Tesla Won The Plug War, But Will It Improve Charging?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 19 июл 2023
- In North America it really looks like J1772 and CCS are on their way out. With only a few major car companies holding out, the tide has turned in a big way and by 2025 the majority of EVs on sale will have the NACS / Tesla connector on board. Why the switch? It seems like it's mainly a desire to attract customers with the promise of more reliable DC charging, but will it actually improve things? Yes and no...
Looking for the shirt? It's here: www.aoamerch.com/product-page...
EV Tax Credits Explained: alexonautos.com/2022-ev-tax-c...
The Mountain Garden: / themountaingarden
Buy Merch! aoamerch.com
Follow AoA on Facebook: alexonautos/ 
Авто/Мото
Wow! This video seems to be way more informative than anything Kyle has put out about this subject. Thank you for all of this, at the same time keeping it simple!
Finally, some critical thinking applied to the situation. and, IMO, a proper voice of reason. I've been trying to tell folks basically the same thing and... no one's listening.
So far the companies adopting NACS are: GM, Ford, Mercedes, Volvo, Polestar, Nissan, Rivian, and Aptera. Most major DC charging networks have also announced support. The rumor mill says Stellantis is in talks but we have no word from BMW, Toyota or Hyundai/Kia yet. The version of NACS everyone is adopting seems to be "V4" which will support up to 615 kW (615A at 1,000V) but we don't have complete details yet because there appear to be a few changes vs the published 1,000V spec on Tesla's website. More to come over the next few months.
Adopting or "say they are adopting"? Does that list of adopters already have cars on the market with the Musk charger? Or have they promised something for the future?
@@jazzfan7491 Supposedly working prototypes already on the ground. Contracts have been signed but we don't know how much money has changed hands. GM has said they are on track with the change-over and that the R&D work started more than a year ago.
what about Honda? they announced their first ev for 2024 and acura as well
@@Takusman They have been tight lipped, but onw would assume they would be also since GM is making the Acura and Honda EVs for Honda.
@@EVBuyersGuide That certainly sounds pretty definitive, assuming “supposedly” means “it is a fact that”.
CCS without validation vs NACS without validation will be a interesting study.
Alex and Team, just wanted to say that you guys are doing an awesome job! I like the changes you guys have made so far and you guys are still by far the most informative channel when it comes to anytime AUTOMOTIVE!
Second this sentiment
You hit on the biggest reason for the legacy brands to jump ship to NACS in the US, the maintenance and upkeep of DCFC stations. When it comes to charging, Tesla’s biggest advantage here in the states is that they actively maintain their DCFC network. I almost exclusively L2 charge both of our EVs at work or at home, and for the most part of I need to L3 it’s no biggie, but I see a lot more complaints about broken hardware on Plugshare at EA, Chargepoint or EVGo stations than I do at Supercharger locations.
Almost all charging happens at home today or shopping/dining on L2. This getting blown out of proportion with a fixation on L3.
@@normt430 The problem is with the mental hurdle that folks who aren’t familiar with EVs need to overcome. To them they aren’t used to not being able to just “gas up and keep going” should they need to take a drive that’s longer than 250-300 miles. These folks don’t have to think about where they’re gonna gas up because there are gas stations everywhere whereas finding a functioning L3 station is hit or miss. They don’t want to have to learn some new shit, they just want the infrastructure to exist and be reliable “should they need it” even though they won’t most days.
The other thing you’re not taking into consideration is folks who don’t have access to home L2 charging. I own my home, have solar and have a 48A L2 on the side of my garage, but life in an apartment with the nearest L2 units being a 15 minute walk to City Hall across the street isn’t the most convenient way to go. It’s way easier for us to live with our two EVs since we bought our house over 2-3 years ago than it was when we had to use public or work charging.
Except Tesla had a way bigger incentive to keep that network functional since it was sold as a feature of their cars. Opening the network to everyone is bound to result in more maintenance and as Alex pointed out, more issues getting it to charge.
Wow, this explains everything!
Thanks for providing a bit of the history. So the J1772-2001 that you were referred to was the Avcon plug, and it was actually released concurrently with the MagneCharge induction paddle chargers used by GM and Toyota. During the standardization process, SAE was concerned about rain/water intrusion during charging with the induction system, so they homologated the J1772-2001 standard with the Avcon conductive charging head. And that's really the one thing I would have liked you to address better here: The plug is not the standard.
In fact, based on precedence, the actual Tesla standard (CAN bus based) is dead or at least dying, and it is being replaced by the CCS/J1772 standards which are now migrating to the Tesla plug head. So, just as no one refers to J1772-2001 as the "Avcon standard" or J1772-2009 as the "Yazaki standard," we also shouldn't be referring to this new "NACS" plug as the "Tesla standard."
Also, a couple other points that need to be addressed. CCS1 is currently deployed across multiple continents, so "NACS" is definitely a misleading and inappropriate name. Also, it will be a while before Tesla owners are able to use public "NACS" heads because while "NACS" is 100% interoperable with CCS, most Tesla cars are still missing the PLC module required to charge using CCS. Likewise, that's why the automakers who have brokered a deal with Tesla to access the Superchargers still will not be able to use about 8,000 Supercharger stalls in North America (those Superchargers are still operating only on Tesla's standard and are not directly compatible with CCS). The 12,000+ Supercharger stalls that are being opened are all "bi-lingual," and able to speak either Tesla or CCS.
Wow, there were really a whole lot of extra details not mentioned in the video, huh.
@@flamingspinach It's complicated topic, for sure, but frankly, that's because the easiest way to explain it isn't palatable for TSLA influencers. All that's happening is that, in North America, South America, parts of Asia, the CCS1 plug format is being replaced by the Tesla plug format. Basically, a new CCS plug head.
The other confusing part is that people keep conflating this new standard with several automakers negotiating to access the Tesla Superchargers. Those are two very different things, though it looks like part of Tesla's requirement for the deal is that those automakers eventually adopt the new plug. My guess is that Tesla is doing that because they realized how expensive it would be to put "Magic Docks" at every location where they wanted public funding to pay for the chargers, and they can't sell a CCS adapter on the open market because they still want to restrict access to the Superchargers as much as possible.
The signaling changes are going to be interesting for sure. It sounds like the rollout schedule for SC V4 is designed to coincide with the roll out of other OEMs accessing SC stations. We have no word from EA or others if they will or will not support the signaling needed to CCS charge. On the support front it seems like "most" Teslas on the road should support CCS already, the build change was October 2020. Tesla sold ~1.3 million cars before the switch and about 3.2 million since November 2020. Older Teslas will require an upgrade that seems to cost about $450.0
@@EVBuyersGuide The true Tesla standard would require both CAN communication and Tesla to release their proprietary protocols, so I can't see that happening for public charging providers. I suppose it's possible, but I expect the public chargers to remain as PLC.
Also, I haven't confirmed this, but some Tesla owners have reported that even post 2020 MY Teslas have been shipping without the PLC module due to parts shortages. I know that friends with pre-2020 MY Teslas haven't even been given a solid ETA for when they will get their PLC modules installed.
This was a very informative show! I had no idea about the 3 phase issue in Europe. Great content explained in a way I could understand it.
3 phase is important in Australia as well.
Alex - Great job explaining the differences between the CCS1, CCS2 and NACS. Appreciate your POV too.
I wonder when the copper hunters will start cutting the charging station cables. Hopefully designers will be pro-active on this.
Out of interest, in Australia a single phase circuit can supply 7kW (240V 32A) and a three phase circuit can supply 22kW (3 x 240V 32A) although few cars accept more than 11kW when charging.
same I Europe afaik
Alex, I remember when MTV's 'Unplugged" videos were cool. Now you have made videos about plugging in all the rage. 😉🤣
show yourself out..
Thanks
In Europe everyone uses CCS-2 because the European Union mandated it by law.
Same deal as USB-C instead of lightning USB-C
No, they did not. By the time that the EU introduced legislation that requires any DCFC that is being financed partially or fully by public funding to have at least a CCS connector, the CCS standard was already widely adopted. But we have no mandate for any manufacturer to use CCS or for any charging network to include CCS as long as they are financing everything themselves. CCS became the natural standard in Europe, in part because it was created by mostly European manufacturers.
@@shinybaldy when all manufacturers use USB-C, why not make it the required standard for all devices?
Thank you, like to see this kind of video coming out. This is the same situation as many years ago that people saying Apple computer is more reliable than IBM compatible. They have all the controls of hardware and software. NACS would need to add contactor in series to meet the safety standard that manufacture had to pay more for nice looking charger connector.
I can always count on Alex to be the voice of reason.
Great video, probably the most informed and unbiased I've seen lately. Personally, I'm excited about Tesla's network, but not their plug. It's more reliable in part because it moves failure components to the vehicle (the lock, and also the AC/DC charging contactors ) from the plug. I can find another plug to charge, but if either of those breaks on the car you're calling a tow truck.
Moving failure components to the vehicle might help with overall reliability, as the latch for instance is less likely to get damaged being in the vehicle instead of on the plug where it can be dropped and is subject to the damaging effects of the sun and rain.
@directorjustin Maybe? Even if so, not comforting when the part breaks on your vehicle.
@@1970351C2Vyou have a lot more control over your own vehicle than the station. Having the latch on a station, being dropped, abused all the time, is worse.
Love your background.
Where did the "J1772" nomenclature come from?
There is no way the EU is going to adopt a proprietary norm for its fast chargers, while the number of fast CCS chargers by various providers such as Ionity are being rolled out, and tens of thousands of slower chargers are sprinkled all over Europe. Plus, the CCS norm comes from EU legislation, which takes years to agree and then implement.
Not a problem in Europe already, already have a standard connector
Lack of regulation in the USA really made this a mess for everyone
I chuckled a bit, so the solution to the problem is to change the part that wasn't a problem.
Also, CCS2/Combo is not exclusively a European thing. It is used in Australia, some countries in Africa, South America and Asia (including India).
Alex said we don't know for sure what the reliability of the CCS1 connector is compared to the Tesla connector. What we do know is that having a latch at the top of the CCS1 connector that gets used thousands of times over the lifetime of the cable is inherently less reliable than having the latch on the car which is only used for maybe a dozen times per year for most cars. The latch on the car side also allows you to lock the charger to the car to prevent theft. The other big problem with CCS1 that CCS2 in Europe and the NACS connectors don't have is the thin shroud around the DC plugs. Go look up a hi-res image of a CCS1 connector and notice that the lower shroud is super thin. The connector relies on this bottom shroud to support the plug along with the top latch. If this shroud breaks or is deformed, it won't work. This has been documented to happen a lot. Notice the CCS2 shroud is very thick in comparison and it's not a problem. Notice that the NACS plug is thick and no thin parts at all.
@@gregb7353 I get it.
The main problems are software incompatibility and lack of maintenance of the charging network with CCS.
Wow, so every car manufacturer is going for Tesla charging, but only for the United States. Thank you for this important update and news!
Nice T-shirt!
Dude, Alex is shedding pounds by the video. He looks so much thinner.
Agreed, great job! How are you doing it? Just Calories in < Calories out, or a special diet? Inquiring minds want to know ;-)
Building a house will do that 😂
@@JamesRussoMillas I didn’t know he was building a house. That’s a big project
Agree 100% with everything you said, both the facts and the opinions. :) It will be interesting to see how NACS develops to fill the need to handle higher charge rates. Every connector is a balance between voltage, current and physical size. Balancing those is hard, especially as the application of the connector diverges (motorcycle to 18 wheeler and then what).
I actually have never thought the CCS was that painful and since I have the ioniq 5 I will be living with it for a long time ahead. I dont mind the tesla plug becoming the common format if it gets me access to more chargers, make3s planning less complicated and wont dilute the fantastic fast-charge curve of the ioniq..
In my little corner of Europe (UK) the vast number of homes are single phase, though often public AC EVSEs are 3 phase. On single phase we are limited to 32A at 230/240v that maxes charging out to 7.6kW, we can't have EVSEs with higher current, unlike the US. And most vehicles can't take full advantage of 3 phase AC, for example VW MEB platform cars are limited to 11kW.
If the comparison is for connectors that provide both DC quick charging and level 1 / 2 charging, I believe a more valid visual comparison for size and bulk would be NACS connector to CCS (Combined Charging System allowing for DC and level 1 /2 charging in a single connector, same as NACS), as opposed to the J1772 connector, which does not have DC fast charging capability.
I may have missed it but this won't work 800v architecture? So no Hyundai/Kia/Geneis 350v capabilities?
A as great to the point unbiased summary
I have a PHEV and am looking at getting a level 2 charger for a second home. I will be going BEV in a couple of years. How do I future proof my level 2 charger or do I face it that we will be using an adapter forever?
It's too soon to say for sure, but you could get a Tesla EVSE and then use a J1772 adapter for now and your next EV won't need the adapter. Some companies may also offer plug swaps.
Find an EVSE where it would be trivial to change the charging cable. Or if that is not possible, find a good electrician in a few years who can cut of the J1772 connector and replace it with a NACS style plug.
Thanks for doing this video Alex. This video just restates what I been telling people all along, NACS is just a plug nothing more, Yes Ford, Chevy and any other manufactures that add the NACS to their cars, might benefit from because they might sell more cars and now they can sell adapters but I don't think it will change the problem with inconsistency.
Wow, makes me glad I kept my PHEVs and haven’t bought a full EV yet.
Btw, couldn’t the SAE just include in their standard a requirement for software validation between the car’s onboard charger and the EVSE? I would think that would force a charge network company and car company to work together to ensure charger reliability.
Alex, is there any impact on bi-directional / vehicle to load / vehicle to grid applications from this. Chadamo had this, and of course Ford and Hyundai / Kia vehicles, but I don't know the extent to which the charging standards enable that vs other choices by car makers.
No, there is not. Since NACS is just CCS with a Tesla plug, it will allow for bi-directional loads and it will even become part of the standard once CCS has included it.
The short answer is we don't know. The long answer is that technically most V2L functionality is outside of the specification which is why V2L adapters are proprietary for now. You can't use a Ford V2L on a Jeep, or a Jeep's V2L plug on a Hyundai, or the Kia adapter on a Silverado EV. For V2L Ford offboards DC directly in the Lightning but GM opts for high output AC via the AC pins on J1772. NACS is just a connector with J1772 and CCS signaling so a company could do anything they already do just using a different plug.
With this change, would you still recommend buying an existing EV that is not using NACS?
I don't see a realistic problem as adapters have been needed for years and this isn't going to change that much.
I think with the DC fast charging reliability thing, anything is better than nothing in this case and we definitely need something for CCS cars in North America.
ID4 also had/has issues on ElectrifyAmerica stations. So either VW didn't validate their own cars on their own network or there's more to it then just validating a car to a charging network.
Another issue with NACS is the question of V2X. Ford may license Tesla charging software, but will you be able to power your home from your F-150 Lightning using the NACS connector?
I don't see any reason that you could not. Ford uses a non-standard method for offboarding power and there is no technical reason they could not do the same with NACS
Do you think this will affect the resale value of CCS vehicles? If the whole charging network moves to NACS, will a CCS car be obsolete in 5 years or does an adapter make this a non-issue?
Interesting question. I would assume long term yes, but short term no. There will be new 2025 vehicles with CCS connectors on them and the adapters will make them usable on any network. How the market responds is anyone's guess but I would assume that say after 2027+ there would be some minor resale penalty
@@EVBuyersGuide thanks! Your channels always have the best, most reliable car information on RUclips. I appreciate it!
With the big players going to NACS do you think EA will continue to add (desperately needed) CCS plugs around the country? Will they default to NACS? I bought my EV6 because of its fast charging speeds and future rollout of CCS. On magic dock and V4 1k volt Superchargers in Europe it apparently only does < 50KW. My other concern is resale value. Mostly due to Elon’s price fluctuations used EV prices appear to be in free fall. I think the other reason is the migration to NACS. Knowing it is coming, non-Teslas are not going to sell. (And used ones plummet like ChaDeMo Nissan Leafs with nowhere to charge.) I just checked and my 10 month old 22 EV6 w/5k miles that cost $55k has a trade in value of $34k… Love the car, but maybe should’ve bought a hybrid as road trips in the Midwest are difficult.
@@MyEVexperience730 EA has said they will start adding NACS plugs on their next generation chargers. As far as the Magic Dock speeds go, that's a software issue that Kia/Hyundai are working through with Tesla. I got an official answer on that and it's due to the way that the EGMP platform buks the voltage up. In a nutshell the buck converter uses the windings on the rear motor and the extra impedance causes the SC station to freak out because it doesn't match the power profile of a battery. The solution for the moment was to drop the charge rate down. Hyundai says they are working with Tesla for a resolution and in theory the EGMP voltage converter should be able to handle 180-200kW once it is fixed.
Thanks ! I appreciate the extra insight and agree with everything you said in todays video.
Makes perfect sense for North America. Many people hate on Tesla car brands in business to sell cars. Lots of examples of non Tesla chargers having major issues. Buyers demand reliable chargers and access to as many charging locations as possible. Tesla provides all there needs, so this is no surprise....
And you clearly didn't listen. NACS will not solve many of the charging issues that people are having. Tesla cars are charging reliably on Tesla chargers because Tesla controls both car and charger and uses a proprietary protocol for it. NACS on the other hand is CCS with a different connector and will keep all the communicaiton issues you already have today. We can see this already in Europe as well as in the US when people use the magic dock.
I would also like to point out that in North America you have more charging locations with CCS than with a Tesla plug today. Not more chargers, but certainly more locations.
Is it going to be more reliable - yes if only because (certainly going by the uk experience) there is a higher incidence of the charger being out of order _before you plug in_ with non tesla chargers compared to tesla chargers
Sooooo....in my area of the US. being able to use a Tesla charger is a big deal as they are only ones with DC fast chargers for the most part. I have to drive 90 minutes at minimum to get to an EA station. We have a Tesla Supercharger in town and their placement in the towns and cities around us is far superior. In my city we only have a 2 stand EV Go 50kw DC fast charger that has 2 CCS and 2 CHAdeMO plugs. I know their are likely to be more bugs to work out, but just having the possibility is huge as a non-Tesla road trip is rough at the moment.
This will help a great deal for anyone doing an interstate road trip. We don't know how the roll out will go aside from the adopters. If Tesla does deploy more Magic Docks around the USA, then anyone will be able to use the stations. At the moment however you'll notice that GM/Ford, etc are all going to be supplying adapters in 2024 which seems to imply that Magic Dock won't be rolling out on a wider scale.
I've been wondering what this will mean for those of us stuck with J1772 Level 2 AC charging -- it's already the case that my success charging overnight on a Tesla destination charger with an adapter is about 50/50 whether it works or shuts off after a few minutes. Will those same kind of chargers still be available for overnight charging, or will the new chargers be DC only like the current superchargers?
Dat t-shirt doe. Imma have to order me one of those when I get home today. Lol
Woohoo! Yep, they are on the merch site!
Love it too!
One issue with the CCS connector is because its so big and bulky it will often disconnect and end your charging session. Thats not an issue wjth NACS
"It could be a paddle from the 1990s" LOL
It would also be a good idea to standardize the location of the charging connector on EVs. How many years did that take on gasoline-fueled cars?
Location? It still hasn't happened on gas cars. Some are on the left, some on the right. Thankfully none are behind the license plate anymore.
But what is the best spot? Front? Side Front? Side Rear?
Do ppl really like having to back their EV up just to make Tesla's job easier?
@@EVBuyersGuide Someone should tell Aptera that part of history.
@@sprockkets really depends on who you ask. Some people say that backing up in any parking spot is usually the bast way to park as you have the best vision when pulling out. And you think having the charge port in the front of the vehicle has only benefits? Go ask some Niro owners how they feel about plugging in the car after driving through snowfall.
@@Hans-gb4mv Well Aptera said they were going to have CCS or J1772, 120v normal plug and nacs under the hood. Cause they said having it behind the license plate was not legal.
But then kept it.
I'm aware of the niro and even kia soul owners about having the charge port up front. Which is a shame because I like it probably the best there.
How will that affect V2L with non U.S. manufacturers?
We don't have a solid answer but I don't foresee any changes other than needing a NACS V2L adapter, there's no technical reason why they couldn't do it.
Alex, what do you think about H/K/G, either alone or in collaboration with eg. Porsche, Audi, Lucid, switching to NACS and building out their own 1000v capable network? Expensive but necessary? They can stay on CCS, look out of touch, remain tethered to EA and allow EA incompetence to taint their very good vehicles? Switch to NACS for Supercharger access but have to deal with charging like molasses? I’m of the mind that I’ll be a long time before even a double-digit percentage of Tesla SCs are 800v capable. Or bite the bullet and roll out their own 1000v network? It’s not like we’re anywhere close to saturation with charging networks. The more the merrier at this point.
NACS charging won't be slow with V4 stations which should be rolling out to coincide with the switch over by most car companies. The V4 stations will support 1000V/615A so a max draw of over 600kW. The power delivery profile easily supports every EV on sale or planned for the N. American market. Tricky part is the older Supercharger stations won't, you'd be limited to fairly low speeds in the EGMP vehicles due to a software issue at the moment and in theory maybe 180kW once that gets fixed. Tesla will likely however make that upgrade rapidly if the Cybertruck is indeed an "800V" EV in which case its a non issue.
It does improve, yes. Universal Infrastructure is key to the use of EVs, along with oncoming fusion technology, which will power the utility companies of the future. The next step will be additional charging stations and facilitating faster sessions, so stations do not bottleneck.
I highly doubt my VW e-Golf was validated with Tesla, yet I had a perfect, first time working, DCFC experience at Scotts Valley Supercharger.
this is simple: for new nacs customers, yes. for tesla customers, no.
All GM EV dealers have invested bank for CCS and are not changing to Tesla ports. Like in Europe not changing or Asia too.. So not all.. They will use adaptors to use Tesla Superchargers when needed... No Follow!
One of the problems with CCS is that the standard isn't clear enough in many areas on the communication protocol. So car and charging system manufacturers have had to basically fill in the blanks and try to agree on what to do in those instances.
NACS uses the same signaling method and protocols as CCS…
@@EVBuyersGuide Superchargers use CANbus to communicate with the car. CCS uses PLC. It wasn't until last year that Teslas got the ability to communicate over PLC which makes them compatible with CCS. Any older Tesla will need a hardware upgrade in order to use CCS.
From what I've read, all non-Tesla cars using NACS will use the CCS/PLC communication methods.
@@seanplace8192 Correct, Superchargers currently use PLC and NACS is different and GM/Ford made that clear in interviews I had with them they it will be using CCS/PLC communication. However, Tesla claims that almost all models produced since October 2020 have the ability to communicate via PLC as well. Users can verify their car's compatibility in the infotainment software. In a nutshell if you can use the CCS adapter, you're all set for the NACS future. According to the numbers, the majority of Teslas on the road support PLC. About 1.5 million Teslas were sold prior to Oct 2020 and around 3.2 million have been sold since. The disclaimer is that Tesla won't say how many of the models built after Oct 2020 lack CCS support and there is a percentage there due to build timing, supply chain issues, etc. On the other hand, Tesla says that all models will be able to be retrofitted to support PLC.
I wonder what this will do to cable lengths. As you showed in another video, Tesla's vertical integration means they could optimize the length based on the receptacle position. It won't help the non-Teslas if they don't also account for shorter length at Tesla infrastructure. Or maybe on the flipside Tesla will start lengthening their cables to accept non-Teslas.
Tesla has already implied that V4 stations will get 18-24 foot cables, that's what we will need to plug 2024 models in since the charge ports won't be moving. Even for 2025 it looks like Gm and Ford aren't changing any sheetmetal.
To be fair, EVgo recently said they are coordinating with manufacturers on their new vehicles to test DCFC prior to actually going on sale. I have no idea what EA is doing though.
EV Go and EA both told me directly in an interview that they would be happy to validate cars, it's GM and Ford that have not bothered to do that. So if the companies don't give EA and EVgo cars and software to test before they roll out an update or new car, why do we think they would treat Tesla any differently?
I wonder if the contracts the manufacturers have signed with Tesla mandate good testing.
@@crb456 so far nobody will give us any answers
With everybody switching to NACS in the near future what does that mean for the “reverse charging” (or vehicle to grid or whatever else they called it) capabilities that cars like the Lightning, Silverado, and Kia/Hyundai EVs used as a selling point? Tesla seems to be reluctant to introduce the capability on their own cars and if they control the standard (or at least have significant influence) will that ability be possible on future American EVs?
It's NACSty!
I went with a Tesla because of NACS but I would have preferred the Ioniq5. I wonder how this decision will impact Tesla sales with other EV's now having access to a real charging infrastructure.
You probably went with Tesla because of its charging infrastructure vs the Ioniq 5's. The Ioniq 5 could have had the same or better charging infrastructure, but not company committed to it anywhere near how Tesla did.
If only the US Govt mandated CCS2 years ago!
Thank you for this level headed take on this switchover. Some of the fanboy behavior over the NACS has just been too much. As long as it's a real standard then I don't care what the plug looks like, within reason. CCS1/2 are fine, not perfect, but fine. The same for NACS. The problem in the US as noted is station reliability and availability. We need the charge point operators (outside of Tesla) to address these issues. We need Telsa not to fail once the walled garden comes down. Let's see where this goes, hopefully increased reliability and more chargers for all EV drivers regardless of charge port installed.
I like his shirt, LOL
It's available on the march store!
Until this gets figured out, I'm trading in my BMW i3. There are just too many EVs and nowhere near enough charging support. Hopefully in 5 years things will get sorted out.
The reason for software incompatibility is the standard isn't completely well defined so both car and chargers have a little too much design flexibility. The issue settles down eventually by market forces, but sometimes industries promote a certification process to ensure compatibility. The computer industry has fought these battles for years with WiFi, USB and Thunderbolt power adapters. It wasn't too long ago that you could destroy a Thunderbolt interface by plugging in a poorly designed adapter.
The standard is well defined, but sometimes engineers take things to the limit, and sometimes you end up over the limit. That's why in software design there is a saying: By strict in what you send out, be lenient in what you accept. Make sure you follow standards to the letter whenever possible, but remember that not everybody does, so make sure you allow for tolerances in what you recieve.
I now understand why Americans are so fixated on dc fast charging. In Europe (with cars that support 22kw 3 phase) home charging seems a much more attractive option.
I wonder what happens to Valkswagen now!, considering they had to pay billionsfor ElectrifyAmerica due to their dieselgate days. If they go to NACS, would that be a loss of investment? And will they use NACS?
VW will likely move in N America, it's just a question of when. EA has already said their new chargers will have NACS plug as well.
So all the current evs are just going to get phased out charger wise. Also it means any current level 1/2 chargers are just going to become ewaste in 5 years. Are these car companies going to make retrofit kits for older EVs so they can use modern connectors?
The SAE forcing a standardized connector would have solved this problem long ago. We dont have different gas nozzles per car brand and gas station brand (just between fuel types which makes sense). This change will tank the value of my older ioniq even more as it will need adapters to charge on any charger in only a few years.
SAE can't force a standard, they only can publish a standard and ask manufacturers to comply with it. Which most did ... except Tesla.
It matters in the US so you can standardize to systems it will be a way that will make it better that we can go to any charge point the government should have done this so the manufacturers didn’t have to think about it
I appreciate the sane and well reasoned thoughts. I don’t think using the Tesla plug is going to do anything to improve reliability in other networks. Honestly, I’d rather everyone use CCS2/mennekes but, I’m a weirdo 😸
You could move to Europe 😊
@@dutchdryfly oh, I’m not opposed to that at all 😹😸
The latch is actually a HUGE deal. Level 3 CCS chargers usually have an electronic latch on the charger, so that you can lock the cable in and leave your car charging. Those cables see a lot of abuse, from some people tossing them on the ground instead of replacing them in the holder, so the latch can get damaged and stuck, especially in freezing weather. With NACS, the car unlatches the connector and always has a manual backup unlatch. So if the connector gets stuck latched, you will be SOL until a maintenance crew gets there to let you leave and depending on the operator it can be next business day.
PS Tesla had a 3 phase compatible connector in Europe, that could lvl2 charge at 22kw on 32A when the Model S launched in Europe. They switched to CCS because the EU forced them to, not for 3 phase.
PPS you look noticably younger now that you've lost some weight Alex.
The 3 phase connector Tesla used in Europe on the Model S was the Menkes connector, just like other Euro EVs. The change that occured with Model 3 in Europe is that they added CCS support, so Type 2 + the extra DC pins. If you google around you can see that no Euro market Tesla has had NACS or a proprietary connector. The Menkes/Type 2 connector was used for up to 120kW DC charging.
Europe did not force Tesla to adopt anything. You will not find any EU legislation that states that CCS is a required plug. As Alex pointed out in his comment, Tesla used the already prevalent type 2 connector initially when launching in Europe. One of the important reasons for that was because there already was decent AC charging infrastructure in Europe using that type of plug and since charging is key when selling EVs, Tesla did not want to miss out on the existing infrastructure. They initially did not opt for the CCS for DCFC but made their own standard, however, since the connector could not safely handle more than 120kW, Tesla decided to adopt the CCS connector in Europe for DCFC to stay backwards compatible with their own infrastructure when they needed faster charging speeds.
And when the EU decided to support the roll-out of DCFC stations, one of the requirements there was that the station had to have at least a CCS plug and be open to all cars. That's when Tesla decided to start opening up the supercharger network in Europe.
European CCS does not have the latch as demonstrated here though.
@@XLoaferY European CCS has an electronic latch in the car. And it latches onto the AC part of the connector as AC cables also get locked onto your car while charging.
@@XLoaferY where was it demonstrated? Just had a look at CCS 2 chargers on sale and they all have latches.
NACS, right now this day, is the much better system for Tesla cars only. We are going to NACS for better or worse. Let's see what's going to happen.
I have both a CCS1 and a NACS vehicle. There is absolutely no benefit to the average consumer with the CCS1 adapter. I can plug my Tesla into any NACS plug without adapters. It is simply “plug and play”. I don’t need to open an app or do anything other than plug it in. Anyone resisting switching to NACS will be left behind. The consumers want NACS and nothing else.
Unfortunately it's not clear if every OEM will get that experience with the SC network. Ford and GM supposedly.
the reason for the switch is not the plug Teslas system works better then any other system in North America, no reason for Tesla to change, because other charging station makers aren't very intelligent or very integrated.
What is going to happen to everyone who just recently purchased a new ev with the ccs charge port? I get a feeling that we are going to be abandoned by manufacturer to support us for the next 10 years.
For now: nothing will change. DCFC stations will either get an additional connector or a solution similar to the magic dock from Tesla and CCS will be supported for years to come. As NACS and CCS are essentially the same, except for the connector, there is also no need to drop support for CCS in the comming years on charging stations.
Maybe, like in a gas station, have 3 or 4 different connectors for what your car needs?
Whats really funny is just how much rnd was going into 1600v charging stations for next gen ccs chargers and charging stations, now i guess most of that will turn into 1000v chargers from tesla, and will have tesla yet again hindering progress in the fast charging space. Im just happy everywhere else ban hammered the tesla connector.
The next step for CCS is MCS which already uses a different plug than CCS. So no real loss there.
Keep in mind that this NACS nonsense only affects Americans, all Euro teslas have CSS and China also has their own standard
This is a reoccurring issue with all modalities of connectors in the tech world. Whether it's USB, HDMI, DP, XMP/DOCC, credit card terminal PCI or EV charging ports. Plain and simple the established automakers don't have the assets in terms of firmware/software engineers to do handshake testing with their vehicles. Like Alex said, Ford, GM, Audi, VW, Jauguar and all the rest could could have collaborated with EA and EVGo but they did not. So no, the NACS form factor wasn't required. Competence in material engineering, firmware and software was and the only one putting in the effort was Tesla (maybe Nissan). Therefor indirectly, NACS is required - at least outside of Europe.
But NACS doesn't fix any of that ...
@@Hans-gb4mv NACS uses Tesla's protocols for communication. While CCS supposedly had a standard layer, even VW's own cars couldn't charge on the network they created from Dieselgate. Handshakes weren't going through, server timeouts, failure to have accounts accepted and so forth. The manufacturers didn't bother working with the ones putting in the infrastructure - Ford even acknowledged this.
The automakers that are going to use Tesla's NACS are doing so not because the connector is smaller but because Tesla knows how to do proper communication from the vehicle to the mothership so to speak - just like Visa network authorizes your credit card at a PCI DSS compliant credit card terminal. Tesla is going to do the backend software for these companies. They can slap whatever UI on the face up front they like.
Mache E Owner CCS charging equals Ford, EA/Charging Operator and Charging Hardware Manufacture to get their software ducks in a row. There are over a dozen charging operators and an additional over dozen hardware manufactures.
Mach E Owner Supercharging equals Ford and Tesla to get their software ducks in a row. Much simpler equals better reliability.
👏👏👏 SWEET BABY JESUS LOL ...
If you could magically transport a NACS car from the future to the present day and plug it in to a current Tesla Supercharger, it would not work. NACS and existing Tesla plugs are two different implementations sharing a common physical form factor. The current NACS "specification" is only a mission statement; the document provides physical dimensions, but then it is just hand waving on the intent of the communication protocol. Future V4 fast charging an existing Tesla will require falling back from the newer NACS protocol to the existing, older CANbus-based Tesla communications standard (or talking to a software-upgraded version of the CCS hardware already built-in to newer Teslas).
I’m sure Tesla would like to control the NACS and DC fast charging in general. I don’t see how switching connectors is going to solve reliability issues with current CCS chargers. It certainly prolongs the confusion for new EV buyers.
I have a Tesla Wall connector at home that is on a 60 amp circuit(charges at 48 amps) and a J1772 charge plugged into a 50 amp circuit which maxes out the EVSE(charges at 40 amps), why is the Tesla wall connector cable about half the size of the J1772 EVSE?
Just the MFRs decision around durability, insulation, etc. It's hard to be specific but generally speaking thicker cables with more protection can be more durable. Many J1772 makers also use less expensive insulation plastics which can be a hair bulkier.
I see CCS vs. NACS in the same way as I see Android vs. Apple. Apple has full control of the "customer experience" -- for better and for worse -- but mostly for the better for most customers. Yes, the customer has less control of what apps are available, but that's a sort of "dated" concept and the trade off (an "Apple-certification" that the app WILL work on one of their iPhones) and trade-off worth making for many. As an Android user (and retired Systems Engineer) I DO see the benefit for most customers -- though, the Andriod-world has moved more toward this sort of standardization (Pixel and Samsung) while allowing the "rouge" Android phone to still exist.
I -- like I believe you, Alex -- hope the NACS isn't "dumbed-down" as it's adopted by the current CCS-standard manufacturers (i.e. Android manufacturers). If EVs were like cell phones that are only charged using standard wall plugs and inexpensive power supplies, we wouldn't even be having this discussion -- if all people had easy access to charge their EVs overnight and no need to drive them on extended routes, we wouldn't have need for standardization. But if EVs are to replace ICE vehicles, we do need to reliable charging network and, I believe, a standardized plug makes this an easier transitions. And, I do believe that Tesla has the best technology -- and either they need to improve (vastly) their vehicle build-quality and/or become the supplier of said technology to other manufacturers -- but, then that requires the other manufactures to admit that Tesla has "nailed it" on the technology.
I mean... We have quite perfect example already, smartphone chargers. It was a mess at the beginning, every brand had its own thing until one standard (except apple, because apple does apple things) but everyone else went with USB standard. EV's are at same exact point, we simply need to pick one standard, one good standard and go with it. At the moment NACS looks to be best option due to its multiple benefits. And yes, while car is big and having tiny bit smaller charger isint making big difference, having it smaller is still a good thing and allow more options for car designers than having that big bulky CCS with DC charging...
EA doesn't make their own chargers. They bought it from other 3rd parties. That makes it harder to certify when there are half a dozen different implementations and interpretations of the so called "Standard", just from EA alone.
9:27 Frankly, I wouldn't blindly trust EA on that because Ford isn't the only automaker their stations are having issues with. As one of the most unreliable public charging providers, that's something that EA needs to own. As long as the automakers are following the standards guidelines and properly programming their Power Line Communications (PLC) modules, the charging errors aren't their fault. We know that they are because their EVs are working fine (or at least better) with almost every other public charging provider. VW literally has an EA testing center in Arizona, and yet their EVs are just as likely to encounter issues with EA chargers.
In fact, from what I've seen, some automakers are adhering more closely to the CCS standards "requirements" than the charging providers. For example, the Chevy Bolt EV won't charge if the locking mechanism is broken off of the CCS1 plug head. EVgo, likewise, won't allow their CCS1 plugs to activate without that required latch being in place. Meanwhile, I've seen a number of other charging providers and EVs dispensing and accepting power from a CCS1 plug with a broken latch.
Lots of interesting information and insights here, but I'm still waiting for a video on this topic which asks perhaps the most important question: what does this all mean for people buying EVs -- and especially non-Teslas -- this year, in the year which is clearly a huge change in the car business in that many other makers are suddenly selling tons of EVs which DO NOT have Musk chargers. Hyundai, VW, and BMW are not small or insignificant car makers. It's an obvious strategic question for those companies: how much do they care about alienating all the customers who are buying their EVs this year?
For now: nothing will change. DCFC stations will either get an additional connector or a solution similar to the magic dock from Tesla and CCS will be supported for years to come. As NACS and CCS are essentially the same, except for the connector, there is also no need to drop support for CCS in the comming years on charging stations.
Umm... At 2:20 ish.. no, GM (Delco) invented the Magne Charge (j1773) used by the EV1, S10, Nissan Altra, and RAV4... Not invented nor mandated by California...
At that time the j1772(1996) was the avcon coupler system used by the Ford ranger, solectria, and Honda EV Plus... See the Wikipedia article for some photos...
Anyway...
Got it. So Tesla charger is slim and sexier. (going by your word count :)
In Europe its CCS. Even Tesla is CCS.
CCS2
No way Jose to monopoly control of the standard. They can control their own network, of course, but the standard needs to run through somebody other than just one company.
NACS only defines the connector, nothing else. And the standard will be controlled by SAE, not Tesla.
One correction is the NACS carries the name standard, but it is only a self proclaimed standard; that is not a standard for any vehicle other than Tesla. So in short, it’s simply a Tesla inlet/plug that Tesla has released the documentation on so people know its dimensions, and its characteristics, but they have not released any of its patents, so for manufacturers of cables or inlets sounding this Tesla standard will either pay the piper, risk patent infringement or this will have to become an open public no patent standard, so the electric vehicle world is not held hostage to what is clearly a more usable interface dictated by a monopoly called Elon. V4’s equipment hasn’t been released as the “standard.” Read Tesla’s documentation carefully, because only non-liquid cooled cables are used anywhere in the publication which are version two and below. 16:01
SAE is working to make a SAE standard for NACS, the name will change but that's the direction it's going.
Nice to see that Alex's evil twin has joined the team.
All these manufactures are choosing to make this switch by 2025. Probably costing em a lot money to do so. It would make absolutely no since for them to then have incompatible software . I know the stupid factor is high anymore. It would be a huge blunder and a wast of time if that comes to be the case.
oh my god alex talked so differently in this channel....
There definitely are some minor reliability issues directly attributable to the CCS1 plug.
Some chargers even instruct you to hold up on the plug while the charging session starts because of the tendency of the comms pins to have spotty contact with the weight of the connector and cable hanging down.
Those are the old CCS stations. And do you remember the days when you need to put a wet towel over the Tesla Supercharger plugs in order to get full power?
I know it’s hard to determine based on what the car accepts, but we know absolutely certain charging stations are just simply not pulling the power they claim to advertise, even if everything in the car is working you precondition etc, why has an Ioniq 5 never actually pulled 350. Tesla will also probably put power walls on standby at stations to just get guaranteed juice incase anything goes wrong, this is a win for consumers IF the manufacturers properly engineer/ incorporate NACS into their vehicles
Ioniq 5 is rated to about 240. I have an EV6 which I have seen pull 235.
Ioniq 5 isn't rated for 350, it peaks between 235-240. Hyundai had some confusing specs surrounding this, but here;'e the nutshell: a 350kW charger is required to charge the Ioniq 5/6/EV6/GV60/GV70/GV80/EV9 at full speed (18 min) but that full speed is 240 kW (ish), not the max station output.
To add to this, IIRC an 800v or 1000v charger is needed, but the car doesn't actually pull anything over around 670ish.
@@sprockkets Indeed. The Lucid is the only one that really does around 1,000V. GM's EVs are barely 800V and just the 24 module packs.
@@sprockkets you have to get the SOC down to about 10% to get the voltage down to 670. At SOC 80% the voltage is very close to 800.