Tesla announces opening of NACS (Tesla Plug Connector) charging standard. Would you replace your CCS port?

[hturnerfamily]

I've driven a Model 3 Long Range 1,000 miles from GA to TX and used 3 superchargers along the way, all worked easily and quickly and charged fast. The ease and size of the cables from the super chargers should be the 'standard' for all of us - why we need such a large, bulky, unwieldy connector is getting old real quick.

Sponsored

 

[hturnerfamily]

but, that's about the extent of my ranting on this subject - we don't have it so bad, it just could be better. Plug N Charge is making life quicker and easier, and eventually we may even have 'wireless' charging... fun. No more cables.

 

[Kev12345]

which one is faster and easier to use? lets go with that one for gen 2 lightning.

 

[Blainestang]

we all acting like we know what HIS is?

Oh, I think it's Home Integration System. I've never heard anyone use that acronym before, somehow. Maybe because I'm getting an SR haha. V2H is probably more common usage.

 

[Pioneer74]

Just calling it a standard doesn't make it so. Just ask Tesla about Europe.

As nice as the Tesla connector may be, this is VHS and Betamax all over again. More vehicles currently on the road now may have the Tesla connector, but in the coming years they will be outnumbered by CCS.

 

[sotek2345]

Keep in mind this is just the hardware spec, not the software, so it doesn't give access to the Tesla charging network.

 

[MichaelCA]

I've personally noticed the tesla "NACS" is easy to plug in and remove. The CCS port seems to bind a bit and require more force than I was used to with the tesla port. Also seriously, the CCS design is huge.

 

[Sam James]

Elon has always said his patents were open and tried to get this through, but no one ever bought in.

If this is the way they intend on doing it there could be big consumer pressure on auto manufactures to do so.

This was only the case if you indemnified Tesla from stepping on your own patents… if you have patents it’s a stupid idea. You can’t spell “generosity” with “Elon” unless you want to take an “L”.

No bi-directional charging is a miss as well. What they should be doing is stepping up to offer help with the next solution as both have their limitations.

 

[RickLightning]

Proclaiming they are the NACS is pure hubris. This is like Apple telling the EU to replace USB-C with Lightning because so many people already have iPhones. They had ample time to conform to the CCS standard, only now that they're incentivized to open up their superchargers in NA do they care to make it "open-source". Nah, I'm good.

Hubris is Elon's middle name.

 

[Tony Burgh]

If someone wants to pay for the mechanical change (ala cellular providers) I might consider it. The change would have to cover my FCSP at home which provides 90% of my Lightning charging.
That said, I’d consider an adapter to keep in the frunk w/ my mobile charger.

 

[Lime Green]

I've seen talk of the TEsla connector being limited on how much more power it is going to be able to support. CCS has a higher ceiling. So for that reason I would stay with CCS.

The Tesla connector/ charge spec handles more power and has a higher ceiling than CCS. ...For now. Initially CCS-1 had maximum specs of 200A @ 600V for DCFC. That has now been increased to 300A @ 800V without altering the connector design through VW Group's introduction and push to 800V charging they launched with the Taycan. There's a lot of misinformation and unnecessary speculation floating around out there. Not trying to be a Tesla fan-boy, but they truly have the superior charging spec (at the moment) with a more robust connector design. Supporting 1MW (1000kW). The DC pin design/ specs are pretty much identical between the two, so I don't see where one is going to be superior in terms of actual real-world charge ceiling for DCFC. I prefer the Tesla connector because of its simpler and more rugged implementation as well as the port ability to lock the connector in while charging.

Nothing has changed with Tesla's charging spec other than the name. It was always free to license. Now it's public domain so no licensing at all. They have dubbed it the North American Charging Standard. Whatever, they can call it what they want. When it was merely just free to license, no automakers took advantage of it. Pretty much because it was created by a single manufacturer, which tends to be how good standards don't get adopted as universal -- no matter how great it might be. The industry went for CCS...

This is what Tesla has to do in order to open up their charge network without providing adapters and/or changing out all the plugs or adding CCS plugs to all their chargers. As for government funding for new chargers... any that receive funding still need to have the CCS connectors or tethered adapters on them. If another automaker adopts Tesla's charge standard as the primary connector on their cars, then it will be eligible for funding just like CCS, as the infrastructure grant program allows for new and emerging standards that are supported by more than one independent manufacturer. Whether or not that happens, it won't be happening soon enough and the grant money will be gone. It's mostly gone now.

I don't hold any grudge against Tesla over their connector. It was created when there was no standard. THey did what they had to do at the time. And it is pretty slick. But no, with the CCS design having more futureproofing designed in, i'd rather see an adapter (that Tesla doesn't purposely block from Supercharging).

Anyone can make such an adapter now, Tesla will probably offer one themselves. We just need them to open up the network, which they are already testing in a couple places and testing internally. It's more an issue of building the software back end than anything else. As for CCS being more future proof, it's not. CCS does not offer any functionality that the Tesla connector doesn't give us. It just has more pins for Level 2 AC power transport, rather than simply utilizing the DC pair for everything. Tesla's charge spec supports bi-directional power, V2H, etc.. Ford's CSP utilizes the CCS DC pins, not the J1772 portion for its operation to support the V2H ability (Home Integration System power backup).

CCS still makes more sense for some markets outside N America... Or at least for the EU and elsewhere that CCS-2 is in place. Where it uses the Menekes connector hybridized with the DC pins rather than J1772. This is better for supporting 3-phase power for L2 AC charging. Also why Tesla had a different connector in the EU than in North America.

 

[adoublee]

Tesla has made patents available in the past, oh but only after they have improved on the released tech and aren't using it anymore.

Might this mean Tesla is dumping info in advance of converting to CCS?

I'll pass on putting Tesla in charge of consensus-based non-proprietary standards development thank you.

 

[meow]

Feelings about Tesla and their CEO aside, the CCS connector is too big and unwieldy and theirs isn't frustratingly unusable. I've seen people struggle to get CCS connectors and their wires wrangled in away I've never witnessed with the Tesla connector.

Standardization on their connector would be fine if it became (a) truly a common standard, and (b) supported bidirectional power delivery (e.g. HIS) - not for the F150 specifically but for every EV. This should be ubiquitous not unique, despite it being obviously unfortunate that the byproduct of everyone having an EV that can power their home to ride them through the embarrassing s**tshow that is the US power grid would be... the grid never being properly invested in, fixed, and maintained appropriately.

 

[adoublee]

Feelings about Tesla and their CEO aside, the CCS connector is too big and unwieldy and theirs isn't frustratingly unusable. I've seen people struggle to get CCS connectors and their wires wrangled in away I've never witnessed with the Tesla connector.

Standardization on their connector would be fine if it became (a) truly a common standard, and (b) supported bidirectional power delivery (e.g. HIS) - not for the F150 specifically but for every EV. This should be ubiquitous not unique, despite it being obviously unfortunate that the byproduct of everyone having an EV that can power their home to ride them through the embarrassing s**tshow that is the US power grid would be... the grid never being properly invested in, fixed, and maintained appropriately.

Musk says customers don't want vehicle to home.

Sponsored