5 ms·
This must be one of those 4D chess things I hear about...
by cmsj 2y ago
This must be one of those 4D chess things I hear about...
- sp332 2y agoNow that the charger standard is open, they don’t need to expand the network themselves.
- peutetre 2y agoThe charger standard is CCS. It was always open. What's happening in North America is that everyone will use CCS with Tesla's plug on the end. It's CCS type 3. Older Teslas will need a retrofit to be able to talk CCS. Tesla chargers will still support Tesla's now dead protocol.
- sp332 2y agoI think that's a weird way to look at it, but anyway, Tesla doesn't need to expand the network of Tesla-compatible chargers anymore.
- peutetre 2y agoIt's the factual way to look at it.
- quonn 2y agoThis seems to be wrong, CCS type 3 looks completely different: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_3_connector https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_3_connector
- peutetre 2y agoThat type 3 was obsoleted and was never used as part of CCS.
- quonn 2y agoPlease stop your disinformation campaign here. You are making things up and as part of that you are giving an industry standard name a new meaning.
- peutetre 2y agoThere is no disinformation. The protocol is CCS. That's how it works. How do you think it works?
- quonn 2y agoYou claimed „It's CCS type 3“, which it is not. Instead the NACS is the proprietary Tesla plug but using the CCS protocol instead of a CAN-based one. Practically this means that all superchargers remain compatible and it also means that all cars with the CCS plug are not compatible (unless the plug is changed or an adapter is used). Therefore your statement is misleading in addition to being plain wrong about „Type 3“. Tesla has, of course, always also supported the CCS outside of the United States, both inside the superchargers and inside the cars.
- peutetre 2y agoSo you admit it's the third plug used by CCS. You've made progress. The Tesla plug is no longer proprietary. It's been standardized as SAE J3400. CCS won.
- quonn 2y agoNo, it‘s not the third plug and it‘s certainly not „Type 3“. > The Tesla plug is no longer proprietary. It's been standardized as SAE J3400. Of course, that‘s the very meaning of opening up the plug.
- peutetre 2y agoOf course it's the third CCS plug. Europe uses type 2. North America will slowly give up on Type 1. But they'll still be using CCS, as you yourself admit. Tesla's protocol is dead.
- donor20 2y agoScame plug is dead dead - how is NACS ccs type 3. The whole point is that it's is NOT ccs type 3 - which is actually largely dead everywhere anyways
- peutetre 2y agoIt's the third plug that CCS uses. The whole point of NACS is that it is CCS. It's going to be easy for everyone to support it because they support CCS already. Charger manufacturers like that. Charging networks like that. Car manufacturers like that. All they're changing is the plug.
- revnode 2y agoThe plug is the thing that matters, not the protocol. It will enable non-Tesla vehicles to use the Tesla network.
- peutetre 2y agoNo, it all matters. Supporting yet another protocol was not wanted by anyone. The CCS support was already there so it won out.
- threeseed 2y agoBut why not spin it off into a seperate company rather than just let an incredibly valuable team go. Surely the superchargers can be made to be self sufficient with rates and advertising etc.
- nindalf 2y agoControl right? This way Tesla keeps ownership and control of the network and can license access out to competitors. If they spun it off, they would have to pay for access themselves. Still, I can't see the 4D chess behind this move. It's far beyond my limited understanding.
- anonymousab 2y agoIf you want to settle for the Electrify America charging experience, sure. The plug on the end of the charger was never the main advantage that the supercharger network brought to the table.
- cj 2y agoFor the uninitiated, what is the main advantage?
- boringg 2y agoI'm going to a wild guess and that it is reliability.
- peteradio 2y agoI would guess a consistent and effective maintenance of equipment and decent payment system. I thought that the network was the only thing really going for Tesla, I hope everyone involved on this makes out well because I don't really care to trust some mom and pop to set the standards even though in general I really care about mom and pop.
- preinheimer 2y agoI don't own an EV. When I hear about Tesla and the Supercharger network what I hear about most is how easy it was to plan long trips. A road trip on gas is easy, there's a gas station in every town with a few thousand people, fast EV chargers aren't yet as common. So if your routing system understood its range, and where the charging stations where it was pretty seamless. Much better than the stuff from other EV makers. Less often I'd hear about the chargers working more often. e.g. https://arstechnica.com/cars/2022/07/electric-cars-are-doomed-if-fast-charger-reliability-doesnt-get-better/ https://arstechnica.com/cars/2022/07/electric-cars-are-doome...
- figers 2y agoand there are a lot of them. Usually 8-16 per supercharger chargers at a single location vs the few electrify America stations I'v seen to on the east coast that have only two chargers at the station. So I'm less worried charging at a Supercharger that all the chargers will be taken. It also tells you on the screen how many chargers are available at each location before you get there.
- throw0101b 2y ago> Now that the charger standard is open […] For anyone curious, this will be SAE J3400 when finalized: * https://www.sae.org/standards/content/j3400/ https://www.sae.org/standards/content/j3400/ * https://driveelectric.gov/charging-connector https://driveelectric.gov/charging-connector Previously the open standard was SAE J1772 / IEC 62196 Type 2: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAE_J1772 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAE_J1772 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_2_connector https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_2_connector
- WorldMaker 2y agoThe IEC 62196 Type 2 connector is the European connector and still standard in Europe. It is different from the CCS Type 1 connector that has been used in North America, also known as the SAE J1772 Type 1 "Combo" connector as it was also standardized originally in North America under SAE J1772. Wikipedia doesn't have a separate page for the "Combo" connector and mentions it in the SAE J1772 page instead. (The base Type 1 is the Level 1/Level 2 charger and the "Combo" Type 1 is the combined one with AC plugs.) It's very useful to note that the North American SAE Type 1 "Combo" connector and the European IEC Type 2 connector have surprisingly different form factors with the SAE one being bulkier by quite a bit. That too was a factor in NACS getting fast tracked for standardization. (It's the least bulky of the three hardware designs.)
- Avshalom 2y agoTo be fair, regular chess is 4d and playing isn't the same as winning.
- xipho 2y agoIf chess were 4d then it wouldn't be playable on (2D) computer screens would it?
- calderknight 2y agoWhy not?
- xdennis 2y agoI think your (plural) problem is that you're talking about chess as opposed to a chess board. A chess board is 2D. But, you could technically say it's 4D (3 dimensions + time). You could also technically say it's 1D (a string) if you play by just writing the chess notation.
- xipho 2y agoJust a thought experiment. I was implying that chess is a game, not a board. That game can be encoded/coded without any need for a Z variable, can't it? My Rook doesn't go up and down an ladder, it doesn't need a 3D array to record its position. So that's 2D + Time, or 3D. YRMV.
- kibwen 2y agoReminder that a chessboard is a 3D object and the game of chess takes place over time, so 4D chess is just... chess. :P
- 1970-01-01 2y agoYou jest, but it is impossible to say this is a mistake without knowing the future. If anything, it's a good indicator that Tesla is forecasting very hard times for EV charging adoption. Killing the goose that lays eggs all day may be justified if the egg supply is exploding.
- Stranger43 2y agoIt's the rational consequences of Tesla failing to turn it's charger network into an network effect creating an monopoly for Tesla. Essentially the ploy was for Tesla to use the charging network as a loss leader to make Tesla the only/most viable EV brand, and because both roads and electricity grids are well regulated utilities that failed so from here on the only source of money for Tesla is going to be the company revenue/profit, as it's phase as a buy an monopoly startup is over.
- SmarsJerry 2y agoThere are a crazy number of charging companies out there. They literally just install a charger at any parking spot anywhere and connect electricity. It’s the simplest thing in the world, there is no ploy to be a monopoly in the space. The issue is there is not enough EVs on the road. Think cell towers in the middle of no where, sure you wish they were there but they just are not useful or profitable to many people.
- secabeen 2y agoThis. I think because NACS is becoming the standard is exactly why they don't want to invest in EV Charging. When Superchargers were Tesla-only, they were a way to promote and market Tesla cars. Now that every car will be able to use them, that's gone. Let someone else run EV charging networks. Additionally, EV Charging is not going to be a high-margin, disruptive industry that is a darling of wall street. Can you imagine investors getting excited about investing in the largest operator of Gas Stations? I don't think so. It's going to end up being a tight, competitive business where people pick where to charge based on prices down to the penny. No one's going to end up as a billionaire running that business.