EV aficionado (Bjørn Nyland) denounces DC fast charging/supercharging!

unkel

liamog wrote: »

Whereas other manufacturers are applying the restricted rate from day one.

Some of those other manufacturers didn't realise they were going to restrict fast charging like this until they made their second EV

Kramer

unkel wrote: »

Jesus, will you forget you ever saw that stupid video from Nyland? It doesn't matter how often it was supercharged.

Ah come on now unkel. He has owned what, 6 or 7 Teslas? He has probably driven each & every iteration of Tesla, at length, for 100s of thousands of kilometers. He has driven practically EVERY make, model & iteration of BEV ever produced, in the USA, throughout Europe & Asia.
He is an EV fanatic & arguably THE most experienced BEV driver of all time, driving the 1000km challenge regularly, in all conditions, all documented & usually live streamed.

Everyone "in the know" uses his reviews as a yardstick of BEV range & practicality.
You yourself regularly refer to his Ioniq videos, largely as the reason you opted for the car.

As soon as he highlights anything even remotely problematic about Teslas or BEVs in general, his video is "stupid"?

Didn't Apple have to apologise & replace batteries "as a gesture" after they were caught surreptitiously throttling iPhone battery charging or actual phone performance? Very similar sequence to what Tesla are doing IMO, similar company ethos, similar company fan base i.e. Apple/Tesla can do no wrong in their fanboys' eyes .

Let's be realistic here. This, if the mainstream media/ICE companies/fossil fuel industry etc. latch on to it, could be hugely damaging to mainstream BEV adoption.

Didn't you say we don't need bigger batteries, we need smallish batteries with loads of rapid chargers with high charge rates?
Tesla say not to supercharge too often, as do VW (rapid charge).
Now Bjorn has confirmed.

Take their advice or don't but people should be aware, before throwing down €50,000 or €60,000 plus another €10,000 of my (tax) money .

Kramer

liamog wrote: »

I believe the charging profile is mostly a business decision.

Does a company sell a car that has a charging rate at 1.6C from 0-160,000km even with constant rapid charging. Or does the company sell a car that starts with a much higher 3C charge rate, that over time reduces based on the amount of rapid charging?

Isn't it trumpeted, ad infinitum, how quickly Teslas can recharge? Coupled with their widespread network of superchargers, aren't Tesla the only real choice for long distance motorway cruising?
Don't experts aim to arrive at a supercharger with a nice hot battery & 10% SOC so as to maximise their charge speed? Don't they gaze in awe at the screen as their indicated charge speed rockets up to 150kW, 170kW, 200kw........., making sure not to share a "stall" so as to maximise this speed?

Do they realise that every single kWh added by the supercharger is damaging their car & will, ultimately, reduce their future charge speed, likely range & future resale value of their expensive car?

Mod Note: Snipped Double Posting

unkel

Kramer wrote: »

Ah come on now unkel. He has owned what, 6 or 7 Teslas? He has probably driven each & every iteration of Tesla, at length, for 100s of thousands of kilometers. He has driven practically EVERY make, model & iteration of BEV ever produced, in the USA, throughout Europe & Asia.
He is an EV fanatic & arguably THE most experienced BEV driver of all time, driving the 1000km challenge regularly, in all conditions, all documented & usually live streamed.

Everyone "in the know" uses his reviews as a yardstick of BEV range & practicality.
You yourself regularly refer to his Ioniq videos, largely as the reason you opted for the car.

As soon as he highlights anything even remotely problematic about Teslas or BEVs in general, his video is "stupid"?

Did you not see the previous points I made? There's not going to be any throttling of Model 3 until the car reaches nearly a million km, even for people who fast charge far more than average. Nyland has taken it out of all proportions and him only AC charging his own Model 3 at home to 60% is beyond absurd. I have lost a lot of respect for him over this issue

liamog

Mod Note: I've pulled some of the discussion from the CPO thread into this one, as we've two threads talking around the same subject.

Kramer

unkel wrote: »

There's not going to be any throttling of Model 3 until the car reaches nearly a million km

You've no basis for claiming that to be fair & I'd be leaning more to Bjorn's opinion based on his history, experiences, contacts & industry knowledge .

Did you read this post which shows Tesla state they started throttling 2016 75kWh cars at just 10,000km & continued throttling them right up to 50,000km.
Do you really believe Model 3s which came out barely a few years later, which were marketed as charging at up to 250kW, will see NO throttling at almost 1,000,000km?

Bjorn's wrong? Tesla themselves are wrong?

That's my opinion anyway & I'd still buy a Tesla tomorrow, if it suited me. I can't be accused of being a hater or anti EV, nor can Bjorn, but we need to be realistic here. No need to overegg the pudding .

liamog

Kramer wrote: »

Isn't it trumpeted, ad infinitum, how quickly Teslas can recharge? Coupled with their widespread network of superchargers, aren't Tesla the only real choice for long distance motorway cruising?

That's an opinion that I'm sure most non-tesla owners do not share. I suspect it mostly comes from people applying the US situation to Europe. Europe has funded (a minimal) cross country interurban networks in the EU using TEN-T programs. In the US, the cross country network (Electrify America) was primarily funded by VW as part of the diesel gate settlement.

For the current network, 200km range cars made it doable, the batch of 400km range cars we're now seeing (starting from the Kona) make it relatively straightforward.

Back to the points re charging speeds, it's up to the consumers to decide wether they'd prefer a car that can always charge at 100kW, versus a car that is capable of charging at much higher rates but only for a limited amount of charges.

To put the numbers into perspective, it's reported that the Model 3 restrictions start at around 2600kWh of supercharging. Given the studies show an average 85% home/work AC charging. The average driver will see restrictions after 17,333kWh of use. At a reported efficency of 15.1kWh/100km (SR+ EV-Database.org) that means they will only start to see restrictions at 114,000km, which for an average usage of 17,000km/year is 6.7 years. So the average Joe is basically not going to notice until well into the life of the car. The reported info also reports the restriction is gradual, I suspect for most normal users, the car will be off the road before the final cap (which makes it perform the same as traditional manufacturer vehicles) is hit.

Lumen

liamog wrote: »

To put the numbers into perspective, it's reported that the Model 3 restrictions start at around 2600kWh of supercharging. Given the studies show an average 85% home/work AC charging. The average driver will see restrictions after 17,333kWh of use. At a reported efficency of 15.1kWh/100km (SR+ EV-Database.org) that means they will only start to see restrictions at 114,000km, which for an average usage of 17,000km/year is 6.7 years. So the average Joe is basically not going to notice until well into the life of the car. The reported info also reports the restriction is gradual, I suspect for most normal users, the car will be off the road before the final cap (which makes it perform the same as traditional manufacturer vehicles) is hit.

I think you're getting mixed up there. The Model 3 nerfing is rumoured to start at 20,000kWh of fast charging, not 2,600. So that's around 400 10-80% charges on a 75kWh pack. And most stops won't be 10-80%.

Superchargers in Ireland are only 120kW max, so using a Tesla charger you won't really notice the drop to 95kW, assuming that the nerf is flat cap and not proportional drop.

And again, 400 charges is one a week for over 7 years.

Of course Tesla might introduce more nerfing later, like they did with the S and X. Or not. We don't know.

ELM327

Lumen wrote: »

I think you're getting mixed up there. The Model 3 nerfing is rumoured to start at 20,000kWh of fast charging, not 2,600. So that's around 400 10-80% charges on a 75kWh pack. And most stops won't be 10-80%.

Superchargers in Ireland are only 120kW max, so using a Tesla charger you won't really notice the drop to 95kW, assuming that the nerf is flat cap and not proportional drop.

And again, 400 charges is one a week for over 7 years.

Of course Tesla might introduce more nerfing later, like they did with the S and X. Or not. We don't know.

This is true.
My S is nerfed, I knew when buying it.
The only difference is at Ionity. 95kW vs 150 odd is a bit of extra time. But generally we stop for 30 minutes at Ionity or Tesla Suc and arrive back out to 85-90%, with no hanging around for the car. So it's all good.


If I was used to Model 3 on V3 speeds then I'm sure 95kW would feel glacial. It feels slow (in terms of km added) compared to my Ioniq!

KCross

Lumen wrote: »

I think you're getting mixed up there. The Model 3 nerfing is rumoured to start at 20,000kWh of fast charging...

Thats the key word. The reality is we dont know yet when it will start happening on the Model 3


The main issue here is the marketing. People dont know kW's to kWh's when it comes to EV's so to expect the general public to be able to understand this issue is going to be difficult and if the issue does come to pass on the Model 3 it will leave alot of secondhand owners in a few years time with a bad taste in their mouth when they get a much slower charge speed than they expected.... Tesla should be more open about this issue.

This is very very like Nissan's rapidgate... they advertised one speed but delivered something very different in some circumstances.

Lumen

KCross wrote: »

The main issue here is the marketing. People dont know kW's to kWh's when it comes to EV's so to expect the general public to be able to understand this issue is going to be difficult and if the issue does come to pass on the Model 3 it will leave alot of secondhand owners in a few years time with a bad taste in their mouth when they get a much slower charge speed than they expected.... Tesla should be more open about this issue.

This is very very like Nissan's rapidgate... they advertised one speed but delivered something very different in some circumstances.

What advertising/marketing? I had a quick skim over the Tesla website and can't find anything about DC charging speeds.

KCross

Lumen wrote: »

What advertising/marketing? I had a quick skim over the Tesla website and can't find anything about DC charging speeds.

The 1000km/hr charge speed is oft heralded/tweeted by Tesla/Musk.
As is the speed of the superchargers themselves. Each time a new iteration of superchargers is released its marketed accordingly.

And the 250kW is on the spec sheet of the Model 3 LR and P (apparently 170kW max on the SR+)... its on their website.... look again.

Lumen

KCross wrote: »

The 1000km/hr charge speed is oft heralded/tweeted by Tesla/Musk.

The brainfarts of company executives have no basis in consumer law, as far as I understand it, but if you could find some examples of such tweets that would be useful.

KCross wrote: »

As is the speed of the superchargers themselves. Each time a new iteration of superchargers is released its marketed accordingly.

Sure, and Ionity blow the 350kW trumpet despite no car from their stakeholders being able to charge that fast.

KCross wrote: »

And the 250kW is on the spec sheet of the Model 3 LR and P (apparently 170kW max on the SR+)... its on their website.... look again.

I looked again and found this:

https://www.tesla.com/en_IE/support/supercharging

KCross wrote: »

What is the peak charge rate for V3 Superchargers?

V3 Superchargers are capable of delivering peak charge rates up to 250kW.

Will all Tesla vehicles be able to receive a 250kW charge?
All Tesla models will benefit from the elimination of power sharing in V3 architecture. The peak rate each vehicle achieves will vary with size and age of battery pack, state of charge and ambient temperature conditions.

How long will it take to reach 80% state of charge at V3 Superchargers?
We expect average charge times to be cut in half when the benefits of On-Route Battery Warmup are combined with V3 Supercharger power capability. The impact to individual owners will vary based on multiple factors, such as size and condition of battery pack.

So age and condition are specifically mentioned. What's the problem?

With respect, I think you might be mistaking the frothy vomit of Tesla fanboys and websites run by Tesla investors with official company marketing material. The Tesla website is detailed but measured and makes no claims which this nerfing would affect, from what I can see.

KCross

Lumen wrote: »

The Tesla website is detailed but measured and makes no claims which this nerfing would affect, from what I can see.

Go to the Model 3 page and go to the spec section... it lists 250kW there.

It does say "max" but it doesnt say anything about this nerfing.

Even what you've posted above is vague, dont you think? It lists 250kW and says it might not reach that but it doesnt mention that it can be as low at 95kW and in some cases 50kW! Thats misleading, imo.


As I said, Nissan did the exact same. They listed charge times and speeds which were best case scenarios and then when people did long distance journeys got a very different result to much uproar!

This is heading along the same lines IF it happens to the Model 3.

Lumen

KCross wrote: »

Go to the Model 3 page and go to the spec section... it lists 250kW there.

It does say "max" but it doesnt say anything about this nerfing.

I just can't see it. I see this.

https://www.tesla.com/en_ie/model3

Lumen

Ah KCross, you're looking on the US site.

https://www.tesla.com/model3

That site has this:

Lumen

Anyway, having cleared that up, I'll answer your question

KCross wrote: »

It does say "max" but it doesnt say anything about this nerfing.

Even what you've posted above is vague, dont you think? It lists 250kW and says it might not reach that but it doesnt mention that it can be as low at 95kW and in some cases 50kW! Thats misleading, imo.

No I don't think it's vague, or misleading.

I suppose they could hyperlink to the parts of the website I've quoted above, that go into more detail, but that Specs screen is hardly shoved in your face. The charging speed is just not a major part of their website marketing.

I guess the reason they don't list speed on the Irish sites is because the superchargers here are only 120kW.

edit: no, the UK site is also non-specific about charging speed, and they have a V3 supercharger in London.

KCross

Lumen wrote: »

No I don't think it's vague, or misleading.

Fair enough, we’re all entitled to our opinion. I think they should be more forthcoming with this significantly reduced charge rate.

Mupchease

I don’t think it’s misleading. I think even the average non tech person knows that battery’s are not as good as they age. It’s expected nearly especially thanks to the Apple iPhone battery issue. Wasn’t it found that all companies were doing similar just Apples iPhone was noticed the most ?

Every ice car gets worse with age too. I really don’t see the issue. They also make top end claims with their speed and efficiency. It’s a car thing, it’s not something new that only cropped up once EVs hit the market.

The only thing il say is the cars are still new and we are still finding out more about them. It’s just like when after a few years people can turn around and say a certain car model and year will have an expected issue. The ground isn’t uprooted when 5 years down the road a known turbo issue happens.

btkm8unsl0w5r4

Mupchease wrote: »

I don’t think it’s misleading. I think even the average non tech person knows that battery’s are not as good as they age. It’s expected nearly especially thanks to the Apple iPhone battery issue. Wasn’t it found that all companies were doing similar just Apples iPhone was noticed the most ?

Every ice car gets worse with age too. I really don’t see the issue. They also make top end claims with their speed and efficiency. It’s a car thing, it’s not something new that only cropped up once EVs hit the market.

The only thing il say is the cars are still new and we are still finding out more about them. It’s just like when after a few years people can turn around and say a certain car model and year will have an expected issue. The ground isn’t uprooted when 5 years down the road a known turbo issue happens.

Will you take your common sense and pragmatism elsewhere, we are trying to have a hissy fit here.

liamog

I'm pretty simple when it comes to this.

For the duration of the warranty time on my vehicle, I expect it to be capable of rapid charging at a rate as advertised when I bought it.

I'm OK with the reduced range because the warranty specifies the reduction, I would expect any reduction in charging ability to also be outlined in the warranty conditions.

Old diesel

Tesla Joy on youtube referred to a 100 k miles Model 3....

Car is supercharged everyday.....

Still charging at 211 kw on version 3 supercharger.

It wasn't her car but one she saw on a Model 3 Facebook group.

Tesla Joy has the opposite view to Bjorn on this - she reckons the Model 3 has a different battery and cooling.

Now of course we could argue that 211 is nerfed if we compare it to 250 kw.

But it's a huge difference from 95 kw and we know it drops from 250 kw very fast so could be a too high SOC thing too.

Lumen

liamog wrote: »

I'm pretty simple when it comes to this.

For the duration of the warranty time on my vehicle, I expect it to be capable of rapid charging at a rate as advertised when I bought it.

I'm OK with the reduced range because the warranty specifies the reduction, I would expect any reduction in charging ability to also be outlined in the warranty conditions.

Tesla does not advertise nor warranty charging speeds in Ireland.

Nothing is more sure than that Li batteries degrade when in use. It's pretty decent for Tesla to safeguard their cars and customers from thermal events when the batteries age.

You always have an option to replace your battery pack if the performance is not good enough for your usage case after 200k kms of constant 250 kW charging. By that time the car has probably paid for itself anyway if that is what is needed. It's a good excuse anyway for everybody else to stop using the DC chargers as their personal charging station if you can charge somewhere else instead.