The issue is that Tesla has the largest and most reliable DCFC network BY FAR in the US, and they were already using NACS before CCS combo was around. (Starting in 2012) Now that they have opened this network to other makes, it's a veritable godsend to have plentiful, and reliable fast charging. If CCS1 stayed the standard, pretty much everyone would use adapters for DCFC going forward, so it's been decided by pretty much all EV makers to switch their NA products to NACS, thus eliminating multiple standards and ultimately eliminating adapters.
The US is, almost without exception, all single-phase for EV charging so NACS having only 2 current-carrying pins is much more elegant and compact, and still allows 80A 277V AC charging (22kW). Then the same 2 pins are re-used for DC charging, so the inlet is much smaller, cheaper, and more reliable. The NACS handle has no moving parts or fragile latch that often breaks when the heavy and bulky connector is dropped. This also means it's much safer, as it's pretty common to see broken latch pawls on public DCFC CCS handles, which means you can yank out the handle under load, which could be a huge disaster. Yes, I'm not suggesting things in the EU change. But in the US it makes sense to migrate everything to NACS. It should have happened sooner, but there was a lot of politics involved, so definitely not engineering-driven. Doesn't really matter anyone's opinion now, as the market has spoken. NACS (SAE J3400) has won the standards war in the US. One connector to rule them all. Just look at the image about half way down on this page, it speaks volumes: (literally!) https://www.midapower.com/news/ccs-vs-teslas-nacs-charging-connector/ On Fri, Feb 7, 2025 at 1:53 PM EV List Lackey via EV <ev@lists.evdl.org> wrote: > I suspect that you and I are talking at cross purposes, and I doubt that > you'll give an inch. > > I persist because I think that even a flawed charging connector standard > is > worth having, as long as it works reasonably well, which CCS2 does, and > ensures that every EV can charge at every public charging point, which > CCS2 > also does. > > The US seems kind of haphazard by comparison. J1772, Chademo, CCS1, NACS > - > every time you add another "standard," you increase the chance that, when > you're looking at 1% on your charge indicator, the charging station you > see > 50 feet away does you no good. > > On 7 Feb 2025 at 8:45, (-Phil-) via EV wrote: > > > Well, #1 is cost. > > Can you give me some specific numbers on that? > > For example, we paid about 26k euros ($28.6k) for our Zoe in 2020. How > much > less would it have cost us if it had been fitted with NACS instead of CCS2? > > > NACS handles more current > > More than the 1mw that CCS2 can supply? > > > It was an SAE mistake to standardize something as clunky as CCS1 in the > > US when there was already a superior standard. > > Hold everything. I'm talking about CCS2 here, not CCS1. It's a different > critter. > > > Ask a little old lady trying to handle a CCS cable vs a NACS cable! > > I don't think Margaret would appreciate being called a little old lady, > but > she's not exactly muscle-bound. She's never had the slightest problem > handling CCS2 charging cables, either AC or DC. > > ----- > > I suspect that the lack of real charging standardization in the US has > slowed EV adoption there. Y'all are at, what, 8%? Europe is averaging > around 20% BEV sales. In Norway it's over 96%! > > Maybe that will improve now that you've settled on one standard, though > I'm > afraid that EVs are facing some serious political headwinds there. > > In any case, you'll probably be using adapters for years, maybe decades. > > There's also still no international connector standard and now probably > never will be. Pity, that. > > David Roden, EVDL moderator & general lackey > > To reach me, don't reply to this message; I won't get it. Use my > offlist address here : http://evdl.org/help/index.html#supt > > = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = > > Post-truth is pre-fascism. > > -- Timothy Snyder > = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = > > _______________________________________________ > Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org > No other addresses in TO and CC fields > HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/ > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20250207/21463b14/attachment.htm> _______________________________________________ Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org No other addresses in TO and CC fields HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
