There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

Wahots ,
@Wahots@pawb.social avatar

Fuuuck, please keep everything on one standard. It’s going to suck to have multiple plugs at every station, particularly since the official standard can scale like crazy :/

Grant_M ,
@Grant_M@lemmy.ca avatar

I’d be careful with making vehicles reliant on a fascist owned charging infrastructure.

nbafantest ,

The plug spec has been opened up, so we should see all infrastructure switch to this. Not just Tesla’s superchargers. This is a good thing.

Grant_M ,
@Grant_M@lemmy.ca avatar

My default is zero trust in muskovite. Hopefully all potential loopholes are closed!

Dozzi92 ,
@Dozzi92@lemmy.world avatar

Wasn’t that an early Tesla thing too, opening up tech so others could use it? I remember being like this is how the future will be.

They got me good.

pastaq ,

Yeah. I bought a Tesla because they “opened their patents” www.tesla.com/blog/all-our-patent-are-belong-you

This company has changed quite a bit from what it used to be. :(

vagrantprodigy ,

That’s disappointing. I can’t wait to see how Musk attempts to screw with everyone once all major companies are using his “open” standard.

IphtashuFitz ,

SAE is ratifying NACS as an automotive standard. Once that process is complete Musk won’t have control over it.

sae.org/…/sae-international-announces-standard-fo…

vagrantprodigy ,

I’d bet anything he still tries something. Don’t forget what an enormous moron he is.

WetBeardHairs ,

I believe Tesla retained patents on their automatic payment system. So other cars can use the NACS, but they have to use a shitty app (which is currently a MAJOR problem with BEV chargers) because none of them have figured out how to install a credit card terminal on the dang things.

Pasketti ,

I believe Tesla has already released ownership of the NACS patent as well.

Grant_M ,
@Grant_M@lemmy.ca avatar

Exactly.

TheRealKuni ,

Technology Connections has a great video on this subject.

akilou ,

Does Toyota have any electic models? I thought they were still stuck between hybrids and hydrogen.

dublet ,

Yes, they’ve created an BEV specific platform, which currently is used by the Toyota bZ4X/Subaru Solterra and Lexus RZ, with the Toyota bZ3 due in 2024.

XGM ,

They also have the Prius Prime and Rav4 Prime models which have larger battery packs and charge ports compared to their standard hybrid variants. These models don’t support DC fast charging and still operate like standard hybrids so having the larger charge network isn’t as important.

I’m not sure if the existing Tesla level 2 “chargers” would work in this case but assuming they do it would offer more options.

lostferret ,

I have a prius prime! Works perfect for my use case. Everyday driving is full battery with maybe a bit of gas. Big long trips require no extra planning or stops.

Not for everyone, and i figure will last until EVs are nice and developed with better infrastructure up where i live.

Hildegarde ,

They made one, and they called it the BZ4X. That’s the sort of name that you give a car you don’t want people to buy. And in the event anyone did buy buy it, they made sure the wheels fell off.

By contrast they literally call their hydrogen car the future, so it’s clear where their priorities lie.

CmdrShepard ,

By contrast they literally call their hydrogen car the future, so it’s clear where their priorities lie.

I’m sure they’re working on EVs behind the scenes for mainstream release once other companies iron out the quirks, while the Murai is a long-term development platform. Let’s not forget Toyota dove headfirst into hybrids 23 years ago while other companies were developing shit like the Hummer H2 and the Excursion. People act like Toyota hates EVs but they’re just very conservative in their designs because their brand has a reputation for being reliable and economical. Compare that with early Teslas costing $100k and having terrible QC issues. Nobody wants that from a Toyota.

WetBeardHairs ,

Honestly that is what makes the most sense to me. They are known as the slow adopter of technology. So they’re just playing the long game by waiting to jump into the BEV world head first once they let the market shake out the first few hurdles. Plus it lets them wait on purchasing Lithium, which is currently in a huge bubble. So from the c-suite, it makes perfect sense to play coy with BEVs right now.

mayonaise_met ,

They’ve announced a lot of EVs are in the works but they’ll also keep offering hybrids and FCEVs. They kind of have to our they’ll lose the European market.

Hildegarde ,

And they have also announced that their EVs will use the same naming scheme as the BZ4X. Toyota has good, distinct, and memorable names for everything other than their EVs.

The choice to identify their EVs by a catalog number instead of a name, shows that they’re only making EVs because they have to.

altima_neo ,
@altima_neo@lemmy.zip avatar

They have some plug in hybrids, too

CmdrShepard ,

They released a compliance car (BZ4x) built with Subaru. From what I’ve read it sucks and essentially just performs the same function as the PT Cruiser and Chevy HHR did back in the day. I’m sure this’ll be retained for the future when they have a proper lineup of EVs though.

nbafantest ,

They have plug in hybrids.

robocall ,
@robocall@lemmy.world avatar

Makes sense. Why not use infrastructure that’s already available?

SSUPII ,

eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex…

There is a placed by law standard in the European Union, don’t know if the US has the same. https://sopuli.xyz/pictrs/image/4a5f7ec4-9716-4b6d-a1c6-ccbee1f0388f.png

Kecessa ,

Nah can’t have standards in the USA, let the market solve that and Canada just follows whatever the USA does for these things.

JohnEdwa ,

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.

Kecessa ,

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.

cole ,
@cole@lemdro.id avatar

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

Kecessa ,

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

cole ,
@cole@lemdro.id avatar

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

Kecessa ,

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.

cole ,
@cole@lemdro.id avatar

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

Kecessa ,

It often isn’t until later on that we truly understand what we need out of a standard

Guess we shouldn’t be using the Tesla standard then because it’s what’s been used by them since the release of the model S in 2012… You know, the early days of wide adoption of EV cars?

cole , (edited )
@cole@lemdro.id avatar

EDIT: the guy I’m replying to edited his comment. Originally he asked something along the lines of “why didn’t they mandate the tesla plug”

so the government should’ve mandated a closed protocol that wasn’t a standard?

Kecessa ,

The government should have sat down with manufacturers, telling them “Better come to the table cuz that’s where we’ll decide what the legal standard will be.” and come up with a solution instead of letting manufacturers do whatever they want until 8 standards came to be.

cole ,
@cole@lemdro.id avatar

well, we’ll have to agree to disagree on that. I think it’s easy to say that with hindsight, but you don’t know where standards are needed when things are first getting going

Kecessa ,

Not as if it was unclear that EV cars were coming though.

cole ,
@cole@lemdro.id avatar

It was, actually. Many people are still skeptical of that even. Some people still think hydrogen is the future

vagrantprodigy ,

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.

guacupado ,

Musk changing the name of his charger doesn’t make it a defacto standard

No, but the majority of carmakes adopting it does.

thisisbutaname ,

Because using proprietary standards puts you at the mercy of the technology owner

Actaeon ,

It was made an open standard about a year ago

thisisbutaname ,

Didn’t know that, that’s fine then

A_Random_Idiot ,

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.

TheRealKuni ,

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.)

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •