Here are a couple pics of that dummy/test-box so you can see what the inlet looks like:
Obviously missing L1 and L2 pins here on this box.
Obviously missing L1 and L2 pins here on this box.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
EV_de
Model SP10/XP9 EU ZOE#47
Don't know, but probably. I don't think the Mennekes inlet is bigger than that translucent ring (probably for LEDs) around the new Tesla inlet. I suppose I should have had a pocket ruler on me for scale when I took photos.
From Doug's photos.
That looks very flimsy to me and something that would break off if someone brushed past or snagged their coat on it in a car park.
That looks very flimsy to me and something that would break off if someone brushed past or snagged their coat on it in a car park.
NigelM
Recovering Member
The hinge seemed as solid as any other fuel/charge door to me. When closed it sits slightly below the level of the bodywork so shouldn't snag.
They're still debating what the right thing to do is. IIRC they're leaning towards an adapter for old connector to new (which would have to be short cable with connectors on each end due to the weight of the roadster's connector).
Edit: And I see other folks here heard different stories; I'm either not remembering correctly or it's REALLY still under debate :smile:
Last edited:
An adapter for CHAdeMO would need to incorporate some active electronics to translate the signaling.
William13
Active Member
The battery engineer was aware of the need for electronics/ software need for CHAdeMO adapter and wants to make one but was unsure if they could do one that is UL approved but indicated that owners might buy grey market adapters.
It was specifically out of public view, and I was told it was a prototype with no case so wasn't meant to be seen by anyone.
They don't have anything ready to show with regards to DC charging yet.
People I talked to seemed down on CHAdeMO thinking it will be a short term solution and they questioned if they would "bother" making an adapter to it.
Also, indications of the SAE being too slow so they had to do something on their own.
Perhaps given all the other pictures, this is redundant, but I took this today:
I measured the size and it is roughly 35mm in diameter... (Slightly oval so a hair wider in one direction and a hair more narrow in the other.)
Many people were remarking that the UMC2.0 cable was very thin for something that could carry 40amps. All I could really get from them is that they said they worked on reducing the insulation to the bare minimum where some other cables are overly fat because they have more insulation than they need.
So that socket can be use all these ways:
#1: With UMC2.0 up to 40amps from all the usual household sockets. (NEMA5-15, 14-50, etc.) (9.6kW)
#2: With a small adapter (not needing UMC) from Tesla to J1772 (up to 70amps/17kW)
#3: From home HPC up to 80A. (20kW)
#4: From a DC fast charger up to 90kW.
Note, DC fast charger is purported to take 3 phase AC input, normally 440/480V, but it might accept other voltages.
I was told that fast charging is not as nice to the batteries, so they would recommend against using it unless you must.
Also, base model will have one 10kW charger included, and a second could be added as an option for 20kW (up to 80A) charging for those that need it.
A good fraction of customers could probably get by with just the 10kW and UMC2 for home charging.
Also, mainly for DPeilow :
The one or two 10kW's are positioned under the rear seat and if you have two then you have used up all the space.
Basically if/when they decide to have a 3phase input, it would likely be a whole different charger, not 3 of the 10kW.
Someone basically said doing 3 10kW would be poor integration and it would make more sense to put one larger 3 phase in place of the 2 10kW units.
And none of this was a confirmation or acknowledgement that they are actually committed to doing that... Just that they have been thinking about it.
Also, indications of the SAE being too slow so they had to do something on their own.
Perhaps given all the other pictures, this is redundant, but I took this today:
I measured the size and it is roughly 35mm in diameter... (Slightly oval so a hair wider in one direction and a hair more narrow in the other.)
Many people were remarking that the UMC2.0 cable was very thin for something that could carry 40amps. All I could really get from them is that they said they worked on reducing the insulation to the bare minimum where some other cables are overly fat because they have more insulation than they need.
So that socket can be use all these ways:
#1: With UMC2.0 up to 40amps from all the usual household sockets. (NEMA5-15, 14-50, etc.) (9.6kW)
#2: With a small adapter (not needing UMC) from Tesla to J1772 (up to 70amps/17kW)
#3: From home HPC up to 80A. (20kW)
#4: From a DC fast charger up to 90kW.
Note, DC fast charger is purported to take 3 phase AC input, normally 440/480V, but it might accept other voltages.
I was told that fast charging is not as nice to the batteries, so they would recommend against using it unless you must.
Also, base model will have one 10kW charger included, and a second could be added as an option for 20kW (up to 80A) charging for those that need it.
A good fraction of customers could probably get by with just the 10kW and UMC2 for home charging.
Also, mainly for DPeilow :
The one or two 10kW's are positioned under the rear seat and if you have two then you have used up all the space.
Basically if/when they decide to have a 3phase input, it would likely be a whole different charger, not 3 of the 10kW.
Someone basically said doing 3 10kW would be poor integration and it would make more sense to put one larger 3 phase in place of the 2 10kW units.
And none of this was a confirmation or acknowledgement that they are actually committed to doing that... Just that they have been thinking about it.
Last edited:
I heard the same as you. Basically that they haven't finalized what exactly to do. Along with everything else, I heard repeatedly "we won't abandon Roadster owners."
& "We know a lot of Model S customers already have Roadsters."
Best I could see was that it is intended to automatically pop open like a gas door would, then you manually push it closed when done.
I was actually thankful it looked simple not some sort of motorized robot arm. I am still thinking the motorized door handles are a bit much and could be subject to reliability concerns.
Someone said there was a menu item on the touch screen to open the charge port door, so you could do it without getting next to it if you needed.
Seems to be purely for guidance / keying with no sign it has any other purpose.
The bottom of the plug has a notch where the car will grab into it whenever you lock the doors.
Also you may notice two small 'nubs' in the center of the L1/L2 hots.
Those are to keep fingers from getting into the holes. The pins must have a small hole in the center so that only they are able to insert.
Last edited:
Similar threads
