Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[BrianTRice@gmail.com]

Diginow managed to fit nearly 10kW into the space of the stock SDS charger (well, a tiny bit larger), and that's with 3 separate units. Zero themselves should be able to do better, at least better than they do at the moment.

I think it should be made clear that the units that DigiNow used for v2 and onwards are good units but were literally rejects from Zero R&D. They couldn't make the units work within regulations.

Zero aren't idiots, and DigiNow aren't geniuses.

Interesting, never knew that. Do you know why Zero gave up on them, or do you mean Zero couldn't make them work (I know Diginow had problems with them)? In what way were they outside of regulations? It doesn't seem like something that should be too hard to get working well, at least just a single unit which would have been better than what we have now.

I didn't know it, either, until I got a claim from an engineer at Zero and then confirmed it elsewhere to avoid gossip contamination. I'm actually sanitizing the claim slightly.

I don't want to get into specifics, because it's hearsay and I don't want to deal with it or make it even slightly obvious who I'm sourcing. It could conceivably be about EMC regulations, thermal management, durability, or a subtle combination thereof.

[Auriga]

It's really interesting to see how opinion flows on this and the Facebook group. Diginow essentially went out of business, and claimed that Zero's engineering was at least partially to blame. And everybody seemed to believe them. Zero never comments publicly, so they almost lose by default. I remain skeptical that the fault did not lie in a lack of engineering knowledge on Diginow's side.

I agree with Brian, Zero aren't idiots. They try to do the best with the limitations present to them. I know EMC regulations are very very hard to solve without significant hardware changes, and I doubt Diginow has to do them as an accessory kit supplier, so I bet it's that. And since Diginow just buys off the shelf chargers with their own custom controller and harnessing, it's not like they can do hardware changes to improve it. Zero has to meet every kind of American and European vehicle regulation to sell, and I know that's a giant pain in the butt.

[pacificcricket]

Zero can talk to Elon, and get access to Tesla network. Problem solved.

This is a laughable suggestion. So, either name a company that has accomplished this, or explain why Tesla would even bother negotiating a deal with Zero.

I even linked an article that explains the point - Elon was asked if he would allow third party access to Superchargers, he said he would.

[BrianTRice@gmail.com]

Zero can talk to Elon, and get access to Tesla network. Problem solved.

This is a laughable suggestion. So, either name a company that has accomplished this, or explain why Tesla would even bother negotiating a deal with Zero.

I even linked an article that explains the point - Elon was asked if he would allow third party access to Superchargers, he said he would.

It doesn’t matter until it actually happens. Plenty of company heads make claims in public for image promotion that they don’t intend to back up or are effectively unimplementable. It serves him to say that, and it costs him nothing if no one succeeds in engaging his company on that, because the discussions would happen under NDA.

[BrianTRice@gmail.com]

Forum reputation is not always what the target deserves.

[pacificcricket]

It doesn’t matter until it actually happens. Plenty of company heads make claims in public for image promotion that they don’t intend to back up or are effectively unimplementable. It serves him to say that, and it costs him nothing if no one succeeds in engaging his company on that, because the discussions would happen under NDA.

Well, I know Elon way better than I know you, so this is a no brainer

[BrianTRice@gmail.com]

It doesn’t matter until it actually happens. Plenty of company heads make claims in public for image promotion that they don’t intend to back up or are effectively unimplementable. It serves him to say that, and it costs him nothing if no one succeeds in engaging his company on that, because the discussions would happen under NDA.

Well, I know Elon way better than I know you, so this is a no brainer

I don’t care if you’re his mother. His words are worthless without implementation, and the cost to him to make empty promises is demonstrably nil.

[Crissa]

We don't know what limitations on the Superchargers present themselves to third-party vehicles since no one has come forward with why they haven't taken the deal.

Tesla has said their are limitations - some of them being software compatibility and others being required to open some of the third party's patents.  Which are generally no goes, but understandable requirements.

If I were Zero I would always have on a target board 'what would be required for X system' bikes, so they can check the theoretical price Every year or so as technology changes.  Napkin math moves around, and being ready to pounce is part of being agile.  You don't want your good thing to lock you from seeking the next thing before it's too late.

-Crissa

[wavelet]

We don't know what limitations on the Superchargers present themselves to third-party vehicles since no one has come forward with why they haven't taken the deal.

Tesla has said their are limitations - some of them being software compatibility and others being required to open some of the third party's patents.  Which are generally no goes, but understandable requirements.

Some of the issues are pretty clear.
There are a lot of technical & business issues to resolve before that could be possible. There have been several EV startups that have approached Tesla about this.

For one, Tesla SCs would need to be retrofitted physically, or the "foreign" EVs, to let the SCs identify them. Currently, from what I've read, that information (VIN) isn't passed through the car-charger interface, but through the cellular connection from a Tesla to Tesla's servers. I.e., A non-connected Tesla can't currently charge at a SC, IIUC.
AFAIK, no quick-charging protocol allows for transferring information from car to charger beyond the directly charging related stuff like max charge rate & SoC. The non-Tesla DC chargers use RFID or other similar methods to identify the driver/car. I doubt the California law you mentioned will require vehicle IDing .

A potentially usage/business thorny issue is that of precedence: Will Teslas be given priority? And to what extent? If so, will a new Tesla coming into the station preempt an already-waiting non-Tesla? This is particularly an issue because Teslas charge far faster (2X+) than most other EVs, both peak and average rates.  Will the session length for a non-Tesla  be limited, or maybe even the session terminated if a Tesla comes in?

Personally I think it makes sense for all networks to allow reserving charging timeslots ahead of time (maybe 50% of the available slots,leaving the remainder for "walk-ins") to avoid long waits. I think this will eventually have to happen, once a more significant % of car on the roads are EVs.
If this happens, the issues with 3d-party charging become more complex.
And all the above gets more complex with motorcycles than only charge at 25kW at best.

If I were Zero I would always have on a target board 'what would be required for X system' bikes, so they can check the theoretical price Every year or so as technology changes.  Napkin math moves around, and being ready to pounce is part of being agile.  You don't want your good thing to lock you from seeking the next thing before it's too late.

From everything I hear about Zero, they still operate far too close to startup mode for that to work; I've worked at or with multiple companies Zero's size or less, and while a many did intend to do this, it never survived the next company crisis (i.e., a couple of months).

[Crissa]

Some of the issues are pretty clear.

...There's talking out of your hat and there's talking out of your hat.

For one, Tesla SCs would need to be retrofitted physically,

...Why?  ID isn't a reason.

(VIN) isn't passed through the car-charger interface, but through the cellular connection

...Like a celphone app or the SR/F does?

AFAIK, no quick-charging protocol allows for transferring information from car to charger

CCS does.

I doubt the California law you mentioned will require vehicle IDing

It doesn't mention it at all, which seems irrelevant?  We don't know what restrictions are on Tesla's deal, since no one has come out and said.  Tesla currently has no method of pre-emption between heir tiers of customers currently, despite having several tiers.  The point was that they'll have to start modifying their charging protocol anyhow.

....

From everything I hear about Zero, they still operate far too close to startup mode for that to work;

That is literally something a startup can do that a normal publicity listed company cannot.  Yes, lots of companies fail to do it.  It's not easy!

Anyhow, my neighbor that's working for Zero is pulling ten hour shifts more days of the week this quarter than last, he was doing four-ten or less, now he seems to be doing more.  I hope that's a good sign 'cause it doesn't seem healthy (for him) to me

-Crissa

[Richard230]

Last night I heard on the news that Tesla is closing in on $1,000 a share stock price.  As a company they are now more valuable than the other three major US vehicle brands combined.  Anyone owning their stock has made a lot of money recently by investing in Tesla.  If I recall correctly, it was under $400 a share just a few months ago.  I hope Crissa's neighbor can hang in there.  Working 10 hours a day for days on end might be a good deal for the company, but it has got to be tough on the employees.

Frankly, I am amazed at Tesla's success and I hope the EV market can keep on supporting them at that level. But will the EV market reach a saturation point and run up against the vehicle owners who either can't afford or don't want an EV for whatever reason?

I can see Tesla not wanting to share their Super Chargers with other brands, what with the locations, numbers and performance of those chargers likely being a big selling point for Tesla.  The number of their chargers need to keep ahead of their production curve otherwise their sales might be impacted if the word gets around that there are starting to be traffic jams around SC facilities.

Finally, I have heard more than once that Eon Musk has got it in for motorcycles for some reason and likely would not want to cooperate with any motorcycle manufacturer to use their facilities or branded products.

[JaimeC]

Elon was injured in a motorcycle accident as a youth, hence his antipathy towards them.  The Model 3 is apparently the biggest selling electric vehicle in the WORLD, so he can pretty much do whatever he wants at this point.

All EV Charging stations "communicate" with the vehicle before initiating a charge.  I found this video VERY educational:

[Crissa]

If TSLA hits $1000, the stock market has gone crazy.

https://www.google.com/search?q=tsla (move the dial to '6m' for six months)

Their share price is too high right now, and that's an enviable position to be in.

-Crissa

[princec]

...aaaand it's tanked again.

Cas

[DonTom]

All EV Charging stations "communicate" with the vehicle before initiating a charge.  I found this video VERY educational:

In that video, he says there is no L3 charging, but  the term is widely accepted and we all know what it is. It's from a REAL charger! IOW, DC direct to the battery.

Yet he calls an AC supply, such as a J-1772 as a charger. How is that a "charger" to any more of a degree than a 120 VAC outlet in our homes? A J-1772 is simply another AC supply. The  ONLY charger involved then is the one in the vehicle.

While his other info is good, he should not be complaining about what we consider L3 chargers. At least those are chargers, unlike a J-1772 which is simply an AC supply for a charger.

-Don-  Reno, NV