Sponsored

Search results

  1. GM follows Ford with NACS Tesla charge port adoption -- time to ditch CCS1 (at least the physcial design)

    Rivian today announced that Supercharger access will be available in March. In addition (somehow I missed this when they announced it last June), they will send one free NACS (J3400) to CCS1 adapter per vehicle. https://electrek.co/2024/02/29/rivian-confirms-tesla-supercharger-access-in-march/
  2. GM follows Ford with NACS Tesla charge port adoption -- time to ditch CCS1 (at least the physcial design)

    EvGo supports what they call “Autocharge+,” which is plug and charge, for a number of vehicles. https://www.evgo.com/autocharge/ The (incomplete) list of supported vehicles: Cadillac LYRIQ Kia Niro and EV6 Chevrolet Bolt EV and Bolt EUV Mercedes EQS, EQB and EQE Energica Experia, Eva Ribelle...
  3. GM follows Ford with NACS Tesla charge port adoption -- time to ditch CCS1 (at least the physcial design)

    I suspect the worst thing about CCS1 is inherent in its name: COMBINED Charging Standard. J1772 was first standardized in 2001, then refined in 2009. CCS1 was developed in 2011. So it appears a key design constraints for CCS1 was backwards compatibility. The already clunky J1772 needed...
  4. GM follows Ford with NACS Tesla charge port adoption -- time to ditch CCS1 (at least the physcial design)

    I think I figured out what you meant with the percentages. The charge rates varies with the state of charge. That is an excellent point. However, in my experience, with most of my charging between 20% and 80% at 48 amps, it is close enough to just use the manufacturer's estimate of charge...
  5. GM follows Ford with NACS Tesla charge port adoption -- time to ditch CCS1 (at least the physcial design)

    Thanks for your comment. I have some thoughts below. Hopefully based on a correct understanding of your post, but please let me know if not. I don’t understand what you meant by the percentages, so I may have missed your overall point. But here goes: It is true that miles per KWh is not...
  6. GM follows Ford with NACS Tesla charge port adoption -- time to ditch CCS1 (at least the physcial design)

    It was well worth watching the full 10 minutes of the embedded video. Farley’s point on charging anxiety being more important than range anxiety is well stated. When I talk to friends who are thinking about their first EV and are concerned about long trips, I suggest they think in terms of...
  7. Home charging

    Another choice to consider: The Tesla NACS wall charger and a J1772 adapter. Tesla’s J1772 charger costs $75 more than their NACS charger. You can get a Lectron NACS to J1772 adapter for $140 to $160 (Lectron Site/Amazon). For a relatively small premium spent on the adapter, you get a...
  8. GM follows Ford with NACS Tesla charge port adoption -- time to ditch CCS1 (at least the physcial design)

    As I understand, one idea behind the Rivian Adventure Network is to put chargers at locations near outdoor attractions. For example, the future map shows a charging station in northern Minnesota that appears to be close to a popular Boundary Waters entry area and (I hope!) a popular off-road...
  9. GM follows Ford with NACS Tesla charge port adoption -- time to ditch CCS1 (at least the physcial design)

    I looked up the dip switch (say that a few times fast), and it appears the procedure is to change switch 2 to the off position for ”legacy.” Even if I don’t get a new cable, I am wondering if changing that switch will cause the charger to work immediately, instead of the 8-10 seconds that it...
  10. GM follows Ford with NACS Tesla charge port adoption -- time to ditch CCS1 (at least the physcial design)

    I have read this forum off and on for quite a while, mostly to read daveo4Ev’s perspective on EV-related issues. I appreciate his deep research as well as the perspectives of others on the forum. The question I have been thinking about is ”What is Tesla’s end game in opening the...





Top