NACS Extension Cable Coming From Tesla

[GrantK]

There is no perfect solution here until the full network is refreshed. This is obviously a stopgap measure.

I think the only real issue might be cost. The cable can do some combination of measuring it‘s own temperature and intercepting signals between the car and charger to manage things, and of course the bits to do that cost money.

My options in order of preference would be:

1. Stop at a charger with a long enough cable
2. Stop at a location with enough stalls open that I can park in the “wrong” bay while charging
3. Use an extension and accept a slower speed

In reality, most of my charge cycle is spent well below 100KW (standard range battery) so really that makes no difference and when I buy my next car I’ll prioritize having a NACS port in the “right“ place.

Sponsored

 

[ChehRob]

What's the story on the entire auto industry worldwide not having done some standards on this? Was it deliberate, or just a matter of bumbling? The needed engineering seems obvious in retrospect.

 

[creedda]

I’ve talked with them twice last month about this cable. They started development on it a little over a year ago and expect to have it ready to ship in about two months. As others have said it does not look anything like the photo they show but they are very excited about the release of this product. They were going to start a pre-order however they did that with their NACS adapter and it was a mess. Way too many orders to fill right away and customers were very upset they didn’t get the product when promised. Those adapters are available now and mine shipped today should have it by the end of next week. Excited to try it out. I’ll also be ordering this extension cable when it’s available to try out.

Something I would be interested in knowing about this product is if it can double as an extension for level 2 charging. With NACS using the same pins for DC and AC charging this could be a very versatile cable for multiple charging situations.

They seem pretty reputable with their nacs to CCS and CCS to NACS adapters.

I’m sure we will get some reviews on State of Charge and through other channels when it’s ready.

 

[dbsb3233]

What's the story on the entire auto industry worldwide not having done some standards on this? Was it deliberate, or just a matter of bumbling? The needed engineering seems obvious in retrospect.

Not sure about other continents (even after a century, electrical plugs vary wildly around the globe), but in North America it was more of a Tesla issue. They used their own proprietary connector and DCFC network, designed only for their own cars. It wasn't until after the rest of the industry had already run with an open standard (CCS1) that Tesla finally said "Oh, now you can use ours". Thus why we have the conflict. CCS chargers are universal with long cords to reach. Tesla chargers aren't (until V4s become common). With $billions in equipment already in the ground, it'll take many years to justify replacing it. So for CCS cars wanting to charge at SCs, we're stuck with dealing with adapters and too-short cords for a while. Or not being able to use them at all because it's old V2 equipment.

 

[kdonnel]

What's the story on the entire auto industry worldwide not having done some standards on this? Was it deliberate, or just a matter of bumbling? The needed engineering seems obvious in retrospect.

I don't think the auto industry ever standardized on fuel filler placement either and they have had a lot longer to create that standard and never did.

 

[markw314]

I imagine that when Ford and other manufacturers start building NACS into the vehicles, they will also reposition the ports to comply with Elon's wishes.

 

[MacherAWD]

What's the story on the entire auto industry worldwide not having done some standards on this? Was it deliberate, or just a matter of bumbling? The needed engineering seems obvious in retrospect.

Our politicians are too old and out of touch to discuss modern issues. Charging, self driving, AI, Internet security, you would think they would be discussing this, but instead we are rehashing issues from 100 years ago.

 

[ChehRob]

SAE should have spoken up ten years ago, about the time that Tesla was introducing high amperage DC charging. Government shouldn't have to do everything. (snarky aside, look at the Boeing mess, maybe government does!)

 

[SpaceEVDriver]

What's the story on the entire auto industry worldwide not having done some standards on this? Was it deliberate, or just a matter of bumbling? The needed engineering seems obvious in retrospect.

SAE-J1772 was standardized in 2001. This was for AC power.
CCS1 accumulated onto J1772 in ~2011. This added DC power.
Roughly: the European (and in most countries world-wide) versions were proposed in 2009 and adopted in 2013.

In 2012, Tesla decided to do their own thing, instead of joining a standards body and helping create a better standard. They likely did this in part to avoid allowing their charging network to be usable by non-T vehicles.

The landscape is changing. Again.

 

[azerik]

Chat GPT said it could be done. But that might be OpenAI just firing back at Musk because of his case against them.

 

[mkhuffman]

Our politicians are too old and out of touch to discuss modern issues. Charging, self driving, AI, Internet security, you would think they would be discussing this, but instead we are rehashing issues from 100 years ago.

Therefore they should keep their noses out of the free market and let us decide what we want. But they don't, and they screw up just about everything they try to "fix".

I imagine that when Ford and other manufacturers start building NACS into the vehicles, they will also reposition the ports to comply with Elon's wishes.

I doubt that. Rivian didn't with the R2 or R3, and both have a NACS port.

By the way, nobody can agree on the best place to put the port. Some want it in the front, others the rear. Some passenger side, some driver side. Manufacturers should be free to decide the best placement of the charging port, and the buyers can decide if we want it or not.

And of course Rivian put it in the right rear position. Why? RJ says it is less expensive to put it there. And they definitely need to make their vehicles as cheaply as possible or they will not survive as a company.

 

[dbsb3233]

I imagine that when Ford and other manufacturers start building NACS into the vehicles, they will also reposition the ports to comply with Elon's wishes.

Farley loosely hinted at that for future Ford vehicles with native J3400 (NACS). But the Rivian R2 has the port in the right-rear (unless they change it for the 2026 launch). So still hit & miss.

The faster Tesla can upgrade stations to put in V4s (centered), the better, of course. But that's sure to be hit & miss for years as well. Just like useless (for us) V2 stations are hit & miss.

 

[A2ZEV]

I agree with others, there is no way that cord would allow full DCFC. Let me explain my thoughts so it might help you and others.

Red flag #1: The website states that cable itself has a temperature sensor and will disconnect the power if it gets too hot. How can it do that? I guess they could put a micro controller (computer chip) to act as a "man in the middle" to tell the charger to stop the current flow. I highly doubt they did that. And that NACS "socket" is not large enough to house an appropriately sized relay to safely connect/disconnect a 300-400Amp DC load from a super charger.

Red flag #2. the whole product description reeks of being generated by AI. Consider the last paragraph:

In summary, the A2Z EV NACS DC extension cord offers a balanced blend of safety and compatibility. The incorporation of temperature monitoring, active locking mechanisms, and temperature sensor switches assures users of a secure charging experience. Our unwavering commitment to transparency and accuracy underscores our dedication to ensuring the safety and trust of our users when utilizing our extension cords for their electric vehicle charging needs.​

Google Gemini AI nearly always ends it's answers to me with "in summary" just like the above. If they are so transparent, why don't they publish what the AWG of the cable is? They can claim all day it supports 1000V, but without a current rating or AWG posted, that's meaningless.

For what it's worth, I am an electrical engineer. I may not have high voltage AC or DC expertise, but conductor current requirements are fairly straightforward. Max Tesla model 3 charge rate: 170kiloWatts. Telsa 3 battery pack voltage = 350volts. Power = Volts * Current (amp) . 170kW = 350V * 485amps. You better have a liquid cooling and something like 4/0 AWG or larger copper conductor (cable) for that. Anything larger that 4/0 is going to start to behave like a rigid pole instead of cable you can coil up.

This product looks suited to be a Level 2 charger extension cord only. Level 2 chargers means 11.5kW = 240V * 48Amps. The picture doesn't give the scale, but it looks roughly similar diameter to my RV 240v, 50Amp AC extension cord.

Hello there,

***Not an electrical engineer***
I am answering based on the information provided by my team (engineer and management)

Regarding your “red flag” #1 :
We are incorporating the NACS to CCS1 locking mechanism to the female side of the extension cord. A switch with a slider lock. The switch would break the proximity if the lock is not engaged.

Unlocked = no charge
Locked = charge
Unlock while charging = breaking proximity with resistors = instant stop

The temperature sensors can be incorporated into the female side or/and male side of the extension cord. When triggered, the temperature sensor switch in the circuit would trigger in resistor in line with the proximity, interrupting the charging process.

We have invested in some heavy equipments allowing us to test our products in house. We are able to study/test temperature rise by exposing them to over 700A.

We are maybe too much transparent about the development of our products, we are giving a lot of technical data and explaining how things work which can be a disadvantage since our competitors are already copying us, especially for the NACS to CCS1 adapter. Ctrl-C - Ctrl-V

We will not release the extension cord in a hurry because the market needs it. The NACS to CCS1 adapter has been developed for over a year in a half. We started in September 2022, had a functional (in-house tested) prototype the 9th of December 2022. Since then, we had the chance the revamp the adapter multiple times in order to ensure safety, adhere to OEMs standards that were imposed to us and etc.
The extension is still in testing, ensuring it is 110% safe. It will not be released until then. It is currently in the hands of the appropriate people/organizations.
We will never rush to release a product, never.

The rest of the specifications will be released as we near an official release.

The picture of the product does not represent the actual product.

Safety is our absolute top priority.

Thank you.

 

[Billyk24]

Hello there,

***Not an electrical engineer***
I am answering based on the information provided by my team (engineer and management)

Regarding your “red flag” #1 :
We are incorporating the NACS to CCS1 locking mechanism to the female side of the extension cord. A switch with a slider lock. The switch would break the proximity if the lock is not engaged.

Unlocked = no charge
Locked = charge
Unlock while charging = breaking proximity with resistors = instant stop

The temperature sensors can be incorporated into the female side or/and male side of the extension cord. When triggered, the temperature sensor switch in the circuit would trigger in resistor in line with the proximity, interrupting the charging process.

We have invested in some heavy equipments allowing us to test our products in house. We are able to study/test temperature rise by exposing them to over 700A.

We are maybe too much transparent about the development of our products, we are giving a lot of technical data and explaining how things work which can be a disadvantage since our competitors are already copying us, especially for the NACS to CCS1 adapter. Ctrl-C - Ctrl-V

We will not release the extension cord in a hurry because the market needs it. The NACS to CCS1 adapter has been developed for over a year in a half. We started in September 2022, had a functional (in-house tested) prototype the 9th of December 2022. Since then, we had the chance the revamp the adapter multiple times in order to ensure safety, adhere to OEMs standards that were imposed to us and etc.
The extension is still in testing, ensuring it is 110% safe. It will not be released until then. It is currently in the hands of the appropriate people/organizations.
We will never rush to release a product, never.

The rest of the specifications will be released as we near an official release.

The picture of the product does not represent the actual product.

Safety is our absolute top priority.

Thank you.

Thank you for the latest update. Some of us have placed orders for your adaptor and eagerly await shipment of the product.

 

[SpaceEVDriver]

Even if there's a small slider/switch that is designed to break the CCS1 communications proximity contact, the size of the DC cables has to be massive. And I mean that literally.

Without active cooling, you're looking at something between about 5-10 kg/meter just for the DC portion of the extension, and that doesn't include the connectors. All of that weight will be hanging off the car connector, not off the charger connector. I cannot imaging my Mustang's charge port lasting very long with a 25-pound weight hanging off it.

Sponsored