Tesla Model S Supercharging Network Milestones

[PV1]

The last two Supercharging locations of the U.S. coast to coast link opened this week. Model S owners can now drive across the country via Supercharging for free. The two locations are Somerset, PA and Macedonia, Ohio respectively.

http://www.teslamotors.com/supercharger

 

[DallasiMiEV]

What's the protocol for non-Tesla EVs using these charging stations? I understand an i-MiEV couldn't use the same super-charging system, but is there any compatibility for other EVs? It seems Tesla thumbs their nose at all the other EVs, and it doesn't seem very supportive of the overall movement.

 

[JoeS]

All modern EVs in the US were designed to comply with the J1772 charging standard (120vac and 240vac), with Japanese cars having their CHAdeMO Quick Charging standard and the North American and European manufacturers consciously rejecting CHAdeMO and coming up with something called Combined Charging Standard (CCS), which is only just now starting to be implemented. Tesla's proprietary quick charging system is technically superior to either the bulky CHAdeMO or frankenplug CCS. More than any other company, Tesla has shown what a luxury EV can do and has removed almost every objection anyone has raised about electric cars. Even though the Tesla is not my cup of tea, I admire the vehicle and at the present time consider Elon Musk (Tesla) and Carlos Ghosn (Nissan) as the only two major-league CEOs dedicated to promoting BEVs. Most of the other manufacturers have reluctantly come on board, with some of the credit going to the California Air Resources Board for making this happen - just wish CARB hadn't caved in ten years ago … but that's really getting off-topic. Yes, the Tesla Supercharger network is in a league of its own dedicated at present to the Model S, and you really have to wonder what all the other manufacturers are thinking…

 

[alohart]

What's the protocol for non-Tesla EVs using these charging stations?

Proprietary. I believe that the CHAdeMO protocol did not support Tesla's need for very high-power DC charging when Tesla first needed such charging, so Tesla designed its own protocol.

Tesla includes a J1772 to Tesla adapter that will allow a standard J1772 EVSE to charge a Tesla and will soon be selling an expensive CHAdeMO to supercharger port adapter that will allow a CHAdeMO charger to charge a Tesla, but I'm not aware of a Tesla supercharger to CHAdeMO adapter that would allow an EV with a CHAdeMO port to be charged by a Tesla supercharger.

I understand an i-MiEV couldn't use the same super-charging system, but is there any compatibility for other EVs?

No

It seems Tesla thumbs their nose at all the other EVs, and it doesn't seem very supportive of the overall movement.

Well, to be fair, Tesla is ahead of other EV's, so it wasn't willing to wait for EV charging protocols to catch up to its needs. Tesla doesn't believe that <100-mile range EV's are sufficient to create large sales numbers. Building a long-range EV is expensive due to high battery pack costs, so Tesla's long-range EV's have been expensive to date. As Tesla drives the cost of its battery pack technology down, it is promising to offer a much more affordable long-range EV in a few years. We'll see…

Contrast Tesla's approach to that of all other EV designers who have chosen to try to stimulate sales by minimizing cost by using relatively small battery packs with the resulting relatively low range. There is certainly a market for such cars, but it remains small even though many multi-vehicle families could make great use of one of these cars. Through it's great publicity, Tesla is helping educate such families about the utility of EV's which could help drive the sales of less expensive EV's.

It's unrealistic to expect Tesla to offer its very expensive supercharger network to other EV's at no cost as it does to most Tesla owners. Tesla would not want to create supercharger queues by including other EV's even if those EV's had to pay to charge. If Tesla did offer other EV's the opportunity to use its supercharger network, it would probably charge them a hefty fee to cover its costs, likely more than other EV owners would want to pay.

 

[PV1]

Tesla .. will soon be selling an expensive CHAdeMO to supercharger port adapter that will allow a CHAdeMO charger to charge a Tesla, but I'm not aware of a Tesla supercharger to CHAdeMO adapter that would allow an EV with a CHAdeMO port to be charged by a Tesla supercharger.

The CHAdeMO protocol supports up to 62.5 kW, where Superchargers can go up to 120 kW. Tesla wasn't waiting around for either CHAdeMO or J1772 "Frankenplug", and neither protocol has the punch or simplicity of the Model S connector.

I highly doubt Tesla would open up the Supercharging network to other EVs. Some of the Superchargers are already backed up at different times throughout the day.

Right now, there is bit of a stretch between Macedonia, Ohio and Somerset, PA. That will be solved by the upcoming Cranberry, PA Supercharger. I'll take a trip to see that one when it opens, and use the CHAdeMO quick charger while I'm there, too. :mrgreen:

 

[jray3]

Here's another Milestone: http://www.siliconbeat.com/2014/01/29/with-a-registration-in-jackson-mississippi-teslas-model-s-now-has-sales-in-all-50-states/
Don, got any connections in Jackson?

 

[fjpod]

Sorry to always be the naysayer on this Tesla topic. The car may be beautiful and all...a technical marvel indeed, but if it requires its own private network of refueling stations, it's doomed to failure.

What if my travels take me hundreds of miles from the nearest Tesla stop? I've got to kill half a day and go hundreds of miles out of my way...for what?? To save the planet? This is why non-environmentalists ridicule tree huggers.

I think there may be one of these chargers in Long Island City NY. I live in NYC. What am I supposed to do, travel from one end of the city to the other in rush hour traffic, waste at least half a day, and pay about $25 in tolls. To do what? Get a quick charge? This my friends, is not technical wizardry. This is just being in love with a technology for technology's sake. For gosh sakes, use a hybrid or a plugin hybrid if you have to travel long distances. And you can buy one of these for way less than $50K.

If a vehicle needs this kind of a specialized, uncommon power source to be successful, than it is not successful, nor is it a good example of technical wizardry.

In my mind, and not just because I own one, the imiev is more of a technical marvel for what it is than the Tesla. It can get me around town up to 75 miles or so, with no more thought and expense then I would have when I plug in my cell phone. And it didn't cost me $85K. The time and money I save by NOT looking for a place to charge makes up for any little inconveniences the imiev may have.

Hey...I look at things differently.

 

[Mattmiev]

A few thoughts on Tesla's approach.

BTW love my i-miev and think the 2014 pricing makes it a much more appealing solution.

Tesla can use, Supercharge stations, Chademo (with adapter), any level 2 station at the maximum output. 240vac conections.

With a range well in excess of 200 mi it would be like our Mievs, but without limitations on long trips. Every day you would have at least 200 miles range available. For a long trip you travel on the highway. 400 miles and you stop once in the middle. If you are staying at your destination for anytime you can top off with level 2.

The super charge stations will cover nearly all main highways by 2016. If I wanted to drive from Akron to Chicago then on to Detroit, just like wn ICE "tank up" on or very near my route. Then off to Detroit, spend 2 nights and then drive home to Akron. This is a trip I make often and is doable today with a Model S. If the Model E has 200 mi range and is about $40,000 I'll get that and then be an all EV household.

The SuperCharger netork is part of Musk's plans to make EVs mainstream and his brand the most desirable. Other manufactures could use SC if they paid royalty.

 

[DallasiMiEV]

Ok, Tesla's Model S is amazing. I would get one if they cost a lot less. Since I'm into lists, here we go again.

What I like about Tesla Model S:
- very comfortable luxury cars
- look very cool
- go very far
- Charging station grid that allows cross-country travel. I love the fact that I could drive from Dallas to my parents in MN with no fuel costs by 2016, if Tesla meets its published goals for supercharging stations. The car would be big enough to bring my family and luggage. Very cool.

What I DON'T like:
- Expensive. I had a very nice Benz R350 for ~$40K less than the cost of a Model S, and I paid about $2K a year in gas. The model S is just not cost-effective, and won't be for a long time. My i saves me tons of money, and I got it cheaper than I could any similar car. The payoff is degrees of magnitude higher for the i than for the S.
- Tesla is a huge contradiction to me. The company seems funded by progressive individuals and tax policies, and the car is a progressive badge of honor, or a liberal status symbol. A huge principle of the progressive movement is about leveling the playing field for disadvantaged people, but this car is unaffordable to all except the very upper middle class and above. Elon Musk's stated goal is to bring EV mass market cars to market, but then he makes cars only for the elite. Another similar contradiction: The EV movement is all about sustainability, but the Tesla business model doesn't seem to be sustainable.
- The elitist feel that Tesla and Elon look down on other EVs and their manufacturers. I read this article about Elon laughing and mocking other EV manufacturers like BMW, and it really gave me a bad feeling.
http://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-response-to-bmw-i3-2013-8
- Tesla's charging incompatibility and setting up their own infrastructure. It's great they are a market leader for EVs (and they obviously know and revel in this fact), but why build infrastructure that only supports your car, and not other EVs? Perhaps it's not directly hurting the other EVs, but it's definitely not helping. It's like Apple, famous for their commercial in the early 80s mocking the IBM behemoth monopoly, but then Apple turned into an even bigger behemoth monopoly with much worse anti-competitive practices. Tesla preaches that they want to make transportation sustainable (but only if Tesla is the only one that profits from it).

Don't mean to seem preachy or political. I like the Model S. But it's far too expensive, and Tesla just rubs me the wrong way. But eventually I'll probably buy one of their cars if they become more affordable and ubiquitous and no other options can compete, just like I eventually had to get an iPhone... It was the only decent option my company gave me, and I grudgingly love it.

 

[PV1]

- Tesla is a huge contradiction to me. The company seems funded by progressive individuals and tax policies, and the car is a progressive badge of honor, or a liberal status symbol. A huge principle of the progressive movement is about leveling the playing field for disadvantaged people, but this car is unaffordable to all except the very upper middle class and above. Elon Musk's stated goal is to bring EV mass market cars to market, but then he makes cars only for the elite. Another similar contradiction: The EV movement is all about sustainability, but the Tesla business model doesn't seem to be sustainable.

Don't know how familiar you are with Tesla's business model. They are shooting for high-dollar markets first ($100,000+ Roadster sports car, then $50,000-$100,000 Premium luxury sedan Model S) to help get economies of scale moving to bring costs down to be able to get high-range, low-cost EVs (upcoming Model E, similar in price to LEAF and Ford Focus Electric, but with 200 mile range). Everybody else is shooting for low price market straight out of the booth, and that's a reason why the lower priced vehicles, the i-MiEV included, go less than 100 miles per charge. Tesla is helping to bring battery prices down quickly by going after the people that have the money to make it possible.

Other Tesla vehicles to fit in are the Model X to tackle the SUV market, and the rumored Model T :lol: to take on the truck market. Currently, the only 2 SUVs that have electric powertrain are the Toyota RAV4-EV and the upcoming Outlander PHEV. There are no electric trucks yet.

Tesla is now turning profit and is funded by Model S sales.

 

[PV1]

http://www.siliconbeat.com/2014/01/26/easy-rider-the-first-coast-to-coast-trip-in-a-tesla-model-s/

 

[alohart]

- Expensive. I had a very nice Benz R350 for ~$40K less than the cost of a Model S, and I paid about $2K a year in gas. The model S is just not cost-effective, and won't be for a long time. My i saves me tons of money, and I got it cheaper than I could any similar car. The payoff is degrees of magnitude higher for the i than for the S.

I'm not familiar with Mercedes models, but I think the Model S would be considered an Mercedes S-class competitor, not a R350 competitor. The MSRP for a 2012 R350 starts at ~$53,000. A Tesla Model S 60 starts at ~$64,000 after the $7,500 Federal tax credit. So a base R350 is only ~$11,000, not $40,000, less than a base Model S 60.

- Tesla is a huge contradiction to me. The company seems funded by progressive individuals and tax policies, and the car is a progressive badge of honor, or a liberal status symbol.

I don't necessarily agree with your premise unless conservatives have some basic objection to EV's. I wouldn't be surprised if many wealthy conservatives are Model S owners.

Maybe conservatism leads to supporting the status quo, so a big change to EV's might be unsettling. I get that conservatives are incensed that the Federal government offered Tesla stimulus loans that Tesla paid back way early with interest and that Tesla benefits financially from zero emission credits. But without Federal support and California emission requirements, the current variety of EV's would almost certainly not be available now. Sometimes the free market just moves way too slow or not at all.

- The elitist feel that Tesla and Elon look down on other EVs and their manufacturers. I read this article about Elon laughing and mocking other EV manufacturers like BMW, and it really gave me a bad feeling.

Musk does not believe that BMW's offering yet another <100-mile-range EV indicates a serious commitment to EV's. Musk's opinion might be vindicated if the BMW CEO's "couple thousand" 2014 US i3 sales projection turns out to be correct. This places the i3 in compliance car territory. At this point, it appears that only Nissan and Tesla are really serious about EV's, so other manufacturers deserve to be derided.

- Tesla's charging incompatibility and setting up their own infrastructure. It's great they are a market leader for EVs (and they obviously know and revel in this fact), but why build infrastructure that only supports your car, and not other EVs?

Because no other charging standard provides the power necessary to rapid-charge a battery pack the size of the Model S, Tesla had to invent its own standard. Offering free supercharging for life to Tesla owners is a significant marketing advantage as well. Why should a private company, Tesla, spend millions of dollars building a supercharger infrastructure that any EV could use?

It's like Apple, famous for their commercial in the early 80s mocking the IBM behemoth monopoly, but then Apple turned into an even bigger behemoth monopoly with much worse anti-competitive practices.

As a retired Apple engineer, I can't imagine what you're talking about. But this isn't the forum to discuss our disagreement.

 

[Mart]

- Tesla is a huge contradiction to me. The company seems funded by progressive individuals and tax policies, and the car is a progressive badge of honor, or a liberal status symbol.

I don't necessarily agree with your premise unless conservatives have some basic objection to EV's. I wouldn't be surprised if many wealthy conservatives are Model S owners.

Maybe conservatism leads to supporting the status quo, so a big change to EV's might be unsettling. I get that conservatives are incensed that the Federal government offered Tesla stimulus loans that Tesla paid back way early with interest and that Tesla benefits financially from zero emission credits. But without Federal support and California emission requirements, the current variety of EV's would almost certainly not be available now. Sometimes the free market just moves way too slow or not at all.

There is a basic school of thought within conservative circles which believes the market should decide. Government tax credits give favor to GM by giving full credit to the Volt's battery, but lesser credit to the smaller, Plug-in Prius. Why was the battery credit maximum set at the 16kWh mark instead of 10kWh or 24kWh? Further, many argue that this credit (or "subsidy") only effects the rich and upper middle-class, as many families have nowhere near a $7,500 annual tax burden. The idea of giving breaks to those who earn the most isn't gaining popular support.

I agree that the variety and mix of EVs available (at least in California and other "compliance" states) would not be as varied as those now. In "flyover states", the choices are limited to the Leaf, Volt, i-MiEV (if a Mitsu dealer is near) or Tesla (if you've got the money). It might also be argued that GM was supporting the EV1 and might have grown that market independently until they perceived they were being mandated to do so. CEOs are just like little kids who are happy to do something they want, but dig their heels in when told they must do it. If it weren't for mandates, we might be driving EVs with similar or greater range using NiMH packs instead of Lithium. GM might be the leader instead of Nissan. But the Federal and State governments have started picking winners and losers by their tax credits, grants, and withheld or delayed grants. Did Tesla have a greater chance than Aptera or Th!nk, who both applied for grants but were both pigeonholed into oblivion?

The same is true for CHAdeMO, Tesla, and SAE quick charge standards. The government can mandate the standard, or we can see duplication of effort and wasted expense and see what the market eventually decides. If the extra expense comes out of corporate rather than public pockets, conservatives are happy. There might be three plug types just like there's a current choice of 3 gasoline octane ratings or diesel. When the government gets involved in installing chargers, the government wants assurances that they picked the winner.

 

[NeilBlanchard]

Oil and coal and natural gas and nuclear (especially nuclear) are heavily subsidized and they have been for decades.

The electric car is clearly a much better way to go, and so the government is doing what they should.

Two Tesla Model S's are being driven across the US with a goal of doing it in 3 days:

http://www.cleanmpg.com/forums/showthread.php?t=49323

Tesla confirms that the Model E will also use the Supercharger network:

http://insideevs.com/elon-musk-confirms-free-supercharging-for-tesla-gen-3-model-e/

 

[DallasiMiEV]

You all make great points, and I have to admit I'm excited by all the progress Tesla is making and all they've done so far. As I was searching online to back up some of my more contentious points, I found more encouraging stuff about Tesla than not. I have to be careful not to do too much research, or else I might go buy a Model S right now. As it is, I find myself seriously considering getting one to replace my Hyndai Sante Fe in a few years so we drive long-distances in an EV. That cross-country grid is amazing.

 

[jray3]

There is a basic school of thought within conservative circles which believes the market should decide. Government tax credits give favor to GM by giving full credit to the Volt's battery, but lesser credit to the smaller, Plug-in Prius. Why was the battery credit maximum set at the 16kWh mark instead of 10kWh or 24kWh? Further, many argue that this credit (or "subsidy") only effects the rich and upper middle-class, as many families have nowhere near a $7,500 annual tax burden. The idea of giving breaks to those who earn the most isn't gaining popular support.

Indeed Mart, I'd have preferred a tax rebate or refundable, carry-over tax credit that covers all electrified vehicles on a straight $/Wh basis, with upper and lower limits that can be debated and adjusted. As is, the iMiEV (and especially the 2014 iMiEV) realizes the greatest benefit. It's an inexpensive car with the smallest battery that can take full advantage of the credit.

Popular support has arguably never existed for tax breaks to the 'rich', but economic arguments in favor of specific tax breaks have often won, arguably on their merits. If I were much poorer, I wouldn't have been able to purchase a new EV without the credit, and would have spent an extra year or two on the sidelines.
If I were much richer, the credit would have been applied to a different car, built in America.