Will Tesla Buildup Superchargers to Accommodate Anticipated Demand from Ford, GM, Rivian, and whoever else, Adopting NACS circa 2024/2025?

[henderrj]

Tesla opening up their charging network was in accord with its mission statement:

Accelerating the world's transition to sustainable energy.​

​

Keeping their charging network in top shape for all brands of EVs would also be in accord with their mission. I would be shocked if they dropped the ball after going to all the trouble of opening it up.

The harsh reality is that even with 50% annual growth, Tesla can't build EVs fast enough to meet the goal of transitioning the world to EVs in a reasonable time frame. This is why they sacrificed the competitive advantage the supercharger network gave them. The game they are playing is not EV vs EV, it is all EVs versus all ICE.

Following all the hullabaloo about the Tesla network being far more reliable than the 3rd party CCS chargers, it would be a catastrophic PR nightmare for Tesla to intentionally reduce the reliability of their network. In addition, IMO, providing a high quality charging experience for all EVs may be even better for their sales than keeping the network Tesla-only.

Yes, I'm saying keeping their network reliable could be a win-win-win for Tesla: a win for EVs in general; a win for other EV makers; and a win for Tesla compared to the others. This is possible because it's not a zero-sum game.

I might accept an "all ships are lifted in a rising tide" approach, but going to any local service center anymore, it definitely feels like Testa has no altruistic motives anymore. They seem to be entirely money driven. Just try to contact a Tesla customer support person. Almost impossible!

I'm afraid that Tesla is falling into the trap that all corporations eventually do; keep the stock holders happy. Keep the profits coming. I don't know, could they get it back? Hard to see it now.

Maybe at the factories and engineering centers it's different, but the face they present to their customers certainly bears no resemblance to what was there 8 years ago when I started the journey with My first Tesla vehicle, or nearly 15 years ago when I first started watching the company.

 

[Rocky_H]

I'm curious @Rocky_H why you disagree.

Because it's not true. Implementing the NACS connector versus getting access to Tesla's stations are separate things.

Do you have an example of an OEM who has joined the NACS coalition that didn't get access to the Supercharger network? (You don't have to join the coalition to use the NACS connector.)

I haven't bothered to look for an example company--there might not be yet. Participating in a standards body is also a third, different, separate topic. I don't think there would be much motive for a company to implement NACS but not to also negotiate an agreement to get access to the Superchargers, because that would be very helpful to their customers. Technically, they could, and their cars would just get to use the NACS cables on other networks like Chargepoint.

For example, Aptera has said that they will use the NACS connector, but they haven't joined the NACS coalition, so they won't have access to the Supercharger network.

That is like the kind of example I'm thinking of. Since the NACS connector has now been set as a published open standard, a company can choose to implement it or not, and they don't have to talk with Tesla at all or get their permission to use the NACS standard. That's disconnected from Tesla now.

But to get access to use the network of charging stations that Tesla owns? That is starting from scratch as an entirely separate topic, and a company would have to contact Tesla and work something out. I have no opinion on the thing other people were referring to of whether those agreements include any upfront payment or are just pay per use.

 

[MP3Mike]

Because it's not true. Implementing the NACS connector versus getting access to Tesla's stations are separate things.

I never said anything about implementing the NACS connector. They have to join the NACS coalition. (NACS coalition=group of OEMs that have agreed to switch to NACS and have signed on with Tesla for access to the Supercharger network.)

That is like the kind of example I'm thinking of. Since the NACS connector has now been set as a published open standard, a company can choose to implement it or not, and they don't have to talk with Tesla at all or get their permission to use the NACS standard. That's disconnected from Tesla now.

That is my point. Apetra has adopted NACS, nothing more. Apetra is not a NACS coalition member. (They have not joined the coalition by signing an agreement with Tesla.)

But to get access to use the network of charging stations that Tesla owns? That is starting from scratch as an entirely separate topic, and a company would have to contact Tesla and work something out.

Yep, that is what I said. The only reason to do such is to get access to the Supercharger network. (As far as I know the only other thing they get from joining is the ability to buy NACS related stuff from Tesla at cost.)

 

[Rocky_H]

I never said anything about implementing the NACS connector. They have to join the NACS coalition. (NACS coalition=group of OEMs that have agreed to switch to NACS and have signed on with Tesla for access to the Supercharger network.)

Oh. I hadn't heard of this "coalition". I thought you meant the committee with SAE that gives input on that NACS standard. That probably includes representatives from other car makers.

If this "coalition" means "The companies that have made agreements with Tesla to use the the Supercharger network", well then yes, that is obviously what it means by definition. Sorry I misunderstood. I removed the disagree.

 

[TunaBug]

I never said anything about implementing the NACS connector. They have to join the NACS coalition. (NACS coalition=group of OEMs that have agreed to switch to NACS and have signed on with Tesla for access to the Supercharger network.)



That is my point. Apetra has adopted NACS, nothing more. Apetra is not a NACS coalition member. (They have not joined the coalition by signing an agreement with Tesla.)


Yep, that is what I said. The only reason to do such is to get access to the Supercharger network. (As far as I know the only other thing they get from joining is the ability to buy NACS related stuff from Tesla at cost.)

What exactly is this "NACS coalition"? I can't find a website for it. It's starting to sound like a personal term for everybody with access to the supercharger network. If that's the case then, yeah, I guess you have to join the SC network.

 

[threeputts]

I don't think there would be much motive for a company to implement NACS but not to also negotiate an agreement to get access to the Superchargers, because that would be very helpful to their customers. Technically, they could, and their cars would just get to use the NACS cables on other networks like Chargepoint.

I suspect this is where Lucid will eventually end up in a few years if they survive, as CCS begins to disappear in North America. Just a hunch.

 

[MP3Mike]

I don't think there would be much motive for a company to implement NACS but not to also negotiate an agreement to get access to the Superchargers, because that would be very helpful to their customers. Technically, they could, and their cars would just get to use the NACS cables on other networks like Chargepoint.

That is where Aptera is right now; implementing NACS but have no agreement with Tesla. (Though they claim a big reason for going NACS is that their design doesn't have room for a CCS inlet.)

It could be that one of the rumored ~40 technical conditions you have to agree to is having a support charge rate of say 100kW or more. (Of course, the Bolt EV falls short of that. Maybe that is why GM is discontinuing the current Bolt EV and are "Ultiumizing" it so that it supports a high enough charge rate?) Aptera vehicles have small batteries and DC fast charging has been reported to be in the 40 to 60kW range depending on battery size. (Or it could be that Tesla won't sign an agreement with a company that isn't currently making production vehicles.)

 

[BitJam]

I might accept an "all ships are lifted in a rising tide" approach, but going to any local service center anymore, it definitely feels like Tesla has no altruistic motives anymore. They seem to be entirely money driven. Just try to contact a Tesla customer support person. Almost impossible!

I completely disagree! IMO the main problem with the service centers is the exponential growth in sales. If Tesla was driven by short-term profits, like most legacy car makers, then you would see very different actions. Tesla is laser focused on building and ramping up EV factories as fast as possible while legacy auto is scaling back on their future EV plans in order to focus on short term profits.

Opening up the charging network was altruistic and was not designed to maximize short term profits. Tesla intentionally helped their competitors and by so doing also helped themselves even more. This is nothing like the typical rising tide phenomenon unless you're casting Elon in the role of Poseidon, god of the seas. Maybe the Tesla logo is actually a trident.

I'm afraid that Tesla is falling into the trap that all corporations eventually do; keep the stock holders happy. Keep the profits coming. I don't know, could they get it back? Hard to see it now.

Again, I see not a shred of evidence for this claim. For example, in this past year Elon has pissed off Wall Street investors by cutting margins to keep cars selling in order to maximize growth, not profits. Tesla did the opposite of what Wall Street wanted.

Maybe at the factories and engineering centers it's different, but the face they present to their customers certainly bears no resemblance to what was there 8 years ago when I started the journey with My first Tesla vehicle, or nearly 15 years ago when I first started watching the company.

I agree with you here. The pressure of exponential growth has hit the customer service experience very hard.

If the growth in sales was linear or even just 5% a year then I imagine the service side of the company would be able to keep up in which case not keeping up would be a sign their intention was to save money by degrading service. But 50% yearly growth, year after year, is almost impossible to keep up with despite the best of intentions.

I agree with you that customer service has fallen off a cliff. IMO it will continue to be in the toilet until sales growth slackens or until Tesla faces some real competition. But I don't interpret this fact as a switch in corporate policy to focus on short-term profits. I see it as an inevitable side effect of Tesla's lofty goal of making the transition to EVs as fast as is humanly possible.

PS: I think it is important to distinguish between short term profits and long term profits/growth when discussing altruism. In some ways altruism can be seen as sacrificing short term profits in order to eventually benefit everyone which usually results in long term profits and growth. I highly recommend the book: Mutual Aid: a Factor of Evolution, written over 120 years ago, where these ideas are explored in great detail.

 

[henderrj]

I completely disagree! IMO the main problem with the service centers is the exponential growth in sales. If Tesla was driven by short-term profits, like most legacy car makers, then you would see very different actions. Tesla is laser focused on building and ramping up EV factories as fast as possible while legacy auto is scaling back on their future EV plans in order to focus on short term profits.

Opening up the charging network was altruistic and was not designed to maximize short term profits. Tesla intentionally helped their competitors and by so doing also helped themselves even more. This is nothing like the typical rising tide phenomenon unless you're casting Elon in the role of Poseidon, god of the seas. Maybe the Tesla logo is actually a trident.

Again, I see not a shred of evidence for this claim. For example, in this past year Elon has pissed off Wall Street investors by cutting margins to keep cars selling in order to maximize growth, not profits. Tesla did the opposite of what Wall Street wanted.

I agree with you here. The pressure of exponential growth has hit the customer service experience very hard.

If the growth in sales was linear or even just 5% a year then I imagine the service side of the company would be able to keep up in which case not keeping up would be a sign their intention was to save money by degrading service. But 50% yearly growth, year after year, is almost impossible to keep up with despite the best of intentions.

I agree with you that customer service has fallen off a cliff. IMO it will continue to be in the toilet until sales growth slackens or until Tesla faces some real competition. But I don't interpret this fact as a switch in corporate policy to focus on short-term profits. I see it as an inevitable side effect of Tesla's lofty goal of making the transition to EVs as fast as is humanly possible.

PS: I think it is important to distinguish between short term profits and long term profits/growth when discussing altruism. In some ways altruism can be seen as sacrificing short term profits in order to eventually benefit everyone which usually results in long term profits and growth. I highly recommend the book: Mutual Aid: a Factor of Evolution, written over 120 years ago, where these ideas are explored in great detail.

I used to be a Tesla fanboy in the most extreme sense. Unfortunately dealing with the company for so many years has convinced me to be otherwise. The fact that Elon has surrounded himself by a cadre of lawyers that is as thick as the wall around the Kremlin, probably doesn't help any. I think he's lost sight of what was once a great goal. As it happens, I'm a very conservative person, so elon's latest political leanings do not bother me to any great degree. (I was never in it for that.). It's simply that the company has almost no interest in the consumer anymore. They are just a means to get the end goal. Perhaps, for Elon musk that means getting to Mars. He needs the money and technology, and he's glad to get it however he can. Not sure, but the end result is my enthusiasm for Tesla is greatly quenched.

I'm still buying and driving Tesla vehicles, since there isn't anything that I considered better for the price, but I'm definitely not as enthusiastic about the company as I once was.

 

[phxazcraig]

Here's part of the answer. Have a look at this video:

So this guy used the Magic Dock feature into a CCS-to-NACS adapter to charge his Tesla. He then removed the CCS adapter and just plugged the NACS connector into the car without using the Magic Dock. Starting at 7:09, in his Tesla app he could see that he was charged $0.51/kWh while using the CCS/Magic Dock/non-Tesla connection, but only $0.41/kWh for the native Tesla connection.

Thus Tesla is charging an extra $0.10/kWh for non-Tesla cars. That will have two effects. First, it will make more profit for Tesla, and I suppose pay for some additional maintenance needed for the extra load. Second, it will incentivize other car owners to find cheaper places to charge, which in itself may incentivize more charger installations.

Eventually we'll be at the situation we are with gas stations advertising lower prices. You'll have choices.

 

[MP3Mike]

Thus Tesla is charging an extra $0.10/kWh for non-Tesla cars. That will have two effects. First, it will make more profit for Tesla, and I suppose pay for some additional maintenance needed for the extra load. Second, it will incentivize other car owners to find cheaper places to charge, which in itself may incentivize more charger installations.

Or it will incentivize them to subscribe to the monthly Tesla Supercharging plan, I think $12/month, that gets them Tesla driver pricing. But from what we have heard, drivers of vehicles from an OEM that have signed on with Tesla for access to the non-MagicDock Superchargers will pay the same price as Tesla drivers without having to pay a monthly subscription fee.

And at this point I think all OEMs, that matter, other than the VW group and Stellantis, have signed on.

 

[KJD]

You can now add Lucid to the list

https://x.com/TeslaCharging/status/1721654811962294371?s=20

 

[threeputts]

Holy crap thats the last make I expected to announce this!

 

[BitJam]

Holy crap that's the last make I expected to announce this!

They are close to the last. Who else is left?

 

[E90alex]

They are close to the last. Who else is left?

VW group and Stellantis

 

[wws]

VW group and Stellantis

And Mazda.

 

[MP3Mike]

And Mazda.

There are a few others if you count the small potatoes... But VW group and Stellantis are the only ones of actual size.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1720133514123710830

 

[kpanda17]

interesting, my approach to road trips and supercharging has changed
with the industry best BMS in our Teslas, I am able to do the min charges at supercharges days ahead of my destination

example, I am approaching my hotel and charging at the supercharger first and want coverage for the next non moving two days at the hotel and than my drive home
in the nav I set my destination for home and watch the -10% begin to climb with battery management
the BMS calculates 25% at my home destination and I leave the supercharger
BMS has calculated 5% on arrival at my home and I added 10% for each 24 hours at the hotel, sentry mode, etc leakage
BMS is brilliant for I did not charge to 95, 90, or even 80%, the 25% plus my drive home need of 45% resulted in just 70% charge necessary

dont waste money if you have home charging, just charge enough during your roadtrip so you are at 5-10% when you arrive
Happy travels, Tesla's are amazing

 

[RTPEV]

interesting, my approach to road trips and supercharging has changed
with the industry best BMS in our Teslas, I am able to do the min charges at supercharges days ahead of my destination

example, I am approaching my hotel and charging at the supercharger first and want coverage for the next non moving two days at the hotel and than my drive home
in the nav I set my destination for home and watch the -10% begin to climb with battery management
the BMS calculates 25% at my home destination and I leave the supercharger
BMS has calculated 5% on arrival at my home and I added 10% for each 24 hours at the hotel, sentry mode, etc leakage
BMS is brilliant for I did not charge to 95, 90, or even 80%, the 25% plus my drive home need of 45% resulted in just 70% charge necessary

dont waste money if you have home charging, just charge enough during your roadtrip so you are at 5-10% when you arrive
Happy travels, Tesla's are amazing

Fully agree. However, one small nit with your terminology is that it's not the BMS that's doing that calculating. The BMS is strictly responsible for managing energy into/out of the battery and the battery's ambient condition (i.e. temperature). What you are talking about is software that's actually part of the nav system that estimates energy usage along a programmed route. It can be (and is) done completely external to the car (a la ABRP). That doesn't take away from the fact that the system works incredibly well, and is very well integrated with the vehicle's systems.

I've even taken what you describe and gone one step further by programming in expected side trips and L1 charging at destinations where I know I can plug into a 120V outlet into ABRP ahead of time and it more or less accurately predicts the entire thing. It's not yet that great at predicting degraded charging performance at L1 during cold weather, so I do have to fudge things a bit there, but all in all it's quite amazing.

 

[rlsd]

There are a few others if you count the small potatoes... But VW group and Stellantis are the only ones of actual size.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1720133514123710830

Lucid already surrendered.
Actually the list should include the Chinese EV manufacturers which are more significant than VW and Stellantis. SAIC already agreed to use NACS in China.

SAIC-GM strikes deal with Tesla for Supercharger Network access in China

The partnership will allow owners of SAIC-GM EVs built on the Ultium platform to access Tesla's Supercharger Network.

www.teslarati.com