VW Group (Porsche, Audi, Scout) Commits to NACS

[charliemathilde]

Maybe they actually listened to our feedback in that recent survey.

it was literally my answer to every question on the survey, regardless of the question.

Sponsored

 

[charliemathilde]

From what I read, the Cybertruck is using the 800V battery, so Tesla has some vested interest in supporting it, though I suspect they designed it to charge as 2 400V halves in parallel for existing 400V chargers.

yes, although apparently the BEV Macan will do this too

 

[mjw930]

I have an adapter NOW...Buy em all day on Amazon.

Do you have a true Tesla DCFC (Supercharger) to CCS1 adaptor or the more readily available Tesla to J1772 adaptor?

Considering I’m only aware of 2 companies making a NACS to CCS1 DC adaptor, A2Z and Lectron and both are on preorder I don’t think you are buying these all day on Amazon.

Please correct me if I’m wrong.

 

[Rusty Griswald]

No adapters until 2025?

• Volkswagen, Porsche, and Audi are exploring adapter solutions for existing vehicles to access the Tesla Supercharger network, starting in 2025

^^^ that’s a bummer

 

[daveo4EV]

NACS/CCS1 North American physical adapters are not the issue - I'm pretty sure adatper(s) will be generic and easily available - the core issue is "authorization" to start a charging session - so we need more information has to how that is controlled/accessed…

I'm pretty sure Tesla could unilaterally provide access (they already do at MagicDock sites and in Europe) - and adapters will be available starting in January - the remaining shoe to drop is charging network access controls - i.e. how is Tesla going to control which non-Tesla vehicle's get to charge at a Tesla site? That's software and business policy that has yet to be detailed…

as I've posted before the physical access to a Supercharger in North America has never really been the issue - it's always been one of lack of a business agreement between the CCS1 crowd and Tesla - the physical access to the network is the most trivial problem to solve - it's always been billing/control/activation and permission from Tesla and support from the other CCS1 Vehicles' (i.e customer that have problems with their CCS1 vehicle will be take seriously by their dealerships)

the physical NACS port and adatper is welcome, necessary and will smooth things going forward, bu that in my opinion was never really a barrier

until Oct. of 2023 recently no one wanted this to happen…that was always the bigger issue than the physical access problem.

the unmitigated failure of EA as an effective CCS1 charging network in North America has done more to make this happen than _ANY_ physical adapter could ever accomplish. The business school case study here will be legendary going forward. If EA had been effective and reliable this entire thread would not exist.

I honestly believe (other than myself) people fail to understand/appreciate how bad EA (and other CCS1 networks) had to be in practice and deployment for anyone to really seriously ever contemplate this sort of change - the level of "fail" here is epic and undeniable - it could've been different - but apathy, incompetence

to quote the star war's series "andor" but repurpose it to EA in North America (and the North American CCS1 network in general)

“...The Combined Ingredients Of Idiocy, Ineptitude, And Total Disengagement...”

"It took the combined ingredients of idiocy, ineptitude, and total disengagement for this farce to have reached the full apex of incredulous disaster."

is what was required for this turn of event to come about - and now Tesla (the empire) is taking over given that the corporate guys f'd it up.

stay tuned.

 

[Tooney]

DECEMBER, 2023

https://media.electrifyamerica.com/...nal/1107-Q32023QuarterlyReportSummaryCARB.pdf
https://media.electrifyamerica.com/...08-2023Q3CARBReportBodyFinalPublicVersion.pdf

 

[daveo4EV]

DECEMBER, 2023

https://media.electrifyamerica.com/...nal/1107-Q32023QuarterlyReportSummaryCARB.pdf
https://media.electrifyamerica.com/...08-2023Q3CARBReportBodyFinalPublicVersion.pdf

"Disengagment…" - that report does not mirror my day to day experience with EA in california.

https://www.taycanforum.com/forum/threads/ea-sop-28-minute-phone-call-for-a-15-minute-charge.17544/

 

[whitex]

is what was required for this turn of event to come about - and now Tesla (the empire) is taking over given that the corporate guys f'd it up.

I seriously hope Tesla (Elon) does not compromise, provide a solution that works, then continues with the approach "my way or the highway". CC1 and EA is "the great compromise", a result of "let's drive consensus" strategies. I know the current auto manufacturers will insist on integration with their own apps, but sincerely hope that Tesla will provide a way to just use the Tesla app instead, for whenever the Ford, GM, Audi, Porsche, or whoever else's app fails. Their agreement with Tesla should also include telling their users to install the Tesla app in any charging error messages that have to do with charging at a supercharger.

 

[whitex]

Slight tangent. I found the following in the MyAudi Connect service fine print, which I think perfectly illustrates the traditional auto manufacturers attitude to online and connected services, including public charging services which of course rely on connected services:

followed by another key bullet point a little further down in the same list of bullet points (I added the highlight myself, as it might be easy to miss at first glance).

 

[Tooney]

"Disengagment…" - that report does not mirror my day to day experience with EA in california.

https://www.taycanforum.com/forum/threads/ea-sop-28-minute-phone-call-for-a-15-minute-charge.17544/

These people depended on Ford EV's onboard charging planner and EA (and shared story in MotorTrend) Our Last Ford F-150 Lightning EV Pickup Road Trip Was a Nightmare

 

[Zcd1]

as I've posted before the physical access to a Supercharger in North America has never really been the issue - it's always been one of lack of a business agreement between the CCS1 crowd and Tesla - the physical access to the network is the most trivial problem to solve - it's always been billing/control/activation and permission from Tesla and support from the other CCS1 Vehicles'

Why does a lack of a business agreement matter to Tesla?

They profit from selling the KWHs to whoever uses them, right? So why couldn’t the “Charge Your Non-Tesla” function in the app be used to start a charging session at ANY Supercharger once the appropriate adapters are available?

 

[daveo4EV]

Why does a lack of a business agreement matter to Tesla?

They profit from selling the KWHs to whoever uses them, right? So why couldn’t the “Charge Your Non-Tesla” function in the app be used to start a charging session at ANY Supercharger once the appropriate adapters are available?

I can't answer that question since I'm not in Elon's head - but it still comes down to the lack of business motiviation or agreement - it was never a technical issue - it was a matter of business.

CCS1 vendors didn't want to be a customer, and Tesla didn't want to be a vendor.

that issue out weighed any technical issues.

 

[Jonathan S.]

Only Elon can provide the definitive answer to that question.

Speculation includes:

• Elon wanted some sort of concessions from the competing EV manufacturers (perhaps merely the adoption of the NACS receptacle).
• Elon wants to phase in the waves of CCS1 refugees.
• Elon just wanted to demonstrate his power by having all the EV manufacturers come to him to beg for access.

The potential upside of all this is that if the driver-equipped adapter access to the V3 (and the few V4) Superchargers in early/mid- 2024 is going well (and given the experience to date with the Magic Docks, sure seems like it should go well), then Elon might just flip the switch to allow any CCS1 EV to access any V3 (or V4) Supercharger via the Tesla app.

 

[DougFrisk]

Only Elon can provide the definitive answer to that question.

Speculation includes:

• Elon wanted some sort of concessions from the competing EV manufacturers (perhaps merely the adoption of the NACS receptacle).
• Elon wants to phase in the waves of CCS1 refugees.
• Elon just wanted to demonstrate his power by having all the EV manufacturers come to him to beg for access.

The potential upside of all this is that if the driver-equipped adapter access to the V3 (and the few V4) Superchargers in early/mid- 2024 is going well (and given the experience to date with the Magic Docks, sure seems like it should go well), then Elon might just flip the switch to allow any CCS1 EV to access any V3 (or V4) Supercharger via the Tesla app.

This. I suspect when the future MBAs do discuss this they will talk about the absolute failure of EA and other CCS1 vendors to scale out quickly enough and Tesla's intransigence demanding large amounts of either cash or concessions from other manufacturers.

I'm pretty sure that the reason Tesla opened up their hardware to actual standardization when they did was because internally they knew they were about to lose the VHS/Betamax war and that their plug-end was about to become a footnote.

I'm still sitting here wondering why we couldn't have simply gone with Type-2/CCS2? It solves all of the same problems J3400 does but has the added benefit of creating a western world standard.

 

[daveo4EV]

I'm still sitting here wondering why we couldn't have simply gone with Type-2/CCS2? It solves all of the same problems J3400 does but has the added benefit of creating a western world standard.

I am also surprised we just didn't move to CCS2/Euro…it would've been fine and also already supported by Tesla in Europe - the pivot here is not NACS but CCS2 physical connector.

that however does not address the reliability issue of the CCS1 networks - and in North America Supercharger network is the most reliable and built-out…

Sponsored