Concerns about Tesla to non-Tesla charging adapters

[Oba]

Can we move the DC charging posts (Supercharger, CHAdeMO) to a new thread? The post that was the start of this thread and most of the comments are about an adapter from Tesla HPWC / UMC to a J177 vehicle (every car except for Tesla). This is strictly AC charging.

Also, it would be awesome if the people who are clearly not lawyers would not offer legal advice.

Finally, homemade 3D printed insulation / hard parts with homemade lathe turned parts is certainly far from ideal for such a product. I'm given pause that there is no restriction for this to be operated at 80 amps, yet it may be completely unsuitable for such activity.

 

[DavidM]

There is nothing worse than planning to charge my Model S overnight at a hotel and arriving to find two Chevy Volts plugged into the only L2 chargers. It's because of that that I will book a hotel with Tesla destination chargers instead of a public charger. Tesla's supercharger network is a huge selling point because it's proprietary. If you're ever on a road trip and you pull into a supercharger station to find all the bays taken up by non-Tesla cars charging slowly, you'll think differently about opening it up to other EVs. What's a fair price for allowing use of the 500+ supercharger stations that Tesla has already heavily invested in? No automaker will likely pay that fair price. And as Tesla installs more supercharger stations each week, the fair price continues to go up.

It may make more sense for another automaker to invest in the Tesla destination charging network instead?

 

[scaesare]

It's not a matter of fairness at all. CHAdeMO is an international standard. Tesla owners using a CHAdeMO station pay to use it as anyone else does, and Tesla's new compatibility with it gives more business to the companies installing those stations. Conceivably that extra business could make some of those locations profitable when they wouldn't be otherwise if just charging Leafs. For those CHAdeMO stations that don't have a fee, they're installed to attract customers to that location and if a Tesla charges there it accomplished it's purpose.

On the other hand, Tesla builds the supercharger network in order to sell its cars. It removes the obstacle of "how do I get to X, even when the person hasn't driven to X in years and has no intention of driving to X", as Steve Jurvetson said. For Tesla it's a marketing expense, and more effective than spending that money on any advertising.

Apples and oranges. Nothing to do with fairness, at any level.

This is precisely correct, IMO.

Destination charging is very similar:

-J1772 is an open standard intended for any EV to use, and Teslas must agree to pay whatever fees are necessary to use them (or abide by whatever provider policies are in place, such as patronizing the establishment, etc...).

-The HPWC is something Tesla is providing free in order to ease travel and at the same time build awareness for their specific brand. It's also likely a marketing expense.

 

[Noel Ingle]

Ugg !!! PM as to why this is a bad idea. Those pins must FLOAT !!!

Finally, homemade 3D printed insulation / hard parts with homemade lathe turned parts is certainly far from ideal for such a product. I'm given pause that there is no restriction for this to be operated at 80 amps, yet it may be completely unsuitable for such activity.

Thanks for the feedback. I designed the adapter. Why must the pins float as opposed to being fixed? J1772 and CHAdeMO pins of same size as Tesla pins don't float. The target user is 40 amps max. You can operate it at 80 amps, but the adapter's built in thermal limiters will shut down charging when pin temp reaches 145 degrees.

 

[Noel Ingle]

I don't know that Tesla would want HPWC destination chargers to be used with J1772 capable vehicles. One of the marketing benefits of giving them away to hotels, etc. was for guests to see Teslas being charged there. Not Leafs or i3s or whatever.

I see what you mean. Kind of like a "whites only" water fountain for Model S owners.

 

[mikeash]

Do Tesla's desires for destination chargers matter at all? We aren't automatically obligated to respect that.

If Tesla wants to restrict destination chargers to Tesla cars, then they need to actually take some action to enforce that. So far, they've relied on simple plug incompatibility. This mostly works, but as we see here, it's not perfect. But that's their problem, not ours!

I doubt these adapters will proliferate to the point where they make any significant impact, so Tesla can probably just keep doing what they're doing. If that's not true, then Tesla would need to take some additional action, such as requiring the destination charger operators to enforce Tesla-only use on them, or add some sort of technical measures to the HPWCs themselves to restrict charging to authorized users, like how Superchargers currently work.

However it works out, it's not our place to be worried about it for them, and given how things are now, if someone wants to build something so they can charge their non-Tesla vehicle off an HPWC, more power to them! (Pun intended.)

 

[TexasEV]

I see what you mean. Kind of like a "whites only" water fountain for Model S owners.

I take offense to that remark. The free HPWC destination charging program is for marketing in addition to supporting its customers. It's so patrons of the hotel, restaurant, etc. see Teslas being charged and they will get interested in the car. That's why the charging stations have to be in a visible location. If Tesla is giving away the charging station and paying towards installation, it's not discrimination to intend them to be for use by Teslas only and not have someone rig a way to charge another car with it.

 

[Oba]

This is precisely correct, IMO.

Destination charging is very similar:

-J1772 is an open standard intended for any EV to use, and Teslas must agree to pay whatever fees are necessary to use them (or abide by whatever provider policies are in place, such as patronizing the establishment, etc...).

-The HPWC is something Tesla is providing free in order to ease travel and at the same time build awareness for their specific brand. It's also likely a marketing expense.

And I must be, in many cases, a patron of that host establishment, and abide by what ever other restrictions that the host demands, to use even the free Tesla provided HPWC.

Once Tesla gives away it's product, it loses any control, no matter what their intentions may or may not have been. Clearly, Tesla owners (based on this thread) would like to have a Tesla fiferom all their own. I'll suggest, however, that it may not turn out quite that way.

- - - Updated - - -

Thanks for the feedback. I designed the adapter. Why must the pins float as opposed to being fixed? J1772 and CHAdeMO pins of same size as Tesla pins don't float. The target user is 40 amps max. You can operate it at 80 amps, but the adapter's built in thermal limiters will shut down charging when pin temp reaches 145 degrees.

Do you have thermal limiting the entire length of the cables? That seems unlikely and therefore it may be that your cables would get hot at 80 A while the connection does not. How large are the conductors?

 

[AmpedRealtor]

This example nicely illustrates how Tesla's intentions does not match what you keep suggesting. If Tesla wanted the HPWC to be accessible to non-Tesla EVs, they would install two J1772 instead of one HPWC and one J1772. That would be the only way the makes sense. It seems obvious to me that they install the HPWC so that it keeps at least one spot always open to Tesla customers only. This avoids the situation that a Tesla customer ever has to wait for a non-Tesla. When they want to support non-Tesla EVs, they do it in a way that does not inconvenience Tesla customers.

Or... here's a radical thought... Maybe Tesla just isn't comfortable with an adapter running that much current through it. Tesla even recommends against using extension cords, yet many do so happily and without any issues. Seems like folks are very quick to assign motives to Tesla where there probably are none. Reminds me of a work of art recently that was hailed as an incredible social commentary, except the artist admitted that he was just trying to paint a pretty picture.

 

[Noel Ingle]

Do you have thermal limiting the entire length of the cables? That seems unlikely and therefore it may be that your cables would get hot at 80 A while the connection does not. How large are the conductors?

Nope.. Thermal cutoff devices are only in the connectors. My goal is to prevent any heat damage to the Tesla charge wand and the vehicle. Conductor size is 6 AWG. Why do you think the pins need to float? Thanks.

 

[stopcrazypp]

I see what you mean. Kind of like a "whites only" water fountain for Model S owners.

This is the same kind of entitlement attitude that gives a bad impression of EV owners to the general public. Tesla paid for the chargers out of their marketing budget so it is within their rights to want to have to available only for their customers.

Their goodwill gesture is to install a separate J1772 charger when the location might have non-Tesla EVs.

Reminds me of this incident:
http://insideevs.com/op-ed-side-story-kia-dealers-version-steve-corams-i3-visit/

- - - Updated - - -

Or... here's a radical thought... Maybe Tesla just isn't comfortable with an adapter running that much current through it. Tesla even recommends against using extension cords, yet many do so happily and without any issues. Seems like folks are very quick to assign motives to Tesla where there probably are none. Reminds me of a work of art recently that was hailed as an incredible social commentary, except the artist admitted that he was just trying to paint a pretty picture.

Sorry, you are wrong about that, Tesla never indicated there was an current limit to the adapter:
"YOUR MODEL S COMES WITH: Public charging station adapter (J1772, 80 amp capable)"
http://www.teslamotors.com/models-charging#/outlet

Another person also gave an example of such a location where both chargers were set for 32A, but Tesla still made one of them a HPWC (which makes absolutely no sense if they intended the HPWC spot to be used by non-Tesla EVs).

Interestingly, the HPWC and J1772s in my scenario are all set for 32 amps delivered (40 amp breaker), probably due to building capacity. So there's no advantage to me to use one over the other.

 

[scaesare]

Once Tesla gives away it's product, it loses any control, no matter what their intentions may or may not have been.

Not necessarily. There most certainly can be terms that the hospitality location may need to agree to.

Free != without stipulation.

 

[TexasEV]

Do Tesla's desires for destination chargers matter at all? We aren't automatically obligated to respect that.

If Tesla wants to restrict destination chargers to Tesla cars, then they need to actually take some action to enforce that. So far, they've relied on simple plug incompatibility. This mostly works, but as we see here, it's not perfect. But that's their problem, not ours!

Yes, Tesla's desire does matter. It shouldn't need to have an enforcement mechanism. People should just be respectful of others and do the right thing. If something wasn't put there for your use, then don't use it. It's not "their problem", it's your problem if you're going to be a jerk about it.

 

[scaesare]

I see what you mean. Kind of like a "whites only" water fountain for Model S owners.

While I admire your ingenuity with the adapter, and would even consider buying one from you should I have the need[1], I think this kind of response undermines your position.

Equating a company retaining it's rights over usage of equipment it bears the expense of providing in direct efforts of it's marketing and brand awareness to racism is over the top, IMO.

[1] Although I'd aim to respect the rights and policies of those providing charging locations... that's simply responsible and polite.

 

[TexasEV]

Suppose Apple made charging stations for iPhones and iPads and gave them away to businesses around the city as a marketing tool. They have several cords with Lightning connectors (the Apple proprietary connector for iThings) so Apple customers patronizing that business can plug in for a few minutes and charge up. Then suppose an inventor invents an adapter that would allow the charging cable with the Lightning connector to plug into other smartphones and charge them too. Would your response be:
A. That's wrong.
or B. Tough luck, Apple.

If your response is B, how long do you think it would take before Apple stops placing those charging stations around town?

 

[TEG]

Why would a Leaf need supercharger access where there seems to be a growing Chademo network?...

The CHAdeMO network in USA has poor coverage in many areas. There are many places I could go in a LEAF if I could use Supercharging that I could not do on CHAdeMO itself.

There is a whole 'entitlement' / 'fairness' argument that goes into all of this. I see some signs that people think 'I paid so much for this car, that I expect exclusivity... I don't want cheapo EVs trying to use "my" charging infrastructure...'

Tesla's party line is that they are trying to bring forward the advent of electrified transportation. In the long run, this proprietary charging system could work against that goal.
CHAdeMO and SAE DC QC networks are are both far behind Superchargers in terms of deployment to good locations in the USA.

What if your Ford gas car could only fill up at Ford branded gasoline stations, or there were Cadillac brand gas stations only for Cadillacs to use?
I think the best answer in the long run is one network of standard charging stations for all EVs to be able to use.

Another thought argument is how long can a Model S be charging at a 30amp J1772 station? With such a big battery, and a J1772 adapter, I sometime find model S parked for literally all day to get a charge at a station that a car like a LEAF could have used for an hour to get back home.

I was just reading this:
Chademo Adaptor-First Use-Almost killed a leaf owner! | Forums | Tesla Motors
Where someone said : "...you don't ever touch someone else's $100K car..." (to unplug their adapter so you can start charging.)
By calling out the price of the car it somewhat implies "it is OK for a Tesla owner (since they paid so much more) to unplug a LEAF , but not the other way around."

By providing CHAdeMO and J1772 adapters for Model S & X, Tesla suggests that it OK to use some other type of charging infrastructure, but so far, I think attempts for others to get access to Tesla standard charging has been cut off.

Is it right for a Model S to charge at a Nissan dealership?
Tesla Model S CHAdeMO Adapter In Real-World Beta Testing Phase

 

[stopcrazypp]

The CHAdeMO network in USA is few and far between. There are many places I could go in a LEAF if I could use Supercharging that I could not do on CHAdeMO itself.

There is a whole 'entitlement' / 'fairness' argument that goes into all of this. I see some signs that people think 'I paid so much for this car, that I expect exclusivity... I don't want cheapo EVs trying to use "my" charging infrastructure...'

I'm not coming from that attitude, and I'm sure most people here are not too. My attitude is whichever car manufacturer wants to use the supercharger network should pay their fair share in the infrastructure. An adapter for a 50kW car doesn't accomplish that in a fair way (shokunin made a great point also about how the adapter can carry over to different cars) and continues to encourage the automakers to lag in terms of pushing for higher power standards.

 

[Beryl]

Is it right for a Model S to charge at a Nissan dealership?
Tesla Model S CHAdeMO Adapter In Real-World Beta Testing Phase

Yes - at a Brownsville, TX dealership. In preparation for a trip there, I called and requested use. They were friendly and gave the green light. They also provided a manager contact at that dealership for reference.

 

[TexasEV]

Yes - at a Brownsville, TX dealership. In preparation for a trip there, I called and requested use. They were friendly and gave the green light. They also provided a manager contact at that dealership for reference.

The Nissan dealer there has a CHAdeMO charging station? Plugshare only shows a J1772.

 

[mikeash]

Suppose Apple made charging stations for iPhones and iPads and gave them away to businesses around the city as a marketing tool. They have several cords with Lightning connectors (the Apple proprietary connector for iThings) so Apple customers patronizing that business can plug in for a few minutes and charge up. Then suppose an inventor invents an adapter that would allow the charging cable with the Lightning connector to plug into other smartphones and charge them too. Would your response be:
A. That's wrong.
or B. Tough luck, Apple.

If your response is B, how long do you think it would take before Apple stops placing those charging stations around town?

My response would be B. I imagine the outcome would depend entirely on how popular these adapters became. If they're not very popular than Apple wouldn't care. If they become popular, then Apple would either add some sort of technological lock to their charging stations, find some other way to enforce Apple-only charging, embrace non-Apple charging, or kill the program.

Given that there are a ton of Lighting chargers out there which aren't provided by Apple and where an adapter like this could be really useful and not interfere with Apple's hypothetical marketing program in any way, would your response be:

A. Making these adapters is still wrong even though there's substantial use for them that doesn't hurt anybody and is very useful.
or B. Making these adapters is fine, and it's Apple's problem to figure out how to deal with it.

If all Tesla plugs were either owned by Tesla or part of their destination charging program, that would be one thing. But there are a lot of HPWCs and UMCs out there which were purchased by the people who own them (I own one of each) and if those people want to charge non-Tesla cars with them using an adapter, that's their right. For the ones Tesla owns or gives away, people should be able to use them with non-Tesla cars to the exact extent that Tesla lets them do so.