Starting to feel like the writing is on the wall for what the winner will be.Rivian now on the NACS bandwagon.
RIVIAN SIGNS AGREEMENT WITH TESLA TO EXPAND CHARGING ACCESS AND ACCELERATE EV ADOPTION - Rivian Stories
Today Rivian announced that in 2024 Rivian drivers will have access to more than 12,000 Tesla Superchargers across the US and Canada - a monumental step in expanding charging access and driving EV adoption. As part of the agreement, Rivian will also adopt the North American Charging Standard...stories.rivian.com
Should Scout adopt the NACS (Tesla) charging system
- Thread starter JohnBills
- Start date
-
From all of us at Scout Motors, welcome to the Scout Community! We created this community to provide Scout vehicle owners, enthusiasts, and curiosity seekers with a place to engage in discussion, suggestions, stories, and connections. Supportive communities are sometimes hard to find, but we're determined to turn this into one.
Additionally, Scout Motors wants to hear your feedback and speak directly to the rabid community of owners as unique as America. We'll use the Scout Community to deliver news and information on events and launch updates directly to the group. Although the start of production is anticipated in 2026, many new developments and milestones will occur in the interim. We plan to share them with you on this site and look for your feedback and suggestions.
How will the Scout Community be run? Think of it this way: this place is your favorite local hangout. We want you to enjoy the atmosphere, talk to people who share similar interests, request and receive advice, and generally have an enjoyable time. The Scout Community should be a highlight of your day. We want you to tell stories, share photos, spread your knowledge, and tell us how Scout can deliver great products and experiences. Along the way, Scout Motors will share our journey to production with you.
Scout is all about respect. We respect our heritage. We respect the land and outdoors. We respect each other. Every person should feel safe, included, and welcomed in the Scout Community. Being kind and courteous to the other forum members is non-negotiable. Friendly debates are welcomed and often produce great outcomes, but we don't want things to get too rowdy. Please take a moment to consider what you post, especially if you think it may insult others. We'll do our best to encourage friendly discourse and to keep the discussions flowing.
So, welcome to the Scout Community! We encourage you to check back regularly as we plan to engage our members, share teasers, and participate in discussions. The world needs Scouts™. Let's get going.
We are Scout Motors.
Hyundai Considers Joining Tesla’s EV Charging Network
Hyundai plans to spend $28 billion over the next decade to speed up its electrification efforts and is considering adopting Tesla’s charging network.
As enlightening as all the posts here are, it reminds me of the earliest days of the automobile around the turn of the 19th-20th centuries. Everyone had their own ideas and it took some 40 years to sort it all out with some semblance of standards. Are we going to take another 40 years to settle whose charger nozzle is best? I don't think we have the time. If the federal government can specify the size of the filler tube opening and the size of the pump's nozzle, they can surely specify a charger plug standard. Sure, have a commission to study it, but give them no more than 6 months to listen to all the player's needs and make a choice. But it might just be wise to note that Europe has already done the deed, and the manufacturers (most are selling internationally anyway) know how to match that requirement, let's just shortcut the game and accept the European standard. (I have a hunch they are pretty smart folks over there that made the choice.)
AMEN!!! I don't like bringing government and the hard hand of regulation into this, but the EU leads the way. North America needs a single standard, adapters can be made or parts can be swapped for those who don't fit. Rather than a Congressional Commission studying this (while soliciting lobbyist's dollars) it is time for Underwriters Laboratories (both UL and cUL and maybe include IEC) to set a standard for model year 25 and beyond. Today's marketplace is truly worldwide.
I'll pile on to Rustic_father's early post. Absolutely have the Tesla plug and have the computer be able to seemlessly communicate with the supercharger. Because this is a Scout, and we want to be able to have the most options, please do include both plugs and make the computer able to easily work with CCS chargers as well. This means that Scout owners will have the best overall charging experience and will have less range anxiety.
Overall, I think Tesla is winning here and would be happy with just their interface if I had to pick.
Overall, I think Tesla is winning here and would be happy with just their interface if I had to pick.
Haven't paid attention to this since the initial wave of announcements, but I recently watched this video which I thought was very informative:
It's Alex on Auto's deep dive into NACS, released Aug 22. As I recall, he's an engineer and his videos tend to be more information-based than "gee when I press the pedal this car goes really fast" type.
A few things I learned:
- The actual standard automakers are adopting is SAE J 2400 NAX, which will be better defined than NACS to increase the chance of interoperability.
- NAX/NACS uses CCS signaling even though it uses the Tesla connector.
- Only version 3 superchargers or better support CCS signaling.
- Recent Teslas support both CCS signaling and their original CHAdeMO-based proprietary signaling, which is required to use the entire Supercharger network.
- Carmakers will only support CCS signaling, which means that even if Tesla does allow access to their network (and doesn't revoke it on a whim), they still won't work on a big part of it.
So, does this actually provide any benefit? I think any minor benefit (smaller connector) will be overshadowed be the decade or more of chaos that is going to ensue. When you get your NACS car, you will always need an adapter to plug into the network you can always use (EA/etc) and no adapter to plug into the network that you may-or-may-not be able to use (Tesla). If they just stayed the course there would have been no change in capability, but it would have been much more clear to the consumer. EA/etc = no adapter. Supercharger network = adapter or use their latest v4 stuff which has the adapter built-in.
The way I see it, the big wins for Tesla here are:
1) Sowing major confusion in the enemy camp for years to come (both manufacturers and especially consumers),
2) Setting up consumers to be even more disappointed with the charging of non-teslas (if you thought the bulky CCS connector was bad, what about the NACS/CCS-adapter combination that everyone will now be using? And being sold on the supercharger network and not really getting it),
3) Lower their cost to get federal money for build-out of their network, as they no longer need to support the CCS connector.
4) Increase the costs to EA/etc as they will now need to provide both types of connectors moving forward.
5) Possible slight increase in cost to make non-teslas as the tesla connector has more complicated hardware on the car side.
Unfortunately, it looks like that ship has sailed and things will be getting more confusing and more of a hassle for non-tesla buyers.
It's Alex on Auto's deep dive into NACS, released Aug 22. As I recall, he's an engineer and his videos tend to be more information-based than "gee when I press the pedal this car goes really fast" type.
A few things I learned:
- The actual standard automakers are adopting is SAE J 2400 NAX, which will be better defined than NACS to increase the chance of interoperability.
- NAX/NACS uses CCS signaling even though it uses the Tesla connector.
- Only version 3 superchargers or better support CCS signaling.
- Recent Teslas support both CCS signaling and their original CHAdeMO-based proprietary signaling, which is required to use the entire Supercharger network.
- Carmakers will only support CCS signaling, which means that even if Tesla does allow access to their network (and doesn't revoke it on a whim), they still won't work on a big part of it.
So, does this actually provide any benefit? I think any minor benefit (smaller connector) will be overshadowed be the decade or more of chaos that is going to ensue. When you get your NACS car, you will always need an adapter to plug into the network you can always use (EA/etc) and no adapter to plug into the network that you may-or-may-not be able to use (Tesla). If they just stayed the course there would have been no change in capability, but it would have been much more clear to the consumer. EA/etc = no adapter. Supercharger network = adapter or use their latest v4 stuff which has the adapter built-in.
The way I see it, the big wins for Tesla here are:
1) Sowing major confusion in the enemy camp for years to come (both manufacturers and especially consumers),
2) Setting up consumers to be even more disappointed with the charging of non-teslas (if you thought the bulky CCS connector was bad, what about the NACS/CCS-adapter combination that everyone will now be using? And being sold on the supercharger network and not really getting it),
3) Lower their cost to get federal money for build-out of their network, as they no longer need to support the CCS connector.
4) Increase the costs to EA/etc as they will now need to provide both types of connectors moving forward.
5) Possible slight increase in cost to make non-teslas as the tesla connector has more complicated hardware on the car side.
Unfortunately, it looks like that ship has sailed and things will be getting more confusing and more of a hassle for non-tesla buyers.
BMW too
apple.news
BMW Group to adopt NACS across its EV brands, enabling Tesla Supercharger access — Electrek
BMW Group is the latest legacy automaker to confirm it will adopt the North American Charging Standard (NACS), delivering EV drivers in the US and Canada access to Tesla’s Supercharger network.
At this point if Scout DOESN'T go with NACS I will have serious reservations about buying one. NACS has been determined by the industry as being THE charging standard going forward so Scout would do well to adopt it before launching its first vehicles.
VW is notable for being one of the few automakers yet to adopt NACS so I have concerns about Scout adopting it. Hopefully the people at Scout will ease those concerns with an announcement soon about adopting the standard.
VW is notable for being one of the few automakers yet to adopt NACS so I have concerns about Scout adopting it. Hopefully the people at Scout will ease those concerns with an announcement soon about adopting the standard.
I've said it before in perhaps another thread. Now that the USA has had time to experience and evaluate the several charger styles, it is time for there to be a nation-wide (better = continental) mandate established by some independent testing agency. I'm thinking it might best be done by SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers) or similar, then incorporated into the FMVSS. I see this as essentially the same as the current mandate on gas pump nozzle diameter, and the current system's idiocy of having to search for a charger with the right plug to fil.
Yes, one standard is necessary. Just imagine if you had to search the gas stations to find the one that had nozzles which fit your make of car. There would be riots in the streets. (/s) Someone in government or industry solved that issue long ago, the same someone should look to SAE to make a choice and mandate it just like the EU did.
There HAS been an SAE connector standard for over a decade now, it's called J1772/CCS Type 1 and all electric vehicles except Tesla (and the anicent Nissan Leaf) have been using it as THE charging connector. Unfortunately Tesla stubbornly refused to adopt it because of weak regulations in the United States (the EU in contrast forced Tesla to adopt the related Type 2 standard in Europe many years ago). The connector design for J1772/CCS Type 1 is admittedly clunky whereas the Tesla connector (now known as NACS) is a lot more elegant. Both form factors (J1772/CCS & NACS) however use the same exact communication protocols so it's really only a form factor discussion at this point - litterally just differently shaped plugs.
Lacking any regulatory guidance the industry has now chosen to go with the more elegantly-designed NACS connector shape which is good. Had they not all suddenly all decided to switch to NACS this year Tesla would have likely eventually had to move over to J1772/CCS Type 1 in North America just as they had to standardize around the European Type 2 connector over there. Up until this spring that's exactly what it looked like Tesla was starting to do. That's all moot now, the industry has chosen NACS and Scout would be well advised to join that movement.
All of this is true. But, after lots of experience with both the NACS and J1772, the NACS is a better design. It’s simpler. It’s easer to plug in especially in the dark. It’s less prone to water intrusion and corrosion. It doesn’t have to flimsy release lever. Etc etc.
From my understanding of electronics its not the conector that dictate bi-directional charging but the capability of the circuity on each side....
per several articles like this one it appears that Tesla's connector is on its way of becoming a industry standard
https://cleantechnica.com/2023/08/19/tesla-plans-to-adopt-bi-directional-charging-by-2025/
the current carrying capability of Tesla's connector current capability exceeds 60amps ample for most EV and given the existing Tesla Charging network being the largest out there and expanding daily ... I think it's wise choice
Yes you are correct. At the moment the NACS connector does not support bi-directional charging but yes support should be coming soon.
Things (including my own views!) have changed significantly since I wrote that post!
Stoked to hear it! Glad we’ll have access to the largest charging network from the start!
Similar threads
