I'm not familiar with the Tesla system, I'm sure it is fine. The Model S does not even have a CD player, it's already way ahead of the game. Actually the CCS provides 200 amps DC for a 20 minute charge to 80% vs. the CHAdeMO 150 amps DC for a 30 minute charge to 80%. Another ten minute wait after my stretch, bathroom, and snack break? I dunno?
Of course if I had CCS I would have to have an adapter so I could stop at Cracker Barrel. : ) Pat ________________________________ From: Dave Davidson <[email protected]> To: Cc: Electric Vehicle Discussion List <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, May 1, 2013 11:59 AM Subject: Re: [EVDL] GM'sCCS vs CHAdeMO The CCS is no faster than the Chademo. It can also be sold as an option just as easily. The only advantage I see is that it combines the two ports. That takes up a little less space, but how much of an advantage it is is really a matter of opinion. If the CCS vs Chademo is equivalent to 8 track vs cassette, then Tesla has the compact disc. Dave On May 1, 2013 5:12 AM, "Pat Dawson" <[email protected]> wrote: > The CCS may not be first but it may be better for the consumer. > Significantly faster charging time, a car charging port that takes less > space, and Level III that can't be sold as an "option" seem to be the major > advantages. > > All Level III charging is truly a wall or pedastal mounted battery charger > putting DC input direct to the car. Level I & Level II use on-board > chargers receiving conditioned AC from the wall or pedestal mount units. > > I have recently read about the Volvo 3-phase on-board system as well and > there is, of course, the Tesla system. Nothing is set in stone at this > early stage except that BEV's are here to stay. As it progresses the EV > industry will shake out winners and losers but the focus for survival must > be on what's best overall for the BEV to compete with the entrenched > highly-evolved combustion engine systems in use today. > > Pat > > > ________________________________ > From: brucedp5 <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 8:53 AM > Subject: Re: [EVDL] GM'sCCS vs CHAdeMO > > > GM 'and' European Automakers pushed the development of ccs so as to not pay > to use CHAdeMo > http://www.chademo.com/ > The number of CHAdeMO DC Quick charger installed up to today is 2545. > > But it was mainly the 800lb Gorilla GM that used it's lobbying and > campaign-funding monies to get ccs, SAE & Gov. accepted. > > http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1075897_new-sae-fast-charging-standard-to-be-shown-next-week > ' ... Audi, BMW, Chrysler, Daimler, Ford, GM, Porsche and Volkswagen are > all > on-board with the [ccs] charging standard ... > It may not be pretty, but the aim of the plug is to standardize charging > [&] take as little as 15-20 minutes. As well as the fast DC charging, the > plug also allows for one-phase AC charging, fast three-phase AC charging, > and home DC charging. > > There is of course one issue for many current electric car owners, and > that's the incompatibility with the Nissan Leaf and Mitsubishi i. The > Japanese cars both use the Japanese standard CHAdeMO charging system, which > uses a different plug and different charging architecture ... ' > > > It is my understanding that to try to carry around an adapter for the ccs, > the designer would need a to know the ccs protocols used (the network > handshaking software bit) so the ccsEVSE could be fooled into allowing > power to flow, and then that ccs AC power would have to be converted into > the DC the CHAdeMO port uses. That hardware may be too heavy and or > expensive to carry around. > > Until ccs is actually out in the public and or its design spec is made > known > to the public (likely not going to happen), it will be a guessing game. > > ... > This reminds me way too much of GM's successful efforts to dilute > installing > public EVSE. GM said their proprietary inductive was safer, but the EVS-12 > sales reps confided in me that it was really to keep GM from being sued (no > metal to metal contact. With ccs using metal to metal, I guess GM feels now > they will not get sued). GM's inductive was only available to those > Automakers that paid to use it, so it was unavailable to all other > Production EVs and the conversion EVs (EVS-12 GM sales reps despised the > conversion EVs that were at the show). Today, what few (old version) > RAV4-EVs there are that use GM's old spi inductive EVSE, can carry with > them > a level-2 spiEVSE so they can connect it to j1772 power, or any other > suitable power source (14-50, etc.). > > It looks like to me, GM is going to cause more harm with this additional L3 > standard because EVSE installation grant monies will have to put in both > CHAdeMO and ccsEVSE. Which was the same wasteful practice when both > conductive Avcon and GM's inductive spi had to be installed at the time at > a > public EV charging installation. If GM had used the same EVSE standard, > there would have been twice as many public EVSE installed (less wasted tax > payer money - at the time, funding for the old EVSE installations came from > DMV fees = the tax payers). > > ... > But wait it gets better ... > Not only is there going to be both a CHAdeMO and a ccs L3 standard to > install, now Volvo has one as well (I have a piece I will be posting on > this > soon). It is a 90 minute, 22kW AC EVSE that uses a 3 phase 240VAC source. > This may be yet another L3 standard (albeit low powered, slower one) to > contend with. IMO I would rather go with the ~20 minute L3 EVSE we already > have an abundance of, CHAdeMO > > http://www.chademo.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/chademomap2013.03.11.png > Map of all installed CHAdeMOEVSE worldwide > > > {brucedp.150m.com} > ... > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/800_lb_gorilla > > > - > On Tue, Apr 30, 2013, at 01:43 AM, Dave Davidson wrote: > > I'd like to see an adapter to allow Chademo equipped vehicles to use the > > Tesla supercharger stations. Is that possible? > - > > - > > On Apr 29, 2013 1:57 PM, "Lawrence Rhodes" <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > GM seems to want to be different. Is there going to be a hack to > > combine > > > the > > > two technologies. Lawrence Rhodes > - > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://electric-vehicle-discussion-list.413529.n4.nabble.com/GM-CCS-vs-NIssan-Chademo-tp4662745p4662758.html > Sent from the Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list archive at > Nabble.com. > _______________________________________________ > UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub > http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org > For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA ( > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA) > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20130501/fb913975/attachment.htm > > > _______________________________________________ > UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub > http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org > For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA ( > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA) > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20130501/252d5bc7/attachment.htm> _______________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20130502/0a824df3/attachment.htm> _______________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
