Ford & GM adopt the Tesla Supercharger network standard (NACS).

Most likely because they have such a huge head start of locations / stalls already - as well as taking ownership of maintenance?
.

 

I did not see in the article “800 V.” Is there a count of 800 DC fast chargers?

I’m in Tuscumbia AL for ribbon cutting of a pair of 62.5 kW, ChargePoint, CCS-1 / CHAdeMO chargers. But I can swing by Athens AL on the way home and try their 350 kW lanes. I’ll share what I find.

Bob Wilson

 

Going in for the kill.

 

That's because I mixed up Ultra and Hyper fast lol. Such a weird naming scheme. But still, this is what Plugshare shows when I ask to show CCS 350KW stalls.



I checked a few and they all show at least two 350 KW stalls per stations.

 

The competitors now have as many stalls as Tesla, but they are not as reliable.

 

Not only is there less reliability;

https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/06/15/1074775/ev-chargers-tesla-nacs-superchargers/

.

 

So, those 800V fast chargers are far more prevalent than the handful of Tesla's V4 Superchargers and back to the point that this is probably why Porsche, Hyundai and Kia are still taking the waiting game regarding switching to NACS.

When Tesla added its MagicDock to some Superchargers last winter, those with these vehicles were really not impressed with the charging speed at Superchargers. I think I read that one manufacturer offers a different charge module at an extra cost that allows faster charging at 400V but by default, the built-in board does a bad job at upping the voltage to 800V while maintaining a high current.

As for VW, they are caught between a rock and a hard place, being the one shelling the money for EA. Couldn't have happened to a better manufacturer lol. Stupid diesel gate. They got off too easy if you ask me.

 

The top 2 most responsible were sentenced to prison.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_Schmidt_(engineer)#:~:text=Oliver%20Schmidt%20(born%20January%209,in%20the%20Volkswagen%20emissions%20scandal.

Don't be so hard on 'em - now days the system evenputs murderers / home invasion robers / human traffickers /drug smugglers etc back on the streets.
.

 

Might as well share this here:

The mayor standing in front of his Ford F150 held a ribbon cutting ceremony for the dual, ChargePoint Fast DC chargers:

The F150 frunk is huge and held his sound system.

Some of us at the celebration:


Earlier, I had grabbed a charge:


I prepared a map showing the EV range of my BMW i3-REx:

This gave insights to the TVA rep who oversaw the installation. I n talso shared that on the direct route to the Tunica casinos, I have to stop in Corinth for an hour long, L2 charge to make the distance or take a 25 mile detour to Tupelo. It will cost me $500 to add CCS-1 to my Tesla.

The TVA rep volunteered that ChargePoint makes a Tesla connector kit but the rules required a CHAdeMO plug. With two chargers, they might put in one Tesla plug and keep the CHAdeMO making everyone would be happy. Also, I mentioned replacing the BMW passenger seat with a recliner seat making it into "Hotel BMW."

Sad to say, no good deed goes unpunished. Someone backed her car into my passenger door. <MEGA SIGH> We exchanged information and Monday I'll visit my insurance agent to get the details worked out and the car door repair scheduled. Good thing this is my backup EV and I can switch back to the Tesla.

I also had this information poster for my EV:


When one of the EV skeptics, 'I drive 1,000 miles', came by, I point to the range extender engine/generator and reported, "I drove 835 miles from Florida. It is like doing a cross country in a weatherproof, four-seater, comfortable motorcycle."

On the way home, I stopped by this Electrify America station in Athens AL:


You don't need an ICE to screw up EV parking. But it didn't matter because the charger on the right by the fence was 'traditionally' down.

I'd come for the 350 kW station but didn't really need a charge. So I took a photo of the data sheet:

So apparently these are 920 VDC ready. Good ... when they are working.

Then there is the challenge of a poorly parked, slower EV using the 350 kW station:

Since all of the Tesla chargers look pretty much the same, there is no "power envy" going on. This EV could have just as well been on the 150 kW station and not parking blocked the broken 350 kW station. What an excellent design to piss everyone off!

Bob Wilson

 

Yeah, sacrifice pawns. I doubt execs were the one doing the coding. Don't they have whisle blower protection law in Germany? How everyone could keep this a secret for so many years? It took outside third party to make the discovery and only when the EPA threatened to withdraw accreditation for VW to fess up. And that's VW group, not just the manufacturer so lots of person must have known about this, and yet, only two saw jail time.

 

The F150 trunk is too huge and a road hazard to vulnerable road users (ie, visibility and height). Ford had a chance to make things better but I guess American pick-up truck buyers wouldn't want a pick-up truck that doesn't ressemble a conventional pick-up truck.

 

F150 doesn’t sell in Canada?

 

Isn't the Cyber truck made here in the usa? Between this cockamamie stuff & solar panel misunderstanding - where do you come up with this stuff.
.

 

Does the Cybertruck ressemble a conventional pick-up truck to you? Anyway, we're talking about the F150 Lightning with its huge opening where a normal engine would have been located. There is no such engine so that huge frunk is unnecessary and a hazard to vulnerable road users. A more slanted hood would have given the F150 driver better vision in front of his vehicle and not a tall wall of steel hurling toward innocent pedestrians and cyclists.

 

And you know so much about truck design because you've designed pickup trucks before? You should help let the 100's of thousands on the waiting list know that they are wrong - thinking that a frunk (front trunk)will mean even more storage than ever.
Let everyone know how that goes.

As for calling the frunk unnecessary? Um - the reason the frunk design typically gets 5 star safety ratings is because that's a huge crumple zone - making vehicles that much safer than normal trucks. Maybe do a little more homework before stating presumptions as 'facts' ?
Jeez - 1st you complain a F150 is too huge - than complain the cybertruck (less huge) is too uncoventional. Must be nice to have it both ways. Make up your mind !

.

 

Why do you put words in other's people mouth. I said the Cybertruck is unconventional, that's it. Nothing about whether I liked it or not.

All the Tesla's vehicles got the best security rating in there class and yet, they don't have that huge frunk, isn't that interesting.

And you don't need to have designed pick-up trucks to use your brain and know that deadly collision with vulnerable road users have increased dramatically since pick-up trucks and large SUV have entered the market. Many researches have already stated that fact. But since people only care about themselves, those pick-up truck and large SUV will keep selling, unfortunately. But, like I said (yes, that I DID say), Ford had a chance to design the Lightning to make it more safe for vulnerable road users and decided not to, and that's unfortunate. They kept that traditional "pick-up truck" look, which was unnecessary for an EV.

Edit: Funny that I just saw this post on Reddit. Beside that bad road intersection, notice how because of the car design, almost every biker "climbed" onto the vehicle instead of being pushed by a wall of steel that makes up the front of a pick-up truck...

https://reddit.com/r/Wth/s/4CBCD2AQAL

 

Do you?

(guessing you meant safety rating?)Yep. It is interesting. So it's not that it has a frunk - but how big it is. Because why? If you think something is or isn't an absolute truth or falsity - say WHY - or it's a meaningless waste of typing. Both Tesla & Ford's E-F150 have a frunk. Yet you are complaining about it being bigger than newer Tesla Frunks. Again, because why? Don't like the idea large crumple zones make it safer? Some of the older Tesla versions have larger ones (like f150)and the newer ons have smaller - so what's the point ... other than complaining.

Link?
You should be in charge, put us all on bicycles and Fiat 500s. Maybe ban all cement trucks while you are at it. Ban 6 & 7 member families. Believe it or not you can't cookie cutter everybody's needs.

If some people get out of their bubbles they will realize there are tons of people that have to haul cattle, horses, work trailers Etc, never mind driving through deep dirt road potholes or 2 ft of snow where a super cool low drag coefficient car just doesn't cut the mustard due to its front wheel drive only & low ground clearance.
Maybe do a rethink .... because some have more than 2 or 3 kids (or grand kids) & some need to carry tons of stuff. Not everybody fits your mold.

please elaborate on the correct "look". Please elaborate also on how to make it safer for the vulnerable. Apparently you have the answers and I am too ignorant to grasp the smartness of your understanding ... in large part because there is no elaboration
.

 

If you can't see how such a huge frontend is detrimental for vulnerable road users (let alone the blind spots it introduces) and you absolutely don't need one to haul thing (spoiler, the engine isn't there /s), then there is no point continuing this conversation, good bye.