Blue Oval Charging Network is Non-existent

[Tony Burgh]

Most charging done at home. If dcfc was such a moneymaker, there would be more stations out there. What we see is what it is.
If you bought the Lightning for long distance travel then you obviously didn’t do your homework. But based upon many of the questions and comments on this forum, that’s not uncommon.

Sponsored

 

[Blainestang]

Most charging done at home. If dcfc was such a moneymaker, there would be more stations out there. What we see is what it is.

You just explained why the manufacturers might have to step in and bolster the charging network, because certain routes and such may not be profitable enough for third parties to justify building charging stations, but are necessary for making EVs more useful for trips.

If you bought the Lightning for long distance travel then you obviously didn’t do your homework. But based upon many of the questions and comments on this forum, that’s not uncommon.

I've road-tripped vehicles way, way harder to road-trip than a Lightning. So, I did my homework, and know the risks, but this argument doesn't support your claim of "GM/Ford don't need to have their own charging networks" at all. The opposite, in fact.

 

[ddbrooke]

Most charging done at home. If dcfc was such a moneymaker, there would be more stations out there. What we see is what it is.
If you bought the Lightning for long distance travel then you obviously didn’t do your homework. But based upon many of the questions and comments on this forum, that’s not uncommon.

I do most of my charging at home as well but I'd say the majority of people on these forms are either owners of other EVs or they were well aware of the challenges of travel away from home.

Remember, this post is about the Ford Blue Oval Charging Network, their words not mine.

Everyone's use case is different but to say that everyone buying these trucks should be content to be tethered to a 150 radius around their home charger is a pretty narrow point of view.

Tesla has figured out a way to do it. The big 3 auto makers can do it as well if they are willing to.

 

[Tony Burgh]

Tesla has figured out a way to do it. The big 3 auto makers can do it as well if they are willing to.
They started in 2008. Read their history. They knew they had to provide charge stations to sell cars.
Ford and GM can let the market do its work. If the market doesn’t respond, it’s for lack of demand and profitability. But I repeat myself.

 

[Tony Burgh]

You just explained why the manufacturers might have to step in and bolster the charging network, because certain routes and such may not be profitable enough for third parties to justify building charging stations, but are necessary for making EVs more useful for trips.




I've road-tripped vehicles way, way harder to road-trip than a Lightning. So, I did my homework, and know the risks, but this argument doesn't support your claim of "GM/Ford don't need to have their own charging networks" at all. The opposite, in fact.

As a stockholder of Ford and GM, if it isn’t profitable, I don’t want them to do it. If you want to travel to areas without chargers yet, that’s your problem, not mine. But if your willing to pay the price to make that work, some company would be looking into that. If people traveling to the outback decide not to by an EV but an ICE instead, win win for all. Ford will sell you one of them too.

This is going circular.

 

[viennaxmas]

Much more disturbing is that Ford in the owners manual recommends to use DC fast charging only in exceptions to improve battery life...

Given the increased popularity of EV's I do expect that the charging infrastructure will improve.

I wonder when there will be a "Crowd" Platform where homeowners open their chargers and get paid for it's usage - similar to what some ISP's do with customers WIFI... Heck, I would install a dedicated charger

 

[Blainestang]

As a stockholder of Ford and GM, if it isn’t profitable, I don’t want them to do it. If you want to travel to areas without chargers yet, that’s your problem, not mine. But if your willing to pay the price to make that work, some company would be looking into that. If people traveling to the outback decide not to by an EV but an ICE instead, win win for all. Ford will sell you one of them too.

This is going circular.

As a stockholder of Ford, I can see that some things aren't *directly* profitable, but are beneficial to the company's bottom line.

For instance, Rivian is putting in charging stations at National Parks. Are those chargers going to be *directly* profitable? Maybe not, but just the fact that they exist strengthens brand perception.

Or, consider chargers across North Dakota that connect West to Midwest and make those trips possible. Are those chargers going to be directly profitable? Maybe not. But their existence makes certain trips possible that would otherwise be impossible, and customers may see that trips that they want to make occasionally are impossible and not buy a Ford EV, as a result.

So, looking for direct profitability of a charging station is shortsighted.

 

[msadan]

A bit of an extreme example, but the county I live in has two DC fast charge stations. Tesla Supercharger has 24 stalls for use by Teslas, EA station has 4 - for everyone else.
Eventually the infrastructure will catch up, but for now I know what to expect if I take my Lightning on a road trip. I assume that it will be a lot like road-tripping in my faithful Tesla Roadster, which can’t use Superchargers (Level 2 only): Plan my charge stops, leave plenty of buffer range, assume that the charger will be broken or ICEd, and have one or two backup charging locations within range.

 

[COrocket]

The biggest development that I see happening in the next year or two is Tesla opening the supercharger network to other brands (like in Europe) and Tesla eventually cornering the charging market because currently nothing comes close to the speed/reliability and coverage it provides. I really think Lightning owners will be blown away by it and solve a lot of issues if this happens one day.

My personal opinion is that Ford is still in denial of the fact that the supercharger network is a HUGE selling point for Teslas, and it'll hurt them in the long run if Superchargers remain proprietary. I was planning out a 2000 mile trip a few days ago and we'd need 4.5 hours of fast charging taking the Tesla, 8.5 hours with the ER Lightning, and 14(!) if we had a SR Lightning. So for now we are keeping the Tesla as our primary road tripping machine.

 

[luebri]

Where is Ford in expanding the DC fast charging network? Is there even a plan other than forcing dealerships to spend a bunch of money installing a single CCS charger in inconvenient locations (and that may not happen for a couple years)?
.

I believe the dealer build out is the greatest hope short term but agree that I am dubious at truly what the deadlines are for dealers to get the build out done. Maybe Tesla complies with their CCS commitments prior to that build out but I’m not betting on it. Based on the dealer sign ups here is the math…


1,659 Certified Elite (2 DC Fast) = 3318
261 Certified (1 DC Fast)

3318 + 261 = 3579

For reference:

“As of summer 2022, Tesla had more than 1,400 Supercharger stations in the United States, with a total of more than 7,000 chargers. “ - Per USnews.com

 

[swajames]

With the news that Mercedes is looking to install 2500 chargers in 400 locations by 2027 you have to think the smart move for anyone that isn't Tesla is to combine and integrate networks. No individual manufacturer is going to be able to catch Tesla. Best thing the likes of EA/EvGo/Chargepoint and this new MB network can do is figure out how to all work in a unified way so that anyone who isn't Tesla has a viable network that can at least begin to compete with Tesla. Basically Blue Oval Network on steroids with the likes of Ford, MB, VW and others all having a unified backbone so you can charge at all of them in network using their own app as the means of unified access.

 

[cwstnsko]

The purpose of the Blue Oval Network is not to build a network of charge stations, it is to integrate a bunch of the existing charge networks into a single user experience. The website shows that they allow you to use all of these networks:

• Shell Recharge
• Electrify America
• EV Connect
• ChargePoint
• SemaConnect
• FLO
• EVgo

without having to set up an account or load an app for any of them, just use plug&charge for those that support it and activate through FordPass app for those who don't. It seems that they are attempting to insulate the average driver from having to deal with most of the craziness that EV drivers have been dealing with up until now.
As several have noted, the downside to this is that you don't get the best price. But if you DCFC infrequently, a few extra $ might save you the hassle of dealing with all of this networks separately.

 

[viennaxmas]

With the news that Mercedes is looking to install 2500 chargers in 400 locations by 2027 you have to think the smart move for anyone that isn't Tesla is to combine and integrate networks. No individual manufacturer is going to be able to catch Tesla. Best thing the likes of EA/EvGo/Chargepoint and this new MB network can do is figure out how to all work in a unified way so that anyone who isn't Tesla has a viable network that can at least begin to compete with Tesla. Basically Blue Oval Network on steroids with the likes of Ford, MB, VW and others all having a unified backbone so you can charge at all of them in network using their own app as the means of unified access.

VW owns Electrify America. It was part of the diesel exhaust settlement.

 

[I=V/R]

Now that I've used up my free charging I realize I have no reason to use the Blue Oval Charging Network app because Ford brings nothing to the table. Any further charging I'll do through the native charge point operators apps because they'll be cheaper if I'm on their plans.

Where is Ford in expanding the DC fast charging network? Is there even a plan other than forcing dealerships to spend a bunch of money installing a single CCS charger in inconvenient locations (and that may not happen for a couple years)? At my local dealership they have a single level 2 charger in the front parking lot that is either ICE'd or charging a dealer Mach-e. If they do manage to build 150,000 trucks this year, along with all of the Chevy, Hyundai/Kia, VW's that will be sold in 2023, road tripping is going to be miserable and unpractical without a rapid build out of DC fast chargers. It doesn't appear that any of the operators have plans to make that happen in 2023.

So here is my point. We all know the DC fast charging infrastructure isn't adequate today and the #2 EV manufacturer has done nothing to help alleviate the problem. Somehow, pressure needs to be applied on Ford to convince them to focus on the charging infrastructure. The 'Blue Oval Charging Network' is nothing more than a bad copy of Plug Share.

Here in Alberta Canada, the fast chargers are by the minute, not by the kWh. And, the charger at the Canmore exit on TCH would not charge faster than 32 kw. I have a Lightning waiting for me at the dealership, but I think I am going to pass on buying it. I have seen YouTube videos of people charging in the USA at 132 kw, and being charged by the kWh. I am unsure about how vendors here in Alberta Canada can charge by the minute, when they are not capable of delivering kW's as rated. If there is an Alberta regulation, it is wrong. If there isn't a regulation then it should be that vendors can only charge by the delivered kWh.

 

[Maquis]

Here in Alberta Canada, the fast chargers are by the minute, not by the kWh. And, the charger at the Canmore exit on TCH would not charge faster than 32 kw. I have a Lightning waiting for me at the dealership, but I think I am going to pass on buying it. I have seen YouTube videos of people charging in the USA at 132 kw, and being charged by the kWh. I am unsure about how vendors here in Alberta Canada can charge by the minute, when they are not capable of delivering kW's as rated. If there is an Alberta regulation, it is wrong. If there isn't a regulation then it should be that vendors can only charge by the delivered kWh.

In the US, it was illegal in most states for anyone other than a utility to sell electricity. That’s why the charge per minute model. Many states have changed their laws to allow the direct sale, but not all. I suspect your situation is similar.
In many (most?) cases here, the per minute model ends up being cheaper.

Sponsored