NACS - Why not specify port location?

[the golden eel]

Was thinking about this the other day.

Why wouldn't the NACS (North American Charging Standard) specify a port location as part of the standard? Either left rear or right front - or the opposite corners, I don't care which. Must work with X length charging cable, located X distance from the curb, etc.

I think those basic specifications can exist without causing every EV to look like a Tesla.

I'm just thinking this would make public charging much easier as more and more EVs are on the road in the coming years.

I'm talking more about looking forward, and future cars. Obviously not our current MMEs.

Sponsored

 

[ShaggySS]

because that would make too much sense

 

[HuntingPudel]

And those corners are vulnerable. Where the charge port is on the MME is a much better location from my stand point. ?‍?

 

[djstough]

Yes, and while we're at it, all gas fillers should be on the left rear.

 

[the golden eel]

And those corners are vulnerable. Where the charge port is on the MME is a much better location from my stand point. ?‍?

Vulnerable to what? I don't know if I understand.

 

[thekat03]

Vulnerable to what? I don't know if I understand.

Corners of cars are more likely to be hit, so it would cost a lot more to repair if there is a charging port in that area.

 

[the golden eel]

Ok, makes sense. The only reason I brough up corners in my original post was because that is where Tesla's ports are, and it's their standard that everyone is adopting.

I don't really care where the port is, but to me, logic dictates that a location should be standardized. Especially this early in the adoption of a standard.

 

[Jimrpa]

The correct thing to do would be not to specify a port location on the vehicle, but instead to specify that the vehicle must be designed such that, when parked in a parking stall, a charge cable of a certain length can be connected to the vehicle. Separately, when developing the spec for charge cables, add a “buffer” to the minimum required length.

 

[Engelbert]

Was thinking about this the other day.

Why wouldn't the NACS (North American Charging Standard) specify a port location as part of the standard?

[...]

I think those basic specifications can exist without causing every EV to look like a Tesla.

Keeping in mind that "NACS" is based on Tesla's own in-house standard --net of some mostly-invisible changes and a renaming to retrain the public into thinking it, not CCS, was the real standard all along -- expanding it to standardize things like port locations quite possibly would result in a Tesla-heavy result.

Tesla implemented multiple de facto pseudo-"standards" with their cars via repeated design choices rather than NACS-tied engineering specs, and I'm glad they were often ignored by other manufacturers. Port location is one of them.

Where should ports be located if standardized? The preponderance of Tesla vehicles already on the road would make it somewhat bizarre to standardize charging anywhere except on the side of the car's butt. For various reasons I would prefer not to have the charge port located anywhere along the rear foot-and-a-half of the length of the vehicle. But it's hard for me to imagine a standardized port location going anywhere else at this point, so I'm glad it isn't standardized.

 

[bbulkow]

Keeping in mind that "NACS" is based on Tesla's own in-house standard --net of some mostly-invisible changes and a renaming to retrain the public into thinking it, not CCS, was the real standard all along -- expanding it to standardize things like port locations quite possibly would result in a Tesla-heavy result.

Tesla implemented multiple de facto pseudo-"standards" with their cars via repeated design choices rather than NACS-tied engineering specs, and I'm glad they were often ignored by other manufacturers. Port location is one of them.

Where should ports be located if standardized? The preponderance of Tesla vehicles already on the road would make it somewhat bizarre to standardize charging anywhere except on the side of the car's butt. For various reasons I would prefer not to have the charge port located anywhere along the rear foot-and-a-half of the length of the vehicle. But it's hard for me to imagine a standardized port location going anywhere else at this point, so I'm glad it isn't standardized.

Side butt, flank, yeah? Not butt-butt?

Otherwise trailers and bike carriers and pull through users are inconvenienced?

The v4 chargers have slightly longer cables, right? All this is parking space hassle becomes a thing of the past in ... 20 years... When the last of the v3 chargers are retired?

 

[Sikkun]

The v4 chargers have slightly longer cables, right? All this is parking space hassle becomes a thing of the past in ... 20 years... When the last of the v3 chargers are retired?

A2Z is going to solve the issue for me much sooner than that.

 

[EasyPass]

"We love Standards! That's why we have so many." -- Anonymous

 

[kltye]

CCS stations have little to no cable reach issues. The J3400 is just the handle (at least to a regular consumer), so no reason to make everything same-y, again.

 

[jgcom]

Anything that defines whether parking is nose first or tail first will reawaken ancient arguments. Then somebody will bring up how a toilet-paper roll should be oriented.

 

[Snakebitten]

Yes, and while we're at it, all gas fillers should be on the left rear.

The fuel tank is up front on a certain number of really cool cars. You know, the mid-engine and rear engine cars?

The fuel filler tube on mine is on the passenger side, and around the same distance behind the front wheel as the Mach-E charge port is.

(not my car)

Sponsored