hturnerfamily
Well-known member
- First Name
- William
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2022
- Threads
- 46
- Messages
- 1,953
- Reaction score
- 2,389
- Location
- rural Georgia
- Vehicles
- 22 LIGHTNING PRO IcedBlueSilver 8/23/2022
- Occupation
- Owner
There are just too many negatives to CCS versus NACS - I've driven a lot of different EVs, a model 3 cross-country, and now own and have driven my LIGHTNING for 25,000 miles, and can attest to the difference:
-NACS is elegant, light, easy to handle, and not a daunting task for those less-than 6' and 250lb men - the CCS is HEAVY, BULKY, UNWIELDY, and hard to handle - just trying to plug it into my truck's port seems to be a trial in angles and stress points - it seems that many times the plug itself is putting way too much 'angle of pressure' on my port - I can only wonder how long it will be before one exerts too much pressure and cracks, or worse, my port. I had no issues with Superchargers with the Tesla.
-NACS, as far as Superchargers goes, seems to work 99% of the time, and the shear number of units available to pull into at most stations makes it a much easier task. The CCS nightmare, when it comes to DOWNTIME and how they are 'placed' and 'situated', are not so easy. It seems there is little thought, sometimes, from the installation standpoint. Provide pull thrus, not concrete barriers. provide angled large spaces, not PUll IN tiny spots. EVs are no longer tiny.
-NACS is a much more elegant and simpler charge port - the sizing creates more opportunity for 'where' to place the port on new vehicles, even if it's in the rear, or the front - but allowing for mid-point placement, for certain vehicles, too.
-CCS will become like that of CHadeMO, a 'secondary' option, where it may be a single port at the end of a row of NACS chargers. That may not be anytime soon, but with charging manufacturers jumping onboard with NACS as the 'new' standard, it's likely CCS will remain in the limelight - since many of those units are not always operational in the first place, or unreliable at best, it's no worry that NACS can't come quick enough.
-NACS is elegant, light, easy to handle, and not a daunting task for those less-than 6' and 250lb men - the CCS is HEAVY, BULKY, UNWIELDY, and hard to handle - just trying to plug it into my truck's port seems to be a trial in angles and stress points - it seems that many times the plug itself is putting way too much 'angle of pressure' on my port - I can only wonder how long it will be before one exerts too much pressure and cracks, or worse, my port. I had no issues with Superchargers with the Tesla.
-NACS, as far as Superchargers goes, seems to work 99% of the time, and the shear number of units available to pull into at most stations makes it a much easier task. The CCS nightmare, when it comes to DOWNTIME and how they are 'placed' and 'situated', are not so easy. It seems there is little thought, sometimes, from the installation standpoint. Provide pull thrus, not concrete barriers. provide angled large spaces, not PUll IN tiny spots. EVs are no longer tiny.
-NACS is a much more elegant and simpler charge port - the sizing creates more opportunity for 'where' to place the port on new vehicles, even if it's in the rear, or the front - but allowing for mid-point placement, for certain vehicles, too.
-CCS will become like that of CHadeMO, a 'secondary' option, where it may be a single port at the end of a row of NACS chargers. That may not be anytime soon, but with charging manufacturers jumping onboard with NACS as the 'new' standard, it's likely CCS will remain in the limelight - since many of those units are not always operational in the first place, or unreliable at best, it's no worry that NACS can't come quick enough.
Sponsored
I think we'll end up with both connectors and hopefully adapters that work perfectly both ways. I'll gladly carry around an adapter in case I'm traveling and want to charge at a Tesla Charger.
