-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
The installed base resists complete abandonment of CHAdeMO, but it is the market share that determines the future direction of charger installations. The EV market in such an early stage that current installed base isn't that significant.
For Tesla I count them as a neutral party at the moment given it's an adapter (the cars can immediately switch to CCS via a different adapter).
SAE Combo is a common name for the flavor of CCS deployed in North America. Another is J1772 CCS. It is Combo1 pictured in Chevy Spark EV Forum • View topic - DC fast charging: J1772 CCS vs CHAdeMO vs Supercharger, etc..
These all use SAE Combo terminology:
2015 Spark EV Electric Vehicles | Chevrolet
The e-Golf is all Golf. No gas. VW does electric.
BMW i3 with Range Extender - Features & Specs - Standard Features - BMW North America
The flavor of CCS used in Europe is Combo2 pictured since J1772 is apparently not common but they use most commonly Mennekes Type 2 for AC charging, hence the difference in the upper portion of the combo connector.
The verbiage in the Plugshare app (iOS vs. Android) and web site for SAE Combo has been changing a bunch. I believe the iOS app one time called it SAE Combo. Now it just calls is CCS/SAE.
The Android version currently calls it Quick Charge (CCS/SAE Combo).
Last edited:
around here they are installing chademo and CCS at the same time as paired stations
If you have Chademo already why bother with CCS?
Whatever reason you can think of becomes less and less important as superchargers and HPWC cover more and more of the landscape.
* Supercharger is better than
* HPWC is better than
* Chademo is faster than
* random L2 EVSE is better than
* random L1 EVSE
and those are all over the place. I don't see why we need to add CCS to the mix.
I put up with Chademo as a necesarry emergency evil option but every chademo around me is insanely overpriced.
I charge at home for less than half the cost of gasoline. If I charge on Chademo around here they charge 20-50 times that rate (the less you need the more onerous the per charge fee is).
Around here, all the CHAdeMO stations are free. I use my CHAdeMO adapter daily and very rarely charge at home, since electricity prices around here are pretty high, especially when compared to free... but you're right, all of the CHAdeMO stations here are dual stations with CSS as well. I'd like a CSS adapter, just in case I need it somewhere. Just about anywhere I've been, it's either slow L2 or CHAdeMO... I've not run into any Tesla chargers but for a handful of times. They are rare as hens teeth where I've been (with the exception of SuperChargers on the highways, of course).
Notwithstanding my earlier posts about 2020, I would buy a CCS adapter were it available, but also, given the CharIN future-proofing for high speed and the electrical design of the system, I'm sure there will be change to the Tesla electrical system to accommodate CCS signaling, as well as a simple adapter. There is little question that by 2020 there will be widespread CCS very fast charging in North America. By that time some form of directly paid Supercharging will probably be common with CCS.
Although none of us have mentioned it so far, the directly paid charging models, whatever they may be, will also require changes in laws in many North America jurisdictions. There are local (city/county), regional (State/Province ) and other legal impediments making almost every EV charging model difficult to implement on a large scale, and we'll really need a NAFTA-level standard to allow easy NA travel in BEV's, Tesla included. The HydroQuebec CircuitElectrique system cold work, but the CCS standard anticipates an array of charging options that require no direct user-involved authorization process, but allows for a wide array of options including the following:
-free, paid by sponsor of charging station;
-free, paid by manufacturer;
-free, paid by dealer/distributor or almost anybody who wants to pay;
-paid, by some form of subscription;
-paid, by customer per use;
- in the paid models allows for per session/per time unit or per kWh.
In other words the CharIN group has spent much of their time designing a payment process that can allow for almost any option. No other system has been so creative, and this one clearly reflects the experience of ChargePoint and other charging network members of the consortium.
Much of the discussion about CCS has been about the inelegant physical connector. Granted, but the overall system design is very thoughtful, incorporating technological and payment systems future-proofing.
Like it or not, CCS will be the primary standard in Europe, North America and much of the rest of the world by five years from now.
Having lived in 16 countries and dealt with a pretty wide variety of electric connection standards in those countries, often different ones in the same country, I am excited by the potential presented by CharIN, that includes almost everybody important among electrical equipment manufacturers, vehicle makers, vehicle suppliers and charging networks. They only miss a critical mass of electrical utilities and lawmakers, both of which would require groupings akin to the United Nations.
Why would "a change to the Tesla electrical system to accomodate CCS signaling" be required? I was under the impression that the Supercharger protocol was in fact based on an early CCS draft, and surely everything above the very lowest layer is software on the car side. Did I misunderstand?
The simplest explanation I have seen is that posted in this thread by renim.
There is also a Long Tail Pipe article from a couple of years ago that gives some more non-technical insight.
EV DC Fast Charging standards – CHAdeMO, CCS, SAE Combo, Tesla Supercharger, etc
As things now stand the key difference is explained by renim. The actual charge validation protocol for most standards is the CAN bus (itself originally designed for vehicle diagnostics before the internet ago, but used by Tesla very creatively). In the CCS standard the DC Fast option is done via a standard, Home Plug Green Phy, intended to support various Smart Grid future applications. The CCS large plug is needed to accommodate the J1772 plus the Home Plug Green Phy. That connections is so that almost any payment/authorization alternative can be used.
FWIW, CCS and CHAdeMO both are designed to handle up to 500v, with amperage upper limits of at least 125 amp but that may be revised upward. Supercharger is the fastest option today and is evolving to faster levels pretty quickly. Even though the others have higher theoretical limits there are no currently existing designs to handle the actual charging loads required. Tesla has the currently existing fastest capacity to transmit and charge batteries.
We shall see what happens!
dhanson865
Well-Known Member
Please note I said "better" not "higher power".
The tesla connector is easier to handle, takes less space, etcetera.
HWPC is free to use in most cases and doesn't require an expensive bulky adapter. When it isn't free it's likely at my own home where it's cheap as can be (10 cents/kwh) and convenient or it's at a destination I'm willing to spend money at other than the charge.
Chademo in my area is about $10 per charge + per minute or + per kWh on top of that. As in if I just need 15 miles charge to make it home I could pay $10 for a Chademo session or hit a HPWC for free or the occasional L2 30A that is free. Heck at those price differences I'd rather sit at a L2 EVSE and sip 30A unless its an absolute emergency.
The only place I've seen free Chademo is at Nissan dealerships that use a Chademo that might have a 50KW rating but tend to throttle Teslas to 20KW. But then that doesn't matter for me as no Nissan dealer in my home town has a chademo at all, free or not.
Check out Nissan manufactured CHAdeMO 25kW limitation as just one of many threads talking about chademo not working as fast as promised.
Last edited:
davewill
Active Member
CHAdeMO is a fast charging method. It's intended for trips and other situations where you need to charge a significant amount. No one would use it to add 15 miles of charge any more than they would use a Supercharger to do that job.
I guess it never dawned on me that someone would willing to wait over twice as long before continuing their trip just so they wouldn't have to pay or handle a clunkier connector.
See CHAdeMO Make/Model Review — Using with a Tesla re: the large range in power levels of CHAdeMO chargers in Japan: ranging from 6 kW to 50 kW.
I didn't realize they'd made such dramatic changes to the physical and link layers. I can understand the appeal of going to HomePlug and Ethernet framing, but...ouch. Yes, I buy it that if Tesla doesn't have Ethernet available at the charge connector, this won't be trivial.
The bit about the large plug makes no sense, though. Home Plug Green is moderately complex as Ethernet PHYs go but it's got nothing on 10GbaseT, and those PHYs are the size of my fingernail. The large plug, as with CHAdeMO, has got to be an example of poor mechanical design at best, or the connector conspiracy at worst.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
The physical connector/pin count is already compatible, so that was never an issue. There is a lower power DC Level 1 mode (that does not need the extra large pins) that works through the existing J1772 AC connector/socket.
SAE J1772 DC (Combo) Connector Adapter for Model S
The challenge for a Combo adapter depends on if Tesla's car supports Homeplug on the car side. If it doesn't then it is quite a challenge.
As for the design of the Combo connector, it is because they did not have the foresight to design in high power DC with the original J1772 connector. The power pins only supported 80A, so they needed to add the extra pins to support higher power.
Whatever the situation with existing Model S/X, I imagine with Tesla joining the CCS group, Model 3 would be fully compatible on the car side out of the factory.
It was "the connector conspiracy", I think. According to my best source on the subject, all parties concerned (SAE, CharIN and various utilities plus a few governments) wanted a massively robust physical connection, at least equal to J1772 and IEC type 2 (colloquially Mennekes). That is how it ended out being that way. Frankly my personal view is that it was public utility considerations that led to all three (CCS, IEC type 2 and SAE J1772. The Tesla Supercharger appears to have as much robustness and growth potential as do the others, except for the AC portion, but that need not be physically large either.
dhanson865
Well-Known Member
Ya, you are in California with high wages and high cost of living. I'm in Tennessee with low wages and low cost of living. Proportionately a $10 quick charge is a big hit to someone with an average salary here. Chargers with fees like that sit empty 99% of the time because around here no one will use them for anything but an emergency.
And if it's sitting empty 99% of the time why should they make it so much more expensive than L2 rates? If you say because of sunk costs, I'll say they aren't getting those back by letting the charger sit idle all day long.
So yes, if it were priced per minute or per kWh I might use it just like a gas pump and put in just enough to get home where I can charge for cheap. But since they price it assuming you'll charge to 80%+ it's useless around here.
We have a supercharger in town, If you have a Tesla you'd use that. If you have a Leaf or something else that is Chademo friendly you'll just charge at home.
Last edited:
In another thread it was posted and discussed that VW is going to be spending a lot of $$$$ to expand the current CCS charging infrastructure. This format is currently supplying only 50Kw, but could supply much more. Should Tesla spend the money and resources to produce a CCS adapter as they did with Chademo?
Last edited:
First off, just to clarify, that picture you have attached is the European version of the CCS plug, with the Type 2 (Mennekes) on top. The North America version has a Type 1 (J1772) on top.
I have read that it would be much simpler to make an adapter for this, since the CCS protocol is more compatible with Tesla signalling, unlike how complicated CHAdeMO was to adapt. Hopefully that would make it cheaper. I think the main issue right now is lack of usefulness. The number of CCS plug out there is tiny.
Gizmotoy
Active Member
I think they'll be one eventually simply because the vehicle already has a simplistic J1772 adapter. A simple way to communicate with the charger using J1772 already exists, so it'd just be a matter of negotiating the DC and getting the power into the port. I don't know anything definitively about that complexity, but surely it's easier than CHAdeMO and we got one of those.
Similar threads
