• Dr. Dabbles@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    They haven’t switched yet, though. And that’s one of the points I’m making. They have said they’re switching in 2025. To me, that sounded a lot like they were waiting to see what happened with chargers in US and Canada. Announcing charger support for it is also not a meaningful announcement since you really only need to change the cable end. It’s like saying I now support winter boots. I didn’t change my feet, so it’s not a meaningful statement.

    The number of EVs sold isn’t an argument that’s going to sway me. As I’ve said, I have technical reasons I don’t like the NACS connector. If everyone sticks to the current announced plan, then we get DCFC with both connectors and nobody really cares. But if the charger manufacturers and EV manufacturers decide to drop NACS as a whole, I don’t think anybody will know or care in 3-4 years time outside of Tesla owners that need an adapter to access other brands chargers.

    • cosmic_slate@dmv.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      I think that viewpoint is naively optimistic for CCS-1. Nearly everyone’s media announcement explicitly states that they are definitively adopting NACS as their charging connector for their fleet starting in 2025. If CCS-1 connector isn’t dead, it’s shaping up to be like CHAdeMO.

      If you don’t believe me: Ford, GM, Hyundai, Kia, Polestar, Volvo, Rivian, Mercedes, BMW, Mini, and Rolls-Royce, Honda, and Fisker

      The only announcements that weren’t fully definitive in bringing this to every vehicle are from Toyota, Subaru, and Nissan. Toyota’s announcement (and is comparable to Subaru) is left at:

      Toyota will incorporate the NACS ports into certain Toyota and Lexus BEVs starting in 2025

      And Nissan is for sure doing it on their Ariya but left the rest ambiguous.

      • Dr. Dabbles@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        I clearly said they all announced it was happening in 2025, so obviously linking to their announcements isn’t really going to change anything.

        The thing they are doing is trying to equip their cars with the port for the chargers that their customer will use. What I’m saying is if the NACS adoption doesn’t take off my charger manufacturers, then auto manufacturers have no incentive to adopt it either. That’s the remaining question mark. Regardless, Combo 1 connectors are going to be on those chargers because that’s what every other brand has on their cars.

        • cosmic_slate@dmv.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          I’m wanting to understand what you’re trying to say but I’m… confused.

          I clearly said they all announced it was happening in 2025, so obviously linking to their announcements isn’t really going to change anything.

          My understanding of your statement (specifically the bolded section) sounded like you were skeptical that carmakers will commit to their NACS plans.

          They haven’t switched yet, though. And that’s one of the points I’m making. They have said they’re switching in 2025. To me, that sounded a lot like they were waiting to see what happened with chargers in US and Canada.

          I guess if it was just Ford and Ford alone, I could see one company backing out, but not several entities.

          Secondly,

          What I’m saying is if the NACS adoption doesn’t take off my charger manufacturers, then auto manufacturers have no incentive to adopt it either. That’s the remaining question mark.

          Each announcement has explicitly said they’re doing this to gain access to the Supercharger network.

          In less than a year we’re going to see NACS connectors on 2025 models. The ink has dried on contracts. Engineers are likely nearly finished with changes needed to integrate and are testing if not already.

          Going back to CCS would be incredibly unlikely. There is no question about it anymore unless they want to figure out a way to justify to car buyers and investors about their decision to switch connectors then un-switch.

          • Dr. Dabbles@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            11 months ago

            I guess if it was just Ford and Ford alone, I could see one company backing out, but not several entities.

            Consider why these companies have decided to transition to an NACS port. Because they want their customers to gain access to chargers that exist, and those chargers are operated by Tesla. Now, imagine that in 2024 we start seeing NEVI funded chargers installed around the country, and those chargers have fewer NACS connectors than CCS Combo, or they have no NACS connectors. What do you think the auto manufacturers would do? They haven’t signed any kind of contract requiring they use NACS, they’ve simply announced that they plan to in 2025.

            In other words, if there’s no convenience improvement to deploying NACS ports because new charger sites don’t have a majority of NACS connectors, then they wouldn’t do it. They’d simply keep equipping vehicles with Combo 1 ports.

            Each announcement has explicitly said they’re doing this to gain access to the Supercharger network.

            Yes. Because today that network is by far the largest in the US, and almost certainly in Canada. But the US is funding deployment of new chargers every 50 miles, so you can see where brands other than Tesla might outnumber Tesla over the next few years.

            The ink has dried on contracts.

            Buying new plastic bits from an injection molding company doesn’t require an insane lead time, and the existence of contracts really isn’t meaningful in any way. There is almost guaranteed to be language in supplier contracts that allows both parties to back out as long as they keep a dollar spend level or pay a small penalty. This kind of thing happens all the time during qualification and testing.

            Going back to CCS would be incredibly unlikely.

            Why? If there was a compelling reason to not use NACS, why would anybody continue charging ahead?

            • cosmic_slate@dmv.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              Consider why these companies have decided to transition to an NACS port. Because they want their customers to gain access to chargers that exist, and those chargers are operated by Tesla.

              Agreed. I don’t think this was a technical decision at all, it was strictly to get access to the Supercharger network.

              Now, imagine that in 2024 we start seeing NEVI funded chargers installed around the country, and those chargers have fewer NACS connectors than CCS Combo, or they have no NACS connectors. What do you think the auto manufacturers would do? They haven’t signed any kind of contract requiring they use NACS, they’ve simply announced that they plan to in 2025.

              Tesla is basically dropping 1.5 sites a day at their current pace, and it’s been gradually increasing over time. They’ll be out-pacing the collective NEVI deployment for a while. Plus, each Supercharger site has 8+ (and now, more commonly, 12/16+, with a few 20-30+) stalls. Tesla’s Supercharger network is so far ahead, nobody else has to matter. NEVI only requires 4-stall sites, I’d bet almost anything that’s what we’re going to see for a while.

              Yeah, there’s probably no contract but why wait for others to catch up when they can get immediate results by swapping a plug and reworking a bit of the electrical system?

              Yes. Because today that network is by far the largest in the US, and almost certainly in Canada. But the US is funding deployment of new chargers every 50 miles, so you can see where brands other than Tesla might outnumber Tesla over the next few years.

              I seriously doubt this will happen in the next 2-4 years at the clip Tesla has been dropping chargers. Go look at the Under Construction list of Tesla chargers: https://supercharge.info/map. There’s practically a full-multiple-states-worth of NEVI deployments coming online from Tesla just in the next few months alone.

              Buying new plastic bits from an injection molding company doesn’t require an insane lead time, and the existence of contracts really isn’t meaningful in any way. There is almost guaranteed to be language in supplier contracts that allows both parties to back out as long as they keep a dollar spend level or pay a small penalty. This kind of thing happens all the time during qualification and testing.

              Sure but we’re 8-9 months from cars rolling off the assembly line, and Farley and Barra have been very vocal about their move to NACS, including relying on it in investor calls w/r/t charging.

              Why? If there was a compelling reason to not use NACS, why would anybody continue charging ahead?

              There is no compelling reason. Car makers gain access to a network that’s at least as large as everyone else combined, with much higher stall-count per site, at a much greater reliability, and greater number of higher power charging stalls. Tesla’s Supercharger network isn’t a hypothetical “this could get better”, they’ve been in the “they are better” camp. NACS+Supercharger is a guaranteed “win” and CCS is, at best, a story of optimism.

              Realistically, most people just don’t care about the CCS/NACS debate. Ford/GM/etc. get the PR hall-pass to claim CCS was the reason everything was bad, people then see Superchargers “just work”, take that statement at face value, and move on.

              I’m with you on that it really sucks a single company can steamroll the industry like this. It sets a scary precedent and puts charging in a very vulnerable spot for a while. IMO anyone who doesn’t see that there’s a pretty substantial risk to this isn’t thinking critically.

              Though, if Tesla tried to pull any funny business I’d bet they wouldn’t get very far considering they’ve explicitly granted anyone using the SAE standard a royalty-free license to the patent.

              • Dr. Dabbles@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                They’ll be out-pacing the collective NEVI deployment for a while.

                I disagree. They’ve added 21 in the past year in the US, so let’s call it 2 per month on average for 2023. The plan for several states I’m interested in will outpace that immediately. I don’t know where you got 1.5 sites per day, but that’s absolutely not the case in any way. It’s not even 1.5 stalls per day, instead it’s 0.624 stalls per day. Can you tell me where you got that number from, because 1.5 sites per day would be 548 sites per year and with an average of 10 stalls per site they’ve installed this past year that’s 5479 stalls. Back of the envelope math should have sounded wrong to you.

                I seriously doubt this will happen in the next 2-4 years at the clip Tesla has been dropping chargers.

                Again, your Tesla number is extremely wrong. You should go back to the supercharge.info site, go to the changes list, and switch to “add”. Lots of Tesla sites have been in planning and permitting for years, and to be frank until something Tesla says actually exists in the world it’s not worth much.

                Sure but we’re 8-9 months from cars rolling off the assembly line

                Maybe.

                There is no compelling reason.

                There’s a couple I can think of off the top of my head. Can you not?

                greater reliability

                You’re comparing to existing EA chargers, which we know isn’t the real comparison at hand here.

                Realistically, most people just don’t care about the CCS/NACS debate.

                Right, which is why I specifically didn’t have it. So let’s not start it, because there’s no debate to be had. One is superior to the other, and it isn’t NACS. That’s entirely separate from the conversation being had right now.

                claim CCS was the reason everything was bad

                Nope. Charger reliability has nothing to do with the connector, stop here. Do not pass go. It was the chargers, not the connectors. The connector decision was one of convenience because Tesla has a reliable network when used with a Tesla.

                What I’m suggesting here is that companies are prepared to use the NACS connector, as published by SAE. They announced this because Tesla’s network exists now and we didn’t know what was going to happen with NEVI funds. Now most of those funds have been allocated (if not all?), and since all of those sites are going to get Combo 1 connectors as well as NACS, it’s conceivable to me that they announced NACS to hype things up for a while, and the option to pull out is always there. They have zero requirement to use NACS on either chargers or vehicles, they simply may choose to. There’s been quite a swing in perception of supporting a certain CEO in the past 6 months that might not be as appealing to a lot of people, so it may not be the selling point it would have.

                • cosmic_slate@dmv.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  11 months ago

                  Your stance just isn’t grounded in data or evidence, and is at best an emotional appeal for CCS instead of coming to terms that the data simply doesn’t give CCS any true advantage.

                  Where do you see they only added 21 in the past year? This number aligns closely to magic dock conversions not the total NACS compatible deployments.

                  Supercharger V3/V4 supports the CCS protocol. This is the number each car maker is citing when they say 12000 (earlier this year). V3 has been deployed for a couple years now.

                  Anyways, here’s my sources:

                  There are literally at least a couple hundred threads of people posting construction updates started this year (and a sanity spot check suggests at least several of these are completed)

                  And to be very clear, this is 250kW DCFC stations.

                  And I have my personal experience that suggests a fast deployment: I live outside of DC and have regularly driven from around from Richmond to Baltimore this year. I have seen 7-8 come up alone:

                  • Tysons Corner, VA - I go to the mall this is at from time to time
                  • the one south of Fredericksburg on Jefferson Davis Highway - friend lives nearby and we’re both electrical nerds so we went to check it out
                  • District Heights, MD - noticed as it popped up as a charging stop
                  • Cumberland, MD - pretty drive
                  • Another Leesburg, VA charger - I’m in this area a couple times a year
                  • Another Reston, VA charger - I’m in this area a couple times a year
                  • Another Stafford, VA charger - Visiting a friend who’s just off this road a few times a year
                  • Another Gaithersburg, MD charger - Another person I see about once a year

                  When my car shows a new red blip for a charger, I get curious if I’m in the area.

                  I am seeing more than 5 other threads with new chargers started and finished this year on TMC.

                  To clear something up, I never said the connector itself was more reliable. I’m saying the car makers are probably going to claim that for sales to people who probably heard charging is hard or something.

                  You’re welcome to tag me in 2-3 years if CCS ends up being chosen over NACS again and I’ll happily concede, but I just don’t see it happening.

                  • Dr. Dabbles@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    11 months ago

                    Where do you see they only added 21 in the past year?

                    I told you exactly how to find it on the supercharge.info site in my previous post.

                    Slide 6 tips your hand, so thank you for commenting about this. You just posted the GLOBAL number, not the US number. NACS is US only, NEVI funds are US only. Pretty important detail, that one.

                    Tyson’s corner has been in planning stages since those shitty 208v destination chargers were installed, so I’m glad they finally did something. Is it actually open now? Took them long enough on that one.