Does a CCS1 to J1772 adapter exist?

[tls]

Upgraded 2In1 CCS & J1772 to Tesla Adapter, 250KW SuperFast CCS1 to Tesla Charging Adapter, Fit for Tesla Model Y, 3, S, X, Compatible with Level 1 2 3 Charging Stations with CCS1& J1772 Plug https://a.co/d/3ahCJy8

Something like this. When used with a NACS to J1772 adapter no pins are left exposed.

Uh. "No pins are left exposed" because of that little flip up and down flap for the CCS DC pins that will have 240V on them when AC charging?

Sponsored

 

[chl]

That is not a thing, "a joint CCS/j1772 to NACS adaptor". NACS uses the same pins for AC and DC charging, which means passive adapters (the only kind made) have to be for AC or DC - not both .

If I recall, the Tesla on-board charging system detects whether the plugged in EVSE has AC or DC on the pins and then throws a contactor (switch) for additional circuitry (AC to DC conversion) so that DC is applied to the battery in either case.

So if the CCS is the FCSP the output is AC up to 80A and the pins will only have AC on them - the DC pins on the FCSP are for powering your house from the Lightning via the HIS if you have one - no DC voltage is one them from the FCSP.

The item *CCS/J1772 to NACS adapter) description says it is rated for up to 80A at 250V AC.

The NACS to to J1772 adapter says the same thing " Our adapter boasts a maximum power output of 80A and a voltage of 250V."

Have two adapters in series could cause issues (resistance issues) so using the full 80A capacity of the FCSP is probably a bad idea.

 

[rh192]

Can the extension cord on the FCSP be exchanged for one with j1772?

 

[Monkey]

Can the extension cord on the FCSP be exchanged for one with j1772?

No. The FCSP is purpose built for the bi-directional power backup. If you are not using the bi-directional charging/ home power backup, your best bet is to replace the FCSP with a different unit.

The other solution posted here is to use an extension cable and modify the one end to fit the CCS plug on the FCSP. That *might* work for you. Unfortunately many vehicles that have only a J1772 port are not compatible with this hack as they don’t support the necessary communications. The FCSP uses CCS signaling. There’s been a handful of reports of people modifying their J1772 to Tesla adapters to fit the FCSP as well as a few trying J1772 extension cords and finding that their older EV that doesn’t have CCS support still won’t play with the FCSP.

 

[chl]

Can the extension cord on the FCSP be exchanged for one with j1772?

Yes I believe you could replace the CCS cord with a J1772 cord. I haven't tried it though.

If you are not using the DC pins for Home Backup with the Home Integration System you don't need the CCS cable and plug, just the J1772 portion/wires/pins.

CAVEAT: Only try it if you know what you are doing, and of course with the POWER OFF!

You would want a heavy-duty J1772 cable rated for 80A one if you plan on using 80A J1772 charging. Or an appropriately rated cable for whatever lower amperage you will use.

You'd have to wire it up properly of course, so consult the FCSP manual images to connect the correct wires to the correct terminals.

You could trace the existing CCS J1772 pins to their ends inside the FCSP before changing cables to be sure you get them right.

The image shows the FCSP without the 240VAC from the house panel hooked up. The CCS wires are shown attached to their respective terminals. The red and black wires coming from the CCS cord are the DC wires to carry DC from the Lightning to a home integration system (not connected in this picture) via the FCSP.

The AC out to the vehicle (needed for charging the Lightning battery) is provided by the Blue and Brown wires, and the Green wire is ground. The other smaller wires are signalling wires.

The CCS pinout is this:

The top part is the J1772:

So the two Hots (Blue and Brown) connect to L1 and N, the Ground (Green) to PE and the PP and CP control signal lines to the appropriate terminals inside the FCSP.

The J1772 cable will not have the DC wires that the CCS cable has of course.

An overview of the FCSP wiring from the SunRun documents is above.

Obviously do the change with the power to the FCSP OFF!!!

Another solution to charging a J1772 vehicle is of course to use the Ford Mobile Power Cord - that's what I do with my 2012 Leaf at 30A (or maybe 32A).

 

[Monkey]

Yes I believe you could replace the CCS cord with a J1772 cord. I haven't tried it though.

Yes, you could do that. But by the time you spend $150 on a cord and time…. You could just sell the FCSP as there is an increased market for them now that Ford no longer includes them with new truck purchases. And then buy a new charger with the right connector.

And as mentioned above, swapping the cord on the FCSP won’t solve any compatibility problems if the car doesn’t support CCS signaling.

 

[chl]

Yes, you could do that. But by the time you spend $150 on a cord and time…. You could just sell the FCSP as there is an increased market for them now that Ford no longer includes them with new truck purchases. And then buy a new charger with the right connector.

And as mentioned above, swapping the cord on the FCSP won’t solve any compatibility problems if the car doesn’t support CCS signaling.

I agree that is an option, I bought my FCSP on eBay and they were going for $500-$600. So if you want to charge at say 48A you could do that for $600.

But if you have a ER battery and want to charge your Lightning at 80A, not many other options the last time I checked anyway. And the ones I saw were pricey like the cheapest I saw was about $700 and most were what the FCSP goes for list price, like $1300 and up.

https://grizzl-e.com/products/grizz...KOxtQGdjvX6kY2YKocTxWOUKpeGHN4CB81BMUCE_mOyyc

Most were what the FCSP goes for list price, like $1400 or so.

https://www.amazon.com/PRIMECOM-Electric-Charging-Lightning-Polestar/dp/B0C3PTL45V?ref_=ast_sto_dp

BTW, the two standards use the same signaling with J1772 and CCS1, so no signalling issues.

CCS1 is, after all, just a "modified SAE J1772 connector that adds two high-speed DC fast charging pins to the J1772 Type 1 plug...CCS 1 allows vehicle manufacturers to use one port for both AC and DC charging, instead of two separate ports. "

 

[chl]

No. The FCSP is purpose built for the bi-directional power backup. If you are not using the bi-directional charging/ home power backup, your best bet is to replace the FCSP with a different unit.

The other solution posted here is to use an extension cable and modify the one end to fit the CCS plug on the FCSP. That *might* work for you. Unfortunately many vehicles that have only a J1772 port are not compatible with this hack as they don’t support the necessary communications. The FCSP uses CCS signaling. There’s been a handful of reports of people modifying their J1772 to Tesla adapters to fit the FCSP as well as a few trying J1772 extension cords and finding that their older EV that doesn’t have CCS support still won’t play with the FCSP.

That is strange because J1772 and CCS1 use the same signaling...could be an error is wiring the signaling lines?

CCS1 is just J1772 with two DC pins. As far as I know, no difference in the J1772 part or J1772 signaling between a CCS1 and a plain old J1772.


"Although there are several different types of CCS connectors, they all use the same communication protocol to negotiate and control the charging process. CCS interfaces use two basic types of communication.

The first mode, known as Basic Signaling (BS), is the same PWM scheme transmitted over the CP contact used by J1772 ac charging systems for safety-related functions and, in the case of ac charging, to advertise the power level the available from the charging station. The only addition for the combo connector is that the station can transmit a pulse width of 5% that indicates the High Level Communication (HLC) protocol should be used.

The HLC protocol involves transmitting a modulated high-frequency signal over the CP contact (also known as power-line communication or PLC) based on the standard DIN SPEC 70121 and the ISO/IEC 15118 standard11 that can be used to transmit digital commands and information. In addition to controlling dc charging operations, HLC can be used to support other advanced services, such as vehicle-to-grid (V2G) load sharing. "

The additional CCS signalling on the CP contact is not used for J1772 level charging, so it should not be initiated by the FCSP unless doing a V2G or DC charging (which the FCSP cannot do anyway).

 

[Monkey]

That is strange because J1772 and CCS1 use the same signaling...could be an error is wiring the signaling lines?

CCS1 is just J1772 with two DC pins. As far as I know, no difference in the J1772 part or J1772 signaling between a CCS1 and a plain old J1772.

Technically the same signaling, but there is a different handshake for CCS and many (most?) non-CCS vehicles don’t support the “yes, I have CCS support” handshake. The FCSP, having a CCS connector implemented, even though it only uses the DC pins for return power, only accepts the CCS handshake and does not fail-over or degrade to a “J1772 mode” or dumb mode. There’s actually a pretty good discussion on this from someone who modified a few adapters and attempted to get the FCSP working with their older Tesla as well as a Chevy Volt. I believe it was at the tesla motors club forums. FCSP has no issues plugging into any car with a CCS port.

And I have myself took a dremel to a spare Tesla J1772 adapter to fit the FCSP in an attempt to charge someone’s early Model 3. It would charge my Model Y, but not his older 3 that also doesn’t work with Tesla’s CCS to NACS adapter — the car does not support CCS handshake and such. Someone else here on these forums did the same and had the same luck and posted about it about the time I tried it. My friend with the model 3 ended up getting the Tesla Universal Charger as he was only hooked up to charge at 48A anyway. …And then traded off the Model 3 for an Ioniq 5 anyway. Any older Tesla that is not compatible with the CCS to NACS DC adapter is actually not compatible with the FCSP, even though the car charges just fine from a normal J1772 charger.

You’re right that if he wants to use the 80A ability of the FCSP there are not too many options. Best options are probably the Gen-2 Tesla wall charger, which can still be purchased from their business sales for $550. They do offer it with a J1772 connector as well, but it’s almost never in stock since they started offering the Universal Charger. And there’s the Grizzl-e that supports 80A — currently available on Amazon for $699. Ford also has the Ford Charger Pro capable of 80A, but not only is the name confusing AF when they also offer the Charge Station Pro and the Pro Charger, it’s also tricky to buy — only available to commercial fleet customers at this time and I think its $800.

 

[Monkey]

The real head scratcher is why did Ford / Siemens design it this way? And why would they not allow for it to dumb down, and even include a simple adapter, to charge vehicles with a J1772 port?

 

[rh192]

Thanks everyone for all the great ideas. I am leaning towards installing another charger. I have an ER battery and we might be adding an escalade iq to the mix.

Another consideration is the BMW can only charge at up to 7kw. Not sure if it will automatically downgrade the charge coming from charger. I am betting it won't . So I think it may be safer to add another charger at 40 amp.

 

[rh192]

The real head scratcher is why did Ford / Siemens design it this way? And why would they not allow for it to dumb down, and even include a simple adapter, to charge vehicles with a J1772 port?

They allow it to downgrade the amperage but I agree an adapter would have been thoughtful.

 

[Runaway Tractor]

Note if you want to replace the entire cable assembly with a plain J1772 cable, you would need to find one capable of 80 amps. I've looked. Haven't found any available retail. Someone will suggest you could use a normal 48 amp cable and lower the max charging setting on the FCSP. This would work. But only you would be aware of this. And the next person who opens it up won't know any better, changes it to 80 amps, and burns down the house. Recommend against that approach.

 

[PJnc284]

Another consideration is the BMW can only charge at up to 7kw. Not sure if it will automatically downgrade the charge coming from charger. I am betting it won't . So I think it may be safer to add another charger at 40 amp.

Any charger will only supply what the car is requesting.

 

[BennyTheBeaver]

The real head scratcher is why did Ford / Siemens design it this way? And why would they not allow for it to dumb down, and even include a simple adapter, to charge vehicles with a J1772 port?

Because Ford doesn't currently manufacture vehicle with just a J1772 port. Why would they engineer a solution for other manufacturers vehicles? The FCSP is compatible, as-is, with every currently manufactured Ford model. No adapter needed. Some can charge up to 80a, others can't.

Tesla sells an option for a combi magic dock adapter unit to be compatible with other manufacturers vehicles, but Tesla has a different business strategy.

Ford isn't in the business of making money off chargers, they sell specific chargers with unique features just for the vehicles they manufacture. The FCSP can goto 80a and provide Home Backup. The Mobile charger sold with the Lightning is derated to 30a from 32a so that we can use it to charge other Lightning's, Mach-E's or vehicles from the Pro Power port in the bed.

Sponsored