Will Scout Work With Future 3rd Party Battery Retrofit/Replacement Companies? (Right to Repair)

[SpaceEVDriver]

I have a NACS adapter and it works flawlessly. It might not be a terrible thing if there is competition and further development as a result, but understand the desire some people have for a "standard".

in reality, and if you need to stick an adapter on a charger it's really no big deal... And now some Tesla chargers have a built-in adapter called a Magic Dock at some superchargers (if you don;t have an adapter).

Heres a breakdown I found from Jan 2025:

NACS (Tesla) Chargers:

• 29,543 NACS connectors (49.1% share) CCS vs. Tesla’s NACS: Which One Is Better?
• The NACS's share in DC fast-charging ports is even higher, at 58%

CCS1 Chargers:

• 21,471 CCS1 connectors (35.7% share)

CHAdeMO:

• 8,908 CHAdeMO connectors (14.8% share)

Hmm… Something seems wrong with those numbers.

The number of CCS1 stations outnumbers NACS by 4:1. But the proportion of CCS1 to NACS ports is about 0.85:1. We cannot use the numbers thrown around by brand-T because they will always talk about superchargers, not NACS-compatible ports. V2 and older superchargers aren’t compatible despite having the same plug type. NACS uses the CCS1 communications protocols with a different physical interface. But V2 and older do not use a compatible communications protocol, so those stations and ports can’t be included in the comparison.

Despite the similar number of charging ports, it is easier to find a CCS1 charging port than a NACS charging port because they’re more broadly dispersed around North America. There may be slightly more NACS ports than CCS1, but they are highly concentrated, so not as accessible to the majority of drivers. The interesting result of this is that for some time there will be more need for adapter use for native-NACS cars than CCS1 cars as drivers try to go outside of the brand-T-blessed corridors.

The following data come from the alternative fuels database (https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/electricity-locations#/analyze?tab=fuel&fuel=ELEC&ev_levels=dc_fast), which isn’t comprehensive but is the most comprehensive database I have found.

[edited to try to clarify the DCFC vs L2 numbers]

DCFC:​

CCS1:​

12,466 charging stations (52%)​

30,676 charging ports (39%)​

(Average port/station ~= 2.5)​

​

NACS:​

3,569 charging stations (15%)​

36,101 charging ports (46%)​

(Average port/station ~= 10)​

​

CHADEMO:​

7,726 charging stations (33%)​

11,443 charging ports (15%)​

(Average port/station ~= 1.5)​

----------

Level 2:​

J1772​

72,410 charging stations (93%)​

179,223 charging ports (93%)​

​

NACS​

5,490 charging stations (7%)​

14,415 charging ports (7%)​

 

[R1TVT]

I don't think those are DCFC chargers... I should have clarified that and was responding based on the Ionna comment. As far as I know, those Ionnas are DCFC's (my numbers were for DCFC chargers)

 

[SpaceEVDriver]

I don't think those are DCFC chargers... I should have clarified that and was responding based on the Ionna comment. As far as I know, those Ionnas are DCFC's (my numbers were for DCFC chargers)

I gave numbers for both DCFC and L2, separately.

 

[Mousehunter]

I don't know on a state by state level - but my assumption (based on what happened in my state) is Tesla did not get much federal support for installing chargers, but many companies that installed CCS chargers did. In Texas, Tesla submitted a proposal that was about 1/3 the cost per charger and it was rejected because it did not support CCS (but if I had to guess, had magic dock and could have charged CCS cars with an adapter).

But then car companies started getting on the NACS bandwagon. The companies that had gotten the contracts wanted significantly more money to install NACS in addition to the CCS they bid on. Given that close to 1/2 the EV's sold in the US to date have been Teslas - I can only assume our legislature decided to go with the 3x expensive CCS over the NACS due to politics - and now those stations will be 4-5x as expensive. Of course, perhaps the reason was Tesla was going to put in the NACS chargers anyway, and funding CCS would give Texas more chargers in the end (but honestly, with my trust of Goverment, the legislators just were not getting the same kickbacks from Tesla).

FWIW, not really sure, but the closest (10 miles) public chargers to my house might be Ionna - but they were just installed (or are still being installed), and I have not looked that hard. Meanwhile, the Tesla superchargers (Level 3) 200 yards further away have been in operation for about 3 years.

 

[Chavannigans]

I don't know on a state by state level - but my assumption (based on what happened in my state) is Tesla did not get much federal support for installing chargers, but many companies that installed CCS chargers did. In Texas, Tesla submitted a proposal that was about 1/3 the cost per charger and it was rejected because it did not support CCS (but if I had to guess, had magic dock and could have charged CCS cars with an adapter).

But then car companies started getting on the NACS bandwagon. The companies that had gotten the contracts wanted significantly more money to install NACS in addition to the CCS they bid on. Given that close to 1/2 the EV's sold in the US to date have been Teslas - I can only assume our legislature decided to go with the 3x expensive CCS over the NACS due to politics - and now those stations will be 4-5x as expensive. Of course, perhaps the reason was Tesla was going to put in the NACS chargers anyway, and funding CCS would give Texas more chargers in the end (but honestly, with my trust of Goverment, the legislators just were not getting the same kickbacks from Tesla).

FWIW, not really sure, but the closest (10 miles) public chargers to my house might be Ionna - but they were just installed (or are still being installed), and I have not looked that hard. Meanwhile, the Tesla superchargers (Level 3) 200 yards further away have been in operation for about 3 years.

You know how it really goes in a business friendly state like Texas. He probably didn’t grease Abbots wheels enough either.

 

[SpaceEVDriver]

Some basic history might help.

The Combined Charging Standard (CCS) was an industry-created standard in 2011, before the production of the Model S began. No governments were involved at that stage. Given the time the discussions took, rollout in 2012 was plenty of time for Tesla to use an existing standard instead of creating their own charging hardware and plugs. They chose to ignore the standards bodies and do their own thing. Their plug and underlying communications was proprietary and could not be used by anyone else until 2024.

The infrastructure bill didn’t specify a standard nor plug, just that the chargers be accessible to vehicles from multiple manufacturers.

In response to that bill, Tesla decided to go with CCS1 in its future (2022+) vehicles and chargers, but they decided to keep the NACS plug.

J3400 (NACS) didn’t become a standard until 2023 when a real, true, independent standards body took on the task of updating, fixing, and formally recognizing the format that would be plug-compatible with Tesla chargers. One of the keys to J3400 is that the underlying communications protocol is identical to the CCS communications protocol. It’s just a different plug on the CCS1 protocol. Easy to make accessible with an adapter.