[Poll] Should Porsche join the NACS network?

[bsclywilly]

There’s several lengthy threads on here discussing Ford, GM, and other North American industry support for NACS going forward.

Let’s have a simple poll showing where Taycan owners stand on the issue. Are you for more charging options and reliability of Tesla’s SC network and would like a DCFC adapter and/or native NACS port in the future? Are you fine with the CCS network and want to stick it to Musk? Or are you undecided?

Sponsored

 

[DerekS]

We own cars with both connectors in our home.
Tesla's NACS is better thought out in every way.

- It's one connector for both DC and AC
- It's easier to plug in, and doesn't require lining up a triangular plug
- The cables are lighter weight and feel more like gas pump hoses

 

[ciaranob]

Not a Musk fan in any way, shape or form TBH but also very much in favor of options in the EV space - having optional access to the Tesla charging network is just a no brainer to me.

 

[TXSchnee]

I think the US government needs to mandate a standard, as the EU did, so we don’t end up with constantly changing “standards”. I have honestly never used a Tesla Supercharger, never even driven a Tesla, so I have no opinion on the actual physical advantages of NACS.

 

[gtm]

This is a no-brainer. Access and an adapter. If Porsche doesn't want to build the NACS port into their cars and restricts "free" (included) charging to EA that's fine but please give me the option to use the Supercharger network. Access to the Tesla network would remove any anxiety from a road trip and possibly prompt the CCS networks to improve their reliability. A big benefit for Porsche's customers.

 

[mutanthands]

I'm so glad the EU / UK standardised EV ports.

 

[satchurator]

Nitpick on the original thread title: NACS isn't a network.
Porsche probably would not embrace NACS unless they can also negotiate access to the Supercharger network.
A future Taycan model year could leverage the two ports to have CCS (which includes J-1772) on one side and NACS on the other. The forthcoming Macan EV apparently only has a single port though. What to do there? Perhaps it would be characteristic of Porsche to offer the option. So you'd choose either CCS or NACS.

 

[bsclywilly]

Nitpick on the original thread title: NACS isn't a network.
Porsche probably would not embrace NACS unless they can also negotiate access to the Supercharger network.
A future Taycan model year could leverage the two ports to have CCS (which includes J-1772) on one side and NACS on the other. The forthcoming Macan EV apparently only has a single port though. What to do there? Perhaps it would be characteristic of Porsche to offer the option. So you'd choose either CCS or NACS.

I was about to title it “… NACS coalition” but thought that might be controversial, lol. I meant NACS and Supercharger networks as one in the same, but I get your point.

I for one would be happy with just an adapter and access to the SC network. CCS, or at least the companies that support it, will still have their place (in the dark corners of parking lots) and location and pricing will give consumers some differentiation. I’d pay more for charging in prime locations and offering more services than just electrons. The type of plug matters less to me but I’d still factor it in to my decision on my next purchase depending on where I desire to charge most frequently.

 

[irrelevant]

My concern is the Tesla Superchargers won't charge the Taycan at its peak rate. With GM and Ford joining forces with Tesla, it's likely there will be less investment in the CCS standard in the future, and we'll be left with an inferior charging system.

Yes, it's reliable. Why can't we have reliable, and 270 KW? My experience using the Superchargers with a Model S required quite a long time to charge, relative to what I've seen with our e-tron and Taycan.

 

[daveo4EV]

My concern is the Tesla Superchargers won't charge the Taycan at its peak rate. With GM and Ford joining forces with Tesla, it's likely there will be less investment in the CCS standard in the future, and we'll be left with an inferior charging system.

Yes, it's reliable. Why can't we have reliable, and 270 KW? My experience using the Superchargers with a Model S required quite a long time to charge, relative to what I've seen with our e-tron and Taycan.

nothing prevents anyone from running a 350 kW CCS session over an NACS connector - nothing - zero - zip - nilch - nadda - in fact it's probably already "happening" and no one notices or cares…

what is unclear about "moving" to NACS - no one has specified if we are simply "upgrading" the connector away from CCS1 but keeping the protocol, or does NACS "require" you also move to Tesla Supercharger protocol…

I believe Ford/GM are just moving to the connector, and they will continue to run CCS even at Superchargers - CCS as a charging protocol can be defined to be connector agnostic (and it is in fact what Tesla is currently doing in Europe and North America w/MagicDock - running CCS charging protocol over an NACS cable/connector) - certainly Ford/GM cars will continue to support CCS to be compatible with EVGo/EA/chargepoint and others…and in europe…

I'm all for moving to the "connector" - CCS1 is crap - I'm less enthused about Supercharger as an "exclusive" protocol - I wouldn't mind it supporting both...

I do not forsee CCS dying as a charging standard - I forsee the CCS standard being amdended to also include a NACS connector/cable as a support alternative to CCS1 cable/connector…

that in my opinion is the most likley outcome...

as far as being "slow" the Model S has a much worse charging curve than Taycan for taper - and V3/V4 superchargers can support 250 kW charge rate - now Porsche would have to provide a 400V/250 kW charging option /(vs. the current 400V/150 kW) but that is technically feasible

Tesla has also already announced V4 supercharging supports 1000V for future standards - so I don't see us being locked in…

we shoudl all be in favor of ditching the CCS1 connector - it's horrible - once we have the right connector honestly it doens't matter what charging protocol is run - that's a "software" problem and both the vehicle's and the charging vendors can evolved on that relatively quickly.

right now the CCS1 connect is a core contributor (not sole, but major) to the unreliability of the North American CCS charging network - and that needs to change. It also sucks ergonomically so this is an excellent opportunity to pivot to a recognized better physical design.

this poll is interesting but I don't think your're voting for what you think you're voting for

• move the new NACS connector yeah probably
• move to NACS protocol - probably not
• run CCS over NACS - I don't care - yeah sure
• access superchargers w/NACS port with no adapter - sure
  • do I care if it's Supercharger or CCS protocol - probably not
• have NACS connectors on CCS chargters - no harm as long as we still have CCS1 plugs/cables
• adpater for both of these? yes please!!!

"moving to NACS" is very unclear - and I don't think it's a wholesale move - it certainly is not a move away from J-1772 AC charging - which technically doesn't support NACS as a connector/cable - but already works and has worked for 10+ years (Tesla's all use J-1772 over the NACS connector)

this is far too technical for a "poll" and we don' tyet know what it "means" to move to NACS - if it's just a physical swap of the awful CCS1 connector/cable for a NACS connector and cable, but unchanges otherwise - there shoudl be 100% agreement

I don't understand you if you like the current status quo with physical CCS1 connector - there is nothing good about it.

 

[daveo4EV]

example we've all seen this connector:

Cat-5E connector - 8 wires - 4 twisted pairs - but it's also Cat-6e, Cat-7 and Cat-8

it's both a physical standard and an electrical/signaling standard - it's all in how you use it.

this _SAME_ connector is either 1 MB, 10 mB, 100 mb, 1000 mB, 10,000 mb depending on the signaling protocol used....

if you move away from digital - the same connector provide 4 separate analog old style phone lines across these same 8 wires and same connector

I've also seen custom applications of HDMI over Cat5, and other "audio-video" standards that use Cat5 conenctors and wires, but not "as ethernet" or networking…

you need to separate the connector from the electrical standard/protocol that is using the 8 wires provided by a Cat-5e connector and jack…you can actually do most anything across those 8-wires (including power over ethernet to power devices & provide data) - it's all in how you use the 8 wires - the wire's themselves do NOT dictate how they are used…

CCS1 is a physical connector that provides: 2 high voltage connectors, 2 low voltage communications connectors, and 1 electrical ground

NACS is a physical connector that provides: 2 high voltage connectors, 2 low voltage communication connectors, and 1 electrical ground

from an electrical signaling point of view they are _IDENTICAL_

the charging/communication protocol used all depends on what is on both ends of this connector when the vehicle is plugged into the charger…

I can run any 5 wire charging standard across NACS and CCS1 and J-1772…

I don't see CCS going away - I see us caring about it a lot less once we have access to both Superchargers (via CCS support from Tesla and an Adapter or native NACS port) - and continue to use CCS when not using Tesla to charge.

but it will be done with a better physical plug that is easier to handle and less prone to breaking.

 

[bsclywilly]

what is unclear about "moving" to NACS - no one has specified if we are simply "upgrading" the connector away from CCS1 but keeping the protocol, or does NACS "require" you also move to Tesla Supercharger protocol…

I believe Ford/GM are just moving to the connector, and they will continue to run CCS even at Superchargers - CCS as a charging protocol can be defined to be connector agnostic (and it is in fact what Tesla is currently doing in Europe and North America w/MagicDock - running CCS charging protocol over an NACS cable/connector) - certainly Ford/GM cars will continue to support CCS to be compatible with EVGo/EA/chargepoint and others…and in europe…

Regarding protocols, here’s an excerpt from CharIN who has/is working with NACS and CCS standardization.

CharIN is pleased that NACS is using DIN 70121 and ISO 15118 protocols based on power line communication (PLC) enabling CCS functionality. These protocols were created for CCS but are versatile communication standards that could help build bridges across all charging standards in North America.

https://www.charin.global/news/char...so-supports-the-standardization-of-tesla-nacs

 

[daveo4EV]

Regarding protocols, here’s an excerpt from CharIN who has/is working with NACS and CCS standardization.

https://www.charin.global/news/char...so-supports-the-standardization-of-tesla-nacs

this tells me we're going to be running CCS over an improved less fragile connector NACS - but fundementially non-Tesla vehicle's will "talk" CCS to chargers (including Tesla superchargers)

• Tesla vehicles will "talk" Supercharger to a Supercharger
• Tesla vehicle's will 'talk" CCS to all other chargers via CCS/NACS adatper (or native NACS connector/cable)
• non-Tesla vehicles will "talk" CCS to a Tesla Supercharger
• non-Tesla vehicles will "talk" CCS to all other charging stations…

the only thing we're doing is transitioning "away" from CCS1 as a flawed/fragile physical connector…in favor of a better connector with proven track record for greater reliability and ergonomics.

 

[irrelevant]

Thanks for the detailed response. My reservation is with being forced to migrate to lower performance Tesla Superchargers as the CCS network withers away from lack of investment. I didn't buy a Taycan to charge at a maximum rate of 150 KW...half that if someone else is plugged into the same dispenser.

If it truly ends up just being a plug issue, and the connector will actually handle higher current, then it may not be as big an issue...though we may find ourselves stuck with using adapters over the long run.

 

[Scandinavian]

Thanks for the detailed response. My reservation is with being forced to migrate to lower performance Tesla Superchargers as the CCS network withers away from lack of investment. I didn't buy a Taycan to charge at a maximum rate of 150 KW...half that if someone else is plugged into the same dispenser.

If it truly ends up just being a plug issue, and the connector will actually handle higher current, then it may not be as big an issue...though we may find ourselves stuck with using adapters over the long run.

It is correct that you will need a bit longer to charge from say 10 to 80%, using a Tesla station here in Europe. But the time difference may be from 22 minutes to 28 to 30 minutes. I have used the CCS2 Tesla chargers here many times. The Tesla chargers starts slower , below 150 kW, but stays at that level for a much longer time. It does not taper off so quickly. Just time to enjoy a larger cup of coffee!

You see the difference on a stopwatch, yes, but in real life driving on a long trip, the difference is minimal.

And the Tesla chargers are much more reliable and also in abundance. Rather than say 6-8 Ionity chargers, you may see 28 to 40 Tesla SuC. Much higher probability that there is congestion and wait times at Ionity!

And don’t start me on crappy Total and Shell chargers that seldom work!

Sponsored