Why Tesla doesn't make a CCS adapter like Chademo?

[stopcrazypp]

Could happen I suppose, but I think that since both of those markets already have a decent Supercharger network, that it won't.

The supercharger network does not really affect the CCS and CHAdeMO networks, which develops pretty much independently. Keep in mind Tesla made a CHAdeMO adapter for the European connector too, so they aren't solely concerned about serving Japan even in that case. Given the amount of manufacturers signed up to CCS (even Tesla is signed up for the next gen version), CCS should greatly outnumber the supercharger network eventually (and although the locations are typically not ideal, it'll be enough to have it make sense to make an adapter).

 

[brianman]

It seems you are just restating my point. Yes, it is possible and would take little resources or time.

So the reason you don't see one yet is financial strategy, not technical limitations.

Conclusion that I think is incorrect. Priorities, not financial strategy, is my conclusion.

 

[TonyWilliams]

CCS only is becoming a thing in Europe:
Europe Has Installed 2,750 CCS Combo DC Fast Chargers

It may also happen in the US if VW's infrastructure investment opts to not install chargers with CHAdeMO connectors.

We are all well aware of the efforts of German politicians and German auto manufacturers to promote CCS throughout Europe... that is no secret. They tried to do this through legal means in the EU Parliament as well as within the German state. Both efforts failed to make CCS-Combo 2 to be the sole charging standard. Tesla is still fully able to install their private charging network without having to add any competitors at their privately owned station. In addition CHAdeMO is an official European DC charging standard, as well as the international IEC "System A".

This issue is so well-known that the court orders and agreements over the Volkswagen Dieselgate scandal specifically prohibits them from only promoting their own charging standard.

So the basis for your speculation is not accurate. VW is required to install CHAdeMO as well as J1772 in California and the United States of America.

 

[TonyWilliams]

The supercharger network does not really affect the CCS and CHAdeMO networks, which develops pretty much independently. Keep in mind Tesla made a CHAdeMO adapter for the European connector too, so they aren't solely concerned about serving Japan even in that case. Given the amount of manufacturers signed up to CCS (even Tesla is signed up for the next gen version), CCS should greatly outnumber the supercharger network eventually (and although the locations are typically not ideal, it'll be enough to have it make sense to make an adapter).

Tesla also signed up for the CHAdeMO Association years ago. They couldn't sign up for a CCS organization because one didn't exist until the last year.

I am confident, however, that just as Tesla has produced a CHAdeMO adapter for worldwide use, that they will also produce the many regional DC fast charge adapters wanted / needed:

1) GB/T - China
2) SAE-CCS-Combo 1 - USA / Canada
3) CCS-Combo 2 - Europe

 

[TonyWilliams]

So what is needed for tesla to talk to ccs?
What conversion in comms are needed?

Virtually all cars and all DC charging communication (Tesla Supercharger, GB/T, and CHAdeMO) speak in "CAN".

CCS uses PLC that is neither compatible with the cars nor with electric utility PLC communication.

So, some electric gizmo will be required to translate PLC to CAN.

 

[TonyWilliams]

CCS only is becoming a thing in Europe:
Europe Has Installed 2,750 CCS Combo DC Fast Chargers

This statement is either wrong or misleading depending on how you want to interpret the words.

Yes, there very likely is 2750 CCS-Combo 2 plugs throughout Europe, but there are also 4000 CHAdeMO plugs, too.

Many, if not most, of those two plugs are combined into one charger. That is the trend going forward; multiple plugs on one charger.

 

[Jonas_man]

Today at the service center i asked about a CCS adaptor and CHAdeMO high power. but no luck. they said "no rumours yet"!

 

[davewill]

...Keep in mind Tesla made a CHAdeMO adapter for the European connector too, so they aren't solely concerned about serving Japan even in that case. ...

Of course they made one. They didn't have to do much besides change the connector, and do testing for EU. It was low-hanging fruit. I just see no motivation for a CCS adapter equal to the motivation they had for the CHAdeMO one.

 

[stopcrazypp]

We are all well aware of the efforts of German politicians and German auto manufacturers to promote CCS throughout Europe... that is no secret. They tried to do this through legal means in the EU Parliament as well as within the German state. Both efforts failed to make CCS-Combo 2 to be the sole charging standard. Tesla is still fully able to install their private charging network without having to add any competitors at their privately owned station. In addition CHAdeMO is an official European DC charging standard, as well as the international IEC "System A".

This issue is so well-known that the court orders and agreements over the Volkswagen Dieselgate scandal specifically prohibits them from only promoting their own charging standard.

So the basis for your speculation is not accurate. VW is required to install CHAdeMO as well as J1772 in California and the United States of America.

As for as I know, the settlement says that VW can't use money on initiatives that would only benefit their own brand. Installing CCS-only would not violate that given other big EV players would also use those chargers (BMW and GM). Their Express Charging Corridor project had plenty of CCS-only chargers. Could you point to where the settlement requires them to install CHAdeMO at every CCS installation?

 

[stopcrazypp]

Tesla also signed up for the CHAdeMO Association years ago. They couldn't sign up for a CCS organization because one didn't exist until the last year.

I am confident, however, that just as Tesla has produced a CHAdeMO adapter for worldwide use, that they will also produce the many regional DC fast charge adapters wanted / needed:

1) GB/T - China
2) SAE-CCS-Combo 1 - USA / Canada
3) CCS-Combo 2 - Europe

We discussed this previously. Tesla signed up as a regular member for CHAdeMO so they can make the adapter. They signed as a core member in the CCS Charin group which means Tesla will be participating in development (not just as a user of the standard). There's a major difference between the two.

 

[MP3Mike]

Of course they mode one. They didn't have to do much besides change the connector, and do testing for EU. It was low-hanging fruit. I just see no motivation for a CCS adapter equal to the motivation they had for the CHAdeMO one.

But once high power third-party charging is available there might be some motivation. (To either create a CCS adapter or update the CHAdeMO adapter to support faster charging.)

 

[TonyWilliams]

As for as I know, the settlement says that VW can't use money on initiatives that would only benefit their own brand. Installing CCS-only would not violate that given other big EV players would also use those chargers (BMW and GM). Their Express Charging Corridor project had plenty of CCS-only chargers. Could you point to where the settlement requires them to install CHAdeMO at every CCS installation?

I do not have the link handy, but it's relatively easy to find. To my knowledge, Volkswagen only just completed all the court and administrative processes to move forward. The requirement is absolutely that they must install all available public charging. Clearly, the regulators and courts are not keen to give Volkswagen the ability to promote their own product as a punishment. Hopefully, this makes sense, however Volkswagen is allowed to own and profit from whatever charging infrastructure they install.

With an order of magnitude greater number of CHAdeMO capable vehicles over CCS, if Volkswagen wants to make their "penalty business venture" successful and profitable, they will offer all the necessary charge equipment.

The East and West Coast corridors that were done with IEF manufactured 63 amp / 25kW CCS-only charge stations through ChargePoint, which was funded by BMW and Volkswagen, had nothing to do with the Dieselgate penalties. Not all of those stations on the coasts were the low powered CCS only. Some were the Tritium Veeville 125a / "50kW" units that includes CHAdeMO.

Obviously, just like Tesla only installs their protocol charger, and Nissan installs mostly their protocol charger, I fully expect both BMW and Volkswagen to continue with that same concept of dealerships and elsewhere. Why not? It's important to note that Nissan, BMW and Volkswagen have all paid for dual protocol chargers to be used by all cars, and that all three have formal agreements in both South Africa, Europe as well as North America to offer dual protocol charging.

 

[TonyWilliams]

We discussed this previously. Tesla signed up as a regular member for CHAdeMO so they can make the adapter. They signed as a core member in the CCS Charin group which means Tesla will be participating in development (not just as a user of the standard). There's a major difference between the two.

It's not required to be a member of CHAdeMO to build an adapter. The CHAdeMO Association works as a Congress where people vote on changes. Tesla is fully capable of influencing any changes they would like with CHAdeMO.

Our company builds CHAdeMO compliant equipment as well a writes CHAdeMO compliant software, but we are not a CHAdeMO member. We may be in the future. We have also been asked on numerous occasions to join the CCS organization (not to be confused with Society of Automotive Engineers in the United States). We have not done that to date, but likely will in the future.

The "major differences" that you attribute aren't really what you believe them to be.

 

[TonyWilliams]

But once high power third-party charging is available there might be some motivation. (To either create a CCS adapter or update the CHAdeMO adapter to support faster charging.)

While it's certainly possible and likely easy to upgrade their current CHAdeMO adapter for up to 350 amp duty, I wonder if company politics won't get in the way?

It's a little hard to brag how awesome-o your Supercharger is if any Tesla can charge just as fast at a CHAdeMO station or a CCS station ;-)

 

[Naonak]

But once high power third-party charging is available there might be some motivation. (To either create a CCS adapter or update the CHAdeMO adapter to support faster charging.)

Can the current CHAdeMO adapter not support higher voltage? I thought it was rated up to 450v? I am probably misremembering that though... but I was under the impression it would be able to support up to near SC level of charging if there ever was a station that supported 100 or 150 kW charging.

 

[Saghost]

Can the current CHAdeMO adapter not support higher voltage? I thought it was rated up to 450v? I am probably misremembering that though... but I was under the impression it would be able to support up to near SC level of charging if there ever was a station that supported 100 or 150 kW charging.

It's not a question of voltage - all DCFC happens at just slightly over the battery pack voltage. The question is current, and I don't think any of us know the answer, though it was correctly pointed out to me that the dataplate on the adapter they sell right now says 125A max current on it:

 

[stopcrazypp]

I do not have the link handy, but it's relatively easy to find. To my knowledge, Volkswagen only just completed all the court and administrative processes to move forward. The requirement is absolutely that they must install all available public charging. Clearly, the regulators and courts are not keen to give Volkswagen the ability to promote their own product as a punishment. Hopefully, this makes sense, however Volkswagen is allowed to own and profit from whatever charging infrastructure they install.

With an order of magnitude greater number of CHAdeMO capable vehicles over CCS, if Volkswagen wants to make their "penalty business venture" successful and profitable, they will offer all the necessary charge equipment.

The East and West Coast corridors that were done with IEF manufactured 63 amp / 25kW CCS-only charge stations through ChargePoint, which was funded by BMW and Volkswagen, had nothing to do with the Dieselgate penalties. Not all of those stations on the coasts were the low powered CCS only. Some were the Tritium Veeville 125a / "50kW" units that includes CHAdeMO.

Obviously, just like Tesla only installs their protocol charger, and Nissan installs mostly their protocol charger, I fully expect both BMW and Volkswagen to continue with that same concept of dealerships and elsewhere. Why not? It's important to note that Nissan, BMW and Volkswagen have all paid for dual protocol chargers to be used by all cars, and that all three have formal agreements in both South Africa, Europe as well as North America to offer dual protocol charging.

I did a quick google and didn't find anything other than Nissan suggesting that CHAdeMO be required to be installed as part of the settlement (for obvious reasons).

As for the corridor program, I am 100% aware it was not all CCS-only and that it was not part of the settlement. What I am saying is I see no evidence that if VW suggested doing the same thing (a mix of dual protocol units and CCS-only units), that the proposal would not be allowed as part of the settlement.

 

[stopcrazypp]

It's not required to be a member of CHAdeMO to build an adapter.
The CHAdeMO Association works as a Congress where people vote on changes. Tesla is fully capable of influencing any changes they would like with CHAdeMO.

Our company builds CHAdeMO compliant equipment as well a writes CHAdeMO compliant software, but we are not a CHAdeMO member. We may be in the future. We have also been asked on numerous occasions to join the CCS organization (not to be confused with Society of Automotive Engineers in the United States). We have not done that to date, but likely will in the future.

The "major differences" that you attribute aren't really what you believe them to be.

CHAdeMO was not a open standard a few years ago (this was also partially why other manufacturers did not want to adopt it). The only way to get access to it back then was to become a member. Of course now that it is a JIS/IEC standard it is not necessary to be a member.

See discussion below (and back then there was lots of talk about having to reverse engineer the protocol):
Open CHAdeMO

 

[Jeff N]

I did a quick google and didn't find anything other than Nissan suggesting that CHAdeMO be required to be installed as part of the settlement (for obvious reasons).

As for the corridor program, I am 100% aware it was not all CCS-only and that it was not part of the settlement. What I am saying is I see no evidence that if VW suggested doing the same thing (a mix of dual protocol units and CCS-only units), that the proposal would not be allowed as part of the settlement.

The actual language is in Appendix C section 2.5.4 (National) and 3.3.2.5 (California):

Any charging infrastructure proposed by the Settling Defendants shall have the ability to service all plug-in ZEVs using non-proprietary connectors as the field evolves by: (i) if necessary, using multiple connectors; and/or (ii) using charging protocols and approaches that anticipate and address the evolving field of vehicle charging. Settling Defendants are free to support evolving standards in the field of non-proprietary connectors, and are not obligated to provide equal support for different types of non-proprietary connectors;

In other words, they should support both CHAdeMO and CCS but are free to phase out CHAdeMO over time if it represents a shrinking part of the marketplace by have a higher ratio of CCS plugs.

 

[stopcrazypp]

The actual language is in Appendix C section 2.5.4 (National) and 3.3.2.5 (California):

In other words, they should support both CHAdeMO and CCS but are free to phase out CHAdeMO over time if it represents a shrinking part of the marketplace by have a higher ratio of CCS plugs.

Yep, as I read it, no ban on VW putting CCS-only. With that language, it's unlikely for them to allow VW to have all chargers with CCS-only, but I don't see how a similar strategy to the corridor program (a mix) would not be allowed.

And looking into the next year, the combined sales of the Bolt, i3, eGolf, Ioniq would likely hammer the Leaf and the Soul EV, so VW can legitimately say the market is going toward CCS.