Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[EV@TucsonEV via EV]

I've had 2 M3's, the first I got in 2019 and it got hit on the driver's side and
was totaled. I got a great settlement from the Ins Co and got a new Tesla at
basically no cost, a 2020 M3 Standard+ with FSD. With my first M3 I drove from
Tucson to NYC and back 3 weeks after I got it and had no trouble at all with
charging/supercharging, got very used to the time waiting by eating, walking,
bathroom etc. The trip was 5587 miles and cost $307.15 for charging.

Best regards,

Rush Dougherty
TucsonEV
www.TucsonEV.com




> -Original Message-
> From: EV  On Behalf Of EV List Lackey via EV
> Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2023 9:09 PM
> To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List 
> Cc: EV List Lackey 
> Subject: Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17
>
> On 22 Jun 2023 at 13:27, EV@TucsonEV via EV wrote:
>
> > Since the EVListLackey ?? didn't figure home charging, where a vast
> > number of EV owners charge, I thought I try and see what the cost is
> > with my Eleco here in Tucson TEP ... So my cost per mile was $0.06
>
> Sorry I didn't look at the cost to home charge that Kia EV6.  It would depend
on the
> utility of course.
>
> Your per-mile cost analysis was interesting.  Maybe others can chime in with
their
> costs. BTW, if you don't mine my asking, what Tesla model are you driving?
>
> I computed our costs for the Renault Zoe:
>
> Public charging on Ionity network (fairly expensive):
>
>   Ionity DC (<= 350kW), 0.69 euro / kWh : 0.10 euro / km (US$0.175 / mile)
>
>   Ionity AC (<= 22kW), 0.39 euro / kWh : 0.057 euro / km (US$0.10 / mile)
>
> Home AC (<= 7.2kW), 0.2142 euro / kWh : 0.03 euro / km (US$0.054 / mile)
>
> For comparison, a Renault Clio hybrid, a similar car that uses 4.3l/100km,
> would cost 0.085 euro/km with fuel at 1.98 euro/litre.
>
> Maybe others here would like to post their per-mile (or per-km) costs.
>
> David Roden, EVDL moderator & general lackey
>
> To reach me, don't reply to this message; I won't get it.  Use my offlist
address here :
> http://evdl.org/help/index.html#supt
>
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
>
>  The Flat Earth Society has members all around the globe.
>
>   -- Twitter user Flat Earth Society
>
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
>
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
>
>
>
> --
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
> www.avg.com



___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[(-Phil-) via EV]

I have a Model 3 Performance, and a Maxwell ePro.   Almost never do I have
to pay any power bills, as my Solar overproduces, (In fact I get a check
back at true-up).   The Maxwell ePro also has its own 1.5kW solar system
built-in, which is good for around 15 miles per/day if it's sunny.

Once in a while I will use CCS to charge the ePro, but my 2018 Model 3 was
one of the very few sold that have free supercharging.  (Though I think I
had an idle fee once while eating.)

I get about 250-350Wh/mile on the Model 3 and 400-500Wh/mile on the ePro.

On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 8:38 AM EV List Lackey via EV 
wrote:

> On 23 Jun 2023 at 10:18, Jay Summet via EV wrote:
>
> > The cost is subsidized by my local city, a local employer, etc...  So it
> > would be perfectly feasable to "drive for free" if I was willing to
> > drive a few miles and wait to charge.
>
> That's what Margaret did when we first got the Zoe.  We didn't have an
> EVSE
> yet because we had to have the prehistoric electrical panel replaced and
> the
> service upgraded first.  The granny cord that came with the car worked,
> but
> it was slw.
>
> Normally she'd walk or bike the 2km to the grocery, but when the car got
> below 40% she drove there and charged for free while she bought
> groceries.
> With a 22kW AC charge on a 52kWh battery, all she had to do was spend 45m
> to
> an hour shopping and the car would be at 80% or better.  I think she could
> probably spend that much time just picking through the short-date
> cut-price
> section.  :-)
>
> David Roden, EVDL moderator & general lackey
>
> To reach me, don't reply to this message; I won't get it.  Use my
> offlist address here : http://evdl.org/help/index.html#supt
>
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
>
>  Finnegans Wake is the best example of modernism disappearing
>  up its own fundament.
>
> -- JG Ballard
>
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
>
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
>
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[EV List Lackey via EV]

On 23 Jun 2023 at 10:18, Jay Summet via EV wrote:

> The cost is subsidized by my local city, a local employer, etc...  So it 
> would be perfectly feasable to "drive for free" if I was willing to 
> drive a few miles and wait to charge.

That's what Margaret did when we first got the Zoe.  We didn't have an EVSE 
yet because we had to have the prehistoric electrical panel replaced and the 
service upgraded first.  The granny cord that came with the car worked, but 
it was slw.

Normally she'd walk or bike the 2km to the grocery, but when the car got 
below 40% she drove there and charged for free while she bought groceries.  
With a 22kW AC charge on a 52kWh battery, all she had to do was spend 45m to 
an hour shopping and the car would be at 80% or better.  I think she could 
probably spend that much time just picking through the short-date cut-price 
section.  :-)

David Roden, EVDL moderator & general lackey

To reach me, don't reply to this message; I won't get it.  Use my 
offlist address here : http://evdl.org/help/index.html#supt

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 

 Finnegans Wake is the best example of modernism disappearing 
 up its own fundament. 

-- JG Ballard

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[Jay Summet via EV]

On 6/23/23 09:45, EV List Lackey via EV wrote:


Very interesting that the Chargepoint electricity (10 cents / kWh) is
actually cheaper than your home electricity (13 cents / kWh).  Bravo for
Kent and Chargepoint.



I have access to multiple chargepoint EVSE's that are "free" (no cost 
for charging, although some have an idle charge if you remain parked 
after finishing the charge).


The cost is subsidized by my local city, a local employer, etc...  So it 
would be perfectly feasable to "drive for free" if I was willing to 
drive a few miles and wait to charge. (Some Uber/Lift drivers will use 
this while waiting for ride hails)


But at 0.14c per kwh, it is a better use of my time to charge at home. 
(I also have solar, so I "pre-paid" for my electric usage when 
installing the system...the 0.14c per kwh is the current Duke energy rate.)


Jay
___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[Rod Hower via EV]

 When I first started charging there back in 2017 it was $0.35/kWhr.  I told 
them it was cheaper to drive on gasoline and wasn't going to charge.  I work at 
Ametek who pays for parking at Parta.  I believe they negotiated special 
pricing for people that pay for the parking garage.
On Friday, June 23, 2023 at 09:45:23 AM EDT, EV List Lackey via EV 
 wrote:  
 
 On 23 Jun 2023 at 12:46, Rod Hower via EV wrote:

>  I have a 2014 Chevy Volt that runs 98% of the time on electric only.I drive
>  21 miles to work and charge at the Kent Central Parking deck using
>  ChargePoint with a rate of 0.1 kWhr and I typically use 7 kWhr driving to
>  work in the spring, summer and fall, so $0.7 per day.At home I charge on 240V
>  and the cost is $0.13, so $0.91.Averaging 20 work days and ignoring the
>  weekend driving it comes out to $32.2 per month for 840 miles.  About
>  $0.038/mile.

Very interesting that the Chargepoint electricity (10 cents / kWh) is 
actually cheaper than your home electricity (13 cents / kWh).  Bravo for 
Kent and Chargepoint.

If I understand you right, and did the math right, it's 3.3 cents ($0.033) 
per mile charging at work on Chargepoint, and 4.3 cents ($0.043) per mile 
charging at home.  That seems pretty reasonable.

David Roden, EVDL moderator & general lackey

To reach me, don't reply to this message; I won't get it.  Use my 
offlist address here : http://evdl.org/help/index.html#supt

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 

    I wish there was a knob on the TV to turn up the intelligence.  
    There's a knob called "brightness," but it doesn't work. 

                                                      -- Gallagher
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

  
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[EV List Lackey via EV]

On 23 Jun 2023 at 12:46, Rod Hower via EV wrote:

>  I have a 2014 Chevy Volt that runs 98% of the time on electric only.I drive
>  21 miles to work and charge at the Kent Central Parking deck using
>  ChargePoint with a rate of 0.1 kWhr and I typically use 7 kWhr driving to
>  work in the spring, summer and fall, so $0.7 per day.At home I charge on 240V
>  and the cost is $0.13, so $0.91.Averaging 20 work days and ignoring the
>  weekend driving it comes out to $32.2 per month for 840 miles.  About
>  $0.038/mile.

Very interesting that the Chargepoint electricity (10 cents / kWh) is 
actually cheaper than your home electricity (13 cents / kWh).  Bravo for 
Kent and Chargepoint.

If I understand you right, and did the math right, it's 3.3 cents ($0.033) 
per mile charging at work on Chargepoint, and 4.3 cents ($0.043) per mile 
charging at home.   That seems pretty reasonable.

David Roden, EVDL moderator & general lackey

To reach me, don't reply to this message; I won't get it.  Use my 
offlist address here : http://evdl.org/help/index.html#supt

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 

 I wish there was a knob on the TV to turn up the intelligence.  
 There's a knob called "brightness," but it doesn't work. 

  -- Gallagher
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[Jay Summet via EV]

Maybe others here would like to post their per-mile (or per-km) costs.

David Roden, EVDL moderator & general lackey



2015 Nissan Leaf S getting 4.8 miles per KWH, Duke energy in Florida 
(0.14 per kWh) = $0.029  (3 cents per mile of fuel costs...tire costs 
are probably more per mile)


Jay
___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[Rod Hower via EV]

 I have a 2014 Chevy Volt that runs 98% of the time on electric only.I drive 21 
miles to work and charge at the Kent Central Parking deck using ChargePoint 
with a rate of 0.1 kWhr and I typically use 7 kWhr driving to work in the 
spring, summer and fall, so $0.7 per day.At home I charge on 240V and the cost 
is $0.13, so $0.91.Averaging 20 work days and ignoring the weekend driving it 
comes out to $32.2 per month for 840 miles.  About $0.038/mile.
On Friday, June 23, 2023 at 12:09:20 AM EDT, EV List Lackey via EV 
 wrote:  
 
 On 22 Jun 2023 at 13:27, EV@TucsonEV via EV wrote:

> Since the EVListLackey ?? didn't figure home charging, where a vast
> number of EV owners charge, I thought I try and see what the cost is
> with my Eleco here in Tucson TEP ... So my cost per mile was $0.06 

Sorry I didn't look at the cost to home charge that Kia EV6.  It would 
depend on the utility of course.  

Your per-mile cost analysis was interesting.  Maybe others can chime in with 
their costs. BTW, if you don't mine my asking, what Tesla model are you 
driving?

I computed our costs for the Renault Zoe:

Public charging on Ionity network (fairly expensive):

    Ionity DC (<= 350kW), 0.69 euro / kWh : 0.10 euro / km (US$0.175 / mile)

    Ionity AC (<= 22kW), 0.39 euro / kWh : 0.057 euro / km (US$0.10 / mile)

Home AC (<= 7.2kW), 0.2142 euro / kWh : 0.03 euro / km (US$0.054 / mile)

For comparison, a Renault Clio hybrid, a similar car that uses 4.3l/100km, 
would cost 0.085 euro/km with fuel at 1.98 euro/litre.  

Maybe others here would like to post their per-mile (or per-km) costs.

David Roden, EVDL moderator & general lackey

To reach me, don't reply to this message; I won't get it.  Use my 
offlist address here : http://evdl.org/help/index.html#supt

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 

    The Flat Earth Society has members all around the globe.

                          -- Twitter user Flat Earth Society

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

  
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[EV List Lackey via EV]

On 22 Jun 2023 at 13:27, EV@TucsonEV via EV wrote:

> Since the EVListLackey ?? didn't figure home charging, where a vast
> number of EV owners charge, I thought I try and see what the cost is
> with my Eleco here in Tucson TEP ... So my cost per mile was $0.06 

Sorry I didn't look at the cost to home charge that Kia EV6.  It would 
depend on the utility of course.  

Your per-mile cost analysis was interesting.  Maybe others can chime in with 
their costs. BTW, if you don't mine my asking, what Tesla model are you 
driving?

I computed our costs for the Renault Zoe:

Public charging on Ionity network (fairly expensive):

Ionity DC (<= 350kW), 0.69 euro / kWh : 0.10 euro / km (US$0.175 / mile)

Ionity AC (<= 22kW), 0.39 euro / kWh : 0.057 euro / km (US$0.10 / mile)

Home AC (<= 7.2kW), 0.2142 euro / kWh : 0.03 euro / km (US$0.054 / mile)

For comparison, a Renault Clio hybrid, a similar car that uses 4.3l/100km, 
would cost 0.085 euro/km with fuel at 1.98 euro/litre.   

Maybe others here would like to post their per-mile (or per-km) costs.

David Roden, EVDL moderator & general lackey

To reach me, don't reply to this message; I won't get it.  Use my 
offlist address here : http://evdl.org/help/index.html#supt

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 

 The Flat Earth Society has members all around the globe.

  -- Twitter user Flat Earth Society

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[EV@TucsonEV via EV]

Hi all,

Since the EVListLackey ?? didn't figure home charging, where a vast number of 
EV 
owners charge, I thought I try and see what the cost is with my Eleco here in 
Tucson TEP. I have what's called 'Residential Super Off-Peak TOU EV'. The TOU 
EV 
is from 10PM to 5AM 7 days a week.

When I need to charge up, I set my iphone alarm for 10pm, walk the 20 steps to 
where I charge up, make sure the Tesla Gen 1 UMC is plugged in (I use the same 
plug for my TucsonEV business Tester, which is my TucsonEV-SE which has been in 
use since Marco and  I made them in 2014)
I plug into the Tesla and within a couple hours, 4 at the most, my 50kWh 
battery 
is at 90%.
Now reading the cost of a  kWh from my TEP bill is another matter entirely.

The charges have a couple different categories, Delivery Services, Power Supply 
Charges, Surcharges and Taxes and Assessments. Breaking out the cost of my TOU 
EV 
charge is pretty impossible. But I've made an attempt, my TOU EV was 135.39kWh
Basic Monthly charge$10.00
Delivery 1-500kWh @ $0.08211$11.18
Summer Super Off Peak @ $0.0145 $1.96
Taxes and Assessments   $11.61 (I put the whole months Taxes...)
Total   $34.75

I drove 553 miles (Stats app calculation) for $34.75
So my cost per mile was $0.06
I also run my washer and drying during the TOU EV, as does my AC, so that 
$0.06/mile is pretty skewed, but it still is much cheaper than at a 
Supercharger 
which for me only points to Tesla 'promoting EV use as a public good'.

Now just wait till I get PV...

Best regards,

Rush Dougherty
TucsonEV
www.TucsonEV.com




> -Original Message-
> From: EV  On Behalf Of EV List Lackey via EV
> Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2023 3:51 PM
> To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List 
> Cc: EV List Lackey 
> Subject: Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17
>
> On 21 Jun 2023 at 14:41, (-Phil-) via EV wrote:
>
> > the experience at a Tesla supercharger with Magic dock ...
>
> "Most are $0.49/kWh ... Idle fees, which are charged if the car is left alone 
> at 
> the
> charger after being fully charged, are $1.00/minute."
>
> The Kia EV6, tested in the article, is similar in size to their Sportage.
>
> Tesla has said for years that they're promoting EV use as a public good.
> Are they?
>
> Current US average gasoline price $3.58/gallon
>
> At 28mpg (Kia Sportage ICEV), fuel cost per mile = $0.128
>
> At 43mpg (Kia Sportage Hybrid), fuel cost per mile = $0.083
>
> At 29kWh / 100mi  (Kia EV6), electricity cost per mile = $0.142
>
> Hmmm.
>
> David Roden, EVDL moderator & general lackey
>
> To reach me, don't reply to this message; I won't get it.  Use my offlist 
> address here :
> http://evdl.org/help/index.html#supt
>
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
>
>  Research (noun): Searching the internet until you find a source
>  that agrees with what you already believed.
>
> -- Anonymous = = = = 
> = = 
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
> = = = = = = = = = = = =
>
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
>
>
>
> --
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
> www.avg.com



___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[(-Phil-) via EV]

While I'll be the first to be critical of Tesla in a lot of cases, It's
likely the supercharger rates are set to cover the demand fees that are
charged by most utilities.  It can easily be tens of thousands of dollars a
day for a supercharger site with 250kW capability.

The rates they charge definitely vary quite a bit over the network.

On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 8:39 PM EV List Lackey via EV 
wrote:

> On 21 Jun 2023 at 21:11, Jay Summet via EV wrote:
>
> > Ignoring the hybrid fuel cost red hearing (as the hybrid won't get
> > 43mgh on the freeway,
>
> Sportage Hybrid: EPA rating: 42 city, 44 highway, 43 combined.
>
> I used the EPA ratings for the EV6, too.
>
> I don't see or smell any herrings here, either red or blue.
>
> >  0.12c per mile vs 0.14c per mile is so close that most American's
> > won't care about the difference.
>
> Again, it's not 12 (actually almost 13) cents vs 14 cents, it's 8 cents vs
> 14 cents.  That's a much larger difference.
>
> > it's not polluting at the tailpipe
>
> Believe it or not, this isn't a high priority for the average vehicle
> owner.
> I wish it were, but it just isn't.
>
> Look, our Kia  buyer has already paid 75% more for the EV6 than he would
> have for a similar Sportage hybrid ($51,400 vs $28,815).  So now he should
> also pay 75%  more for his fuel on a road trip?:  Really?
>
> > still seems like a reasonable price for the public good.
>
> Some folks will pay more for the sake of the public good.  That's
> altruism.
> I like it.  But a lot won't.  Those latter people need a little nudge to
> do
> the right thing. Basically, you have to bribe them.
>
> I don't see any such nudges coming from Tesla, that's for sure.  Not at
> those kind of charging costs.
>
> Obviously Musk has seen the other kind of green and decided that he likes
> that kind better.  Nothing wrong with him making a profit, but I'd like to
> see him cut with the "we're saving the world with EVs" hypocrisy already.
>
> Google at least had the decency to bury "don't be evil" when they went
> over
> to the dark side.  How about Tesla?
>
> David Roden, EVDL moderator & general lackey
>
> To reach me, don't reply to this message; I won't get it.  Use my
> offlist address here : http://evdl.org/help/index.html#supt
>
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
>
>  I distrust people who know well what God wants them to do, because
>  I notice that it always coincides with their own desires.
>
>  -- Susan B Anthony
>
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
>
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
>
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[EV List Lackey via EV]

On 21 Jun 2023 at 21:11, Jay Summet via EV wrote:

> Ignoring the hybrid fuel cost red hearing (as the hybrid won't get
> 43mgh on the freeway, 

Sportage Hybrid: EPA rating: 42 city, 44 highway, 43 combined.   

I used the EPA ratings for the EV6, too.   

I don't see or smell any herrings here, either red or blue.  

>  0.12c per mile vs 0.14c per mile is so close that most American's
> won't care about the difference. 

Again, it's not 12 (actually almost 13) cents vs 14 cents, it's 8 cents vs 
14 cents.  That's a much larger difference.  

> it's not polluting at the tailpipe 

Believe it or not, this isn't a high priority for the average vehicle owner. 
I wish it were, but it just isn't.  

Look, our Kia  buyer has already paid 75% more for the EV6 than he would 
have for a similar Sportage hybrid ($51,400 vs $28,815).  So now he should 
also pay 75%  more for his fuel on a road trip?:  Really?   

> still seems like a reasonable price for the public good. 

Some folks will pay more for the sake of the public good.  That's altruism. 
I like it.  But a lot won't.  Those latter people need a little nudge to do 
the right thing. Basically, you have to bribe them.  

I don't see any such nudges coming from Tesla, that's for sure.  Not at 
those kind of charging costs.  

Obviously Musk has seen the other kind of green and decided that he likes 
that kind better.  Nothing wrong with him making a profit, but I'd like to 
see him cut with the "we're saving the world with EVs" hypocrisy already.  

Google at least had the decency to bury "don't be evil" when they went over 
to the dark side.  How about Tesla?  

David Roden, EVDL moderator & general lackey

To reach me, don't reply to this message; I won't get it.  Use my 
offlist address here : http://evdl.org/help/index.html#supt

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 

 I distrust people who know well what God wants them to do, because 
 I notice that it always coincides with their own desires.

 -- Susan B Anthony

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[Jay Summet via EV]

On 6/21/23 18:50, EV List Lackey via EV wrote:


At 28mpg (Kia Sportage ICEV), fuel cost per mile = $0.128

At 43mpg (Kia Sportage Hybrid), fuel cost per mile = $0.083

At 29kWh / 100mi  (Kia EV6), electricity cost per mile = $0.142



Ignoring the hybrid fuel cost red hearing (as the hybrid won't get 43mgh 
on the freeway, and if you are not doing a road trip, you'd charge at 
home), 0.12c per mile vs 0.14c per mile is so close that most American's 
won't care about the difference.


Plus, it's not polluting at the tailpipe. And, if you charge at home 
it's a lot cheaper, so you'd really only charge at a supercharger for 
road trips...and if the price is close to that of gas for road 
tripsstill seems like a reasonable price for the public good.


Jay
___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[EV List Lackey via EV]

On 21 Jun 2023 at 14:41, (-Phil-) via EV wrote:

> the experience at a Tesla supercharger with Magic dock ... 

"Most are $0.49/kWh ... Idle fees, which are charged if the car is left 
alone at the charger after being fully charged, are $1.00/minute."

The Kia EV6, tested in the article, is similar in size to their Sportage. 

Tesla has said for years that they're promoting EV use as a public good.  
Are they?

Current US average gasoline price $3.58/gallon

At 28mpg (Kia Sportage ICEV), fuel cost per mile = $0.128

At 43mpg (Kia Sportage Hybrid), fuel cost per mile = $0.083

At 29kWh / 100mi  (Kia EV6), electricity cost per mile = $0.142

Hmmm.

David Roden, EVDL moderator & general lackey

To reach me, don't reply to this message; I won't get it.  Use my 
offlist address here : http://evdl.org/help/index.html#supt

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 

 Research (noun): Searching the internet until you find a source 
 that agrees with what you already believed.

-- Anonymous
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[(-Phil-) via EV]

Looks like the list is throwing away any most my posts with HTML, here's a
retry:

This was a good read and they had a video.  It shows how the experience at
a Tesla supercharger with Magic dock is about is good, or maybe even worse
(parking problems) than using another public CCS station:
https://www.consumerreports.org/cars/ev-chargers/how-well-do-tesla-superchargers-work-for-non-tesla-evs-a4713673565/

Particularly note the pic of the Lucid charging that needed to block 3
stalls.

You can see there's really no way Tesla is going to OK using existing
short-cabled V3 pedestals for 3rd party use widespread.

On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 2:00 PM John Lussmyer via EV 
wrote:

> So, it's NOT a technical problem - it's a business/licensing issue.
> If Ford (or GM) offers enough money, it could happen. (remember,
> Standards aren't)
>
> On 6/21/2023 12:47 PM, (-Phil-) wrote:
> > No.  If you read the Official NACS document I linked to a few posts
> > ago, the ONLY communications protocol supported is PLC (DIN 70121),
> > they do not list the single-wire CAN legacy supercharger protocol in
> > any of these released documents because they absolutely will not
> > support 3rd party use of it.
> >
> > >
> >
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20230621/ac881aa4/attachment.htm
> >
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
>
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[(-Phil-) via EV]

This was a good read and they had a video.  It shows how the experience at
a Tesla supercharger with Magic dock is about is good, or maybe even worse
(parking problems) than using another public CCS station:
https://www.consumerreports.org/cars/ev-chargers/how-well-do-tesla-superchargers-work-for-non-tesla-evs-a4713673565/

Photo, Lucid needed to block 3 stalls:

Link:
https://article.images.consumerreports.org/image/upload/w_652,f_auto,q_auto/v1678891331/prod/content/dam/CRO-Images-2023/03March/Cars/CR-Cars-Inline-Supercharger-Lucid-Side-3-23

You can see there's really no way Tesla is going to OK using existing
short-cabled V3 pedestals for 3rd party use widespread.

On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 2:00 PM John Lussmyer via EV 
wrote:

> So, it's NOT a technical problem - it's a business/licensing issue.
> If Ford (or GM) offers enough money, it could happen. (remember,
> Standards aren't)
>
> On 6/21/2023 12:47 PM, (-Phil-) wrote:
> > No.  If you read the Official NACS document I linked to a few posts
> > ago, the ONLY communications protocol supported is PLC (DIN 70121),
> > they do not list the single-wire CAN legacy supercharger protocol in
> > any of these released documents because they absolutely will not
> > support 3rd party use of it.
> >
> > >
> >
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20230621/ac881aa4/attachment.htm
> >
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
>
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[John Lussmyer via EV]

So, it's NOT a technical problem - it's a business/licensing issue.
If Ford (or GM) offers enough money, it could happen. (remember, 
Standards aren't)


On 6/21/2023 12:47 PM, (-Phil-) wrote:
No.  If you read the Official NACS document I linked to a few posts 
ago, the ONLY communications protocol supported is PLC (DIN 70121), 
they do not list the single-wire CAN legacy supercharger protocol in 
any of these released documents because they absolutely will not 
support 3rd party use of it.


>


-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[Jay Summet via EV]

On 6/21/23 15:40, (-Phil-) via EV wrote:

I agree about the invasive logging, which is why I offer the service to
disconnect a Tesla from Tesla's back end.   This can be done in degrees, so
no communication, only needed communication, or just no logging/telemetry
(software updates still possible).

But Tesla isn't the only one, pretty much all automakers, EV or not, now
have fully connected infotainment.   Just like a smartphone, your car is
now in constant communication with their back-end.   In fact, GM was one of
the first into this with OnStar in 2011.  Since then the amount of data
collected has only increased.



If the Nissan Leaf experience is any indication, older cars will start 
to lose communications with the factory after their warranty expires. In 
the case of the Leaf, the 2G cellular modems they used stopped working 
completely as various telecommunications companies upgraded to 3G/4G and 
shut down their 2G networks. If you wanted to retain telematics, you had 
to take proactive action and pay to have the modem upgraded to 3G.


[Also, cellular data plans cost money, as soon as the manufacturer stops 
paying for them, you would be limited to wifi, etc...]


So I expect that in a few years on the used market, you'll start finding 
that it costs money if you want to keep telemetries services (remote 
climate, unlock, charge monitoring, etc...)



Jay
___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[(-Phil-) via EV]

There are a lot of paths that "could be made to work".  I have
reverse-engineered the legacy supercharger protocol, so I could make an
adapter that would allow charging a non-Tesla EV at a supercharger, and
in-fact, I did this in 2017 for a client, and the owner promptly received a
cease-and-desist from Tesla.   (Which they abided by)

Over the years I have also been hired as an independent consultant for
several companies, including one of the top-tier charging equipment
manufacturers to help them investigate adapting Tesla compatibility well
before any of the NACS announcements of late.

It's not a technology limitation, it's more business and politics.  Tesla
wants in on the government cheese, so they will do what they need to do to
qualify for grant and incentive money.  They are already having trouble
keeping up with supercharger build-outs just for Tesla owners.   They do
not want to jeopardize one of the primary selling points of Tesla ownership
by suddenly making it difficult for their customers to use the
supercharging network.  They will do this slowly and on their terms, by
rolling out sites with upgraded superchargers that will support 3rd party
EVs, and they will try to get public money to do so.  They don't really
have any motivation to trip all over themselves to clog the existing
supercharging network with a bunch of 3rd part EVs blocking multiple stalls.


On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 12:50 PM Ron via EV  wrote:

> Just spitballing here...
>
> What about VIN equivalents in the adapter itself or manufacturers building
> their charge ports and in-vehicle networking to Tesla specs?
>
> All of this stuff is well over my head, but having written Palm Pilot
> programs that interface with mainframe systems, it strikes me that there
> are usually ways to effectively and reliably extend systems without
> breaking them.
>
> But, as I said, all of this is well over my head. :)
> --
> Ron
>
> On June 21, 2023 11:23:40 a.m. CST, "(-Phil-) via EV" 
> wrote:
> >No, but there is no way to bill it.  Tesla handles billing on SWCAN
> >supercharger protocol by VIN, the car controls the supercharger, there is
> >no back-end auth.   So the only technical way to build such an adapter
> >would be to spoof a Tesla, and "steal" the power, which is theft of
> >service, and probably access device fraud (I am not an attorney), which
> >carries a 10 year sentence.
> >
> >On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 10:16 AM John Lussmyer via EV 
> >wrote:
> >
> >> So, you are saying that it's technically impossible to build a CCS
> >> adapter that can translate the CCS standard communications to whatever
> >> the current Tesla super chargers have.  i.e. Ford Lied about it.
> >> it is physically impossible, even if you have the Ford app that will
> >> work with Tesla superchargers, and it tells the system that using a
> >> special Ford Custom CCS adapter is ok, that it can't ever work.
> >>
> >> On 6/21/2023 8:51 AM, (-Phil-) wrote:
> >> > The broken record continues:
> >> >
> >> > Only the superchargers that support CCS signalling native (V4) or the
> >> > two (so far) V3 retrofitted with Magic dock will be able to be used by
> >> > 3rd party EVs, adapter or not!
> >> >
> >> > It's all right there at 4.5.1 in the "official" Tesla document:
> >> >
> >>
> https://tesla-cdn.thron.com/static/HXVNIC_North_American_Charging_Standard_Technical_Specification_TS-0023666_HFTPKZ.pdf?xseo==inline%3Bfilename%3D%22North-American-Charging-Standard-Technical-Specification-TS-0023666.pdf%22
> >> > <
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
>
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[Ron via EV]

Just spitballing here...

What about VIN equivalents in the adapter itself or manufacturers building 
their charge ports and in-vehicle networking to Tesla specs?

All of this stuff is well over my head, but having written Palm Pilot programs 
that interface with mainframe systems, it strikes me that there are usually 
ways to effectively and reliably extend systems without breaking them.

But, as I said, all of this is well over my head. :)
--
Ron

On June 21, 2023 11:23:40 a.m. CST, "(-Phil-) via EV"  wrote:
>No, but there is no way to bill it.  Tesla handles billing on SWCAN
>supercharger protocol by VIN, the car controls the supercharger, there is
>no back-end auth.   So the only technical way to build such an adapter
>would be to spoof a Tesla, and "steal" the power, which is theft of
>service, and probably access device fraud (I am not an attorney), which
>carries a 10 year sentence.
>
>On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 10:16 AM John Lussmyer via EV 
>wrote:
>
>> So, you are saying that it's technically impossible to build a CCS
>> adapter that can translate the CCS standard communications to whatever
>> the current Tesla super chargers have.  i.e. Ford Lied about it.
>> it is physically impossible, even if you have the Ford app that will
>> work with Tesla superchargers, and it tells the system that using a
>> special Ford Custom CCS adapter is ok, that it can't ever work.
>>
>> On 6/21/2023 8:51 AM, (-Phil-) wrote:
>> > The broken record continues:
>> >
>> > Only the superchargers that support CCS signalling native (V4) or the
>> > two (so far) V3 retrofitted with Magic dock will be able to be used by
>> > 3rd party EVs, adapter or not!
>> >
>> > It's all right there at 4.5.1 in the "official" Tesla document:
>> >
>> https://tesla-cdn.thron.com/static/HXVNIC_North_American_Charging_Standard_Technical_Specification_TS-0023666_HFTPKZ.pdf?xseo==inline%3Bfilename%3D%22North-American-Charging-Standard-Technical-Specification-TS-0023666.pdf%22
>> > <
___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[(-Phil-) via EV]

No.  If you read the Official NACS document I linked to a few posts ago,
the ONLY communications protocol supported is PLC (DIN 70121), they do not
list the single-wire CAN legacy supercharger protocol in any of these
released documents because they absolutely will not support 3rd party use
of it.

This documentation means that all 3rd party use of NACS will be effectively
CCS just using Tesla's NACS connector, it will authenticate the same, and
require working back-end communications for a 3rd party EV using the Tesla
app, another manufacturer's app, or plug-and-charge (ISO 15118).  All of
these will require back-end auth.   This will also have the side-effect of
drastically reducing the reliability of the superchargers for 3rd party
EVs.  Mark my words.


On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 12:41 PM John Lussmyer 
wrote:

> So, Ford, with the Tesla API, can have their newer vehicles control the
> Tesla charger.
> AND if the existing Ford vehicle has some smarts, and a "smart" adapter,
> it could also control the Tesla charger.
> Again, I'm talking a major car manufacturer, with a API agreement with
> Tesla, making the adapter.
> Ford isn't about to miss a chance to bill it's car users for a new service.
> Even if the car doesn't have cell comms, I'd bet it can connect to a
> phone that does.
>
> On 6/21/2023 11:37 AM, (-Phil-) wrote:
> > No using the existing supercharging protocol that Tesla uses on all
> > it's existing fleet, the CAR CONTROLS THE SUPERCHARGER, not the other
> > way around.  All authentication/billing is handled on the CAR SIDE.
> > The literally is ZERO AUTHENTICATION on the supercharger.
> >
> > If you don't pay your bill, the CAR is what refuses to let you
> > charge.  There is no VIN list, there is no back-end comms needed, and
> > this is one of the main reasons the superchargers have been so
> > reliable.  Most do have a cell connection to a back end for
> > logging/status, and this is in-turn sent to the cars so you can see
> > stall availability at each site, but it's not always working.  Some
> > superchargers in remote locations do not have cell, and thus do not
> > show up with status on your in-car supercharging map.
> >
> > The car can also log data from the supercharger and cache it for later
> > upload when the car gets back into cell range.
> >
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[John Lussmyer via EV]

So, Ford, with the Tesla API, can have their newer vehicles control the 
Tesla charger.
AND if the existing Ford vehicle has some smarts, and a "smart" adapter, 
it could also control the Tesla charger.
Again, I'm talking a major car manufacturer, with a API agreement with 
Tesla, making the adapter.

Ford isn't about to miss a chance to bill it's car users for a new service.
Even if the car doesn't have cell comms, I'd bet it can connect to a 
phone that does.


On 6/21/2023 11:37 AM, (-Phil-) wrote:
No using the existing supercharging protocol that Tesla uses on all 
it's existing fleet, the CAR CONTROLS THE SUPERCHARGER, not the other 
way around.  All authentication/billing is handled on the CAR SIDE.  
The literally is ZERO AUTHENTICATION on the supercharger.


If you don't pay your bill, the CAR is what refuses to let you 
charge.  There is no VIN list, there is no back-end comms needed, and 
this is one of the main reasons the superchargers have been so 
reliable.  Most do have a cell connection to a back end for 
logging/status, and this is in-turn sent to the cars so you can see 
stall availability at each site, but it's not always working.  Some 
superchargers in remote locations do not have cell, and thus do not 
show up with status on your in-car supercharging map.


The car can also log data from the supercharger and cache it for later 
upload when the car gets back into cell range.



___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[(-Phil-) via EV]

I agree about the invasive logging, which is why I offer the service to
disconnect a Tesla from Tesla's back end.   This can be done in degrees, so
no communication, only needed communication, or just no logging/telemetry
(software updates still possible).

But Tesla isn't the only one, pretty much all automakers, EV or not, now
have fully connected infotainment.   Just like a smartphone, your car is
now in constant communication with their back-end.   In fact, GM was one of
the first into this with OnStar in 2011.  Since then the amount of data
collected has only increased.

On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 12:23 PM EV List Lackey via EV 
wrote:

> On 21 Jun 2023 at 11:37, (-Phil-) via EV wrote:
>
> > The car can also log data from the supercharger and cache it for later
> > upload when the car gets back into cell range.
>
> This is what I find unsettling about Teslas.  Actually all cars do
> something
> similar now but it could be said that Tesla was a leader in making
> vehicles
> that set fire to your privacy.
>
> Back when the Model S was new the New York Time (I think it was) published
> a
> hit piece on it.  Using the car's spy computer, Musk revealed that the
> tester / writer had driven in circles in a parking lot to deliberately
> drain
> the battery.
>
> A lot of folks on this list were jubilant.  I found it seriously
> unsettling
> that a Tesla would log that much information about where the driver was,
> when, how he drove, and much more.
>
> More recently it emerged that Tesla employees were passing round images
> taken by Tesla cameras:
>
> https://www.reuters.com/technology/tesla-workers-shared-sensitive-images-
> recorded-by-customer-cars-2023-04-06/
> 
>
> or https://v.gd/l23Ra9
>
> You can't call that anything  but voyeurism.
>
> Your car knows a LOT about you, and it rats you out to the company that
> made
> it.
>
> This has been used to prosecute people.
>
> The case that sticks in my mind (though it's not an EV) took place a few
> years ago in the UK.  A person was convicted of murder on the evidence
> from
> his car's computer.  He had parked the car in the area where a body was
> found.  The car had logged - and told the server - that he'd also opened
> and
> closed the boot (trunk).
>
> Now you might say "Well, sure.  He was a bad guy.  He should have been
> busted."  And that might be true, though the car log is purely
> circumstantial evidence.  But there are many less legitimate things that
> people with authority can do with such data.  I don't know about you, but
> I
> don't trust them to not abuse it.
>
> Maybe you're also thinking, "They can look at everything I do; I don't
> care.
> My life is boring.  I have nothing to hide."
>
> Edward Snowden once said, "Arguing that you don't care about the right to
> privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different from saying that
> you don't care about free speech because you have nothing to say."
>
> Sorry for the somewhat off topic rant.
>
> David Roden, EVDL moderator & general lackey
>
> To reach me, don't reply to this message; I won't get it.  Use my
> offlist address here : http://evdl.org/help/index.html#supt
>
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
>
>  I see a set of solutions but I don't know what problems they exist
>  to solve other than "How can we use these to absorb all this spare
>  money that's washing around?"
>
> -- Brian Eno on Cryptocurrency and NFTs
>
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
>
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
>
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[EV List Lackey via EV]

On 21 Jun 2023 at 11:37, (-Phil-) via EV wrote:

> The car can also log data from the supercharger and cache it for later
> upload when the car gets back into cell range.

This is what I find unsettling about Teslas.  Actually all cars do something 
similar now but it could be said that Tesla was a leader in making vehicles 
that set fire to your privacy.

Back when the Model S was new the New York Time (I think it was) published a 
hit piece on it.  Using the car's spy computer, Musk revealed that the 
tester / writer had driven in circles in a parking lot to deliberately drain 
the battery. 

A lot of folks on this list were jubilant.  I found it seriously unsettling 
that a Tesla would log that much information about where the driver was, 
when, how he drove, and much more.  

More recently it emerged that Tesla employees were passing round images 
taken by Tesla cameras:

https://www.reuters.com/technology/tesla-workers-shared-sensitive-images-
recorded-by-customer-cars-2023-04-06/

or https://v.gd/l23Ra9

You can't call that anything  but voyeurism.

Your car knows a LOT about you, and it rats you out to the company that made 
it.  

This has been used to prosecute people.  

The case that sticks in my mind (though it's not an EV) took place a few 
years ago in the UK.  A person was convicted of murder on the evidence from 
his car's computer.  He had parked the car in the area where a body was 
found.  The car had logged - and told the server - that he'd also opened and 
closed the boot (trunk).

Now you might say "Well, sure.  He was a bad guy.  He should have been 
busted."  And that might be true, though the car log is purely 
circumstantial evidence.  But there are many less legitimate things that 
people with authority can do with such data.  I don't know about you, but I 
don't trust them to not abuse it.

Maybe you're also thinking, "They can look at everything I do; I don't care. 
My life is boring.  I have nothing to hide."  

Edward Snowden once said, "Arguing that you don't care about the right to 
privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different from saying that 
you don't care about free speech because you have nothing to say."

Sorry for the somewhat off topic rant.

David Roden, EVDL moderator & general lackey

To reach me, don't reply to this message; I won't get it.  Use my 
offlist address here : http://evdl.org/help/index.html#supt

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 

 I see a set of solutions but I don't know what problems they exist 
 to solve other than "How can we use these to absorb all this spare 
 money that's washing around?"

-- Brian Eno on Cryptocurrency and NFTs

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[(-Phil-) via EV]

No using the existing supercharging protocol that Tesla uses on all it's
existing fleet, the CAR CONTROLS THE SUPERCHARGER, not the other way
around.  All authentication/billing is handled on the CAR SIDE.  The
literally is ZERO AUTHENTICATION on the supercharger.

If you don't pay your bill, the CAR is what refuses to let you charge.
There is no VIN list, there is no back-end comms needed, and this is one of
the main reasons the superchargers have been so reliable.  Most do have a
cell connection to a back end for logging/status, and this is in-turn sent
to the cars so you can see stall availability at each site, but it's not
always working.  Some superchargers in remote locations do not have cell,
and thus do not show up with status on your in-car supercharging map.

The car can also log data from the supercharger and cache it for later
upload when the car gets back into cell range.

When Tesla disables supercharging on salvage cars, they reach INTO THE CAR
and modify the option in the car's configuration which lives in the
security gateway.  I have reversed this chage and restored the factory
config on thousands of salvage Teslas all over the world, which still
happily supercharge.  (I then lock Tesla out from making further changes to
the config)  This is technically illegal on Tesla's part, as they are
accessing a computer they have no rights to.  Once I make the change and
restore the config, on cars with paid supercharging, they get billed by
Tesla just like any other car.  I do not interrupt the billing comms, so
it's all still perfectly legal, no theft of service.




On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 11:23 AM John Lussmyer 
wrote:

> Note that I was talking in terms of a Ford supplied adapter, with a Ford
> supplied phone app.
> I sincerely doubt that each SuperCharger has an up to date list of every
> VIN that Tesla ever produced.  So, they MUST talk back to the Tesla servers
> to validate the VIN. This means that Ford - who is going to be using the
> Tesla Supercharger API with their system, is likely to be able to make this
> work.  Even if the existing CCS communications doesn't include a VIN (or
> equivalent ID), the fact it's being used with a Ford supplied adapter and
> phone app, means that the specific car owner can be identified for billing.
>
> I did NOT say that any random person on the street can make their own CCS
> adapter to make it work.
> On 6/21/2023 10:23 AM, (-Phil-) wrote:
>
> No, but there is no way to bill it.  Tesla handles billing on SWCAN
> supercharger protocol by VIN, the car controls the supercharger, there is
> no back-end auth.   So the only technical way to build such an adapter
> would be to spoof a Tesla, and "steal" the power, which is theft of
> service, and probably access device fraud (I am not an attorney), which
> carries a 10 year sentence.
>
> On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 10:16 AM John Lussmyer via EV 
> wrote:
>
>> So, you are saying that it's technically impossible to build a CCS
>> adapter that can translate the CCS standard communications to whatever
>> the current Tesla super chargers have.  i.e. Ford Lied about it.
>> it is physically impossible, even if you have the Ford app that will
>> work with Tesla superchargers, and it tells the system that using a
>> special Ford Custom CCS adapter is ok, that it can't ever work.
>>
>> On 6/21/2023 8:51 AM, (-Phil-) wrote:
>> > The broken record continues:
>> >
>> > Only the superchargers that support CCS signalling native (V4) or the
>> > two (so far) V3 retrofitted with Magic dock will be able to be used by
>> > 3rd party EVs, adapter or not!
>> >
>> > It's all right there at 4.5.1 in the "official" Tesla document:
>> >
>> https://tesla-cdn.thron.com/static/HXVNIC_North_American_Charging_Standard_Technical_Specification_TS-0023666_HFTPKZ.pdf?xseo==inline%3Bfilename%3D%22North-American-Charging-Standard-Technical-Specification-TS-0023666.pdf%22
>> > <
>> https://tesla-cdn.thron.com/static/HXVNIC_North_American_Charging_Standard_Technical_Specification_TS-0023666_HFTPKZ.pdf?xseo==inline%3Bfilename%3D%22North-American-Charging-Standard-Technical-Specification-TS-0023666.pdf%22
>> >
>> >
>> > It's the first link; "Technical Specification" on this page:
>> > https://www.tesla.com/support/charging-product-guides#NACS-resources
>> >
>> > It specifies "For DC charging, communication between the EV and EVSE
>> > shall be power line communication over the control pilot line as
>> > depicted in DIN 70121.", which is NOT supported by current V1, V2, and
>> > V3 superchargers all over North America.   In addition, the location
>> > and length of Tesla's whips are not able to reach almost any other EV
>> > without it blocking multiple parking spots.
>> >
>> ___
>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>> HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
>>
>>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[John Lussmyer via EV]

Note that I was talking in terms of a Ford supplied adapter, with a Ford 
supplied phone app.
I sincerely doubt that each SuperCharger has an up to date list of every 
VIN that Tesla ever produced.  So, they MUST talk back to the Tesla 
servers to validate the VIN. This means that Ford - who is going to be 
using the Tesla Supercharger API with their system, is likely to be able 
to make this work.  Even if the existing CCS communications doesn't 
include a VIN (or equivalent ID), the fact it's being used with a Ford 
supplied adapter and phone app, means that the specific car owner can be 
identified for billing.


I did NOT say that any random person on the street can make their own 
CCS adapter to make it work.


On 6/21/2023 10:23 AM, (-Phil-) wrote:
No, but there is no way to bill it.  Tesla handles billing on SWCAN 
supercharger protocol by VIN, the car controls the supercharger, there 
is no back-end auth.   So the only technical way to build such an 
adapter would be to spoof a Tesla, and "steal" the power, which is 
theft of service, and probably access device fraud (I am not an 
attorney), which carries a 10 year sentence.


On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 10:16 AM John Lussmyer via EV 
 wrote:


So, you are saying that it's technically impossible to build a CCS
adapter that can translate the CCS standard communications to
whatever
the current Tesla super chargers have.  i.e. Ford Lied about it.
it is physically impossible, even if you have the Ford app that will
work with Tesla superchargers, and it tells the system that using a
special Ford Custom CCS adapter is ok, that it can't ever work.

On 6/21/2023 8:51 AM, (-Phil-) wrote:
> The broken record continues:
>
> Only the superchargers that support CCS signalling native (V4)
or the
> two (so far) V3 retrofitted with Magic dock will be able to be
used by
> 3rd party EVs, adapter or not!
>
> It's all right there at 4.5.1 in the "official" Tesla document:
>

https://tesla-cdn.thron.com/static/HXVNIC_North_American_Charging_Standard_Technical_Specification_TS-0023666_HFTPKZ.pdf?xseo==inline%3Bfilename%3D%22North-American-Charging-Standard-Technical-Specification-TS-0023666.pdf%22



>

>
>
> It's the first link; "Technical Specification" on this page:
> https://www.tesla.com/support/charging-product-guides#NACS-resources
>
> It specifies "For DC charging, communication between the EV and
EVSE
> shall be power line communication over the control pilot line as
> depicted in DIN 70121.", which is NOT supported by current V1,
V2, and
> V3 superchargers all over North America.   In addition, the
location
> and length of Tesla's whips are not able to reach almost any
other EV
> without it blocking multiple parking spots.
>
___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/


-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[(-Phil-) via EV]

Here's a video I made about a year ago on how Tesla charging works.  I need
to do another one with updates.
https://youtu.be/0lxxOsLcNQQ

On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 10:23 AM (-Phil-)  wrote:

> No, but there is no way to bill it.  Tesla handles billing on SWCAN
> supercharger protocol by VIN, the car controls the supercharger, there is
> no back-end auth.   So the only technical way to build such an adapter
> would be to spoof a Tesla, and "steal" the power, which is theft of
> service, and probably access device fraud (I am not an attorney), which
> carries a 10 year sentence.
>
> On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 10:16 AM John Lussmyer via EV 
> wrote:
>
>> So, you are saying that it's technically impossible to build a CCS
>> adapter that can translate the CCS standard communications to whatever
>> the current Tesla super chargers have.  i.e. Ford Lied about it.
>> it is physically impossible, even if you have the Ford app that will
>> work with Tesla superchargers, and it tells the system that using a
>> special Ford Custom CCS adapter is ok, that it can't ever work.
>>
>> On 6/21/2023 8:51 AM, (-Phil-) wrote:
>> > The broken record continues:
>> >
>> > Only the superchargers that support CCS signalling native (V4) or the
>> > two (so far) V3 retrofitted with Magic dock will be able to be used by
>> > 3rd party EVs, adapter or not!
>> >
>> > It's all right there at 4.5.1 in the "official" Tesla document:
>> >
>> https://tesla-cdn.thron.com/static/HXVNIC_North_American_Charging_Standard_Technical_Specification_TS-0023666_HFTPKZ.pdf?xseo==inline%3Bfilename%3D%22North-American-Charging-Standard-Technical-Specification-TS-0023666.pdf%22
>> > <
>> https://tesla-cdn.thron.com/static/HXVNIC_North_American_Charging_Standard_Technical_Specification_TS-0023666_HFTPKZ.pdf?xseo==inline%3Bfilename%3D%22North-American-Charging-Standard-Technical-Specification-TS-0023666.pdf%22
>> >
>> >
>> > It's the first link; "Technical Specification" on this page:
>> > https://www.tesla.com/support/charging-product-guides#NACS-resources
>> >
>> > It specifies "For DC charging, communication between the EV and EVSE
>> > shall be power line communication over the control pilot line as
>> > depicted in DIN 70121.", which is NOT supported by current V1, V2, and
>> > V3 superchargers all over North America.   In addition, the location
>> > and length of Tesla's whips are not able to reach almost any other EV
>> > without it blocking multiple parking spots.
>> >
>> ___
>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>> HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
>>
>>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[(-Phil-) via EV]

No, but there is no way to bill it.  Tesla handles billing on SWCAN
supercharger protocol by VIN, the car controls the supercharger, there is
no back-end auth.   So the only technical way to build such an adapter
would be to spoof a Tesla, and "steal" the power, which is theft of
service, and probably access device fraud (I am not an attorney), which
carries a 10 year sentence.

On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 10:16 AM John Lussmyer via EV 
wrote:

> So, you are saying that it's technically impossible to build a CCS
> adapter that can translate the CCS standard communications to whatever
> the current Tesla super chargers have.  i.e. Ford Lied about it.
> it is physically impossible, even if you have the Ford app that will
> work with Tesla superchargers, and it tells the system that using a
> special Ford Custom CCS adapter is ok, that it can't ever work.
>
> On 6/21/2023 8:51 AM, (-Phil-) wrote:
> > The broken record continues:
> >
> > Only the superchargers that support CCS signalling native (V4) or the
> > two (so far) V3 retrofitted with Magic dock will be able to be used by
> > 3rd party EVs, adapter or not!
> >
> > It's all right there at 4.5.1 in the "official" Tesla document:
> >
> https://tesla-cdn.thron.com/static/HXVNIC_North_American_Charging_Standard_Technical_Specification_TS-0023666_HFTPKZ.pdf?xseo==inline%3Bfilename%3D%22North-American-Charging-Standard-Technical-Specification-TS-0023666.pdf%22
> > <
> https://tesla-cdn.thron.com/static/HXVNIC_North_American_Charging_Standard_Technical_Specification_TS-0023666_HFTPKZ.pdf?xseo==inline%3Bfilename%3D%22North-American-Charging-Standard-Technical-Specification-TS-0023666.pdf%22
> >
> >
> > It's the first link; "Technical Specification" on this page:
> > https://www.tesla.com/support/charging-product-guides#NACS-resources
> >
> > It specifies "For DC charging, communication between the EV and EVSE
> > shall be power line communication over the control pilot line as
> > depicted in DIN 70121.", which is NOT supported by current V1, V2, and
> > V3 superchargers all over North America.   In addition, the location
> > and length of Tesla's whips are not able to reach almost any other EV
> > without it blocking multiple parking spots.
> >
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
>
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[John Lussmyer via EV]

So, you are saying that it's technically impossible to build a CCS 
adapter that can translate the CCS standard communications to whatever 
the current Tesla super chargers have.  i.e. Ford Lied about it.
it is physically impossible, even if you have the Ford app that will 
work with Tesla superchargers, and it tells the system that using a 
special Ford Custom CCS adapter is ok, that it can't ever work.


On 6/21/2023 8:51 AM, (-Phil-) wrote:

The broken record continues:

Only the superchargers that support CCS signalling native (V4) or the 
two (so far) V3 retrofitted with Magic dock will be able to be used by 
3rd party EVs, adapter or not!


It's all right there at 4.5.1 in the "official" Tesla document: 
https://tesla-cdn.thron.com/static/HXVNIC_North_American_Charging_Standard_Technical_Specification_TS-0023666_HFTPKZ.pdf?xseo==inline%3Bfilename%3D%22North-American-Charging-Standard-Technical-Specification-TS-0023666.pdf%22 



It's the first link; "Technical Specification" on this page: 
https://www.tesla.com/support/charging-product-guides#NACS-resources


It specifies "For DC charging, communication between the EV and EVSE 
shall be power line communication over the control pilot line as 
depicted in DIN 70121.", which is NOT supported by current V1, V2, and 
V3 superchargers all over North America.   In addition, the location 
and length of Tesla's whips are not able to reach almost any other EV 
without it blocking multiple parking spots.



___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[(-Phil-) via EV]

The broken record continues:

Only the superchargers that support CCS signalling native (V4) or the two
(so far) V3 retrofitted with Magic dock will be able to be used by 3rd
party EVs, adapter or not!

It's all right there at 4.5.1 in the "official" Tesla document:
https://tesla-cdn.thron.com/static/HXVNIC_North_American_Charging_Standard_Technical_Specification_TS-0023666_HFTPKZ.pdf?xseo==inline%3Bfilename%3D%22North-American-Charging-Standard-Technical-Specification-TS-0023666.pdf%22

It's the first link; "Technical Specification" on this page:
https://www.tesla.com/support/charging-product-guides#NACS-resources

It specifies "For DC charging, communication between the EV and EVSE shall
be power line communication over the control pilot line as depicted in DIN
70121.", which is NOT supported by current V1, V2, and V3 superchargers all
over North America.   In addition, the location and length of Tesla's whips
are not able to reach almost any other EV without it blocking multiple
parking spots.

On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 7:20 AM John Lussmyer via EV 
wrote:

> If there isn't one now, there will be soon.  Ford has said that their
> existing vehicles will be able to use the Tesla stations with an adapter.
>
> On 6/21/2023 1:22 AM, Matt Lacey via EV wrote:
> > That adapter is the wrong direction (incidentally the only direction
> > that will work)
> >
> > going from CCS2 charge station to US Tesla Car is possible, and what
> > that adapter is
> >
> > Going from US Tesla charge station to CCS2 is not, without Tesla
> > allowing for a legacy mode to be CCS2 compatible
> >
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
>
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[John Lussmyer via EV]

If there isn't one now, there will be soon.  Ford has said that their 
existing vehicles will be able to use the Tesla stations with an adapter.


On 6/21/2023 1:22 AM, Matt Lacey via EV wrote:
That adapter is the wrong direction (incidentally the only direction 
that will work)


going from CCS2 charge station to US Tesla Car is possible, and what 
that adapter is


Going from US Tesla charge station to CCS2 is not, without Tesla 
allowing for a legacy mode to be CCS2 compatible



___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[paul dove via EV]

He said supercharger. 
Guess he’s saying the charger checks the Vin #.
Would work on home Tesla chargers 


Sent from AT Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Wednesday, June 21, 2023, 3:10 AM, Lawrence Rhodes via EV 
 wrote:


Chargerman CCS Combo 2 to US Tesla Dual(DC+AC) Adapter - Black
Last item available

Condition:NewNewQuantity:Last One / 4 soldPrice:US $229.00They are lying? LR
    On Tuesday, June 20, 2023 at 06:33:31 PM PDT, (-Phil-) 
 wrote:  
 
 No, there is no adapter that will allow existing superchargers to charge a CCS 
car, and if there ever was it would be illegal and shutdown instantly by Tesla 
legal as it would have to be spoofing a Tesla VIN and thus not paying for the 
charge.
I feel like a broken record at this point, as I've said it several times 
already, but my predictions are: 1. Tesla will only allow access for other 
vehicles on V4 superchargers.  2. The network will become substantially less 
reliable for non-Tesla cars.  3. The rollout will be slow, it's  not going to 
be overnight all superchargers with just an adapter.
I've already explained the technical reasons I am asserting this.
I've also warned about using Tesla destination chargers, as some are hooked to 
1 leg of 480 3-phase wye, which is 277V nominal which most EVs will not 
tolerate.   For example, a Leaf will blow it's on-board charger.   Teslas are 
rated up to 300VAC.  Most others top out at 264VAC.  There is no good way to 
tell before you plug your non-Tesla EV in and there's smoke and you are stuck!


( Pic: http://ingineerix.com/pic/?tesla-wc-277v )

On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 5:53 PM Lawrence Rhodes via EV  
wrote:

 It seems to me if there is an adapter available for purchase, that would 
qualify Tesla Superchargers. I bought a Tesla Tap to take advantage of Tesla 
destination EVSE. CCS drivers could buy this and have ac or dc charging. 
https://www.ebay.com/itm/35483570?_trkparms=amclksrc%3DITM%26aid%3D1110006%26algo%3DHOMESPLICE.SIM%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20201210111314%26meid%3Dc1ad667158b04eb79d33fda7ba7b28ee%26pid%3D101195%26rk%3D1%26rkt%3D12%26sd%3D354835758942%26itm%3D35483570%26pmt%3D1%26noa%3D0%26pg%3D2047675%26algv%3DSimplAMLv11WebTrimmedV3MskuWithLambda85KnnRecallV1V4V6ItemNrtInQueryAndCassiniVisualRankerAndBertRecall&_trksid=p2047675.c101195.m1851=cksum%3A35483570c1ad667158b04eb79d33fda7ba7b28ee%7Cenc%3AAQAIAAABQA2rugFlOq3qu1cLac%252F%252Fk6Vp0Oa0HaJIqoXKeIiOR%252BTUgsSvHaeyPxKYu6UqHqq7GaGyKVqHQnjeiiXcQpMGw2t3aB%252BssGfjtIWOBj8wExc7oYYP7xGMyQCrHDyDaSaWjB1CueI3A94n0yxXX5dx5gAU%252FT8Fo%252BhA4uBFp%252BOwvsmjMx9svf4%252B372fK2%252Fh1O6bxu3XXlcPikVngfjzVkKfN1lwJYO4DTP0c6sUG2XIHT8T1ZF%252FFEudHDvVkzR0g73ogbAWksoGWUYhm1zt%252F0G2dL4hl8V2wSq543sodOojwXnCYuf2c0C%252BJa530Edy9yIdIlvH1BMdtvgdl0yCCGVp1bdez1hD%252B03XGIvFqhUw2JkLeMVSMa7keDCDqXE%252Fwk3cmo52x29a4WsrQlzr%252Bcj8UmaXoa3muZU2BSJ5pn%252BqeS9u%7Campid%3APL_CLK%7Cclp%3A2047675
 LR


  
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/




-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[Jay Summet via EV]

On 6/20/23 22:51, EV@TucsonEV via EV wrote:


AC Level 2  208 to 240 V AC, 1-phase? 80 A
Per NEC 625



"240 volt" power really has an acceptable range of voltage from 228 
volts to 252.  (My home regularly sits at 245 volts).


But yes, pulling from one leg of a 3 phase at 277 volts is too much for 
a "240" volt circuit, although a lot of hardware will "work" at slightly 
higher voltages...until it doesn't.


Since the Tesla destination chargers are designed to only work with 
Teslas, which are presumably all designed to work at higher voltages 
when charging, the problem appears to be people selling and marketing 
NCAS -> J1772 adapters that do not detect this over voltage condition 
and refuse to pass through the over-voltage or at least have a warning 
light of some sort and educate the user about what it means so they can 
determine if their vehicle can handle the extra voltage.


[I assume the NCAS standard allows 277 volt AC charging...since the 
installation manual shows it being set up that way]


Jay

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[EV@TucsonEV via EV]

The J1772 SAE Specifications state -

5.1 Electrical Ratings
Table 9 - AC charging electrical ratings (North America)
Charge Method   Nominal Supply Voltage  Max Current Branch  Circuit
Breaker
(V) (Amps-continuous)
rating (Amps)
AC Level 1  120 V AC, 1-phase   12 A
15 A (min)
120 V AC, 1-phase   16 A
20 A
AC Level 2  208 to 240 V AC, 1-phase? 80 A
Per NEC 625

So if in fact there are EVSE's with 277VAC, then they are out of spec with the
J1772 Specifications.

Best regards,

Rush Dougherty
TucsonEV
www.TucsonEV.com




> -Original Message-
> From: EV  On Behalf Of John Lussmyer via EV
> Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2023 7:23 PM
> To: (-Phil-) via EV 
> Cc: John Lussmyer 
> Subject: Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17
>
> I've run into some J1772 stations that are 277V. (at least, that's what my
voltage
> monitor said.)
>
> On 6/20/2023 6:32 PM, (-Phil-) via EV wrote:
> > I've also warned about using Tesla destination chargers, as some are
> > hooked to 1 leg of 480 3-phase wye, which is 277V nominal which most EVs
will not
> > tolerate.   For example, a Leaf will blow it's on-board charger.   Teslas
> > are rated up to 300VAC.  Most others top out at 264VAC.  There is no
> > good way to tell before you plug your non-Tesla EV in and there's
> > smoke and you are stuck!
> >
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
>
>
>
> --
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
> www.avg.com



___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[Matt Lacey via EV]

That adapter is the wrong direction (incidentally the only direction 
that will work)


going from CCS2 charge station to US Tesla Car is possible, and what 
that adapter is


Going from US Tesla charge station to CCS2 is not, without Tesla 
allowing for a legacy mode to be CCS2 compatible


On 21/06/2023 4:07 pm, Lawrence Rhodes via EV wrote:
  
Chargerman CCS Combo 2 to US Tesla Dual(DC+AC) Adapter - Black

Last item available

Condition:NewNewQuantity:Last One / 4 soldPrice:US $229.00They are lying? LR
 On Tuesday, June 20, 2023 at 06:33:31 PM PDT, (-Phil-) 
 wrote:
  
  No, there is no adapter that will allow existing superchargers to charge a CCS car, and if there ever was it would be illegal and shutdown instantly by Tesla legal as it would have to be spoofing a Tesla VIN and thus not paying for the charge.

I feel like a broken record at this point, as I've said it several times 
already, but my predictions are: 1. Tesla will only allow access for other 
vehicles on V4 superchargers.  2. The network will become substantially less 
reliable for non-Tesla cars.  3. The rollout will be slow, it's  not going to 
be overnight all superchargers with just an adapter.
I've already explained the technical reasons I am asserting this.
I've also warned about using Tesla destination chargers, as some are hooked to 
1 leg of 480 3-phase wye, which is 277V nominal which most EVs will not 
tolerate.   For example, a Leaf will blow it's on-board charger.   Teslas are 
rated up to 300VAC.  Most others top out at 264VAC.  There is no good way to 
tell before you plug your non-Tesla EV in and there's smoke and you are stuck!


( Pic: http://ingineerix.com/pic/?tesla-wc-277v )

On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 5:53 PM Lawrence Rhodes via EV  
wrote:

  It seems to me if there is an adapter available for purchase, that would qualify 
Tesla Superchargers. I bought a Tesla Tap to take advantage of Tesla destination EVSE. 
CCS drivers could buy this and have ac or dc charging. 
https://www.ebay.com/itm/35483570?_trkparms=amclksrc%3DITM%26aid%3D1110006%26algo%3DHOMESPLICE.SIM%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20201210111314%26meid%3Dc1ad667158b04eb79d33fda7ba7b28ee%26pid%3D101195%26rk%3D1%26rkt%3D12%26sd%3D354835758942%26itm%3D35483570%26pmt%3D1%26noa%3D0%26pg%3D2047675%26algv%3DSimplAMLv11WebTrimmedV3MskuWithLambda85KnnRecallV1V4V6ItemNrtInQueryAndCassiniVisualRankerAndBertRecall&_trksid=p2047675.c101195.m1851=cksum%3A35483570c1ad667158b04eb79d33fda7ba7b28ee%7Cenc%3AAQAIAAABQA2rugFlOq3qu1cLac%252F%252Fk6Vp0Oa0HaJIqoXKeIiOR%252BTUgsSvHaeyPxKYu6UqHqq7GaGyKVqHQnjeiiXcQpMGw2t3aB%252BssGfjtIWOBj8wExc7oYYP7xGMyQCrHDyDaSaWjB1CueI3A94n0yxXX5dx5gAU%252FT8Fo%252BhA4uBFp%252BOwvsmjMx9svf4%252B372fK2%252Fh1O6bxu3XXlcPikVngfjzVkKfN1lwJYO4DTP0c6sUG2XIHT8T1ZF%252FFEudHDvVkzR0g73ogbAWksoGWUYhm1zt%252F0G2dL4hl8V2wSq543sodOojwXnCYuf2c0C%252BJa530Edy9yIdIlvH1BMdtvgdl0yCCGVp1bdez1hD%252B03XGIvFqhUw2JkLeMVSMa7keDCDqXE%252Fwk3cmo52x29a4WsrQlzr%252Bcj8UmaXoa3muZU2BSJ5pn%252BqeS9u%7Campid%3APL_CLK%7Cclp%3A2047675
 LR


   
-- next part --

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/


___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[Lawrence Rhodes via EV]

 
Chargerman CCS Combo 2 to US Tesla Dual(DC+AC) Adapter - Black
Last item available

Condition:NewNewQuantity:Last One / 4 soldPrice:US $229.00They are lying? LR
On Tuesday, June 20, 2023 at 06:33:31 PM PDT, (-Phil-) 
 wrote:  
 
 No, there is no adapter that will allow existing superchargers to charge a CCS 
car, and if there ever was it would be illegal and shutdown instantly by Tesla 
legal as it would have to be spoofing a Tesla VIN and thus not paying for the 
charge.
I feel like a broken record at this point, as I've said it several times 
already, but my predictions are: 1. Tesla will only allow access for other 
vehicles on V4 superchargers.  2. The network will become substantially less 
reliable for non-Tesla cars.  3. The rollout will be slow, it's  not going to 
be overnight all superchargers with just an adapter.
I've already explained the technical reasons I am asserting this.
I've also warned about using Tesla destination chargers, as some are hooked to 
1 leg of 480 3-phase wye, which is 277V nominal which most EVs will not 
tolerate.   For example, a Leaf will blow it's on-board charger.   Teslas are 
rated up to 300VAC.  Most others top out at 264VAC.  There is no good way to 
tell before you plug your non-Tesla EV in and there's smoke and you are stuck!


( Pic: http://ingineerix.com/pic/?tesla-wc-277v )

On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 5:53 PM Lawrence Rhodes via EV  
wrote:

 It seems to me if there is an adapter available for purchase, that would 
qualify Tesla Superchargers. I bought a Tesla Tap to take advantage of Tesla 
destination EVSE. CCS drivers could buy this and have ac or dc charging. 
https://www.ebay.com/itm/35483570?_trkparms=amclksrc%3DITM%26aid%3D1110006%26algo%3DHOMESPLICE.SIM%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20201210111314%26meid%3Dc1ad667158b04eb79d33fda7ba7b28ee%26pid%3D101195%26rk%3D1%26rkt%3D12%26sd%3D354835758942%26itm%3D35483570%26pmt%3D1%26noa%3D0%26pg%3D2047675%26algv%3DSimplAMLv11WebTrimmedV3MskuWithLambda85KnnRecallV1V4V6ItemNrtInQueryAndCassiniVisualRankerAndBertRecall&_trksid=p2047675.c101195.m1851=cksum%3A35483570c1ad667158b04eb79d33fda7ba7b28ee%7Cenc%3AAQAIAAABQA2rugFlOq3qu1cLac%252F%252Fk6Vp0Oa0HaJIqoXKeIiOR%252BTUgsSvHaeyPxKYu6UqHqq7GaGyKVqHQnjeiiXcQpMGw2t3aB%252BssGfjtIWOBj8wExc7oYYP7xGMyQCrHDyDaSaWjB1CueI3A94n0yxXX5dx5gAU%252FT8Fo%252BhA4uBFp%252BOwvsmjMx9svf4%252B372fK2%252Fh1O6bxu3XXlcPikVngfjzVkKfN1lwJYO4DTP0c6sUG2XIHT8T1ZF%252FFEudHDvVkzR0g73ogbAWksoGWUYhm1zt%252F0G2dL4hl8V2wSq543sodOojwXnCYuf2c0C%252BJa530Edy9yIdIlvH1BMdtvgdl0yCCGVp1bdez1hD%252B03XGIvFqhUw2JkLeMVSMa7keDCDqXE%252Fwk3cmo52x29a4WsrQlzr%252Bcj8UmaXoa3muZU2BSJ5pn%252BqeS9u%7Campid%3APL_CLK%7Cclp%3A2047675
 LR


  
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[(-Phil-) via EV]

From SAE-J1772:

Pic: http://ingineerix.com/pic/?sae-j1772-voltages

On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 9:20 PM (-Phil-)  wrote:

> That should never happen!   That would be frying a bunch of cars.
>
> On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 7:24 PM John Lussmyer via EV 
> wrote:
>
>> I've run into some J1772 stations that are 277V. (at least, that's what
>> my voltage monitor said.)
>>
>> On 6/20/2023 6:32 PM, (-Phil-) via EV wrote:
>> > I've also warned about using Tesla destination chargers, as some are
>> hooked
>> > to 1 leg of 480 3-phase wye, which is 277V nominal which most EVs will
>> not
>> > tolerate.   For example, a Leaf will blow it's on-board charger.
>>  Teslas
>> > are rated up to 300VAC.  Most others top out at 264VAC.  There is no
>> good
>> > way to tell before you plug your non-Tesla EV in and there's smoke and
>> you
>> > are stuck!
>> >
>> ___
>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
>> HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
>>
>>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[(-Phil-) via EV]

That should never happen!   That would be frying a bunch of cars.

On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 7:24 PM John Lussmyer via EV 
wrote:

> I've run into some J1772 stations that are 277V. (at least, that's what
> my voltage monitor said.)
>
> On 6/20/2023 6:32 PM, (-Phil-) via EV wrote:
> > I've also warned about using Tesla destination chargers, as some are
> hooked
> > to 1 leg of 480 3-phase wye, which is 277V nominal which most EVs will
> not
> > tolerate.   For example, a Leaf will blow it's on-board charger.   Teslas
> > are rated up to 300VAC.  Most others top out at 264VAC.  There is no good
> > way to tell before you plug your non-Tesla EV in and there's smoke and
> you
> > are stuck!
> >
> ___
> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
>
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[John Lussmyer via EV]

I've run into some J1772 stations that are 277V. (at least, that's what 
my voltage monitor said.)


On 6/20/2023 6:32 PM, (-Phil-) via EV wrote:

I've also warned about using Tesla destination chargers, as some are hooked
to 1 leg of 480 3-phase wye, which is 277V nominal which most EVs will not
tolerate.   For example, a Leaf will blow it's on-board charger.   Teslas
are rated up to 300VAC.  Most others top out at 264VAC.  There is no good
way to tell before you plug your non-Tesla EV in and there's smoke and you
are stuck!


___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[(-Phil-) via EV]

No, there is no adapter that will allow existing superchargers to charge a
CCS car, and if there ever was it would be illegal and shutdown instantly
by Tesla legal as it would have to be spoofing a Tesla VIN and thus not
paying for the charge.

I feel like a broken record at this point, as I've said it several times
already, but my predictions are: 1. Tesla will only allow access for other
vehicles on V4 superchargers.  2. The network will become substantially
less reliable for non-Tesla cars.  3. The rollout will be slow, it's  not
going to be overnight all superchargers with just an adapter.

I've already explained the technical reasons I am asserting this.

I've also warned about using Tesla destination chargers, as some are hooked
to 1 leg of 480 3-phase wye, which is 277V nominal which most EVs will not
tolerate.   For example, a Leaf will blow it's on-board charger.   Teslas
are rated up to 300VAC.  Most others top out at 264VAC.  There is no good
way to tell before you plug your non-Tesla EV in and there's smoke and you
are stuck!


( Pic: http://ingineerix.com/pic/?tesla-wc-277v )

On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 5:53 PM Lawrence Rhodes via EV 
wrote:

>  It seems to me if there is an adapter available for purchase, that would
> qualify Tesla Superchargers. I bought a Tesla Tap to take advantage of
> Tesla destination EVSE. CCS drivers could buy this and have ac or dc
> charging.
> https://www.ebay.com/itm/35483570?_trkparms=amclksrc%3DITM%26aid%3D1110006%26algo%3DHOMESPLICE.SIM%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20201210111314%26meid%3Dc1ad667158b04eb79d33fda7ba7b28ee%26pid%3D101195%26rk%3D1%26rkt%3D12%26sd%3D354835758942%26itm%3D35483570%26pmt%3D1%26noa%3D0%26pg%3D2047675%26algv%3DSimplAMLv11WebTrimmedV3MskuWithLambda85KnnRecallV1V4V6ItemNrtInQueryAndCassiniVisualRankerAndBertRecall&_trksid=p2047675.c101195.m1851=cksum%3A35483570c1ad667158b04eb79d33fda7ba7b28ee%7Cenc%3AAQAIAAABQA2rugFlOq3qu1cLac%252F%252Fk6Vp0Oa0HaJIqoXKeIiOR%252BTUgsSvHaeyPxKYu6UqHqq7GaGyKVqHQnjeiiXcQpMGw2t3aB%252BssGfjtIWOBj8wExc7oYYP7xGMyQCrHDyDaSaWjB1CueI3A94n0yxXX5dx5gAU%252FT8Fo%252BhA4uBFp%252BOwvsmjMx9svf4%252B372fK2%252Fh1O6bxu3XXlcPikVngfjzVkKfN1lwJYO4DTP0c6sUG2XIHT8T1ZF%252FFEudHDvVkzR0g73ogbAWksoGWUYhm1zt%252F0G2dL4hl8V2wSq543sodOojwXnCYuf2c0C%252BJa530Edy9yIdIlvH1BMdtvgdl0yCCGVp1bdez1hD%252B03XGIvFqhUw2JkLeMVSMa7keDCDqXE%252Fwk3cmo52x29a4WsrQlzr%252Bcj8UmaXoa3muZU2BSJ5pn%252BqeS9u%7Campid%3APL_CLK%7Cclp%3A2047675
>  LR
>
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/

Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 128, Issue 17

[Lawrence Rhodes via EV]

 It seems to me if there is an adapter available for purchase, that would 
qualify Tesla Superchargers. I bought a Tesla Tap to take advantage of Tesla 
destination EVSE. CCS drivers could buy this and have ac or dc charging. 
https://www.ebay.com/itm/35483570?_trkparms=amclksrc%3DITM%26aid%3D1110006%26algo%3DHOMESPLICE.SIM%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20201210111314%26meid%3Dc1ad667158b04eb79d33fda7ba7b28ee%26pid%3D101195%26rk%3D1%26rkt%3D12%26sd%3D354835758942%26itm%3D35483570%26pmt%3D1%26noa%3D0%26pg%3D2047675%26algv%3DSimplAMLv11WebTrimmedV3MskuWithLambda85KnnRecallV1V4V6ItemNrtInQueryAndCassiniVisualRankerAndBertRecall&_trksid=p2047675.c101195.m1851=cksum%3A35483570c1ad667158b04eb79d33fda7ba7b28ee%7Cenc%3AAQAIAAABQA2rugFlOq3qu1cLac%252F%252Fk6Vp0Oa0HaJIqoXKeIiOR%252BTUgsSvHaeyPxKYu6UqHqq7GaGyKVqHQnjeiiXcQpMGw2t3aB%252BssGfjtIWOBj8wExc7oYYP7xGMyQCrHDyDaSaWjB1CueI3A94n0yxXX5dx5gAU%252FT8Fo%252BhA4uBFp%252BOwvsmjMx9svf4%252B372fK2%252Fh1O6bxu3XXlcPikVngfjzVkKfN1lwJYO4DTP0c6sUG2XIHT8T1ZF%252FFEudHDvVkzR0g73ogbAWksoGWUYhm1zt%252F0G2dL4hl8V2wSq543sodOojwXnCYuf2c0C%252BJa530Edy9yIdIlvH1BMdtvgdl0yCCGVp1bdez1hD%252B03XGIvFqhUw2JkLeMVSMa7keDCDqXE%252Fwk3cmo52x29a4WsrQlzr%252Bcj8UmaXoa3muZU2BSJ5pn%252BqeS9u%7Campid%3APL_CLK%7Cclp%3A2047675
 LR
On Tuesday, June 20, 2023 at 01:01:47 PM PDT, ev-requ...@lists.evdl.org 
 wrote:  
 
 Send EV mailing list submissions to
    ev@lists.evdl.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
    http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
    ev-requ...@lists.evdl.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
    ev-ow...@lists.evdl.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of EV digest..."


 Also, please be careful not to append the entire digest to your reply. Many 
mail systems do this by default. Trim or delete the digest text from the bottom 
of your message, and quote only the parts to which you're replying.



Today's Topics:

  1. White House welcomes Tesla to take advantage of federal
      dollars for chargers (EV@TucsonEV)
  2. Re: White House welcomes Tesla to take advantage of federal
      dollars for chargers (Jay Summet)
  3. Electric H20 Ski Boats (that run more than 1/2 hour)
      (markehans...@gmail.com)


--

Message: 1
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2023 10:19:17 -0700
From: "EV@TucsonEV" 
To: "'Electric Vehicle Discussion List'" 
Subject: [EVDL] White House welcomes Tesla to take advantage of
    federal dollars for chargers
Message-ID: <01a201d9a39b$5b2c5270$1184f750$@TucsonEV.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/white-house-says-tesla-chargers-available-feder
al-dollars-long-they-include-ccs-2023-06-09/

 

I don't know how many of you caught this Reuters article, it seems that Tesla
Superchargers are great for America as long as they include the U.S. charging
standard connection, CCS, as well.

 

Looks like the CCS consortium still has a great deal of influence of political
influence.

 

Best regards,

 

Rush Dougherty

TucsonEV

www.TucsonEV.com  

 

 

 

 

-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 



--

Message: 2
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2023 14:34:06 -0400
From: Jay Summet 
To: ev@lists.evdl.org
Subject: Re: [EVDL] White House welcomes Tesla to take advantage of
    federal dollars for chargers
Message-ID: <271d63f1-b373-372e-1c05-dc3969ce1...@summet.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed



On 6/20/23 13:19, EV@TucsonEV via EV wrote:
> https://www.reuters.com/world/us/white-house-says-tesla-chargers-available-feder
> al-dollars-long-they-include-ccs-2023-06-09/
> 
>  
> 
> I don't know how many of you caught this Reuters article, it seems that Tesla
> Superchargers are great for America as long as they include the U.S. charging
> standard connection, CCS, as well.
> 
>  
> 
> Looks like the CCS consortium still has a great deal of influence of political
> influence.
> 
>  

My understanding is that the J1772 plug/standard and CSS standards are 
the "official" standards for the United States, developed by SAE with 
wide-spread industry participation, so I would expect them to be 
officially supported by any governmental subsidies, tax incentives, etc.

  https://www.sae.org/standards/content/j1772_201710/


It's fine for TESLA to market and promote a competing standard, but the 
government usually follows the guidance of the national academies, and 
large scale industry standards associations as opposed to those provided 
by a single company.

So I would expect the SAE and other national standards groups to have 
more influence than any single company, as they typically represent a 
broad swath of the