4 ms·
calling your own implementation a standard is like trying to make fetch happen; it’s so disingenuous. ccs is government funded, tesla “nacs” is not. if you wan
by kanbara 3y ago
calling your own implementation a standard is like trying to make fetch happen; it’s so disingenuous.
ccs is government funded, tesla “nacs” is not. if you want tesla to be standard, sure. open it up, get all automakers on board, dont charge royalties, and let’s see.
it’s so asinine that NA and ROW will have different ac and dc charging. why cant we just have one global standard? preferably one not controlled by a rich megalomaniac
- josephcsible 3y ago> calling your own implementation a standard is like trying to make fetch happen; it’s so disingenuous. Is Intel not allowed to call USB4 a standard? > ccs is government funded, tesla “nacs” is not. Are USB or PCIe government funded? Are they not standards either? > if you want tesla to be standard, sure. open it up, get all automakers on board, dont charge royalties, and let’s see. Didn't Tesla already do those things? (Assuming you meant "some other" instead of "all", because if you didn't, then USB-C wouldn't be a standard either since iPhones don't use it.)
- valianteffort 3y agoThe overwhelming majority of EV chargers in the US use NACS, that is what makes it the standard.
- saalweachter 3y agoIt looks like there are roughly 128k public EV charging stations in the US, of which 28k are DC fast chargers, of which 17k are Tesla Superchargers and 6600 are CSS chargers. So NACS is beating CSS roughly 3:1, but J1772 still outnumbers NACS something like 5:1.
- sugarpile 3y agoFord and GM recently announced they will be using NACS for new electric vehicles. NACS is the standard.
- josephcsible 3y agoTesla Destination Chargers are public EV charging stations that aren't DC fast chargers but are NACS. You appear to be counting them all as J1772 instead.
- saalweachter 3y agoHmmm, fair point. Looks like there are around 4000 Tesla Destination Chargers in the US; that shifts the numbers to more like 32:7:2 for J1772:NACS:CSS.
- mkozlows 3y agoYou can plug a J1772 plug into a CCS car without an adapter, and you can't plug it into a Tesla/"NACS" car without one. I think it's meaningfully true to treat J1772 as CCS for this purpose.
- Sohcahtoa82 3y agoJ1772 should never have existed, IMO. It's pitiful 19.2 kW maximum charge rate hurt EV adoption by continuing the idea that it takes hours to charge your car. In the conversation of NACS versus CSS, J1772 shouldn't even be part of the conversation. It's simply not relevant.
- saalweachter 3y agoYou frame the argument the way you want it to end. CSS is a fraction of the US fast chargers; NACS is a fraction of the total US EV chargers. NACS is used by 2/3rds of the existing BEV fleet; CSS/J1772 is used by 2/3rds of the existing plug-in EV fleet.