New J1772 standard could replace Chademo
- Thread starter evmike
- Start date
Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:
davewill
Well-known member
Old news. They've been threatening to do something for a couple of years in hopes of slowing CHAdeMO and the Japanese car makers down. It doesn't matter because no cars are going to have the plugs for who knows how long. By then CHAdeMO should have a good chance to win the day.
Nekota
Well-known member
The SAE and IEEE may well propose a new connector but the design is for a single connector rather than a separate plugin. The DC quick charging electronics will support either version with their respective plugs so the charging station will likely have two plugs, one that gets used on current technology and one from the SAE. I see no problem other than the extra expense for the charging station to supply two connectors. And since the CHADEMO version has fewer heavy conductors than the SAE it will be lighter than the SAE and thus easier to use.
GeekEV
Well-known member
Are you suggesting that they would come up with another DIFFERENT connector that consolidate and replace both the current L1/2 J1772 plug *and* the CHADEMO DC plug? I can see then wanting to consolidate plugs, but to do so with a new design and NOT the already standardized J1772 would be absolute lunacy. Let's hope THAT's not what they're thinking.
walterbays
Well-known member
I'm afraid what they're thinking is that if they can use standards confusion to slow down adoption of CHAdeMO then they can slow down adoption of Nissan and Mitsubishi EV's, until Detroit has some EV's to compete. Then eventually some of the Detroit EV's will begin to be offered with SAE compatible quick charging ports.GeekEV said:
I hope they're dreaming, and by the time the first car hits the pavement that can use an SAE quick charging connector there are already thousands of CHAdeMO quick charging stations in place.
garygid
Well-known member
Some portion of the new proposed connector would take the existing L1/L2 J1772-2010 connector directly.
Plugging in the new Big-L3-DC connector would just cover the L1/L2 part, and might (or might not) use any of the wires there.
If it is ONLY a plug change, then new plugs (or even adapters) could be made.
However, if they are ALSO re-inventing a new communication protocol, WITHOUT backward compatibility to Chademo, that would APPEAR to me to be just an effort to make EVs fail so that GM does NOT need to make EVs AT ALL, and they can continue to make and sell their oil-eaters.
Plugging in the new Big-L3-DC connector would just cover the L1/L2 part, and might (or might not) use any of the wires there.
If it is ONLY a plug change, then new plugs (or even adapters) could be made.
However, if they are ALSO re-inventing a new communication protocol, WITHOUT backward compatibility to Chademo, that would APPEAR to me to be just an effort to make EVs fail so that GM does NOT need to make EVs AT ALL, and they can continue to make and sell their oil-eaters.
rumpole
Well-known member
I'm confused. No matter what new standard SAE comes up with, won't one be able to make an adapter to fit CHAdeMO? I would be surprised if the new standard includes some sort of active communication protocol, since that would just bog down deployment further, and therefore GM et al. would be shooting themselves in the foot, while Nissan and the other CHAdeMO makers would be burning rubber. The beauty of what Nissan has done is that they essentially own the Level 3 market by actually selling product and creating market momentum.
garygid
Well-known member
If the communication protocol is different, AND there is no Chademo-compatible subset or mode, then changing plugs or building "simple" physical adapters will be insufficient.
Another Beta vs. VHS war?
To bad humanoids do not work together rather than "fight" each other at almost every opportunity. You could do SO MUCH good working together, MAYBE even survive as a species!
Another Beta vs. VHS war?
To bad humanoids do not work together rather than "fight" each other at almost every opportunity. You could do SO MUCH good working together, MAYBE even survive as a species!
DarkStar
Well-known member
That would be a smart thing for the SAE to do, even smarter would be to just adopt CHAdeMO without any changes. Since it's the smart thing to do though, it means it probably won't happen, but we won't know for another 7-10 years (that's about how long it will take for them to decide on Level 3 DC charging).rumpole said:
DarkStar
Well-known member
It's not a Betamax vs. VHS war since there is no Betamax. CHAdeMO is the de-facto VHS until something else shows up, and the SAE is still many years away from finalizing a standard.garygid said:
Unfortunately in the state with the largest population of LEAFs there are no Chademo charging stations. If Ecotality doesn't get it's act together and start installing Chademo charging stations per the blink network (20 in Bay Area for example) then the FUD of SAE will win since the argument is we might as well wait for the new standard.
I still have not found a map of where the Chademo stations will be located or when they will be installed.
I still have not found a map of where the Chademo stations will be located or when they will be installed.
garygid
Well-known member
There are 2 Chademo QC installed in CA, one actually working, which can be unlocked on polite request in person.
There WAS Beta, it LOST the war.
There WAS Beta, it LOST the war.
hill
Well-known member
Several manufacturers are busy building CHAdeMO's even now. Even as SAE and GM continue to try to put the brakes on EV developement, the CHAdeMO's are coming. Apparenty SAE and GM can even screw up trying to screw up others.walterbays said:
.
LTLFTcomposite
Well-known member
Convinces me all the more that extra $$$ for the QC port is better kept in my pocket.
GeekEV
Well-known member
I get it. So they're suggesting a coaxial plug arrangement with a J1772 in the middle and a larger plug with extra DC pins on the outside. That makes some sense, although I could see it confusing consumers who look at the small plug and the big socket and think "they don't match"... I'd rather have two for clarity's sake.
You've got it. That's exactly the idea -- one plug that can handle either L1, L2, or DC charging. They'll probably use the existing communication pins. Completely disagree that two plugs are better or less confusing. One plug is way more flexible from a design perspective. As for being confusing for consumers, if there are two plugs then you have to know which one to use. With only one plug you don't ever have to think about it. You push it on and any of the three will work.GeekEV said:
Apart from the better mousetrap idea, I think it's a virtual certainty that the SAE would not go for a standard based on patented technology. This may create a bit of temporary disruption but it shouldn't be very difficult to change out any DC charging stations to the SAE standard. Probably wouldn't be worth it for the cars. FWIW I have a fast charger but after five months I haven't found a need to use one so I'm not too fussed about ending up with orphan technology. Of course mine was free. I might feel differently had I plunked down actual money for one, though I would never have paid for the option since the value of so called "fast charging" seems quite modest to me.
DarkStar
Well-known member
I'll believe it when I see it. What we know today as J1772-2010 (the plug update from AVCON) took a lot longer than a year.drees said:
DarkStar
Well-known member
FYI, Oregon's 2nd publicly accessible CHAdeMO DC Quick Charger (Eaton brand) is opening on Tuesday.garygid said:
http://www.slideshare.net/patrick0101/portland-electric-avenue
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
A thread for people happy with their Leaf
- Latest: DougWantsALeaf
