HankLloydRight
No Roads
Don't include me in the list. My 3 years of experience at supercharging all over the USA has been great
Same here. Supercharging is great and fun.
You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Don't include me in the list. My 3 years of experience at supercharging all over the USA has been great
Don't include me in the list. My 3 years of experience at supercharging all over the USA has been great
Same here. Supercharging is great and fun.
Here's a brief article from a British site that goes a bit into how the super chargers split the juice. Might be of interest.
http://teslapedia.org/model-s/tesla-driver/supercharging/
, if two cars of equally low charge are connected to the same supercharger unit then the system splits power between them in a way that favours the car that arrived at the supercharger first. The second car therefore gets a smaller share of the available power initially, but this increases over time as the first car’s battery fills and its maximum charge rate reduces.
If someone pulls into 2B while 2A is still charging the recifier will split the load between the two cars.
@HankLloydRight I'm going to be polite, but you are very aggressively spreading misinformation based on your mistaken assumption. There are still plenty of Superchargers in the U.S. that are a few years old that have a total power level of 120kW, not 144kW like the newer installations are getting. The secondary car does not just get measly leftover scraps while the primary car always gets all that it wants.
The secondary car does get a guaranteed minimum of 30kW. On the 120kW ones, that does mean that the primary car can get its charge level dropped down a bit to 90kW maximum. Plenty of people have seen this. One of the benefits of the newer installs going to 144kW was giving them enough total power that the 30kW minimum on the secondary car wouldn't have to reduce the primary car's charging rate because there was enough overhead there.
I noticed you gave a link to @Fiver explaining how Supercharger pairing worked, but not to my comment immediately following it, which corrected that small detail.
How pairing at Supercharging works
I noticed you gave a link to @Fiver explaining how Supercharger pairing worked, but not to my comment immediately following it, which corrected that small detail.
**(There is one uncommon scenario where the second car would draw a small amount of power from the first, but it's not common and not as drastic as your single solitary data point describes.)
You and your assumptions again. You are treating this as if the word "split" has a definition of an exact half-and-half, 50%/50% two parts. It doesn't have to mean that, so your wrong assumption about what he said is getting you outraged and in trouble.But not the manner in which ajdelange continues to assert. The energy is not "split" between the cars.
Things can be split many different ways and sometimes very unevenly. Think of royalties agreements between recording labels and artists, for example. They can be all over the map in how unevenly split they are, depending on how much power and leverage each party has. A very uneven 80% 20% split is still a split, and is definitely still is in line with what @ajdelange said. It's not misleading or disingenuous.As inaccurate as I may be in generalizing the situation as I have, the way ajdelange portrays it is much, much, more inaccurate and would lead to much more confusion if people assume that their charging session will be significantly reduced by another car pulling up, or that their charging session will significantly reduce the charge rate of their neighbors who were there first. I stand by my previous comments to just let the assertion that "the charge is split" to be anything but misleading and disingenuous.
Yes, I noticed you threw that fragment in there at the last minute on page 4, but it was too little too late, as you had insisted the opposite of that 9 times with complete absolute finality and with the word "never" underlined. This is why it's a good idea to phrase things with terminology like, "In most cases..." or "Generally..." or "For the most part...". Then, you can be correct instead of what you did, being so arrogant and absolute and therefore wrong.By the way, I did mention that small detail in my post above:
Define anonymous. I'm pretty sure that HankLloydRight and TexasEV would both argue that it isn't. Also, they may well choose to use "disagree" as "dislike" given the icon.fortunately, for them, anonymous
This thread was about people chatting at superchargers.