Toyota to adopt Tesla charger for North American EV models
Toyota to adopt Tesla charger for North American EV models
NEW YORK (Kyodo) -- Toyota Motor Corp. said Thursday it will adopt Tesla Inc.'s charging standards for its electric vehicles to be sold in North Ameri
NEW YORK (Kyodo) -- Toyota Motor Corp. said Thursday it will adopt Tesla Inc.'s charging standards for its electric vehicles to be sold in North Ameri
You're viewing a single thread.
Makes sense. Why not use infrastructure that's already available?
Because using proprietary standards puts you at the mercy of the technology owner
It was made an open standard about a year ago
Didn't know that, that's fine then
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32014L0094
There is a placed by law standard in the European Union, don't know if the US has the same.
Nah can't have standards in the USA, let the market solve that and Canada just follows whatever the USA does for these things.
In this case there is, it's called the North American Charging Standard! Granted, Tesla did name it that way just last year, before it became a standard, but hey, at least it worked out in the end. Probably.
It's not a standard unless it's made mandatory by the state, it's just an agreement between manufacturers and sadly it seems like States always wait too long to establish standards and we end up with incompatible tech that lose support in the long term because of it.
that is absolutely not true. most standards AREN'T mandated by law. ANSI is voluntary for example. USB is a standard that isn't written into law, you get the picture
My point is that at any time a manufacturer can just go "Fuck them, I'm creating my own interface" for this reason, the standard isn't mandated by law! Case in point: Apple
I guess I don't understand the problem. Companies use the superior standard. Innovation is good. Look at NACS charging plug, everyone has given up on CCS in the US and signed up to switch. Despite the government mandating CCS in charge stations
Companies don't necessarily use the superior standard, maybe you're too young to have known or you don't remember the time when each cellphone brand had their own plug and sometimes had a different plug for different phones...
Heck, the car charging ports are a perfect example, the government could have stepped in and imposed a standard in the early days of EVs, instead it had to wait nearly two decades for manufacturers to agree with brands using one of multiple standards for their car and now we'll end up with charging stations that will be borderline useless in a couple of years because no one will be carrying a bunch of adapters just in case they try to charge somewhere with the wrong plug for their car and if the stations are updated then it's still a whole lot of waste for the landfills and owners of older cars will need to carry adapters with them so they're able to keep charging their car.
While I understand with what you're saying, I personally believe that regulating standards during the early days of an industry is just asking for trouble.
It often isn't until later on that we truly understand what we need out of a standard. This can take iterations and different approaches. I think it is too big a risk to potentially be hamstrung with a shitty solution later on
We had a standard before that, it was called CCS. Musk changing the name of his charger doesn't make it a defacto standard, no matter what the Muskites tell you.
Musk changing the name of his charger doesn’t make it a defacto standard
No, but the majority of carmakes adopting it does.
because, from what I understnad, only the newest tesla chargers will support non-teslas charging, which is gonna leave a shitton of older chargers as tesla exclusive.
and overnight renders all the investment and infrastructure thats been built for J1772/CCS Type1/2 completely pointless and wasted effort almost overnight.
and overnight renders all the investment and infrastructure thats been built for J1772/CCS Type1/2 completely pointless and wasted effort almost overnight.
I could be mistaken, but I don't think it's that grim. J1772 will still be good for supporting vehicles and locations that don't support DC charging. Level 2 will continue to be useful for years since the grid doesn't support Level 3 charging just anywhere.
And CCS 1/2 will support NACS with relatively simple adapters as I understand it. Existing DC charging stations can simply replace their CCS 1/2 ends with NACS over time when they would be replaced for maintenance anyway, and perhaps provide adapters in the meantime.
I highly recommend this video from Technology Connections which changed my mind about this.
(To be fair, as an owner of a PHEV that can't use DC charging anyway it doesn't make much difference to me though.)
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
I highly recommend this video from Technology Connections which changed my mind about this.
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Still a good bot.