BMW
, Ford, General Motors and Volkswagen are among the eight U.S. and German automakers that will demonstrate a single-port fast-charging system for electric vehicles at the Electric Vehicle Symposium 26 (EV26) in Los Angeles starting next week.

Audi, Chrysler, Mercedes-Benz parent Daimler and Porsche will also show off the so-called DC-fast system, which will be able to recharge most battery-electric vehicles in as little as 15 minutes.

With a combination AC and DC charging capabilities, the DC-fast system is supposed to start sales by the end of the year and will enable U.S. and German plug-ins to be able to be recharged at most public charging stations while also accommodating high-powered fast-charging stations. The International Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) has officially tapped the system as the standard for fast-charging.

Electric-vehicle proponents consider the establishment of a fast-charging standard to be an important key to plug-in vehicle adoption because the availability of publicly accessible fast chargers that can recharge a vehicle in minutes instead of hours makes range anxiety a moot point. Pike Research said last year that annual revenue generated by makers of electric-vehicle charging equipment will increase more than tenfold between 2011 and 2017 to about $4.3 billion.

Still, the fast-charging issue is far from settled because a separate fast-charging standard – CHAdeMO – has been proposed by the Japanese automotive industry. Toyota, Nissan, Mitsubishi and Subaru parent Fuji Heavy Industries are all partners in the CHAdeMO Association.
Show full PR text
Global Automakers to Demo EV Fast Charging at EVS26
Combined Charging System facilitates both AC as well as DC fast-charging from a single inlet port

Eight global automakers to participate in charging display and will demo the standardized single-port DC-fast charging technology
The system will optimize customer ease of use and will accelerate more affordable deployment of electrified vehicles and charging infrastructure
The Society of International Engineers has chosen the single-port fast charging method as its standard for fast charging and the European manufacturing association (ACEA) has endorsed harmonization for all vehicle types
Chargers will be available commercially as of the end of 2012 and vehicles using the technology will be available starting 2013

Los Angeles, CA – May 3, 2012... Global automakers from the United States and Germany will demonstrate fast-charging technology that will enable the recharging of most electrified vehicles with compatible systems in as little as 15-20 minutes.
Audi, BMW, Chrysler, Daimler, Ford, General Motors, Porsche and Volkswagen have agreed to support a harmonized single-port fast charging approach – called DC-fast charging with a Combined Charging System – for use on electric vehicles in Europe and the United States. Live charging demonstrations will be conducted during the Electric Vehicle Symposium 26 (EVS26) May 6-9.
The combined charging system integrates one-phase AC-charging, fast three-phase AC-charging, DC-charging at home and ultra-fast DC-charging at public stations into one vehicle inlet. This will allow customers to charge at most existing charging stations regardless of power source and may speed more affordable adoption of a standardized infrastructure.
The International Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) has chosen the Combined Charging System as the fast-charging methodology for a standard that incrementally extends the existing Type 1-based AC-charging. The standard is to be officially published this summer. ACEA, the European association of vehicle manufacturers has also selected the Combined Charging System as its AC/DC-charging interface for all new vehicle types in Europe beginning in 2017.
The charging system design was based on the collaborative review and analysis of existing charging strategies, the ergonomics of the connector and preferences of U.S. and European customers. The Combined Charging System was developed for all international vehicle markets and creates a uniform standard with identical electrical systems, charge controllers, package dimensions and safety mechanisms.
The system maximizes capability for integration with future smart grid developments through common broadband communication methods regardless of the global location of the charging system. The combined charging approach will reduce development and infrastructure complexity, improve charging reliability, reduce the total cost-of-ownership for end customers and provide low maintenance costs.
Commercially available combined charging stations are projected to be available later this year. All committed OEMs have vehicles in development which will use the Combined Charging System. The first vehicles to use this system will reach the market in 2013.

BMW ActiveE and project i - research and development of tomorrow's mobility.
The BMW ActiveE is the BMW Group's next step towards an emission-free, mass-produced electric vehicle. Within the framework of project i, the BMW Group is carrying out research and development work on the development of electrically powered vehicles. The next step will be the BMW i3 due to launch in 2013. It will be designed to meet the demands of a sustainable mobility solution for congested urban areas. For this reason, the drive components and battery technology that will be used in the BMW i3 are being tested now in the BMW ActiveE.
The recent field test involving more than 600 MINI E cars, including 450 in the US, have provided vital knowledge ab


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 119 Comments
      Andy Smith
      • 3 Years Ago
      This is like the mobile phone charger farce of the past 20 years. Every manufacturer with some kind of adapter battling for supremacy, millions of people with yards of spaghetti like twisted cables and then legislation forces them to use the mini usb port on all models
        SVX pearlie
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Andy Smith
        Exactly. And now that we have a standard USB plug for charging & data, life is far better. Otherwise you have Sony & Nokia & other stupidity, trying to lock in with vendor-specific chargers. Could you imagine if Sony went to a micro-Memory Card for their phones a la PS Vita? *One* standard to keep things simple for the Customer.
      Spec
      • 3 Years Ago
      Is it worth it for Nissan & Mitsubishi to fight for ChadeMo? They already use the J1772 for AC level 1 & 2 charging. Why not just add the new level 3 system to upcoming cars. I understand they have existing customers but Level 3 fast-chargers can easily support both both the new SAE system and the existing ChadeMO system. Call this new SAE system ugly if you want but at least it is a single integrated system as opposed to two separate connectors which requires and even bigger "barn door"!
        MTN RANGER
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Spec
        Nissan/Mitsubishi/CHAdeMO will get steamrolled by the new SAE standard. There is too many players behind it and it's just a matter of time. It will probably mirror how the HD-DVD (Toshiba & Microsoft) vs Blu-ray (everyone else) war played out.
        EZEE
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Spec
        Your level of knowledge on this is impressive... I read it and feel like saying, "I like turtles." It would be cool if they (or you for that matter) could write something that would be permanently posted on the side of the page, "Guide to EV Chargers", as a single post like this takes a bit of research of fully understand. Good job man!
        skierpage
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Spec
        There are 1154 CHAdeMO stations in Japan and 207 in Europe. Of course Nissan and Mitsubishi are going to fight for it. Nobody has announced a DC fast charger that can support both CHAdeMO and SAE DC fast charge. Nobody has announced a price for SAE DC fast charger, I suspect it will be a while before any will be as cheap as Nissan's. Solas is right, this is a "meh" standard, and it's backed by companies that don't currently sell plug-in only vehicles. It's the usual Standards War 101 B.S., if you don't have something you always promote a standard incompatible with what's on the market now. Like Blu-ray and HD DVD, I want one to win more than I care about the details. By the way, DC fast charging isn't "level 3". There are separate levels for AC and DC. DC level 3 is hypothetically 240 kW (way more than this standard), and AC level 3 is undefined.
      noevfud
      • 3 Years Ago
      Glad we are getting yet another plug while there are over 10K in the US with a different plug on the ground and the companies pushing this do not have any EVs on the road in the US. More political BS. By the time this stupid thing is implemented they will have delayed chugging infrastructure by years. If you are going to get behind yet another "option" which is not compatible with one already widely used then at least have EVs to put them into.
        Naturenut99
        • 3 Years Ago
        @noevfud
        Becareful not to start your own FUD. There has been no accepted standard till now. Nissan jumped the gun, they knew there was not a standard they took that risk, they knew they didnt create the standard. The US uses the SAE to create the standards, not just what a company wants, but what a group of engineers/electricians decide is the best/most safe/best scenario. Using Chademo requires two different ports... a lot of space that is unnecessary. It would have been better if it had been finalized sooner, but it isnt holding the industry back. This actually helps... one port (to rule them all.... could not help myself...) to handle L1, L2, and L3. The only difference is how much of the port the plug uses. The standard J1772 uses the top half as it has been doing, using L3 it uses the whole port. This only helps the industry, if they had been fighting for a couple more years, that could be problematic. This is only the 2nd year of a real puch for EV's. It took many more between Beta and VHS, or even Blu-ray and HD...
          Ele Truk
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Naturenut99
          I wouldn't say they jumped the gun, they just went with the only option that's available. Hopefully there is enough similarities between the standards that Nissan can offer an upgrade (sidegrade?) for a reasonable price. But for now, there will be many more CHAdeMO chargers than SAE for a couple years.
          Spec
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Naturenut99
          Japan often tries to advance things but is not always successful in getting everyone else to go along. Japan had an HDTV system up and running years before everyone else but their system was not adopted and eventually abandoned.
        SVX pearlie
        • 3 Years Ago
        @noevfud
        10k is peanuts, and the known risk of being an early adopter.
        Spec
        • 3 Years Ago
        @noevfud
        So everyone should be a slave to paying TEPCO royalties just because ther were there first? No thanks.
          Rotation
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Spec
          TEPCO doesn't charge royalties right now. But they invented the standard before they were super duper broke from Fukushima. So who knows if that will stand. TEPCO took a risk going forward alone with their own standard. But there's no reason we all should have to live with the mistakes they made. They gambled and lost, they'll have to recover now.
          SVX pearlie
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Spec
          TEPCO needs to pay for Fukushima.
      solas
      • 3 Years Ago
      @ Spec "Is it worth it for Nissan & Mitsubishi to fight for ChadeMo?" Yes. Specifically because -- ChadeMo is already deployed, and, the new SAE "standard" (nothing makes this standard with only 7 automotive companies behind it, and exactly 0 cars deployed) offers nothing critical that ChadeMo already has (there are differences, none of them critical). That is the most disappointing thing of all. This design is most obviously an afterthought (the fact that proper car communications is only now proposed on the J1772 connecter shows that this SAE body moves too slow - far too slow). This standard IS big (it does not significantly reduce the "barn door" size, nor does it reduce the plug size in any significant way ... one has to go to Tesla model S - incompatible as it is - for elegance in design). If we all were truly getting something elegant out of this design, I am sure ChadeMo would die quite quickly, and I am sure we'd all yell "hooray!" ... but instead we get "meh". Just "meh". How can anyone favor "meh" ? So we get a standards war (well, technically a "standard" vs. "proprietary" war) ... I favor: finish the war quickly, and let the clear leader win early so we can get on with ... plugging in (for now, the game changes again maybe in 10 years). I don't think anyone should care who actually wins, as ... except for gorr, we all know "adapters", while annoying, can work us through the transition/fallout.
        Naturenut99
        • 3 Years Ago
        @solas
        Using the existing part of the J1772 for communication is the smart thing to do. Why would they add more wiring for more communication lines when they already exist. That would be stupid and wasteful. re: size.. It absolutely is smaller to have only the one versus 2. Your absolutely blind to facts to think otherwise. It does reduce the door size... Only one port that is smaller than the two. How do you not get that? Is the Tesla better... yeah. But we rarely get what is the ultimate as a standard otherwise Apple's Firewire and not USB would be the standard. It was always faster and could power small devices thru it before USB even thought of it. It's clear you already have a chademo plug otherwise you would not be fighting for it. It's not worth your breath.
          solas
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Naturenut99
          Exactly where did I fight for Chademo? (In fact, I explicitly voted for: neither - or either ). Exactly where did I claim I own a ChadeMo plug? (I don't) Exactly where did I say Chademo is smaller, or that the door size would be smaller (I didn't). Perhaps you should read more carefully exactly what my point is.
        Spec
        • 3 Years Ago
        @solas
        You know what critical things this SAE standard offers? Audi approval BMW approval Chrysler approval Daimler approval Ford approval General Motors approval Porsche approval Volkswagen approval International Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) approval ACEA, the European association of vehicle manufacturers approval And no license fees to TEPCO! http://www.greencarcongress.com/2010/01/akerwade-20100115.html You really wanna give money to TEPCO?
        SVX pearlie
        • 3 Years Ago
        @solas
        For transferring large amounts of electrical power without high losses (heat), by necessity, the physical connection will be large. And it will have to survive 20 years of daily plugging & unplugging. If the connector breaks, and creates a short in a 480V 40A, or DC fast charge, that's rather dangerous. Lethal, really.
          marcopolo
          • 3 Years Ago
          @SVX pearlie
          @ SVX pearlie A good argument for wireless :)
          solas
          • 3 Years Ago
          @SVX pearlie
          actually wireless, despite its inefficiencies -- if it were a standard, it avoids many of the pitfalls of these plug wars, is far more reliable (anyone who has used a public charger ... you'd think, after only two weeks, the damn cable had been dragged through World War III and back --- what exactly are these "people" doing to the plug?), and ... @ home, you just won't forget to plug in. It has other downsides, but -- yes, it has good arguments.
          Rotation
          • 3 Years Ago
          @SVX pearlie
          After a lot of opposition, I'm rather pro-wireless. Wireless means no one can come by and take the plug out of your car, stopping your charging. Wireless means no one can cut the charger probe off the charger to sell the copper for scrap. Honestly, even though it is less efficient, wireless seems like the place we're all headed.
      EZEE
      • 3 Years Ago
      Ahhh, my tip from a few posts down was used. Good, good...
        Edge
        • 3 Years Ago
        @EZEE
        Misunderstood, as I see you mean a few articles down. I don't see a post below by you.
          Edge
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Edge
          I think some people missed my sarcasm in the post. I notice in general, if you not a gung-ho EV fanatic here, and try to input a realistic perspective, you get down ranked. Fine by me.
          marcopolo
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Edge
          @Edge, I have no idea who keeps downranking even the most neutral of your posts !? Weird !
        Edge
        • 3 Years Ago
        @EZEE
        It's too bad, there is no option here to uprank posts, and have them filter to the top of the list, who want that option. I'm sure your posts, would always be at the top. ;)
          EZEE
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Edge
          I worded that wrong - it was a sebastian story one or two stories below where I tipped. I tried the tip button a few times, but it caused my computer to show strange messages (not just the voices in my head). so I just started screaming inside articles. realclearenergy.com, leftlanenews, and even occasionally jalopnik have good alt energy vehicle articles. realclearenergy.com is my fav, because they mine from all over the net for stuff. In a single day you can read everything on why the volt is cool, to why people don't like it, to all sorts of stuff on emerging technologies. Actually Greenjoyment (the guy that posts here has a site of his own) isn't bad either!) is good for posting many different sources.
          Edge
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Edge
          I think you mean realclearenergy.ORG not .COM. Thanks for the heads up. I will check it out, along with those other sites.
      Edge
      • 3 Years Ago
      It's compact, and might be easy to retrofit into existing EV's. Seems excellent in it's flexibility in offering four charge options. I like to hear more details on that 15 min charge option.
        Dave R
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Edge
        Retrofitting DC quick charging into an EV that doesn't have any DC quick charge capability is cost prohibitive and very invasive. You will never see any manufacturer do this. For CHAdeMO equipped cars, the best bet is that someone builds an adapter box that can interpret the SAE DC protocol and convert it to CHAdeMO, but given that the CHAdeMO plug by itself costs thousands of dollars I doubt we'll see it happen except perhaps as a proof of concept.
      usbseawolf2000
      • 3 Years Ago
      Who Killed The Electric Cars 3: Fast Charger Politics
      Randy C
      • 3 Years Ago
      My complaint is the new universal plug will not fit old cars like the Volt. The added pins exceeds the current J1772 area of interference specifications. Not to mention the plug looks a little intimidating. I prefer the current 2 different plugs system. What I don't get is what is wrong with having more than 1 charge port on a car? Electricity can go around as many corners as needed. It is not restricted by there having to be a gravity feed from the input port to the storage unit. Heck you can put a charge port on all 4 sides of a car if you want. A simple interlock will keep things safe. It's bad enough SAE created a problem with public charging stations through poor foresight. They did not restrict the location of the charge port on the vehicle. Now every public charger has to have a long heavy cord to reach every point on the vehicle. A cord that has to be deployed and stowed for every use. It can get tangled up or someone having a bad day can simply pull the plug throw it on the ground and drive off. Not to mention it is a tempting target for thieves and vandals. And the cord laying along the ground is a nice trip hazard. If every car had a charge port on the center front the parking can be deigned so the only a 6 foot cord is needed, like a gas pump. Park, walk to the front, lift the plug, turn 90 degrees, plug in car, what could be simpler? Put 2 ports on a car, one on the front for public charging and one on the side near the driver's door for home charging.
        solas
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Randy C
        "My complaint is the new universal plug will not fit old cars like the Volt" -- you don't have to worry about that, because ---as planned, these systems will not be common (there are thousands o f Level 2 chargers already), and, so far, they are devoted level 3 systems. Which means a Volt couldn't use it anyway, and, wouldn't care, because -- they will not be common. Which means this "backwards" (in time) compatibility is a strawman argument, leaving such a lovely "1 charge port" on the table as the benefit. Here some humor for you from the web: Here's a sneak peak at SAE's next proposed standard. It replaces the gasoline pump nozzle and the diesel pump nozzle with a single convenient connector. Although petroleum cars currently on the road have individual sockets for gas and/or diesel, and no car company has announced plans to build any car which could use the new connector, some SAE members may wish to enter the petroleum car market in the future. So SAE expects deployment of old style petroleum pumps in the U.S. to halt until the new standard pumps are ready. The rest of the world will of course continue to use the separate gasoline and diesel connectors http://desmond.imageshack.us/Himg88/scaled.php?server=88&filename=saegasnozzle.jpg&res=landing
        Rotation
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Randy C
        Interesting point about how DC fast chargers won't be usable on current cars. I presume though that every DC fast charger will be flanked by at least two non-fast chargers for the near future. I also (perhaps incorrectly) assumed that DC fast chargers will not double as AC chargers. That'd be more circuitry in there, raising the cost of the charger even more. I think having multiple different charge ports on a car makes no sense to me. That's why I like this plug.
          MTN RANGER
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Rotation
          I think they will be working on this. Here is a response to a Facebook question to Blink Networks regarding the new SAE standard: "We will start implementing the new SAE standard when vehicles start to roll out with the new connector. We are able to have two connectors on our DC Fast Chargers so we are excited for the implementation!" https://www.facebook.com/blinknetwork
        Rotation
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Randy C
        I'm gonna go back on my stance below. I don't think they want to people to hook their slow-charge cars to fast DC chargers anyway. Why do you want a car using up a DC fast charger for 5 hours to charge? If they want to slow charge cars, they'll put a 2nd probe on , leaving the fast probe for face charge cars. Or better yet they just might not. Put the fast chargers and slow charger far enough apart that no slow-charging car can park in the fast spot while slow charging, using it up. To a person who wants to fast charge, seeing a slow charging car in that spot would be akin to slow charge people complaining a charger parking space is ICEd.
        Spec
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Randy C
        "If every car had a charge port on the center front the parking can be deigned so the only a 6 foot cord is needed, like a gas pump." What are you talking about? Gas tank openings are all over the place on gas cars too. Left, right, center, etc. Gas pumps have long conduits too.
          Randy C
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Spec
          Take a look at the gas station. It is designed so that you can conveniently pull up to the dispensing unit. If your port is on the left you pull up one way, on the right you pull up the other. There is no line that dictates how far forward you have to pull in order to line up. 99.9% of parking lot stalls are nose in type. I live in a major city with over 600,000 people with another million in the suburbs and I can only think of 1 place where the default parking is back in. All of the charging stations I've seen installed put the EVSE at the front of the stall, either on a wall or a free standing bollard. The EVSE is required to have a 18 to 25 foot cord so that it can reach the back end of the car. The Mitsubishi "i" is a prime example, its charge port is on the rear. They expect this driver to back into the stall.
        Spec
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Randy C
        "My complaint is the new universal plug will not fit old cars like the Volt." Uh . . . the Volt can't handle level 3 DC charging. It is good it doesn't fit into the VOlt.
          Randy C
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Spec
          Here is the situation. You pull up to a charge station. You're driving an older car like the Volt. And you want to plug in and charge. But since there is only a charger with this new plug there you can't plug in because the plug won't fit. Remember this is going to be the standard charge port for all cars.
          JakeY
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Spec
          @Randy C Connectors for Level 2 chargers (like for the Volt) will not have the two extra DC pins on the bottom (this will remain true going forward), so it's a non-issue. Only if you happen upon a station that is both Level 2 AND DC (and no other level 2 only connector available) will this become an issue. But I find that unlikely, since a place with a DC station (50kW+) would have enough power available for multiple level 2 connectors (for the Volt 3.3kW), so it should also have multiple level 2 connectors available.
      marcopolo
      • 3 Years Ago
      This will be quite a dilemma for Carlos Ghosn, Renault will want to join with the Europeans, but Nissan will want to still fight it's corner! The PRC companies already are making, unlicensed, unauthorised copies of both technologies while everyone is arguing! But these are early days, and with wireless charging becoming more economic and practical, plugs themselves may be obsolete ;)
        Dave R
        • 3 Years Ago
        @marcopolo
        Renault has already gone a 3rd route - they are using the Mennekes charge port which can take up to about 50 kW AC - single or 3 phase. No expensive stationary DC charge station required.
          JakeY
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Dave R
          "Renault has already gone a 3rd route - they are using the Mennekes charge port which can take up to about 50 kW AC - single or 3 phase" The Mennekes/IEC 62196 charge port is akin to J1772. It's not really a third route, besides from the support for 3-phase (43kW max). There is also a DC extension for the Mennekes/IEC 62196 charge port that will be compatible with the J1772-DC proposed here (the foot print of the two will be the same, so car manufacturers can just swap J1772 with Mennekes for the European market without having to change the connector opening in any way.). They call the two systems the "Combined Charging System" and that is what they are going to show at EVS26. Initial specs for J1772-DC calls for 90kW/200A charging, with up to 250kW possible in the future. So it's not just the 50kW/125A being offered by CHAdeMO.
          Rotation
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Dave R
          JakeY, this (CCS) is the combined system you are talking about. When engadget ran the story they showed the combined connector that used Mennekes on top as well as the J1772 on top pic here.
        Naturenut99
        • 3 Years Ago
        @marcopolo
        Ghosn, I think is smarter than that. He seems to be not only a fighter but rational when he needs to be. He might not like it. But he should realize that its a losing battle to fight a recognized standard. It would be easier and cheaper to (if they can) retrofit the new plug or just quickly change to the actual standard. If they fight it, they would be the ones hindering the process. This industry doesnt need martyrs, when the martyrs would not only die but lose the war also. (Sorry for the dramatic wording... dont mean it to be... just couldnt quickly think of another way) While wireless is interesting, but it's even further away from being a standard. How hard is it really to plug it in?
          SVX pearlie
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Naturenut99
          I didn't mention DAT or UMD, as I was thinking it might be excessive.
          SVX pearlie
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Naturenut99
          No, he should be like Sony and stick to his guns. PS Vita Memory, Sony Memory Stick, Sony Betamax, were all "better" than SD memory, VHS, etc. And Sony actually managed to get DVD over HD.
          Spec
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Naturenut99
          @SVX Don't forget the Sony mini-Disc! ;-) Yeah, sometimes you gotta know when to give up and join the party.
        MTN RANGER
        • 3 Years Ago
        @marcopolo
        Wireless charging companies are using the J1772 standard for communications and compatibility reasons.
      Dan Frederiksen
      • 3 Years Ago
      not a fan of this ********* design. and from the picture it's based on j1772 but the european EVs don't use j1772. no french or asian automakers are part of it. even if we assumed everybody adopted it, it's not exactly elegant. it will require quite the barn door on the vehicle which is particularly inelegant if you want 3 or 4 ports on a car. yet another case of everybody doing everything wrong
        marcopolo
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Dan Frederiksen
        @ Dan Frederiksen [quote] not a fan of this ********* design....yet another case of everybody doing everything wrong [/quote] Hmm,,,,now why does this not surprise me ?
        Dan Frederiksen
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Dan Frederiksen
        really? "*********" is too graphic to be allowed here?? the shape is reminiscent of testicles. in a pouch. sensoring it makes it look worse. people run through all the possible swear words it could be. big fail sebastian. this week in unnecessary censorship.
        Naturenut99
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Dan Frederiksen
        re: "...particularly inelegant if you want 3 or 4 ports on a car." The whole point of this is to create one and only one port. It would handle all of L1, L2 and L3. ONE SINGLE PORT, not two like Nissan. That single port can handle all the "levels/modes" they mention. I dont know who you think is going to be installing 3 or 4...? I've paid very close attention for many years and no one has suggested 3 or 4. If your thinking every level has its own port just shows how little you actually know. Plus there are only 3 not 4 levels. The only difference in the DC for home vs. public would be the amps delivered, NOT the wiring or ports. Just like the J1772 can handle high L2 amps it can also handle low L1 amps... Same with the hm vs. public DC... It can not only handle the high input of public but the lower home input.
          Dan Frederiksen
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Naturenut99
          Naturenut, my arguments always hold up. you are the one in error. you mistakenly assume that I'm advocating j1772 and chademo. I'm all for an integrated plug but my point is that it can be much more elegant and smaller. in general if you think I made a mistake, it's because you did.
          Dan Frederiksen
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Naturenut99
          use of caps doesn't make your point any less unintelligent. and nissan has one port. mitsu imiev has two. a combined plug doesn't preclude the need for multiple ports dude... multiple ports would help avoid a large cable hanging over the car
          Rotation
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Naturenut99
          Dan: The Nissan LEAF has two ports if it has fast charging. The J1772 and ChaDeMo ports are side-by-side.
          Naturenut99
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Naturenut99
          Dan F.: If what you are talking about is putting ports are multiple sides of a car. Then having one port that handles all three levels makes it even more worth while. Makes it more reasonable to have on front and back or both sides if it's a all in one port. Otherwise, under your argument there would be 2 J plugs for two different areas along with two chademo's for the two different sides. Which does get you up to the four ports you were complaining about. But... using an all in one would make that a total of only 2 ports... 1 on each side versus 2 on each side. Your argument on this doesnt hold up.
        Rotation
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Dan Frederiksen
        So one company, Renault and their Nissan subsidiary doesn't sign up and the world has ended? I think you exaggerate. I agree that pic shows a rather large connector. I can't figure out why the DC ports aren't next to (instead of below) the J1772 portion either, since cars have more space horizontally on the side than vertically.
          Naturenut99
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Rotation
          Good point on the side vs bottom placement of the L3 addition.
        Spec
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Dan Frederiksen
        "but the european EVs don't use j1772. no french or asian automakers are part of it." Well . . . the European car makers signed up for it. "ACEA, the European association of vehicle manufacturers has also selected the Combined Charging System as its AC/DC-charging interface for all new vehicle types in Europe beginning in 2017." I don't understand that 2017 thing at all though . . . are they going to make a bunch of chargers for 5 years and then suddenly abandon them all? They must have an adapter or other migration plan
      goodoldgorr
      • 3 Years Ago
      It won't work because all the different battery need different voltage and current. When bev manufacturers conceived their battery they didn't know that some will want to fast-charge them, so this is just a painful and useless experiment.
        Rotation
        • 3 Years Ago
        @goodoldgorr
        Actually gorr, during DC fast charging, the charger (the stationary thing, not the thing in your car) produces different voltages all through the charge cycle, the car requests a voltage and the charger has to produce it. It ramps up the voltage as the battery gets more full. So the fact that different packs need different voltages isn't all that big a problem, they already had to solve that problem to create DC fast charging in the first place. Also, DC-DC voltage conversion is actually very easy now. A smartphone has between 5 and 8 DC-DC voltage converters in it, and 3-4 of those are the efficient switching type that a DC fast charger uses.
          Rotation
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Rotation
          gorr: Smartphones take in +5V DC over USB. The chargers are not particularly adapted. And again, whether they take their own adapter or not, they still have 5-8 DC-DC voltage converters in them. You're wrong about how hard it is to DC-DC convert. And you also still don't understand that DC fast chargers already by design issue the voltage requested by the car. Having to select different voltages within the available range just isn't much of an issue. There would have to be a practical limit on the top voltage requested, so packs may have to have more parallel cells and less in series. What's this other stuff you talk about? What's that have to do with standards?
          SVX pearlie
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Rotation
          "A Smartphone is sold with his own unique adapted charger" No, they all charge just fine off regular USB from adapter in car, wall, or PC.
          goodoldgorr
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Rotation
          A Smartphone is sold with his own unique adapted charger. A fast charger made for all available electric cars is not made yet and cannot adapte itself to the leaf, imiev, volt, tesla, prius plug-in which are been engineered to recharge at home at night with 110 volt. You then need a special charger that is different for all these car if you want something more fast. Also manufacturers have said that you cannot use the battery right after fast-charging it because or cooling. If you need a fast charger you will have to buy it for yourself and put it somewhere on the road where you 'might' stop for a refill which will add tremendously to the cost and also you will be bound for years and years to just one model of bev and the car manufacturer will change anyway his battery and connector each 3-5 years. If they didn't realease hydrogen then big tractor-trailer truck will switch to battery diesel hybrid and they will occupy each fast charger on the road and with big batteries they will be there for hours. A therotical fast chargers infrastructure will then cost way more money and ressources then an hydrogen infrastructure and will be innadapted to any electric car sold prior then the date they will agree to just one norm. Fast charging a bev in the day when electric comsumption is already at his max output will cost a fortune.
        Chris M
        • 3 Years Ago
        @goodoldgorr
        Gorr, just because you don't understand how it works doesn't mean it cannot work. There are automotive engineers that do understand, and they've designed this fast charging system to work with a variety of different battery types used in a variety of different cars. It really is a smart charging system.
          goodoldgorr
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Chris M
          It won't work because all the different battery need different voltage and current. When bev manufacturers conceived their battery they didn't know that some will want to fast-charge them, so this is just a painful and useless experiment
          Chris M
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Chris M
          Um, Gorr, apparently you didn't realize that this new standard DC charging outlet is able to supply a variety of different voltages and current levels. That's what it means to "work with a variety of different battery types used in a variety of different cars". No major compatibility issues.
        • 3 Years Ago
        @goodoldgorr
        But it will work - the vehicle is in control of the charging, specifying charge voltage and current limits via the control pilot wire using Power Line Communications. There is also compatibility with AC charging as the system uses a so-called combi-plug with pins for both AC and DC according to J1772. Vehicles from all eight manufacturers will support this standard and it will soon be codified by SAE and IEC/ISO. Look for vehicles and chargers to be available within a year.
        Spec
        • 3 Years Ago
        @goodoldgorr
        Uh . . . gorr we do have the technology to convert between different voltage and current levels.
      mustang_sallad
      • 3 Years Ago
      No need to act all surprised and pissed off about this. SAE J1772 is the only universally adopted standard for charging now, and this is an extension of it that they've been planning for years. It's just too bad they didn't have it ready in time before Nissan and Mitsubishi went to market with their Chademo connectors Now it's just a question of whether Nissan has rolled out enough vehicles and charge stations to have achieved a critical mass such that their's BECOMES the standard. I'm hoping not though, as the charge port area on the Leaf is HUGE. You could cut it in half with this single combo connector. I just hope existing customers wouldn't be left hanging, hopefully it'd be possible to retrofit, although it wouldn't be straightforward!
        noevfud
        • 3 Years Ago
        @mustang_sallad
        It's not a standard. They are trying to make it one. Besides, there is no law on this so consumers should have choices. The reason there is less chademo is because installations of chargers are dragging as a result of this silly plug. It's political not practical. Dan id right, this is a beast and if you only want a small J plug then you need a huge barn door. Why not go with something that is all over Japan and Europe already and proven to work? Before you force a new "standard" build an EV.
          Naturenut99
          • 3 Years Ago
          @noevfud
          Actually, they literally are the ones who decide on the standard. There has not been a L3 standard yet, because they didnt agree to one until now. This design has been in the works for a while/long time/years. I'm surprised it wasnt ratified last year, the spec was ready last year.
        • 3 Years Ago
        @mustang_sallad
        This site as some of the most negative posters on the net, denigrating the effortsof the people that are working so hard to develop vehicle electrification. All this ragging about how it should have been done sooner, should have been done cheaper, bla bla bla. Instead of complaining why not join the SAE efforts in this regard and be an agent of change.
    • Load More Comments
    Share This Photo X