Why did Ford choose 11kW charging for Level 2?

[Clockwork]

It doesn't make a huge difference and I have no gripes about charge time, but why did Ford choose 11kW for Level 2 charging? This has been our only EV that has this limit.

- 2021 Tesla Model 3 Performance: 11.5 kW
- 2022 Rivian R1T Adventure quad: 11.5 kW
- 2024 Chevy Equinox 3LT eAWD: 11.5 kW

Seems the Mach-E is the odd man out in this scenario. Did it just come down to a cost/benefit analysis on Ford's part? In house or tier 1 supply chain availability?

Yes, I know it is nitpicky to question a .5kW difference, but I am truly curious.

Sponsored

 

[HuntingPudel]

If you are getting the information out of the app, Ford truncates the charge rate. It calls 32A L2 charging 7KW when it’s 7.6 and change. ?‍?

 

[Clockwork]

If you are getting the information out of the app, Ford truncates the charge rate. It calls 32A L2 charging 7KW when it’s 7.6 and change. ?‍?

No, I am not. I am obtaining this info from my Tesla Wall Connector.

 

[phidauex]

I think it is just different ways of presenting the specifications. In reality, if you were designing an onboard charger, you would design it to take advantage of the full 48A@240V input (11.5kW), but output will vary, because the efficiency will depend on the DC voltage (changing based on SOC). Some companies will describe their product based on input power, some on output power, and in reality they will all vary based on conditions.

94% would be a good estimate for the nominal efficiency of the onboard charger, which would give you 11.5kW in, 10.8kW out. You could describe it as an 11.5kW or an 11kW charger and be accurate enough.

In practice I think they are all probably substantially similar, and provided by one of a small number of OEMs.

 

[RickMachE]

I believe they chose 48amps. 48x240=11.5kW. 7% loss to vehicle = 10.7kW.

 

[Clockwork]

I think it is just different ways of presenting the specifications. In reality, if you were designing an onboard charger, you would design it to take advantage of the full 48A@240V input (11.5kW), but output will vary, because the efficiency will depend on the DC voltage (changing based on SOC). Some companies will describe their product based on input power, some on output power, and in reality they will all vary based on conditions.

94% would be a good estimate for the nominal efficiency of the onboard charger, which would give you 11.5kW in, 10.8kW out. You could describe it as an 11.5kW or an 11kW charger and be accurate enough.

In practice I think they are all probably substantially similar, and provided by one of a small number of OEMs.

Except I can monitor via my Wall Connector the kW going in. As stated, one set of vehicles always hit 11.5. The Mach-E never goes beyond 11.

 

[phidauex]

Except I can monitor via my Wall Connector the kW going in. As stated, one set of vehicles always hit 11.5. The Mach-E never goes beyond 11.

I see, I missed your post saying that you are measuring it. Do you have a voltage and current measurement, or just power? Voltage drop on your system at high power can drop your input voltage, dropping your maximum power - the limit is on current, not power, so if the unit is drawing, say 48A at 230V, ~4% voltage drop, then you'd hit 11kW as well.

I strongly suspect that if you measured actual charge power from a lot of EVSEs running all the way up at 48A you'd see a range of values, with only a handful actually getting all the way to 11.5kW.

 

[HuntingPudel]

I can’t answer the “why” since I am not a Ford engineer. I am not sure if this is a software issue or if the hardware cannot support that last 500 watts. @Mach-Lee might be able to illucidate on whether the hardware supports it. Not sure a question of “why” can be answered by anyone on the forum. ??

 

[RickMachE]

Except I can monitor via my Wall Connector the kW going in. As stated, one set of vehicles always hit 11.5. The Mach-E never goes beyond 11.

I would be surprised if you're measuring the kW going in. Intelligent chargers show what's sent from the wall, not what the vehicle receives.

 

[bbulkow]

I see, I missed your post saying that you are measuring it. Do you have a voltage and current measurement, or just power? Voltage drop on your system at high power can drop your input voltage, dropping your maximum power - the limit is on current, not power, so if the unit is drawing, say 48A at 230V, ~4% voltage drop, then you'd hit 11kW as well.

I strongly suspect that if you measured actual charge power from a lot of EVSEs running all the way up at 48A you'd see a range of values, with only a handful actually getting all the way to 11.5kW.

The post as presented seem to be accurate measurement. As i read the post, all vehicles were measured at the op's home on the same charger.. The numbers were compared using the same metric, input voltage as measured by the charger.

I have no idea why Ford would choose this limit. Could be anything. Certainly a 5 percent difference in this use case doesn't matter.

 

[Clockwork]

The post as presented seem to be accurate measurement. As i read the post, all vehicles were measured at the op's home on the same charger.The numbers were compared using the same metric, input voltage as measured by the charger.

I have no idea why Ford would choose this limit. Could be anything. Certainly a 5 percent difference in this use case doesn't matter.

It's one screen.

I have seen this as 11.5 on the 3 mentioned vehicles. I never have seen this hit higher than 11 for the Mach-E.

The Tesla app has a separate Energy section with a charging session graph. This did have different numbers than the above, so I don't know the difference in measurement/methodology.

As I only have the Mach-E and Equinox charging sessions to compare (don't own the other two anymore), the Equinox numbers on the graph varied from 10.8 to 11.3. The Mach-E hovered at a flat and consistent 10.8.

 

[AtomicInternet]

I'm going to make a wild guess and presume they added .5 kW as a safety buffer and might remove it in a future update.

I'm assuming all on-board EV AC/DC chargers are basically the same equipment, so if everyone else gets 11.5 kW the most reasonable explanation is "Ford safety buffer."
The battery can clearly take more, so either there's a hard limit from the on-board charger to the battery (maybe cable rating) or they added it in to prevent problems. Maybe our charger is mounted somewhere with less air circulation, so it was a thermal concern.

As I said, no answers. Just guesses.

 

[azerik]

The Mach-E hovered at a flat and consistent 10.8.

You should be very happy with that (with this car). There's piles of us that are lucky to avg over 7kw thanks to something Ford hasn't fixed for us.

 

[Clockwork]

You should be very happy with that (with this car). There's piles of us that are lucky to avg over 7kw thanks to something Ford hasn't fixed for us.

I don't have a negative or positive opinion about it. Like I said, more of a curiosity than anything.

I do feel for your situation though. :-(

 

[azerik]

Good to know that a 24 in cooler climates can charge properly though. However I won't run out and buy one if that's what Ford's trying to get me to do

Sponsored