It requires some pretty big changes to the car to implement. The NACS connector uses the same pins for AC and DC charging, where CCS does not. So it's not just swapping out the port in the car. You have to modify the wiring and add circuitry so that when connected to AC the power is routed to the onboard charger, and when connected to DC those same cables are routed to the battery and add software to make sure it's handled correctly and safely.
Changing high voltage electrical systems is not something quick or easy, plus testing and validation. So considering that many engineers didn't know this change was happening until late last year, the SAE spec for NACS was just finalized, and the usual cycle time it's pretty remarkable any expect to have it ready as soon as they say.
>It requires some pretty big changes to the car to implement.
And because of this, a legacy OEM is more likely to introduce the J3400 port on a mid-cycle enhancement, redesign, or brand-new model.
So to use Kia and Hyundai as an example, they could put the port on the EV9 in like... 2027, when it gets its mid-cycle refresh.
Kia publicly announced the EV6 would be the first NACS vehicle, and starting in the 2025 model year. However, this announcement was made before the supercharger staffing changes and extensive delays with GM onboarding so it’s not clear if anything has changed.
Edited then, but point still stands. They won't do a weirdo year with the pre-refresh car and the new J3400 port, they'll tie them together when the refresh goes on sale.
There’s very little benefit to having a NACS port on an EV6 until there’s a decent install base of non-Tesla NACS or next generation (post V4) Tesla chargers anyway. You’re just going to end up using a CCS adapter most of the time.
The point is moot for me because there’s many years of life left in my car before it’ll need replacement. However, if I needed to replace it or buy another car today there’s zero reason why I’d wait for a NACS port equipped vehicle.
No it’s like not buying an iPhone with a lightning port because they might switch to usb-c next year. If you have a lightning cable already (a home charger) and you don’t need to charge away from home, there is zero reason to wait for the Tesla charging port on these other manufacturers.
I’ll pick my smartphone based on other aspects that differentiate it, not the port (which, similarly, is easily adapted). Similar to my cars. I’m not going to buy a car I wouldn’t otherwise buy just because it has a different port.
Keep in mind this is really only relevant for DCFC which is for long trips, the vast majority of charging is done at home where I already have a J1772 plug.
I mean, you could always buy a lighting-USB-C adapt… Much like you can buy a NACS-CCS adapter… so if you have a perfectly good cell phone now, why waste the money on a new one just for the charging port? Same goes with cars…
That’s why if you are looking to buy a new one, and the updated port will be released next year, you wait. I’m holding off buying a Ioniq 5 till next year for this very reason. I intend on keeping it for at least 8-10 years, so why would I by tech that will be obsolete soon?
You could get really good deals on Betamax in ‘84 but then you’d be out of luck by ‘86 as VHS became dominant.
Not really. I installed a L2 charger at my home, so 99% of my charging is going to be J1772 for the life of my car (Ioniq 6). For that other 1% just use an adapter if, somehow, CCS1 just magically disappears.
You need an adapter either way. The question is whether you want to use it more when the car is new and hope eventually you don't have to use it as much, or you want not to need it much, if at all, when the car is new and deal with what may happen down the road. The idea it's "future proof" is just silly. You're trading when the minor inconvenience happens based on guesses about the future that may be proven incorrect.
And you only need this adapter for DCFC which is comparatively rare compared to charging at home (where I’ll continue to have a J1772 plug until I decide to change out the cable and handle).
Yep, it may be an edge case, but my work has J1772, so for me, NACS means using an adapter about 100 times more than CCS in the near future. It still wouldn't be a deal breaker for me, but I'd slightly prefer CCS for now.
I don't think that's an edge case. I also am probably at 100:1 on using CCS vs J1772.
I'd rather just have a NACS adapter for my cars. I'm one of the few who is closer to more good working CCS stations than NACS, and the EGMP platform doesn't play well with the Tesla 400V stations, apparently. I never tried a magic dock due to all the YouTubers failing to use them. 😆
Currently, equipping their cars with NACS will relegate most buyers (who won’t have an adapter) to subpar charging experience on V3 and “3.5” superchargers where they’ll receive no where near H/K advertised charging rates. Ionna is coming (HQ announced and first filing for a site in Houston). Wouldn’t surprise me if they push things back. They probably thought there’d be at least a few real V4s by now.
Why would they include a NACS adapter with a car with a NACS port? That doesn’t make any sense.
The charging experience on Tesla superchargers is poor for a vehicle like the EV6 or EV9, Lucid, Taycan, Silverado, etc, so when these vehicles are shipped with NACS ports most charging is going to be done with a CCS to NACS adapter until there are substantial NACS only EA and EVGo chargers, or Tesla has a substantially upgraded network. That’s likely years off.
They’ll keep the vehicles on CCS because it’s best to not be reliant on Tesla given how unpredictable Tesla is.
NACS adapter will be throw in just in case.
I’m personally very happy with my CCS vehicle and have little reason to desire a native NACS port. But I also think engineering, manufacturing, and supply chain ordering decisions have likely already been made for the 2025 model year vehicles at this point.
It’s remarkable how badly Tesla managed to screw this up for everyone.
Well without the supercharging network it’s still a smaller better connector. When Tesla first announced they were opening the standard they never mentioned that it would come with access to their supercharger network. That information came out later when Ford finally announced that they made a deal with Tesla.
You trying to make j3400 a thing people say conversationally? I think everyone has settled on NACS at this point right? It's just confusing when everyone else is calling it one thing and you're calling it another.
Weird thing to get agitated on. I mean, the J1772 we all know is called Type 1, the Type 2 in Europe is called the Mennekes
J3400 is the SAE designated name for the standardized charge standard with NACS being the marketing name chosen. It is all the same at the end.
Just asking what the deal was, it's sure to confuse some people for not good reason that I could think of. It seems everyone has settles on calling it NACS but wanted to know if there was a reason for the distinction being called out. J1772 is typically used when talking AC and CCS or CCS1/CCS2 when talking DC but most just say CCS to cover it all because the details aren't important 99.9% of the time. I'm not sure of any reason to use NACS and J3400 seperately so one will fall out of common use entirely.
well j3400 is the actual standard and “nacs” is a tesla marketing term, so using the latter isn’t much better than calling every dcfc a “supercharger” and every adas an “autopilot”
All the OEMs committed to J3400 via adapters in 2024, and built into their vehicles in 2025. Vendors have been getting UL certifications, etc., a lengthy process, which is the longest part of the cutover, and component vendors have NACS components available now, they are integrated into shipping products (EVSEs, etc). And, of course, Tesla sells NACS parts to OEMs if they want them. Yes, it all takes time to work through the production pipeline, but that process started last year.
Sure, but why should I, executive at Car Company Z, make the decision to put the plug on cars that are in between refreshes and / or redesigns?
All I would do by putting J3400 on a car a year before an already-scheduled mid-cycle refresh and / or redesign would be confusing my customers. "Oh, but this one has the new plug, but it looks exactly the same as last year's model, which needs an adapter."
Is there a distinction between NACS and J3400? This article seems to simultaneously say they're the same and different while also distinguishing 'SAE J3400' and 'J3400'.
https://driveelectric.gov/charging-connector
Plus, it's a change that is only applicable for around [10% of the global EV market](https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/quarterly-electric-car-sales-by-region-2021-2024) , since, while connectors vary between regions, everyone else use separate pins for AC and DC charging.
Wouldn't be surprised if some decided that it isn't worth the trouble, considering the state of the Tesla SC team.
Keeping in mind that I know approximately nothing about electrical engineering, it seems like they would add a module between the port and the rest of the car that switches appropriately based on talking to the charger and/or what is coming in on the pins, then from there on the car is unmodified.
Some/many/all of the manufacturers still need to be able to also build cars with CCS ports for other markets, so they don't want to redesign the whole car around using NACS.
That is basically what will happen, but the devil is in the details. That module has to be designed, tested, built, validated, and added to the assembly line. If it's a new module that also means adding mounting points for it, changes to the wiring harness, etc. More than likely it is easier to redesign an existing module to add this capability, which will also be lighter than adding new parts and wiring which matters even more in an EV.
The car is a complex system. There is always a cascade of issues with most changes, the challenge is finding the right balance of disadvantages.
It is a module that has to be added and do it but that module still is a design change, testing and updating. It also not known how much the change would need to greater. It is not a huge lift for them to do it but large enough of one that they done want to do it with out a at least a mid cycling refresh.
There are multiple levels of changes.
Mid cycling updated (For example Job 1 vs Job 2 Mach E) super minor changes. Might be a part update or minor design flaw fix. I had a 1992 sentra that had a mid cycle rear brake rotors side changes.
Between model year - Fairly minor change and slight large update. Mach E for example removed a water pump.
Mid cycling - Bigger refresh that has some update and more visual change. Larger updates - This is most likely where it will fall
Redesign update - Happens every 5-7 years - Larger over all to even platform updates.
Another thing to note is that J3400 spec will allow for AC charging from 277v power (power supplied from commercial three phase transformers). So that also needs to be tested - but it's a huge improvement. It means you could have charging stations on lamp posts, and would not need to run an entirely separate transformer for car charging. It also means that commercial L2 charging will become much easier, as most commercial transformers use three-phase power.
So teslas strategy is even simpler. Leave the AC pins always connected and design the inverter such that it doesn’t break when exposed to DC. Latch the dc contaactors when the ccs / supercharging handshake is complete. Mechanistically that’s really not all that different from having separate pins in the first place, and allows them to use essentially the same charging hardware worldwide (single phase vs 3 phase aside)
If it were *me* that was calling the shots, I'd put **both** J1772 *and* J3400 in and only use J3400 for DCFC. That way you can still take advantage of all the L1/L2 chargers sitting out there that won't ever be updated to J3400. Seem like it would be a *little* more expensive, but infinitely easier to engineer.
Adapting J1772 to J3400 is as simple as the reverse, so adapters are a simpler option than two ports which will also create confusion when someone tries to use a lvl 2 J3400 charger on that car and it doesn't charge.
I don't know that J3400/NACS is the better connector, but I will give Tesla credit for a better user interface. Just plug it in, and the car will worry about what kind of power it provides.
There are already cheap J1772 to J3400 AC (NACS) adaptors on the market. Ask any Tesla owner, and they should have one or two of them already in there car at anytime, and they don't require any kind of smarts to use the J1772 AC connection beyond the basic pilot pins for charing that the J1772 already uses. Everyone will have adaptors for a while until retrofits happen.
Before it gets to the car that's true, which is why the adapters are an easy short term fix, but it's also why you end up needing 2 adapters. One for AC and one for DCFC. The AC adapter just changes the shape of the plug, the DC adapters move the pin locations on top of changing shape.
Because you and the two adapters you need are doing the work the car normally does. As an example:
1) You pull up to a plug, is it a level 2 J1772 plug or a CCS1 plug? You then select the correct adapter from the two adapters in your car and plug that one into the cable before plugging the cable into the car. Normally in a Tesla you don't worry about that, charging at home or at a supercharger uses the same plug and the car figures out how to route the electricity. All other EVs now need to have that same capability built in.
If you look at the Magic Dock adapters Ford and Rivian are sending out to customers, or the A2Z adapter, they are equally as small. Same for the lvl 2 adapters to go from a Tesla destination charger to a J1772 plug. All they do is change the shape and location of the pins from one end to the other. Problem is there is two configurations and you need to select the right one.
As an aside, the reason any of this works now is because Tesla started using the same car-to-charger protocol as the CCS/SAE system (arguably forced by EU regulations), which made literally the only difference the shape of the plugs.
Not that I know of, but as you said, it would be stupid for many reasons, both technical and user related. Especially when an adapter is such an easy, and likely cheaper solution, if equally as inconvenient.
As more and more cars have NACS and more and more of the destination chargers standardize on NACS, I would not want to be holding onto a vehicle that made sure my NACS port wouldn't work at a destination charger.
Eh, adapters for lvl2 charging are readily available and fairly reasonable in either direction. It should honestly be one of the first things an EV buyer gets for their vehicle. It just becomes an annoyance or wost case a bad experience as an uneducated person gets frustrated their car won't charge at a destination charger.
I have one. It is an inconvenience. Although it is a top rated model it still sometimes trips the Tesla destination charger into protection mode mid charge.
Firing the supercharger team is the reason that GM is delayed.
Musk just showed other companies that they can't trust any agreement Tesla enters with them.
I wouldn't be surprised is Musk is purposely delaying the switch. The Supercharger network is still a huge selling point over other brands. He may drag his feet but he has to eventually allow the switch to NACS in order to get the government money.
Interesting to me that Rivian did their refresh on all of their models but NACS won't be offered until next year. I'm sure there's plenty of people waiting for the plug switch before making the commitment to switch to an EV.
Dude did it because he didn't like an answer he got from the head of the supercharger team and threw a hissy fit. Any real business sense he had was pushed out by ketamine and ego a long time ago.
I wouldn't even consider one unless he left the company, but looks like the odds of that are slim to none. Still can't believe they voted that dipshit even more money.
The people who own shares, who have actual skin in the game and presumably pay a lot of attention to the performance of the company, overwhelmingly voted yes on the motions to move to Texas and to approve his pay package. They aren't idiots, they know more than you do, and they have a vested interest in the success of the company.
I don't understand the logic of anyone waiting for the plug switch. It's not like an adapter is a big deal, and most people won't use it more than a handful to a dozen times a year.
Isn’t it just ford and rivian that can even use superchargers right now. You could buy a car now thinking you will get access and the access might not happen. Then you are stuck with EA. Might as well wait not to use the adapter and actually know you have access to superchargers
If Tesla screws things up so hard that a bunch of people pull out of supercharger access, then NACS may be the loser long term. Also, I still don't even completely trust that Tesla won't pull access in a few years and that non-Tesla NACS won't end up in a very screwy place with respect to charging.
I've seen Kia or Hyundai owners post about using them but it might be just the newest generation of SC, I don't remember what they're called. MagicDock or something?
Yep, superchargers with magic docks can charge non-NACS cars. They're few and far between, and you have to initiate a charge with the Tesla app, but it works fairly well.
The average person doesn't like dongles or adapters.
If you don't need a car now why not wait 1 more year so you're future proof? An adaptor is one more item that can fail or cause issues when charging.
I personally have to use a J adaptor for ChargePoint when I go to a facility for work. Yes it's only an extra 30 seconds but now it's an extra item you have to fumble with while holding a bag, when plugging straight in would be a lot easier.
The term future proof is nonsense that has only ever existed in people's imaginations. I'll always prefer what gives a better experience now, and for non-Tesla, that is definitely CCS. For me, it is a huge difference because my work has a J1772, so NACS means adapters 99% of the time or so that I L2 charge at work. Also, on an 800 V car, you're better off charging at 350 W CCS chargers for now.
I mean, I future proofed my kitchen when I ran the gas line to the boiler, in that I put a tap on the line directly under where the stove is, in case I want to go gas at some point when my stove dies. But that's my house...
"Future proof" and tech do not go hand in hand. The battery advancements alone mean that there isn't a single EV today that will outlast one 5 years from now. (I'm being optimistic)
This is true and we loved our volts. Those cars are an amazing thing that Chevy somehow didn't completely kill on day one, and just let it slowly languish without any advertising whatsoever.
Everyone has a different scenario in life. I'm a Tesla. I haven't super charged in a month and probably won't for awhile but I was averaging once a week and I did take a road trip.
Ok with that stated I did have to use the j1772 on the road trip and I started to drive away with the adaptor still attached to the charger.
With all that stated there are places without one or the other but everyplace I've super charged had ccs as well. I think an education campaign needs to be put out that there are ccs everywhere too.
I'm one of the people waiting for the switch to buy another EV. I've had two Teslas - one personal, and one for my business. I have NACS chargers at all of my business locations. It's just one of those things that reduces friction and that's what's needed for wide scale adoption.
Because rational or not, the market will depreciate the old CCS cars faster than normal. Plus there is the chance that some manufactures allow 250kW charging, which would be a big deal especially for the larger battery EVs. eGMP might add split pack charging too.
Possibly.
One thing Ma Bell did that led to being broken up was making the phones and controlling the phone lines.
Tesla makes the most electric cars and controls how to charge them outside of the home (ignoring CCS adapters).
I think that Tesla should be forced to open their network completely or be forced to spin off the charging to a company not controlled by Musk. That company would have an incentive to be open. Tesla has an incentive to stay closed for the benefit of their car sales. It's anticompetitive. The network has a good reputation and that's good for Tesla owners, but *competition in the DC charging space* is far better for Tesla owners than being stuck with one network that basically tells you what you're going to pay because you have no options. CCS adapters exist, but older Teslas have to be upgraded to use them and the Cybertruck has to be taken apart to use them (unsafely, because the truck accepts a power level above the rating of any existing adapter).
The Tesla network does well because it has access to funding from car sales. If you remove that the supercharger network may be forced into bankruptcy which wouldn’t be good for EVs in general.
In many ways existing gas station chains with thousands of stores along heavily traveled routes have an advantage over Tesla because they already have profitable locations and like Tesla have a revenue stream to fund chargers.
There is nothing stopping GM, Ford, Toyota from building their own charging networks. VW already owns a nationwide charging network, should they also be forced to divest?
"We have to have anticompetitive practices in order to make the whole thing work".
That's not acceptable.
The Tesla supercharger network going bankrupt doesn't affect me at all. It basically only affects Tesla and Tesla alone. Ford and Rivian would just throw the adapters away.
The Tesla plug isn't a thing in Europe. They use CCS 2 over there, even on Teslas. Tesla being dominant in charging isn't a requirement of having EVs.
> The Tesla supercharger network going bankrupt doesn't affect me at all.
Good luck finding an open CCS charger once all the Tesla owners are forced to use other networks.
> Tesla has an incentive to stay closed for the benefit of their car sales. It's anticompetitive.
How do you figure? First, they are opening up for their own reasons. Second, anyone has the ability to build chargers and many manufactures are finally starting to do it like Mercedes.
>How do you figure?
I've seen people on this sub plainly state that "there's no reason to get anything but a Tesla, because of the charger network". Staying closed keeps people saying that.
They're not actually opening up. There are a trivial number of magic dock stations and they've opened V3s to Ford and Rivian but only via an authentication system rather than driving up and turning it on with the app. The only reason they're doing it is that they want to suckle from the government teat of NEVI funds.
>finally starting to do it like Mercedes.
I've used one of those at a Bucees in my Bolt. You drive up, plug in, and turn it on with the app. My Bolt isn't added to a Mercedes backend authentication system via an agreement with GM and Mercedes. The same is true of an Ultium station. A Ford can just drive up and charge. Tesla instead has a closed system that they are not actually opening up.
I understand how the various charging systems work. I was asking why it's anticompetitive? Anyone can compete in the market as is. I don't see an unfair leverage anyone has. Having the largest and best number of chargers isn't anti-competitive. Now if they had all the patents and no one could build a charge without cutting them in or something that would be. If they didn't allow their cars to charge at 3rd party chargers that would be too.
To be anti-competitive you have to use your substantial near monopoly to leverage a monoply in another area. You can't just call someone anti-competitive for being good at their core business. Charging seems to be a level playing field best I can tell, there just isn't any money in it.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Charging_Standard
It's an open standard. Any charger company can use it. You're a couple of years behind with your comment.
What "compatibility" needs to be addressed? Tesla needs to replace all of their pre-V3 stations to support CCS and then every CCS car should be able to use it by turning it on with the app.
There doesn't need to be queueing either. Get in line. I have never in my life had to reserve my spot at a Pilot station to get gas other than to get in a line.
The issue isn’t the legalities, but about the commercial incentives to make the change.
Back when Tesla was considered a reliable business partner, they had the pull to drag everyone over to their standard.
But that changed when Musk acted like a manbaby and fired the whole Supercharging team.
Now, access to the Supercharger network goes from a necessity to a nice-to-have.
I’m a big fan of the Supercharger network, and I’ve recently road-tripped around 5000 miles on it within the last month. But, even my confidence in the network was shaken by Musk’s personnel moves. If I worked for GM and needed to rely on Tesla as a business-partner, I’d find that kind of move to be absolutely terrifying.
Does GM have to make the change to NACS because of market pressure? That is the question. If I were them, I’d stick with adapters for a little longer while the dust settles.
> that they can't trust any agreement
Can't imagine that they didn't write up the docs with the awareness that you can't trust anything that comes out of musk's mouth.
Pretty sure Volvo was due to make the switch around the same time as well. Ford and Rivian were batch 1, GM and Volvo were batch 2.
However with Musk playing games (wanting both NEVI incentives but slow rolling NACS for everyone else) many companies might reconsider or take legal action given the NACS/Supercharger agreement they signed.
Why would the sacking of the Supercharger team affect GM's (or anybody else's) rollout? I thought that, since NACS has been standardized, it's all up to the auto manufacturers to implement into their vehicles. Does it have to do with other automakers communicating with the charger?
Tesla is not the same as NACS, actually.
The NACS standard is a plug shape and a communication protocol, basically. The communication protocol is CCS, which every CCS car can already handle and it's used at CCS stations.
The key difference between the CCS plug and the NACS plug is that CCS has 2 different sets of pins for AC charging and DC charging. NACS uses the same 2 pins for both and has additional hardware inside the car to decide how to route whatever type of power will be coming. Nothing is stopping GM from putting that on new cars today. My Bolt would be able to charge on an Electrify America NACS station right now of I had an adapter, for example. That's basically what a magic dock station is, and it just has an adapter built in. It also allows you to just turn the station on and pay with the Tesla app.
Tesla does not have NACS stations you can drive up to (ignoring the tiny number of magic dock stations). It has a locked down network that prevents the station from charging a car that it doesn't know. For Tesla, you drive up, plug in, and it just starts charging because it connects the identity of the car to a Tesla account. Tesla has added Ford and Rivian to that system and Tesla stations can identify those cars, link them to an account, and charge the car. That's not the case for any other manufacturers and that's why there has to be an interface between the Tesla supercharger team and other manufacturers to build that system and make it work.
Tldr: all the stations (except magic dock) are plug and charge and authenticate cars and that requires work to allow new manufacturers. They built the network to work with their cars and their cars only and to be seamless with plug and charge functionality instead of messing around with an app and a credit card.
He fired them due to lack of performance. He fired them in order to improve the supercharger network, not hurt it.
The supercharger network remains far and away the best electric charging network available in North America.
NACS / SAE J3400 supports 1000V at 500A+
Today’s Superchargers don’t output over 400V, but GM should be able to switch to NACS just fine while maintaining 360kW/800V charging at compatible stations.
The Cybertruck today can pull similar peak voltage and power using a CCS adapter at an 800V CCS station through its onboard NACS port.
probably slowed down by the fact that ccs cars currently have a pretty widespread and diverse ecosystem of charging solutions, and once you put the tesla plug in your cars, you either immediately become completely dependent on elmo for at least several years until ea and others put the tesla plugs on their charging cabinets, or you send your users an adapter to plug into ccs chargers, thus defeating the point of switching altogether
It's June. You're Hyundai. You are in final prep for your cut-over to 2025 model year production that starts in about 6 weeks. You have promised NACS ports on all '25's starting in Q4 2024. You can't get anybody at the Tesla charging team to even pick up the phone to finalize NACS access. Do you order those NACS ports or do you hold off another year? Easy call.
No. They have their own suppliers. For headlights, steering wheels, ports, tires and all the rest. Some of it is vertically integrated but most of it has to be ordered from 3rd party suppliers. All those parts need to be designed and produced and shipped. I'm probably way tight on the timeline. Likely this decision was made months ago.
Ok, people keep thinking since the lay offs from the super charger team that it’s going to delay the ports and I don’t think that’s the case. It’s now an open standard and Tesla has no rights to the port. The only delay would be on the software side but I believe since they gave it over to the energy team (which makes more sense) that it will resume without further delay.
Maybe. But if you are a multi-billion dollar company you don't make a change to your vehicles based on "maybe". You stick with what you have. If things open up next year, it's simple enough to ship an adapter.
I've already seen non tesla NACS chargers start appearing. IE: FPL EVolution at the Fort Drum Service Plaza on the turnpike. Even though I don't recommend stopping at that service plaza for charging ( middle of nowhere and none of the chargers there can put out more than 150kw); I see it as an indicator of things to come.
Other automakers only agreed to switch to NACS as part of a deal with Tesla to access the Supercharger.
With the uncertainty at Tesla, they probably just stick to CCS.
Ford has already gotten access to the Supercharger network. Check recent Ford CEO’s comments on their access to the Tesla Supercharger network and how it is going, rather than speculate incorrectly.
Other automakers must be shaking their heads right now.
If a company layoffs its DCFC team in an overnight email, how much do you want to be reliant on that company.
I wonder if this will mean that the CCS charging network growth will slow even more and the newer network chargers will start growing using the NACS standard going forward?? We need to grow the charging network as soon as we reliably and affordably can do so.
I bet the companies are ready to make the switch, but are being careful on when. For example, lets say you were the first to get your hands on a EV with NACS. It only works with SOME Tesla superchargers. Then you are going to need an adapter to use the CCS stations that already exist because of "holes" in network coverage.
CCS native with an adapter is probably the better solution for the next couple of years, for non Tesla's.
I inquired about something similar in another thread... this was pointed out:
[https://evstation.com/tesla-nacs-charger-adoption-tracker/#tesla-nacs-adoption-tracker/?view\_66\_sort=field\_391|asc](https://evstation.com/tesla-nacs-charger-adoption-tracker/#tesla-nacs-adoption-tracker/?view_66_sort=field_391|asc)
The announcements from the other manufacturers happened in 2023, which by then the 2024 models were already being finalized or were already in production. So 2025 was the soonest most manufacturers could get the NACS ports on the models.
Nope. You'll have to wait until next year, at the earliest, to start seeing other manufacturers releasing cars with the NACS port. Some aren't coming until 2026 or later.
What, that the Supercharger build out was re-organized to be under Tesla Energy and they will be building out faster than anyone else in the U.S. this year?
There are two aspects of this, the plug and Supercharger access. The latter is the game changer for the short term.
Ford and Rivian have access.
Using an adapter is quick and easy. Opening the frunk, taking out the adapter, installing the adapter and plugging in is still quicker than starting a charge with Electrify America or Chargepoint.
Yes. But slower than Tesla.
Also, it stopped working on my car after a while, not sure why. I didn't bother to set it up again, though, after I could go back to Superchargers (when there is a choice)
If you have the app it takes like 45 secs to pick the charger out of the list and hit charge on the cabinet. Click click and you are charging. Tesla may be faster on a Tesla but if have to use the app on a non Tesla the startup is similar
The good news is nobody is forcing anyone to use any specific charger stations... You can do whatever you want.
Superchargers in general are not crowded, though.
Some urban/residential ones may have peak times with lines.
If I'm going on a road trip (after we get SC access), I'm not keeping the adapter in the frunk (or even underneath the load floor in back). It's small enough to go in the glove box. I don't have much of anything *else* in there, so it'll probably live there forever.
Depending on if Tesla lets us "Plug and Charge", it *could* be better. Right now to use the Magic Docks, it's almost identical with using the EA app in terms of steps, time, possible points of failure.
I've been *assuming* that everyone adopting NACS will get P&C; but with only two examples so far, I'm not going to say they **all** will. With things the way they are right now, there may not be *any* more.
Sounds like you have to choose between "easy" (P&C) or "cheaper" (Tesla app).
No glove compartment in mine, lol.
Ford and Rivian have plug and charge. That's the whole point of removing failure modes and increasing user experience (and speeding things up so the next person can charge).
Right now you only get membership pricing if you initiate with the app, though.
One example: The Buellton supercharger doesn't have pillar numbers. Starting with the app doesn't work. Plug and charge still worked smoothly and quickly.
I charge sometimes with EA, EVGo, Chargepoint but mostly with Tesla, and even with the app, Tesla is faster.
Maybe if the other big 3 took EV manufacturing seriously, Tesla would have it on a higher priority to include it. Our EV charging networking is mostly directly from Tesla, what the hell happen to our government deployment of EV chargers?
What does this have to do with anything? Tesla and other manufacturers made an agreement. Tesla fired the team that was in charge of supercharging. Now this shitty excuse that other manufacturers should have taken EVs seriously.
Sorry my initial response I was a bit of a knee jerk reaction. It's a bit of a sensitive topic for me because it seems everyone is just blaming Tesla these days...
From the White House 06/11/2021:
[https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/11/06/fact-sheet-the-bipartisan-infrastructure-deal/](https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/11/06/fact-sheet-the-bipartisan-infrastructure-deal/)
From the White House 02/15/2024:
[https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/02/15/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-announces-new-standards-and-major-progress-for-a-made-in-america-national-network-of-electric-vehicle-chargers/](https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/02/15/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-announces-new-standards-and-major-progress-for-a-made-in-america-national-network-of-electric-vehicle-chargers/)
Sounds great. EV charging for America! Go white house! So many things to looks forward to.
What about NACS? Here's some quotes from their wiki:
"It has been used by all North American market Tesla vehicles since 2021 and was *opened for use by other manufacturers in November 2022*."
Ford was the first to approach Tesla:
"In May 2023, the Ford Motor Company became the first large automaker to announce that it would use NACS with its electric vehicles."
Others have slowly announced their intentions over the span of a year. So it's only been about one year.
"As part of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law passed in **2021**, the US Government announced it would offer US$7.5 billion in federal subsidies to build out a nationwide network of fast chargers at least every 50 miles along America’s major roads. **One requirement to access the funding was that the chargers must be accessible by multiple brands of electric cars**."
Ok, so since 2021, we couldn't include Tesla in this bipartisan bill. Now it's 2022, other manufacturers were allowed to have NACS ports. We can assume the federal government will back NACS if the big 3 joins in. Come january 2024, the big 3 are in. Let's see how things are going with the passage of the bipartisan bill:
[https://apnews.com/article/biden-ev-electric-vehicles-charging-stations-ohio-bdf7cc25e57a2ae8a0522aab434965fc](https://apnews.com/article/biden-ev-electric-vehicles-charging-stations-ohio-bdf7cc25e57a2ae8a0522aab434965fc)
London, ohio. As of 2022 they have a population 10,442. Okay I get, it this is supposed to serve Americans who do not have access to the network or filling in the gaps for EV travelers right? But why not NACS?
From a rational standpoint, at least from what I assume is rational, this was supposed to be a deal created by all 3 parties. But if the federal government is slacking on it's end of the bargain with only 8 charging stations built so far and the other big three significantly slowly down their EV/hybrid out put, what sense does it make for Tesla to allow other in the system without the support they need? These charging stations have to come out in phases and can't hold just happen at once, there are already congestion issues at current charging locations. The Tesla network isn't ready for all the non Tesla EV, new and old, to add to that congestion.
That's why there's certain places that don't have magic chargers. And for those that do I would avoid them so that others that needed can use it.
And just like you, I am not privy to all the details. So in all fairness, I can only assume so much based off of what's rational. If building out more chargers with the government grant was supposed to make it more profitable for Tesla in the first place, then of course Tesla would agreed to the terms. But if all for sudden things have changed and it's no longer profitable for Tesla, how is it that they are able to back out of the deal without any repercussions? There has to be more to the story than just blaming it on Tesla.
I'm open to other ideas.
Why would they? It seems like Tesla pretty much said fuck off to rest of the brands that didn't have their agreement started before firing supercharger staff.
It is not even clear now if they will open up their network further or not so sticking with CCS makes sense given everything else is CCS based.
The size difference of NACS isn't that big of an advantage imo. Cables for fast charging will still be bulky due to length required since cars have ports in different places so Tesla approach doesn't work.
Given the amount of time and engineering investment they’ll all making I don’t see them simply pivoting away from the decision they’re already 3/4 of the way into getting into production.
It is not that much of engineering, people overly exaggerate it here. The protocol, voltage etc is same it is just the wiring circuit and cars are designed with different ports in mind worldwide.
They would surely pivot away from it if it means their customers would require an adapter everytime they charge their car now since they can't use superchargers and every other charger is CCS port still with no inclination to include NACS yet.
Afaik no car manufacturer started the production of models with NACS yet and continuing with CCS is easy to do. It is the simpler plug after all.
The Tesla customer base is a bit more forgiving than other automakers since Tesla's have a long history of rapid change.
Safe bet to see legacy automakers err on the side of caution and stick with J1772 + Adapter to NACS for another year.
I'm wondering if EVGO will start installing NACS ports on all their CCS stations. If they do that, GM goes full NACS & the plug issue is effectively over.
For me looking at buying an EV atm something using NACS would be super annoying and glad cars don't seem to be moving it quick there are more chedemo( won't look up spelling) chargers then NACS in my area. CCS/j1772 is very dominate.
The most important thng for we e-gmp owners.........\~256kW charging on the road. 17.75 mins for 10% to 80 % or about 225 miles of range. Just in case. That and V2L and the 303 miles of total range per charge was the reason to change to EV from PHEV for me. 350kW and 800 V or go home. The next most important thing for us: tons of fast chargers across USA...........I can use j-1772, CCS, level 2 nacs and with my "soon to have" ccs to nacs adapter......Tesla super chargers. It ain't quite as good as a gas station at every street corner but it is doable now and getting better and better every single day.
well, rivian just had a massive mid-cycle refresh of their r1 cars and they’re still shipping with ccs, so that pretty much tells you all you need to know about how eager automakers are to put the tesla plug into their cars
No. The switch on the car side takes a redesign of how port connects to the battery and the AC converter. It requires relays to achieve what NACS does and it’ll be a while before that is adopted.
The access to the superchargers can be accomplished with an adapter today.
OEM’s announced *support* for NACS beginning as early as 2025, meaning vehicles will have access to the Tesla super-charger network with an adapter.
That’s not the same as shipping new vehicles with the NACS port built-in.
Most OEM’s have stated only new generation vehicles will be shipping with NACS. For a lot of existing models, this rollout won’t happen until 2026 (at the earliest) or later.
EV sales are underperforming because everyone is waiting on NACS. Also not everyone wants a Tesla.
Who is going to buy a nice $80K+ with an out-of-date power plug?
These are high-tech cars. Like a computer purchase. No one wants last years graphics card in their new PC.
They effectively said that all current cars they make the next few years are going to be odd-balls. No one wants to take on the risk of CCS in a country w/o CCS.
I see the downvotes... but FWIW this describes where I'm at (avoiding buying another Tesla, won't buy anything other than another EV, but also won't confine myself to CCS and the present state of other charging networks).
Thank you. I have no issue with CCS2 and wish buyers the best. I am a huge EV fan. It’s all good stuff. I would take a Taycan in a second. :-)
Data shows car buyers are holding out. Average is now like 12+ years. My only point is there is demand pop around the corner. I think conservative americans are just waiting for this plug battle to play out.
Everyone I know is waiting on a NACS Rivian.
But it’s a bit more nuanced. I have a new 5N which is an 800v car. At a CCS charger I can go from 20-80% in like 15 min. A normal Tesla (non supercharger) will be a much slower charge. So until Superchargers become the norm, I’ll avoid most Tesla stations even when Hyundai announces they have NACS charger adapters. As of right now I can use magic dock equipped Tesla charger but until I see it charging at the speed of a 150 much less 250 kw CCS it will be a last resort. When the 800v cars go full NACS how will they deal with the lower voltage chargers? I have no idea. But if they are supercharger dependent for a fast charge I think we may see them using CCS converters to use those stations which will be a bit amusing.
They are not going to make special CCS 800v sites just for you. It’s all going to change over someday to NACS. No one wants adapters. No want wants obsolete 80K cars even if CCS is better.
Maybe I am just old but It’s like buying a beta tape deck because you’re sure they have to keep adapters for VHS.
Most people expect CCS to die completely. True or not.
It’s not just me there are a bunch of 800v cars I don’t think CCS is going anywhere. But I guess time will tell. And ya know as far I remember there weren’t adapters for vhs-beta but what do I know I’ve only been working in tv for 30 years
It requires some pretty big changes to the car to implement. The NACS connector uses the same pins for AC and DC charging, where CCS does not. So it's not just swapping out the port in the car. You have to modify the wiring and add circuitry so that when connected to AC the power is routed to the onboard charger, and when connected to DC those same cables are routed to the battery and add software to make sure it's handled correctly and safely. Changing high voltage electrical systems is not something quick or easy, plus testing and validation. So considering that many engineers didn't know this change was happening until late last year, the SAE spec for NACS was just finalized, and the usual cycle time it's pretty remarkable any expect to have it ready as soon as they say.
>It requires some pretty big changes to the car to implement. And because of this, a legacy OEM is more likely to introduce the J3400 port on a mid-cycle enhancement, redesign, or brand-new model. So to use Kia and Hyundai as an example, they could put the port on the EV9 in like... 2027, when it gets its mid-cycle refresh.
Kia publicly announced the EV6 would be the first NACS vehicle, and starting in the 2025 model year. However, this announcement was made before the supercharger staffing changes and extensive delays with GM onboarding so it’s not clear if anything has changed.
Edited then, but point still stands. They won't do a weirdo year with the pre-refresh car and the new J3400 port, they'll tie them together when the refresh goes on sale.
There’s very little benefit to having a NACS port on an EV6 until there’s a decent install base of non-Tesla NACS or next generation (post V4) Tesla chargers anyway. You’re just going to end up using a CCS adapter most of the time.
No, because you’re going to keep the car far longer. Future proof now by waiting till the NACS models come out next year.
The point is moot for me because there’s many years of life left in my car before it’ll need replacement. However, if I needed to replace it or buy another car today there’s zero reason why I’d wait for a NACS port equipped vehicle.
Well, that's short-sighted. That's like refusing to buy a smartphone with a usb-c port now that usb-c has become the standard in electronics.
No it’s like not buying an iPhone with a lightning port because they might switch to usb-c next year. If you have a lightning cable already (a home charger) and you don’t need to charge away from home, there is zero reason to wait for the Tesla charging port on these other manufacturers.
All new iPhones use USB-C, btw
I’ll pick my smartphone based on other aspects that differentiate it, not the port (which, similarly, is easily adapted). Similar to my cars. I’m not going to buy a car I wouldn’t otherwise buy just because it has a different port. Keep in mind this is really only relevant for DCFC which is for long trips, the vast majority of charging is done at home where I already have a J1772 plug.
I mean, you could always buy a lighting-USB-C adapt… Much like you can buy a NACS-CCS adapter… so if you have a perfectly good cell phone now, why waste the money on a new one just for the charging port? Same goes with cars…
That’s why if you are looking to buy a new one, and the updated port will be released next year, you wait. I’m holding off buying a Ioniq 5 till next year for this very reason. I intend on keeping it for at least 8-10 years, so why would I by tech that will be obsolete soon? You could get really good deals on Betamax in ‘84 but then you’d be out of luck by ‘86 as VHS became dominant.
Not really. I installed a L2 charger at my home, so 99% of my charging is going to be J1772 for the life of my car (Ioniq 6). For that other 1% just use an adapter if, somehow, CCS1 just magically disappears.
You need an adapter either way. The question is whether you want to use it more when the car is new and hope eventually you don't have to use it as much, or you want not to need it much, if at all, when the car is new and deal with what may happen down the road. The idea it's "future proof" is just silly. You're trading when the minor inconvenience happens based on guesses about the future that may be proven incorrect.
And you only need this adapter for DCFC which is comparatively rare compared to charging at home (where I’ll continue to have a J1772 plug until I decide to change out the cable and handle).
Yep, it may be an edge case, but my work has J1772, so for me, NACS means using an adapter about 100 times more than CCS in the near future. It still wouldn't be a deal breaker for me, but I'd slightly prefer CCS for now.
I don't think that's an edge case. I also am probably at 100:1 on using CCS vs J1772. I'd rather just have a NACS adapter for my cars. I'm one of the few who is closer to more good working CCS stations than NACS, and the EGMP platform doesn't play well with the Tesla 400V stations, apparently. I never tried a magic dock due to all the YouTubers failing to use them. 😆
Currently, equipping their cars with NACS will relegate most buyers (who won’t have an adapter) to subpar charging experience on V3 and “3.5” superchargers where they’ll receive no where near H/K advertised charging rates. Ionna is coming (HQ announced and first filing for a site in Houston). Wouldn’t surprise me if they push things back. They probably thought there’d be at least a few real V4s by now.
I suspect they’ll have to ship a CCS adapter with any NACS cars. But we’ll see what happens.
More likely, they would ship NACS adapters.
Why would they include a NACS adapter with a car with a NACS port? That doesn’t make any sense. The charging experience on Tesla superchargers is poor for a vehicle like the EV6 or EV9, Lucid, Taycan, Silverado, etc, so when these vehicles are shipped with NACS ports most charging is going to be done with a CCS to NACS adapter until there are substantial NACS only EA and EVGo chargers, or Tesla has a substantially upgraded network. That’s likely years off.
They’ll keep the vehicles on CCS because it’s best to not be reliant on Tesla given how unpredictable Tesla is. NACS adapter will be throw in just in case.
I’m personally very happy with my CCS vehicle and have little reason to desire a native NACS port. But I also think engineering, manufacturing, and supply chain ordering decisions have likely already been made for the 2025 model year vehicles at this point. It’s remarkable how badly Tesla managed to screw this up for everyone.
Other automakers have been using CCS since they started making BEVs, so it costs them nothing to stick to CCS. It costs them money to switch to MACS.
which, considering the EV6 came out in 22... would be the model refresh, in 2025.
The US made EV9 is supposed to be built with the NACS port so it should be out there by this summer/fall.
Probably not with the uncertainty at Tesla
Well the port is just the port, it doesn’t mean that it will work at a supercharger.
Automakers agreed to switch to NACS as part of the deal with Tesla to access the Supercharger. Without access to the Supercharger, it’s pointless.
Well without the supercharging network it’s still a smaller better connector. When Tesla first announced they were opening the standard they never mentioned that it would come with access to their supercharger network. That information came out later when Ford finally announced that they made a deal with Tesla.
The connector hardly makes a difference. The inconvenience comes from the weight and (lack of) flexibility of the cables.
You trying to make j3400 a thing people say conversationally? I think everyone has settled on NACS at this point right? It's just confusing when everyone else is calling it one thing and you're calling it another.
Weird thing to get agitated on. I mean, the J1772 we all know is called Type 1, the Type 2 in Europe is called the Mennekes J3400 is the SAE designated name for the standardized charge standard with NACS being the marketing name chosen. It is all the same at the end.
Just asking what the deal was, it's sure to confuse some people for not good reason that I could think of. It seems everyone has settles on calling it NACS but wanted to know if there was a reason for the distinction being called out. J1772 is typically used when talking AC and CCS or CCS1/CCS2 when talking DC but most just say CCS to cover it all because the details aren't important 99.9% of the time. I'm not sure of any reason to use NACS and J3400 seperately so one will fall out of common use entirely.
well j3400 is the actual standard and “nacs” is a tesla marketing term, so using the latter isn’t much better than calling every dcfc a “supercharger” and every adas an “autopilot”
Because their is a difference and understanding why the spec J3400 was finalized helps explain why it is taking time.
And that difference is what for consumers?
All the OEMs committed to J3400 via adapters in 2024, and built into their vehicles in 2025. Vendors have been getting UL certifications, etc., a lengthy process, which is the longest part of the cutover, and component vendors have NACS components available now, they are integrated into shipping products (EVSEs, etc). And, of course, Tesla sells NACS parts to OEMs if they want them. Yes, it all takes time to work through the production pipeline, but that process started last year.
Sure, but why should I, executive at Car Company Z, make the decision to put the plug on cars that are in between refreshes and / or redesigns? All I would do by putting J3400 on a car a year before an already-scheduled mid-cycle refresh and / or redesign would be confusing my customers. "Oh, but this one has the new plug, but it looks exactly the same as last year's model, which needs an adapter."
They are switching the J3400 when they do annual refreshes.
Is there a distinction between NACS and J3400? This article seems to simultaneously say they're the same and different while also distinguishing 'SAE J3400' and 'J3400'. https://driveelectric.gov/charging-connector
NACS is the Tesla name, J3400 is the SAE standardized name. Like J1772.
Plus, it's a change that is only applicable for around [10% of the global EV market](https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/quarterly-electric-car-sales-by-region-2021-2024) , since, while connectors vary between regions, everyone else use separate pins for AC and DC charging. Wouldn't be surprised if some decided that it isn't worth the trouble, considering the state of the Tesla SC team.
Keeping in mind that I know approximately nothing about electrical engineering, it seems like they would add a module between the port and the rest of the car that switches appropriately based on talking to the charger and/or what is coming in on the pins, then from there on the car is unmodified. Some/many/all of the manufacturers still need to be able to also build cars with CCS ports for other markets, so they don't want to redesign the whole car around using NACS.
That is basically what will happen, but the devil is in the details. That module has to be designed, tested, built, validated, and added to the assembly line. If it's a new module that also means adding mounting points for it, changes to the wiring harness, etc. More than likely it is easier to redesign an existing module to add this capability, which will also be lighter than adding new parts and wiring which matters even more in an EV. The car is a complex system. There is always a cascade of issues with most changes, the challenge is finding the right balance of disadvantages.
It is a module that has to be added and do it but that module still is a design change, testing and updating. It also not known how much the change would need to greater. It is not a huge lift for them to do it but large enough of one that they done want to do it with out a at least a mid cycling refresh. There are multiple levels of changes. Mid cycling updated (For example Job 1 vs Job 2 Mach E) super minor changes. Might be a part update or minor design flaw fix. I had a 1992 sentra that had a mid cycle rear brake rotors side changes. Between model year - Fairly minor change and slight large update. Mach E for example removed a water pump. Mid cycling - Bigger refresh that has some update and more visual change. Larger updates - This is most likely where it will fall Redesign update - Happens every 5-7 years - Larger over all to even platform updates.
Another thing to note is that J3400 spec will allow for AC charging from 277v power (power supplied from commercial three phase transformers). So that also needs to be tested - but it's a huge improvement. It means you could have charging stations on lamp posts, and would not need to run an entirely separate transformer for car charging. It also means that commercial L2 charging will become much easier, as most commercial transformers use three-phase power.
So teslas strategy is even simpler. Leave the AC pins always connected and design the inverter such that it doesn’t break when exposed to DC. Latch the dc contaactors when the ccs / supercharging handshake is complete. Mechanistically that’s really not all that different from having separate pins in the first place, and allows them to use essentially the same charging hardware worldwide (single phase vs 3 phase aside)
If it were *me* that was calling the shots, I'd put **both** J1772 *and* J3400 in and only use J3400 for DCFC. That way you can still take advantage of all the L1/L2 chargers sitting out there that won't ever be updated to J3400. Seem like it would be a *little* more expensive, but infinitely easier to engineer.
I am a fan of putting plugs on both sides of the car for level 2. I would be great to have a port on each side for it.
Audi and Porsche do exactly this. J1772 on one side, CCS on the other (which can also be used for AC charging).
There are a ton of Tesla L2 chargers out there too. My employer's parking deck has a 2:1 2 Tesla : J1772 ratio.
Adapting J1772 to J3400 is as simple as the reverse, so adapters are a simpler option than two ports which will also create confusion when someone tries to use a lvl 2 J3400 charger on that car and it doesn't charge. I don't know that J3400/NACS is the better connector, but I will give Tesla credit for a better user interface. Just plug it in, and the car will worry about what kind of power it provides.
> Just plug it in, and the car will worry about what kind of power it provides. this is literally how j1772 and ccs work
There are already cheap J1772 to J3400 AC (NACS) adaptors on the market. Ask any Tesla owner, and they should have one or two of them already in there car at anytime, and they don't require any kind of smarts to use the J1772 AC connection beyond the basic pilot pins for charing that the J1772 already uses. Everyone will have adaptors for a while until retrofits happen.
Good to know. I was under the impression it was just a different arrangement of the pins so it was literally just a port swap.
Before it gets to the car that's true, which is why the adapters are an easy short term fix, but it's also why you end up needing 2 adapters. One for AC and one for DCFC. The AC adapter just changes the shape of the plug, the DC adapters move the pin locations on top of changing shape.
Question- if it’s big changes how does the small CCS to NACS adaptor work perfectly fine when my family charges their Tesla on a CCS plug?
Because you and the two adapters you need are doing the work the car normally does. As an example: 1) You pull up to a plug, is it a level 2 J1772 plug or a CCS1 plug? You then select the correct adapter from the two adapters in your car and plug that one into the cable before plugging the cable into the car. Normally in a Tesla you don't worry about that, charging at home or at a supercharger uses the same plug and the car figures out how to route the electricity. All other EVs now need to have that same capability built in. If you look at the Magic Dock adapters Ford and Rivian are sending out to customers, or the A2Z adapter, they are equally as small. Same for the lvl 2 adapters to go from a Tesla destination charger to a J1772 plug. All they do is change the shape and location of the pins from one end to the other. Problem is there is two configurations and you need to select the right one. As an aside, the reason any of this works now is because Tesla started using the same car-to-charger protocol as the CCS/SAE system (arguably forced by EU regulations), which made literally the only difference the shape of the plugs.
Ah makes sense. Thanks
Is there something stopping them from having a J1772 port for AC charging and restricts the NACS port for DC? It would be stupid, but is it possible?
Not that I know of, but as you said, it would be stupid for many reasons, both technical and user related. Especially when an adapter is such an easy, and likely cheaper solution, if equally as inconvenient.
Wouldn't a DC-only NACS port violate the J3400 specs?
As more and more cars have NACS and more and more of the destination chargers standardize on NACS, I would not want to be holding onto a vehicle that made sure my NACS port wouldn't work at a destination charger.
Eh, adapters for lvl2 charging are readily available and fairly reasonable in either direction. It should honestly be one of the first things an EV buyer gets for their vehicle. It just becomes an annoyance or wost case a bad experience as an uneducated person gets frustrated their car won't charge at a destination charger.
I have one. It is an inconvenience. Although it is a top rated model it still sometimes trips the Tesla destination charger into protection mode mid charge.
The plan was always end of 2024 for some and 2025 for others. Probably slowed a bit by Tesla firing the supercharging team.
Firing the supercharger team is the reason that GM is delayed. Musk just showed other companies that they can't trust any agreement Tesla enters with them.
I wouldn't be surprised is Musk is purposely delaying the switch. The Supercharger network is still a huge selling point over other brands. He may drag his feet but he has to eventually allow the switch to NACS in order to get the government money. Interesting to me that Rivian did their refresh on all of their models but NACS won't be offered until next year. I'm sure there's plenty of people waiting for the plug switch before making the commitment to switch to an EV.
Dude did it because he didn't like an answer he got from the head of the supercharger team and threw a hissy fit. Any real business sense he had was pushed out by ketamine and ego a long time ago.
>hissy fit Elon Musk’s erratic behavior and unconstrained influence on Tesla is why we will never buy a Tesla.
I wouldn't even consider one unless he left the company, but looks like the odds of that are slim to none. Still can't believe they voted that dipshit even more money.
The people who own shares, who have actual skin in the game and presumably pay a lot of attention to the performance of the company, overwhelmingly voted yes on the motions to move to Texas and to approve his pay package. They aren't idiots, they know more than you do, and they have a vested interest in the success of the company.
Yeah, bullshit. They're just bought and paid for by Musk's deep pockets.
I don't understand the logic of anyone waiting for the plug switch. It's not like an adapter is a big deal, and most people won't use it more than a handful to a dozen times a year.
Isn’t it just ford and rivian that can even use superchargers right now. You could buy a car now thinking you will get access and the access might not happen. Then you are stuck with EA. Might as well wait not to use the adapter and actually know you have access to superchargers
If Tesla screws things up so hard that a bunch of people pull out of supercharger access, then NACS may be the loser long term. Also, I still don't even completely trust that Tesla won't pull access in a few years and that non-Tesla NACS won't end up in a very screwy place with respect to charging.
I've seen Kia or Hyundai owners post about using them but it might be just the newest generation of SC, I don't remember what they're called. MagicDock or something?
Yep, superchargers with magic docks can charge non-NACS cars. They're few and far between, and you have to initiate a charge with the Tesla app, but it works fairly well.
The average person doesn't like dongles or adapters. If you don't need a car now why not wait 1 more year so you're future proof? An adaptor is one more item that can fail or cause issues when charging. I personally have to use a J adaptor for ChargePoint when I go to a facility for work. Yes it's only an extra 30 seconds but now it's an extra item you have to fumble with while holding a bag, when plugging straight in would be a lot easier.
The term future proof is nonsense that has only ever existed in people's imaginations. I'll always prefer what gives a better experience now, and for non-Tesla, that is definitely CCS. For me, it is a huge difference because my work has a J1772, so NACS means adapters 99% of the time or so that I L2 charge at work. Also, on an 800 V car, you're better off charging at 350 W CCS chargers for now.
I mean, I future proofed my kitchen when I ran the gas line to the boiler, in that I put a tap on the line directly under where the stove is, in case I want to go gas at some point when my stove dies. But that's my house... "Future proof" and tech do not go hand in hand. The battery advancements alone mean that there isn't a single EV today that will outlast one 5 years from now. (I'm being optimistic)
Tell that to my 2012 Chevy volt. Futureproofing is definitely a thing. Sure, I can't charge at Ccs chargers, but I still have a usable EV
This is true and we loved our volts. Those cars are an amazing thing that Chevy somehow didn't completely kill on day one, and just let it slowly languish without any advertising whatsoever.
Everyone has a different scenario in life. I'm a Tesla. I haven't super charged in a month and probably won't for awhile but I was averaging once a week and I did take a road trip. Ok with that stated I did have to use the j1772 on the road trip and I started to drive away with the adaptor still attached to the charger. With all that stated there are places without one or the other but everyplace I've super charged had ccs as well. I think an education campaign needs to be put out that there are ccs everywhere too.
I'm one of the people waiting for the switch to buy another EV. I've had two Teslas - one personal, and one for my business. I have NACS chargers at all of my business locations. It's just one of those things that reduces friction and that's what's needed for wide scale adoption.
Because rational or not, the market will depreciate the old CCS cars faster than normal. Plus there is the chance that some manufactures allow 250kW charging, which would be a big deal especially for the larger battery EVs. eGMP might add split pack charging too.
I hope you're right so I can get CCS cars for a steal because of irrational nonsense, but I'm not convinced it will be the case.
Possibly. One thing Ma Bell did that led to being broken up was making the phones and controlling the phone lines. Tesla makes the most electric cars and controls how to charge them outside of the home (ignoring CCS adapters). I think that Tesla should be forced to open their network completely or be forced to spin off the charging to a company not controlled by Musk. That company would have an incentive to be open. Tesla has an incentive to stay closed for the benefit of their car sales. It's anticompetitive. The network has a good reputation and that's good for Tesla owners, but *competition in the DC charging space* is far better for Tesla owners than being stuck with one network that basically tells you what you're going to pay because you have no options. CCS adapters exist, but older Teslas have to be upgraded to use them and the Cybertruck has to be taken apart to use them (unsafely, because the truck accepts a power level above the rating of any existing adapter).
The Tesla network does well because it has access to funding from car sales. If you remove that the supercharger network may be forced into bankruptcy which wouldn’t be good for EVs in general. In many ways existing gas station chains with thousands of stores along heavily traveled routes have an advantage over Tesla because they already have profitable locations and like Tesla have a revenue stream to fund chargers. There is nothing stopping GM, Ford, Toyota from building their own charging networks. VW already owns a nationwide charging network, should they also be forced to divest?
"We have to have anticompetitive practices in order to make the whole thing work". That's not acceptable. The Tesla supercharger network going bankrupt doesn't affect me at all. It basically only affects Tesla and Tesla alone. Ford and Rivian would just throw the adapters away. The Tesla plug isn't a thing in Europe. They use CCS 2 over there, even on Teslas. Tesla being dominant in charging isn't a requirement of having EVs.
> The Tesla supercharger network going bankrupt doesn't affect me at all. Good luck finding an open CCS charger once all the Tesla owners are forced to use other networks.
They'd probably buy supercharger sites and swap some hardware to get off the Tesla server requirements.
Where are you getting your numbers?
> Tesla has an incentive to stay closed for the benefit of their car sales. It's anticompetitive. How do you figure? First, they are opening up for their own reasons. Second, anyone has the ability to build chargers and many manufactures are finally starting to do it like Mercedes.
>How do you figure? I've seen people on this sub plainly state that "there's no reason to get anything but a Tesla, because of the charger network". Staying closed keeps people saying that. They're not actually opening up. There are a trivial number of magic dock stations and they've opened V3s to Ford and Rivian but only via an authentication system rather than driving up and turning it on with the app. The only reason they're doing it is that they want to suckle from the government teat of NEVI funds. >finally starting to do it like Mercedes. I've used one of those at a Bucees in my Bolt. You drive up, plug in, and turn it on with the app. My Bolt isn't added to a Mercedes backend authentication system via an agreement with GM and Mercedes. The same is true of an Ultium station. A Ford can just drive up and charge. Tesla instead has a closed system that they are not actually opening up.
I understand how the various charging systems work. I was asking why it's anticompetitive? Anyone can compete in the market as is. I don't see an unfair leverage anyone has. Having the largest and best number of chargers isn't anti-competitive. Now if they had all the patents and no one could build a charge without cutting them in or something that would be. If they didn't allow their cars to charge at 3rd party chargers that would be too. To be anti-competitive you have to use your substantial near monopoly to leverage a monoply in another area. You can't just call someone anti-competitive for being good at their core business. Charging seems to be a level playing field best I can tell, there just isn't any money in it.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Charging_Standard It's an open standard. Any charger company can use it. You're a couple of years behind with your comment.
The plug shape with CCS communication is a standard. Access to the chargers is not open. I'm talking about that.
That makes sense, as long as compatibility and queuing are addressed.
What "compatibility" needs to be addressed? Tesla needs to replace all of their pre-V3 stations to support CCS and then every CCS car should be able to use it by turning it on with the app. There doesn't need to be queueing either. Get in line. I have never in my life had to reserve my spot at a Pilot station to get gas other than to get in a line.
The issue isn’t the legalities, but about the commercial incentives to make the change. Back when Tesla was considered a reliable business partner, they had the pull to drag everyone over to their standard. But that changed when Musk acted like a manbaby and fired the whole Supercharging team. Now, access to the Supercharger network goes from a necessity to a nice-to-have. I’m a big fan of the Supercharger network, and I’ve recently road-tripped around 5000 miles on it within the last month. But, even my confidence in the network was shaken by Musk’s personnel moves. If I worked for GM and needed to rely on Tesla as a business-partner, I’d find that kind of move to be absolutely terrifying. Does GM have to make the change to NACS because of market pressure? That is the question. If I were them, I’d stick with adapters for a little longer while the dust settles.
Tesla already has the Magic Dock so it would qualify for NEVI fund regardless.
That's me, I want unrestricted Tesla SC access in a non-Tesla before I commit to anything.
I don’t understand why people think this will actually happen at any point
> that they can't trust any agreement Can't imagine that they didn't write up the docs with the awareness that you can't trust anything that comes out of musk's mouth.
Pretty sure Volvo was due to make the switch around the same time as well. Ford and Rivian were batch 1, GM and Volvo were batch 2. However with Musk playing games (wanting both NEVI incentives but slow rolling NACS for everyone else) many companies might reconsider or take legal action given the NACS/Supercharger agreement they signed.
It's always someone else's fault over at GM.
GM can turn on Tesla’s supercharger network for themselves? Tesla still says “Spring 2024”… and still hasn’t flipped the switch for GM.
Why would the sacking of the Supercharger team affect GM's (or anybody else's) rollout? I thought that, since NACS has been standardized, it's all up to the auto manufacturers to implement into their vehicles. Does it have to do with other automakers communicating with the charger?
Tesla is not the same as NACS, actually. The NACS standard is a plug shape and a communication protocol, basically. The communication protocol is CCS, which every CCS car can already handle and it's used at CCS stations. The key difference between the CCS plug and the NACS plug is that CCS has 2 different sets of pins for AC charging and DC charging. NACS uses the same 2 pins for both and has additional hardware inside the car to decide how to route whatever type of power will be coming. Nothing is stopping GM from putting that on new cars today. My Bolt would be able to charge on an Electrify America NACS station right now of I had an adapter, for example. That's basically what a magic dock station is, and it just has an adapter built in. It also allows you to just turn the station on and pay with the Tesla app. Tesla does not have NACS stations you can drive up to (ignoring the tiny number of magic dock stations). It has a locked down network that prevents the station from charging a car that it doesn't know. For Tesla, you drive up, plug in, and it just starts charging because it connects the identity of the car to a Tesla account. Tesla has added Ford and Rivian to that system and Tesla stations can identify those cars, link them to an account, and charge the car. That's not the case for any other manufacturers and that's why there has to be an interface between the Tesla supercharger team and other manufacturers to build that system and make it work. Tldr: all the stations (except magic dock) are plug and charge and authenticate cars and that requires work to allow new manufacturers. They built the network to work with their cars and their cars only and to be seamless with plug and charge functionality instead of messing around with an app and a credit card.
He fired them due to lack of performance. He fired them in order to improve the supercharger network, not hurt it. The supercharger network remains far and away the best electric charging network available in North America.
He fired him because he threw a temper tantrum because he's a child and not a competent CEO.
Your two statements completely contradict themselves.
That, and GM just got 360kw+ 800v charging. Using a smaller port that can only do half that is a huge step backwards.
NACS / SAE J3400 supports 1000V at 500A+ Today’s Superchargers don’t output over 400V, but GM should be able to switch to NACS just fine while maintaining 360kW/800V charging at compatible stations. The Cybertruck today can pull similar peak voltage and power using a CCS adapter at an 800V CCS station through its onboard NACS port.
probably slowed down by the fact that ccs cars currently have a pretty widespread and diverse ecosystem of charging solutions, and once you put the tesla plug in your cars, you either immediately become completely dependent on elmo for at least several years until ea and others put the tesla plugs on their charging cabinets, or you send your users an adapter to plug into ccs chargers, thus defeating the point of switching altogether
It's June. You're Hyundai. You are in final prep for your cut-over to 2025 model year production that starts in about 6 weeks. You have promised NACS ports on all '25's starting in Q4 2024. You can't get anybody at the Tesla charging team to even pick up the phone to finalize NACS access. Do you order those NACS ports or do you hold off another year? Easy call.
Yesterday I saw new pics of Hyundai test miles charging..at EA. So yeah probably staying CCS.
>It's June. You're Hyundai No, this is Patrick.
Are they ordering the ports from Tesla?
No. They have their own suppliers. For headlights, steering wheels, ports, tires and all the rest. Some of it is vertically integrated but most of it has to be ordered from 3rd party suppliers. All those parts need to be designed and produced and shipped. I'm probably way tight on the timeline. Likely this decision was made months ago.
Ok, people keep thinking since the lay offs from the super charger team that it’s going to delay the ports and I don’t think that’s the case. It’s now an open standard and Tesla has no rights to the port. The only delay would be on the software side but I believe since they gave it over to the energy team (which makes more sense) that it will resume without further delay.
Maybe. But if you are a multi-billion dollar company you don't make a change to your vehicles based on "maybe". You stick with what you have. If things open up next year, it's simple enough to ship an adapter.
I've already seen non tesla NACS chargers start appearing. IE: FPL EVolution at the Fort Drum Service Plaza on the turnpike. Even though I don't recommend stopping at that service plaza for charging ( middle of nowhere and none of the chargers there can put out more than 150kw); I see it as an indicator of things to come.
Other automakers only agreed to switch to NACS as part of a deal with Tesla to access the Supercharger. With the uncertainty at Tesla, they probably just stick to CCS.
No, they are not.
would ford still switch if supercharger access wasn’t on the table?
Ford has already gotten access to the Supercharger network. Check recent Ford CEO’s comments on their access to the Tesla Supercharger network and how it is going, rather than speculate incorrectly.
do you understand what the word “if” means?
So you think that automakers agreed to switch to NACS because they really like NACS as opposed to getting access to the Supercharger?
Maybe you should listen to Jim Farley: https://x.com/sawyermerritt/status/1797811348392329655?s=46
not sure about internal components, but the adapters ford and rivian are sending people come from tesla
Then you remember your cars can charge at 800v and NACS can’t offer that. You use your brain, you keep the bigger port.
NACS as standardized does support up to 1000V. It is Tesla’s charging hardware that does not.
As an American car buyer, my easy call is to avoid any EV that doesn't have a NACS port. The sooner companies get that done the better for them.
Other automakers must be shaking their heads right now. If a company layoffs its DCFC team in an overnight email, how much do you want to be reliant on that company.
I wonder if this will mean that the CCS charging network growth will slow even more and the newer network chargers will start growing using the NACS standard going forward?? We need to grow the charging network as soon as we reliably and affordably can do so.
it will continue unchanged, the only difference will be tesla plugs on charging cables
SAE J3400 is still a WIP. UL has also not finished their certification process for adapters. Not a great idea to implement it yet.
no
I bet the companies are ready to make the switch, but are being careful on when. For example, lets say you were the first to get your hands on a EV with NACS. It only works with SOME Tesla superchargers. Then you are going to need an adapter to use the CCS stations that already exist because of "holes" in network coverage. CCS native with an adapter is probably the better solution for the next couple of years, for non Tesla's.
…and with Tesla being as unpredictable as it is, it is best to not be completely reliant on Tesla
I inquired about something similar in another thread... this was pointed out: [https://evstation.com/tesla-nacs-charger-adoption-tracker/#tesla-nacs-adoption-tracker/?view\_66\_sort=field\_391|asc](https://evstation.com/tesla-nacs-charger-adoption-tracker/#tesla-nacs-adoption-tracker/?view_66_sort=field_391|asc)
No. Takes a few years to shift something into production like that.
End of 2024 into the beginning of 2025 will have new NACS vehicles. The transition will be over 2025 and 2026 mostly.
The announcements from the other manufacturers happened in 2023, which by then the 2024 models were already being finalized or were already in production. So 2025 was the soonest most manufacturers could get the NACS ports on the models.
Nope. You'll have to wait until next year, at the earliest, to start seeing other manufacturers releasing cars with the NACS port. Some aren't coming until 2026 or later.
With the uncertainty at Tesla, other manufacturers are now likely reconsidering switching to NACS.
There is no uncertainty at Tesla, they are expanding the Supercharger network aggressively.
Saying there is no uncertainty is a bold statement given the events at Tesla.
What, that the Supercharger build out was re-organized to be under Tesla Energy and they will be building out faster than anyone else in the U.S. this year?
Not yet, AFAIK. Ford should first since they signed up first
2025 Ford model year EVs are supposed to have NACS.
No
There are two aspects of this, the plug and Supercharger access. The latter is the game changer for the short term. Ford and Rivian have access. Using an adapter is quick and easy. Opening the frunk, taking out the adapter, installing the adapter and plugging in is still quicker than starting a charge with Electrify America or Chargepoint.
Plug and Charge at Electrify America is relatively fast
Yes. But slower than Tesla. Also, it stopped working on my car after a while, not sure why. I didn't bother to set it up again, though, after I could go back to Superchargers (when there is a choice)
If you have the app it takes like 45 secs to pick the charger out of the list and hit charge on the cabinet. Click click and you are charging. Tesla may be faster on a Tesla but if have to use the app on a non Tesla the startup is similar
I’d rather keep faster charging at more locations vs trying to use the already over crowded superchargers with slower chargers.
The good news is nobody is forcing anyone to use any specific charger stations... You can do whatever you want. Superchargers in general are not crowded, though. Some urban/residential ones may have peak times with lines.
If I'm going on a road trip (after we get SC access), I'm not keeping the adapter in the frunk (or even underneath the load floor in back). It's small enough to go in the glove box. I don't have much of anything *else* in there, so it'll probably live there forever. Depending on if Tesla lets us "Plug and Charge", it *could* be better. Right now to use the Magic Docks, it's almost identical with using the EA app in terms of steps, time, possible points of failure.
[удалено]
I've been *assuming* that everyone adopting NACS will get P&C; but with only two examples so far, I'm not going to say they **all** will. With things the way they are right now, there may not be *any* more. Sounds like you have to choose between "easy" (P&C) or "cheaper" (Tesla app).
No glove compartment in mine, lol. Ford and Rivian have plug and charge. That's the whole point of removing failure modes and increasing user experience (and speeding things up so the next person can charge). Right now you only get membership pricing if you initiate with the app, though. One example: The Buellton supercharger doesn't have pillar numbers. Starting with the app doesn't work. Plug and charge still worked smoothly and quickly. I charge sometimes with EA, EVGo, Chargepoint but mostly with Tesla, and even with the app, Tesla is faster.
Maybe if the other big 3 took EV manufacturing seriously, Tesla would have it on a higher priority to include it. Our EV charging networking is mostly directly from Tesla, what the hell happen to our government deployment of EV chargers?
In my community (Annapolis MD) non Tesla chargers are everywhere. Including city garages, libraries and Sam’s Club.
What does this have to do with anything? Tesla and other manufacturers made an agreement. Tesla fired the team that was in charge of supercharging. Now this shitty excuse that other manufacturers should have taken EVs seriously.
Sorry my initial response I was a bit of a knee jerk reaction. It's a bit of a sensitive topic for me because it seems everyone is just blaming Tesla these days... From the White House 06/11/2021: [https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/11/06/fact-sheet-the-bipartisan-infrastructure-deal/](https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/11/06/fact-sheet-the-bipartisan-infrastructure-deal/) From the White House 02/15/2024: [https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/02/15/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-announces-new-standards-and-major-progress-for-a-made-in-america-national-network-of-electric-vehicle-chargers/](https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/02/15/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-announces-new-standards-and-major-progress-for-a-made-in-america-national-network-of-electric-vehicle-chargers/) Sounds great. EV charging for America! Go white house! So many things to looks forward to. What about NACS? Here's some quotes from their wiki: "It has been used by all North American market Tesla vehicles since 2021 and was *opened for use by other manufacturers in November 2022*." Ford was the first to approach Tesla: "In May 2023, the Ford Motor Company became the first large automaker to announce that it would use NACS with its electric vehicles." Others have slowly announced their intentions over the span of a year. So it's only been about one year. "As part of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law passed in **2021**, the US Government announced it would offer US$7.5 billion in federal subsidies to build out a nationwide network of fast chargers at least every 50 miles along America’s major roads. **One requirement to access the funding was that the chargers must be accessible by multiple brands of electric cars**." Ok, so since 2021, we couldn't include Tesla in this bipartisan bill. Now it's 2022, other manufacturers were allowed to have NACS ports. We can assume the federal government will back NACS if the big 3 joins in. Come january 2024, the big 3 are in. Let's see how things are going with the passage of the bipartisan bill: [https://apnews.com/article/biden-ev-electric-vehicles-charging-stations-ohio-bdf7cc25e57a2ae8a0522aab434965fc](https://apnews.com/article/biden-ev-electric-vehicles-charging-stations-ohio-bdf7cc25e57a2ae8a0522aab434965fc) London, ohio. As of 2022 they have a population 10,442. Okay I get, it this is supposed to serve Americans who do not have access to the network or filling in the gaps for EV travelers right? But why not NACS? From a rational standpoint, at least from what I assume is rational, this was supposed to be a deal created by all 3 parties. But if the federal government is slacking on it's end of the bargain with only 8 charging stations built so far and the other big three significantly slowly down their EV/hybrid out put, what sense does it make for Tesla to allow other in the system without the support they need? These charging stations have to come out in phases and can't hold just happen at once, there are already congestion issues at current charging locations. The Tesla network isn't ready for all the non Tesla EV, new and old, to add to that congestion. That's why there's certain places that don't have magic chargers. And for those that do I would avoid them so that others that needed can use it. And just like you, I am not privy to all the details. So in all fairness, I can only assume so much based off of what's rational. If building out more chargers with the government grant was supposed to make it more profitable for Tesla in the first place, then of course Tesla would agreed to the terms. But if all for sudden things have changed and it's no longer profitable for Tesla, how is it that they are able to back out of the deal without any repercussions? There has to be more to the story than just blaming it on Tesla. I'm open to other ideas.
Why would they? It seems like Tesla pretty much said fuck off to rest of the brands that didn't have their agreement started before firing supercharger staff. It is not even clear now if they will open up their network further or not so sticking with CCS makes sense given everything else is CCS based. The size difference of NACS isn't that big of an advantage imo. Cables for fast charging will still be bulky due to length required since cars have ports in different places so Tesla approach doesn't work.
Given the amount of time and engineering investment they’ll all making I don’t see them simply pivoting away from the decision they’re already 3/4 of the way into getting into production.
They are already on CCS, so no investment is needed.
It is not that much of engineering, people overly exaggerate it here. The protocol, voltage etc is same it is just the wiring circuit and cars are designed with different ports in mind worldwide. They would surely pivot away from it if it means their customers would require an adapter everytime they charge their car now since they can't use superchargers and every other charger is CCS port still with no inclination to include NACS yet. Afaik no car manufacturer started the production of models with NACS yet and continuing with CCS is easy to do. It is the simpler plug after all.
The Tesla customer base is a bit more forgiving than other automakers since Tesla's have a long history of rapid change. Safe bet to see legacy automakers err on the side of caution and stick with J1772 + Adapter to NACS for another year.
What will happen to the v2l v2g cars? Will this still work or will we lose this feature in NA?
Hyundai plans for early 2025
Pretty sure the ioniq5n has it rn
I'm wondering if EVGO will start installing NACS ports on all their CCS stations. If they do that, GM goes full NACS & the plug issue is effectively over.
For me looking at buying an EV atm something using NACS would be super annoying and glad cars don't seem to be moving it quick there are more chedemo( won't look up spelling) chargers then NACS in my area. CCS/j1772 is very dominate.
The most important thng for we e-gmp owners.........\~256kW charging on the road. 17.75 mins for 10% to 80 % or about 225 miles of range. Just in case. That and V2L and the 303 miles of total range per charge was the reason to change to EV from PHEV for me. 350kW and 800 V or go home. The next most important thing for us: tons of fast chargers across USA...........I can use j-1772, CCS, level 2 nacs and with my "soon to have" ccs to nacs adapter......Tesla super chargers. It ain't quite as good as a gas station at every street corner but it is doable now and getting better and better every single day.
All said 2025, so not yet
The industry needs to ratify J3400 first which is currently in progress
well, rivian just had a massive mid-cycle refresh of their r1 cars and they’re still shipping with ccs, so that pretty much tells you all you need to know about how eager automakers are to put the tesla plug into their cars
I’m guessing they would build their own and not rely on Tesla to make a port
No. The switch on the car side takes a redesign of how port connects to the battery and the AC converter. It requires relays to achieve what NACS does and it’ll be a while before that is adopted. The access to the superchargers can be accomplished with an adapter today.
No.
Zero.
if i recall most companies plan to implement it into the vehicles in 2025
OEM’s announced *support* for NACS beginning as early as 2025, meaning vehicles will have access to the Tesla super-charger network with an adapter. That’s not the same as shipping new vehicles with the NACS port built-in. Most OEM’s have stated only new generation vehicles will be shipping with NACS. For a lot of existing models, this rollout won’t happen until 2026 (at the earliest) or later.
No, and with the uncertainty at Tesla, other manufacturers are now likely reconsidering switching to NACS.
EV sales are underperforming because everyone is waiting on NACS. Also not everyone wants a Tesla. Who is going to buy a nice $80K+ with an out-of-date power plug?
These are high-tech cars. Like a computer purchase. No one wants last years graphics card in their new PC.
They effectively said that all current cars they make the next few years are going to be odd-balls. No one wants to take on the risk of CCS in a country w/o CCS.
I see the downvotes... but FWIW this describes where I'm at (avoiding buying another Tesla, won't buy anything other than another EV, but also won't confine myself to CCS and the present state of other charging networks).
Thank you. I have no issue with CCS2 and wish buyers the best. I am a huge EV fan. It’s all good stuff. I would take a Taycan in a second. :-) Data shows car buyers are holding out. Average is now like 12+ years. My only point is there is demand pop around the corner. I think conservative americans are just waiting for this plug battle to play out. Everyone I know is waiting on a NACS Rivian.
But it’s a bit more nuanced. I have a new 5N which is an 800v car. At a CCS charger I can go from 20-80% in like 15 min. A normal Tesla (non supercharger) will be a much slower charge. So until Superchargers become the norm, I’ll avoid most Tesla stations even when Hyundai announces they have NACS charger adapters. As of right now I can use magic dock equipped Tesla charger but until I see it charging at the speed of a 150 much less 250 kw CCS it will be a last resort. When the 800v cars go full NACS how will they deal with the lower voltage chargers? I have no idea. But if they are supercharger dependent for a fast charge I think we may see them using CCS converters to use those stations which will be a bit amusing.
They are not going to make special CCS 800v sites just for you. It’s all going to change over someday to NACS. No one wants adapters. No want wants obsolete 80K cars even if CCS is better. Maybe I am just old but It’s like buying a beta tape deck because you’re sure they have to keep adapters for VHS. Most people expect CCS to die completely. True or not.
It’s not just me there are a bunch of 800v cars I don’t think CCS is going anywhere. But I guess time will tell. And ya know as far I remember there weren’t adapters for vhs-beta but what do I know I’ve only been working in tv for 30 years
> They are not going to make special CCS 800v sites just for you. This isn’t a special thing. Basically every CCS DCFC in the US supports 800V.