Apples and oranges: low-power DC devices like USB are generally unregulated in the US; high power devices like EV chargers are subject to electrical and fire code.I connectors were regulated we wouldn't have so many flavors of USB cables.
to steer this exact issue back on topic: If USB standards were mandated, until decades of bickering by committees, we'd be stuck with the old USB-A/USB-C, ~100 Kbps data rates, with no detents to keep the plugs into the big sockets and only 5v/500mA of possible charging power.
They did need regulatory approval in South Korea, although I'm not aware of equivalent requirements in the US.
CCS2 adds 3phase which is lacking from the Tesla and CCS1 connector. Many many more CCS2 ports exist than CCS1. They mandated CCS2 as fits with the local building power much better than CCS1 does. When we have a common connector it will need to be one that supports 3phase power.
Except we'd all be using only USB Type A and B connectors because that would be the only thing allowed. It would trade off one problem (having to get the right flavor of cable or an adapter) for another (blocking the progress of improving USB connectors).I connectors were regulated we wouldn't have so many flavors of USB cables.
”Europe” is pretty broad. Dieselgate was due to VW/Audi. Most other European brands were not involved.
Again, I think you’re too broad here. For the last decade, most EVs besides Tesla have been compliance cars. They have been hard to find, especially outside California and similar markets with pollution requirements. And apart from the Nissan Leaf, “Japan” has not been pushing hard for EVs - until recently, Toyota’s strategy was around hybrids and, to a much lesser extent, fuel cells.
That isn't how I remember it:
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/19228131/982500118.jpg.jpg)
www.theverge.com
Thanks, I didn’t find those links at first but the sources are reliable.That isn't how I remember it:
BMW Will Pay $11.6 Million in Dieselgate Fines—a Tiny Penalty Compared to Other Emissions Scandals
Volkswagen is surely jealous.fortune.com
Daimler fined nearly $1 billion for selling cars that cheated emissions tests
At least 700,000 cars worldwide were designed to cheat.
Interesting. A bit more internet searches show that while the Germans and VW in particular were the worst offenders, it seems that even PSA and Volvo were tagged. So I stand corrected that Dieselgate seems pretty widespread across Europe.
It started long before the last decade. As Americans (don't worry, I won't let us get by easy either) were buying ever larger SUVs (Ford
I'll also note that, while non-Germans haven't been busted for cheating. Most Europeans (the people and the manufacturers), were smugly driving diesels and thinking they were saving the planet. There was almost zero effort in Europe (other than Renault - kudos should be noted!) to do anything electric until Tesla started clobbering the German luxury brands.
And possibly the logistics of handling retrofits for cars that aren't CCS1 enabled (or dealing with the PR involved with not providing such retrofits).
Nah, the retrofits will be available. No changes to the port are needed, and the Gen4 ECU is electrically compatible with the previous (Gen 3 ECU) ports but the firmware & pin positions need to change (that's the reason for a different P/N, eventually). The part for the retrofit kit is listed in the parts catalog, but it's not available to buy yet. You can still get it working with a Gen4 ECU/Gen3 port, with a little Bundle of Wires kit I put together in the retrofit thread (pinned in Model 3 charging forum). At the moment it's just that the Gen4 ECU is programmed only for Gen4 ports, but the kit I made adapts the wiring/sensors necessary to make it happy. I'm charging with CCS today on my 2018 Model 3 with the EVHub (Ukranian) adapter & Gen4 ECU.
What power, and what rated power on the station?Nah, the retrofits will be available. No changes to the port are needed, and the Gen4 ECU is electrically compatible with the previous (Gen 3 ECU) ports but the firmware & pin positions need to change (that's the reason for a different P/N, eventually). The part for the retrofit kit is listed in the parts catalog, but it's not available to buy yet. You can still get it working with a Gen4 ECU/Gen3 port, with a little Bundle of Wires kit I put together in the retrofit thread (pinned in Model 3 charging forum). At the moment it's just that the Gen4 ECU is programmed only for Gen4 ports, but the kit I made adapts the wiring/sensors necessary to make it happy. I'm charging with CCS today on my 2018 Model 3 with the EVHub (Ukranian) adapter & Gen4 ECU.
I've been up to 190kW on a 350kW station -- those ratings are max power at optimal voltage, but the Model 3 uses a lower 400v battery, so it's limited by amperage. For example, expect 90kW or so on a 150kW station, or 55-65kW on more common ones, from what I've experienced.
Note that I said the logistics of handling the retrofit. The parts and the procedure may be known but Tesla may want to have sufficient quantities to meet (at least partial) demand before making the adapter available. We know that electronic components to enable CCS have been scarce, at least in the past, as seen by batches of newer cars that have indicated CCS not enabled (hence the need for a retrofit).
teslamotorsclub.com
Nah. Temperature sensors in both the port and the CCS charging handle. The only result of high kW over a weak connection is heat - and both sides know how hot they're getting, and back off the power if too hot. I have more concerns over the weight of CCS' magnificently, hilariously, grotequely heavy cords being placed on that tiny little stub of a Tesla outlet, than anything. It would cause any adapter (Tesla's or EVHub's) to flex, reducing the contact area between the pins and sockets of the Tesla DC pins. Fairly bad... but entirely the fault of the CCS station designers that make the cables 2-4x thicker than they have any right to be.
Perhaps, from a design perspective. But, and I'm guessing here, the heavier cords also stand up better and longer to the abuse they take in use. It could be cheaper to deliver a more bulletproof cable than to have to change them out more frequently. As an example, I saw one (apparently new) user at a supercharger trying to yank out the cable thinking it was mounted on a retractable device and could extend the distance to where he parked the car, instead of parking closer (better). Two others at the site and I all saw this, and engaged the owner trying to explain that wasn't quite how it worked. Small sampling to be sure, and maybe irrelevant. But over-engineering has its place.I have more concerns over the weight of CCS' magnificently, hilariously, grotequely heavy cords...but entirely the fault of the CCS station designers that make the cables 2-4x thicker than they have any right to be.
