Tesla's charging network No longer a selling point?

[kdryden99]

So Tesla seems open to the idea of sharing their network.
https://news.google.com/articles/CA...qoP5CjDpz-ACMJ_YtAU?hl=en-CA&gl=CA&ceid=CA:en

Sponsored

 

[silverelan]

So Tesla seems open to the idea of sharing their network.
https://news.google.com/articles/CAIiEHL-cQdhp5OwRtX7Fd3R5J0qGQgEKhAIACoHCAowqoP5CjDpz-ACMJ_YtAU?hl=en-CA&gl=CA&ceid=CA:en

Tesla has been saying that for years. There must be a poison pill or something because other manufacturers have so far balked at going the Supercharger route.

Maybe the idea of charging being controlled by a competitor is a bridge too far?

 

[Garbone]

Return on investment. Co worker is retiring just to start his own company setting up a charging network. In a few years being only able to sell to one make when everyone else does not will be bad for business.

 

[JamieGeek]

Its usually always about $$ even Musk said if they can come up with an agreement about sharing costs.

 

[kdryden99]

Even if it does cost a bit more why not? If it means that our charging network just doubled in size overnight its still cheaper then gas so id be for it. We might be limited to the number of stalls available like in Europe but its better than what we have currently have. Everyone agrees more is better.

 

[DBC]

Hard to see this happening. Seems like in a relatively short period of time the Supercharger network has gone from being number one to number two. That's not to say the Tesla network doesn't have some advantages. It does, reliability being one. It's just that those remaining advantages are disappearing and the number of charge stations and the number of higher power charge stations is tilting away from it. In any event the supercharger network is not the marketing advantage it once was. We can all be thankful to VW executives for being criminals.

This doesn't mean Tesla owners are disadvantaged. Adapters will allow them to use both J1772 and CCS chargers. But it does mean that Tesla has to maintain a network for only Tesla vehicles. When that's 90% of the market not a big deal. When it's 30% of the market that's a different story.

On the other hand, if you're a manufacturer not named Tesla then it makes more sense to invest and partner in the open systems like EA than the proprietary Tesla system. That's what Ford and VW are doing. GM is doing something similar by partnering for lower power DC chargers in metro areas, apparently so lower income people without garages have a way to DC charge their $75K-$100K Hummers and Lyriq.

 

[timbop]

Everyone agrees more is better.

Absolutely. Unfortunately the sticking point that always gets int the way with philosophy is finances: who's going to pay how much has a tendency to derail things that everyone agrees to in principle.

 

[DBC]

Even if it does cost a bit more why not? If it means that our charging network just doubled in size overnight its still cheaper then gas so id be for it.

It doesn't really double it. For example, since most EA chargers are located very close to Tesla superchargers, adding the two networks together gives you more capacity but maybe 10% more coverage. it would be an advantage but probably not a significant one.

In metro areas things might be different but in those areas there are plenty of chargers. Plus, until prices for BEVs come down, most people will charge at home.

On the other hand, because most charging occurs at home, the additional cost of using a different system doesn't really matter. The cost of DC charging could double and in the scheme of things it wouldn't matter. The $200 for an adapter would probably be a larger barrier.

 

[Maric]

Interesting

 

[malba2366]

Tesla has been saying that for years. There must be a poison pill or something because other manufacturers have so far balked at going the Supercharger route.

Maybe the idea of charging being controlled by a competitor is a bridge too far?

Tesla probably wants money from the other automakers to allow access to superchargers. EA is getting big enough at this point though, so no one will pay Tesla at this point.

 

[kdryden99]

Tesla probably wants money from the other automakers to allow access to superchargers. EA is getting big enough at this point though, so no one will pay Tesla at this point.

The way i see it though is the auto makers shouldnt have to pay its up to the end users no?

 

[dbsb3233]

The way i see it though is the auto makers shouldnt have to pay its up to the end users no?

Agreed. That's the way it should work.

Some automakers may choose to subsidize them anyway if they feel like it's an investment that gains them enough sales to offset it.

 

[kdryden99]

Agreed. That's the way it should work.

Some automakers may choose to subsidize them anyway if they feel like it's an investment that gains them enough sales to offset it.

In Quebec DCFC is roughly .20$/min. If i can get access to faster charging and on the Tesla network at .35$/min id do it.

 

[ab13]

There have been articles like this in the past, but here is brand new one. As I had understood, you would not be able to take any legal action for anything if you make this agreement.

https://www.roadandtrack.com/news/a35030461/why-other-car-companies-dont-use-tesla-superchargers/

 

[ChasingCoral]

So Tesla seems open to the idea of sharing their network.
https://news.google.com/articles/CAIiEHL-cQdhp5OwRtX7Fd3R5J0qGQgEKhAIACoHCAowqoP5CjDpz-ACMJ_YtAU?hl=en-CA&gl=CA&ceid=CA:en

At the same time it looks like Tesla is coming out with an adapter to allow their cars to charge on CCS1:
https://insideevs.com/news/460661/tesla-ccs1-adapter-proprietary-charging-inlet-coming/

Sponsored