40A most of the time. What it won't show is why. It won't show how much I wish I had 70A available (or better) when on road trips. It kinda becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy when the lack of high power charging infrastructure on the road limits the number of high-power charges I do.
As valuable as the Roadster data is, you have to take it with a grain of salt, too. You need to understand why those patterns currently exist, and understand how they will change with a different product.
They're also extremely busy, and most of them aren't driving an EV daily. It certainly doesn't hurt to express your views.
Good points.
Two years ago I saw JB give this talk during which he showed this slide:
Concluding that most the time spent charging was using the MC120 (now called the spare connector) and thus 120V, 12A was good enough for most folks. Can anyone remember why this data might be biased?
Whereas a company might be OK to let various EVSEs plug into their vehicle (for instance "who knows what" could be on the other side of a J1772 adapter), I am thinking they might not be so flexible about external DC chargers going to their pack. With AC, their own charger will handle turning AC into appropriate DC and charging the batteries "safely". If someone manages to "Macguiver" some random off-board DC charger to their charge port, they might be at risk of battery damage if the external charger doesn't behave their same as their own "factory authorized" charger.
Was there a conclusion before that we are supposed to remember?
Right now I can think of some reasons it might be biased:
#1: Stuck charging off of 120V because the customer was waiting for a MC240 to become available...
#2: Stuck charging off of 120V because the customer was waiting for permits to get an HPC installed...
#3: Stuck charging off of 120V because there were no public HPCs nor J1772s with adapters until very recently.
(I bet the 240V@24A has gone up these days from people using the J1772 cable at public J1772 stations.)
Basically #1. Also the HPC which was previously supposed to come with the car got turned into an expensive option.
Would like to see an updated histogram.
Would like to see an updated histogram.
I suspect a new histogram would be somewhat different. It was almost a year before I even took the cable tie off the spare connnector.
SByer
'08 #383
My thoughts:
- CHAdeMO is insufficient for real long term targets (600Mi range, 340Wh/mi for an SUV, target a 30min 80% charge).
- The current connector standards aren't optimal - J1772 really kind of sucks, or at least the plastic-y crap we see now does (and the combo looks just plain stupid), and connecting an adapter cable is nearly no extra work.
- Getting a standard protocol robust enough and cross-tested enough to use the same pins for AC and DC across mfrs. has a snowball's chance in hell.
- Things are still very fluid.
I look at that and say "gee, it'd be nice to have one standard, but it wouldn't let my battery/connector/recharge time stand out".
If you believed that you could always get an adapter down to 1/2 brick sized, and support it and the connector off the side of the car, why wouldn't you go with a new connector as long as things were this fluid?
And, don't forget, the WAF of the Roadster connector is pretty close to zero. CHAdeMO is pretty close to that, J1772 not far behind that. Mennenkes is quite a bit better, but still not really in the same ballpark as that sleek, light Model S connector.
And what if you think that, in 3 years, you could get the cost of an external DC charger down to that of the high-powered on-board AC converters. And the size down to a shoebox. But you can't quite bet on that completely, yet.
I think that Tesla has made a valid, not easily dismissible bet. It will be interesting to see how it plays out.
- CHAdeMO is insufficient for real long term targets (600Mi range, 340Wh/mi for an SUV, target a 30min 80% charge).
- The current connector standards aren't optimal - J1772 really kind of sucks, or at least the plastic-y crap we see now does (and the combo looks just plain stupid), and connecting an adapter cable is nearly no extra work.
- Getting a standard protocol robust enough and cross-tested enough to use the same pins for AC and DC across mfrs. has a snowball's chance in hell.
- Things are still very fluid.
I look at that and say "gee, it'd be nice to have one standard, but it wouldn't let my battery/connector/recharge time stand out".
If you believed that you could always get an adapter down to 1/2 brick sized, and support it and the connector off the side of the car, why wouldn't you go with a new connector as long as things were this fluid?
And, don't forget, the WAF of the Roadster connector is pretty close to zero. CHAdeMO is pretty close to that, J1772 not far behind that. Mennenkes is quite a bit better, but still not really in the same ballpark as that sleek, light Model S connector.
And what if you think that, in 3 years, you could get the cost of an external DC charger down to that of the high-powered on-board AC converters. And the size down to a shoebox. But you can't quite bet on that completely, yet.
I think that Tesla has made a valid, not easily dismissible bet. It will be interesting to see how it plays out.
Norbert
TSLA will win
Yes, given the amazing Tesla connector as an alternative, the reason to use CHAdeMO would be the future network built with Nissan's support, which seem to become a 50 kW network. And while I'm happy for Leaf owners about that, it won't really be the network which Model S and Bluestar owners will want, and I'll just assume that Bluestar will also have a 90 kW ability. That's a major selling point. 50 kW and 90 kW is a significant difference. Since Tesla has already recognized the need to start building the network (at least initially), we at least won't have to wait for others to discover the business model. And with Tesla's larger range, it won't need as many stations, and not necessarily in the same locations.
While CHAdeMO is theoretically capable of more than 50 kW, it seems that would happen only far in the future if at all. (And even if there were select stations with more than 50 kW, they might be frequently occupied by Leafs using them at 50 kW). So the alternative would be SAE DC combo (or Mennekes DC combo), but that's probably still more than a year away from being even agreed upon, and there still aren't any plans announced to actually implement either that or anything else at 90 kW, by the "big three" in Detroit (or any european manufacturer). Of those, Ford is apparently closest to building a pure EV, but we wouldn't know the DC rate it might support, if any, and whether Ford would be willing to support a DC network (one which would be useful to Tesla owners). And after seeing the Tesla connector, I just wouldn't be happy having to use those big combo connectors. One could even argue that if Tesla wants 90 kW (as in: more than 50 kW), which is certainly what I want as a future customer, using some other connector might be helping the future competition more than anyone else, and make things only more difficult (and more expensive) for Tesla, still being a small company.
While CHAdeMO is theoretically capable of more than 50 kW, it seems that would happen only far in the future if at all. (And even if there were select stations with more than 50 kW, they might be frequently occupied by Leafs using them at 50 kW). So the alternative would be SAE DC combo (or Mennekes DC combo), but that's probably still more than a year away from being even agreed upon, and there still aren't any plans announced to actually implement either that or anything else at 90 kW, by the "big three" in Detroit (or any european manufacturer). Of those, Ford is apparently closest to building a pure EV, but we wouldn't know the DC rate it might support, if any, and whether Ford would be willing to support a DC network (one which would be useful to Tesla owners). And after seeing the Tesla connector, I just wouldn't be happy having to use those big combo connectors. One could even argue that if Tesla wants 90 kW (as in: more than 50 kW), which is certainly what I want as a future customer, using some other connector might be helping the future competition more than anyone else, and make things only more difficult (and more expensive) for Tesla, still being a small company.
Last edited:
So why not offer CHADeMO as an additional option ? It would not need to be externally accessible, a connector inside the frunk would be fine with me. I'd happily pay $2k for such an option.
Without it I can't see getting a Model S. I seriously doubt Tesla will install a hundred DC chargers in Norway, and without them I'd be limited to 16A charging. No way we go on a road trip and wait 24 hours for a recharge. So it seems the Leaf will eventually be replaced with a Leaf "2.0" and not a Model S
I think this is where Tesla have dropped the ball.... the reality in Europe is that a CHAdeMO network is being built and we will have thousands of Tesla competitor cars driving around and using it. I'd much rather work with my Leaf friends on building a mutually beneficial network than try to build a proprietary one for Tesla.
I think Tesla have excluded a very large number of potential customers in Europe by removing access to the CHAdeMO fast charge network. For me the Model S would be an ICE replacement and I cannot use it if I can only drive 200 miles with the family and then wait for hours to recharge.
Norbert
TSLA will win
Why do you think there won't be such an option? I was referring to the primary connector. I'd expect that DC doesn't require a conversion, only a translation of signaling, which would require not much more than a small micro-controller, if it can't be done in software, although I wouldn't know what it takes to make CHAdeMO's extra pins happy. It seems to me that the door on the port would allow an additional mechanical connection which would hold a box just large enough for a CHAdeMO plug, and that could be locked to the car.
Without it I can't see getting a Model S. I seriously doubt Tesla will install a hundred DC chargers in Norway, and without them I'd be limited to 16A charging. No way we go on a road trip and wait 24 hours for a recharge. So it seems the Leaf will eventually be replaced with a Leaf "2.0" and not a Model S
100 chargers would be $2.5 million at $25,000 each. Not exactly an astronomical sum, however if using $500 per car, it would require selling 5000 Model S or Bluestars, so I wouldn't expect it to happen very quickly. However, on the major highways, it might give you a number of 90 kW chargers sooner than anything else.
I agree that CHAdeMO is not the Network that Tesla customers want BUT it will be the network that is actually on the ground in Europe and Tesla should use that to accelerate sales.
I do not believe that Tesla will be able to finance a practicable fast charge network in Europe (probably true of the US as well). I also doubt that many third party sites will spend thousands installing a proprietary solution when for the same (less?) money they will be able to install CHAdeMO that supports thousands (millions?) of cars.
Norbert
TSLA will win
A 90 kW charger has the advantage that it can serve more cars in the same time. 50 kW is just a bit slow for long trips, though not impossible. I do agree it would be nice to have a CHAdeMO adapter box, as I wrote above. But with the range of the Model S, and 90 kW chargers on main routes, not many will have to use it very often.
Similar threads
