Supercharging can't be good for the battery.
2nd Generation Volt to be Supercharger Capable?
Wouldn't it be great if GM partnered with Tesla to expand the use of Supercharger technology? Imagine charging in a few minutes using Superchargers with the next generation Chevrolet Volt that has a larger battery.
GM could use the Tesla Motors adapter too, and make a converter available for those with J1772 EVSEs at home like one of the ClipperCreek models.
GM could use the Tesla Motors adapter too, and make a converter available for those with J1772 EVSEs at home like one of the ClipperCreek models.
21 - 31 of 31 Posts
Well as has been said, "We did not move out of the stone ages because we ran out of stones".The Volt already has a wonderful supercharger network in the USA: 114,533 retail gas stations. Supercharging a Volt 200 miles takes less than 2 minutes, vs 30 minutes in an electric supercharger.
That is the entire point of the Voltec drive train: to get rid of the hassle and range anxiety disadvantages of EV driving.
This assumes building a fast charging network, not just along main freeway routes, but at every workplace, shopping mall, restaurant, movie theater, and any place else where there is public parking.I agree with most of the comments that DC fast charging/Tesla type super charging is not really needed for the Volt.
I DO think, though, that faster charging, even if only 6.6 kW charge rates, would be really useful for a substantial portion of the Volt buying public. I frequently drive 60 or 70 miles and being able to get 20 miles per hour of charging while taking a lunch break (instead of the current 10-11 with the 3.3 kW charge rate) would really make a difference. It would also make using public charging stations that charge by the minute make a lot more sense than they do now.
Is it a make or break item like more AER, lower MSRP or roomier back seats/seating for 5? Probably not. But it would help me decide on a Volt when my current lease runs out in 2016, instead of another plug in choice. Heck make it an option, I would pay $500 to get it, maybe more, and it would cost GM a lot less than that to do the upgrade.
I still say this is trying to turn an EREV into an EV.
If it is a deal breaker, then so be it......
What we need is more vehicle choices instead of one vehicle with all options. What is this, the Bradley Fighting Vehicle? Someday when the Volt is not the only EREV on the road, people will stop trying to make it do "EVERYTHING".
Baragona, I understand where you are coming from on the issue, and like I said, I don't think 3.3 kW charging would be a deal breaker for me. But given the fact that the main point of the Volt is being a no compromise car that is primarily electric but can drive all day when you want to, why wouldn't you make it charge at a 6.6 kW rate, which is becoming the minimum for a serious electric car? This isn't rocket science, nor is it expensive, but it would it would help a lot of Volt drivers do a lot less driving on gas.
For just $300-$500 increased cost to GM, you can get a Volt with an extra 10 miles per hour of charge rate. That is a huge upgrade that a lot of Volt owners would use fairly frequently. And it would make using public chargers that charge by the hour less of a losing proposition. There are already enough chargers in place in most larger towns to make 6.6 kW charge rates a very nice option to avail yourself of. Within a year or two it will be even better, more ubiquitous, option.
I agree with you on the more vehicle choices. There are so many people on this site that really want an Equinox/MPV5 that it really is obvious that there is a demand for larger vehicles.
For just $300-$500 increased cost to GM, you can get a Volt with an extra 10 miles per hour of charge rate. That is a huge upgrade that a lot of Volt owners would use fairly frequently. And it would make using public chargers that charge by the hour less of a losing proposition. There are already enough chargers in place in most larger towns to make 6.6 kW charge rates a very nice option to avail yourself of. Within a year or two it will be even better, more ubiquitous, option.
I agree with you on the more vehicle choices. There are so many people on this site that really want an Equinox/MPV5 that it really is obvious that there is a demand for larger vehicles.
This assumes building a fast charging network, not just along main freeway routes, but at every workplace, shopping mall, restaurant, movie theater, and any place else where there is public parking.
I still say this is trying to turn an EREV into an EV.
If it is a deal breaker, then so be it......
What we need is more vehicle choices instead of one vehicle with all options. What is this, the Bradley Fighting Vehicle? Someday when the Volt is not the only EREV on the road, people will stop trying to make it do "EVERYTHING".
the battery design needs to be optimized around that planned charging rate. Right now, doing so hurts some other key performance parameters (nail spike heat rate among them) but battery technology will continue to improve at least as fast if not a lot faster than either ICE efficiency or fuel cell production costs.Supercharging can't be good for the battery.
The bigger problem with supercharging is the impact on the electric grid if it is widely adapted. It is cute to have a dozen charge plugs with a big battery hidden in the back room at a rest stop or 6 plugs connected to the main power lines at a upscale mall, but imagine if we ask every work place to offer 80 KW charge rates, at 8:15 am, the whole grid will brown out....
if everyone in your neighborhood had a Volt, there would be no infrastructure changes needed for their overnight charging. If on the other hand everyone in your neighborhood installed a 40 kw charge station, you would need to completely rewire the neighborhood. If 25 % of the people In your community installed high rate charge stations at home, you would need new substations and new high voltage feeder lines...
so there are more considerations than just the cool factor of Tesla's sleek proprietary plug.
Thanks for all of the responses everyone. If the battery has two or three options, perhaps one being capable of 100+ miles of EV range, then for long trips using the Tesla Superchargers would be nice in my opinion. This applies to the upcoming Chevrolet Sonic EV too. Even if you couldn't go 100% using Superchargers in the Volt, this could reduce the fuel you use significantly. GM could also offer Supercharger access as an upgrade.
From what I read, Tesla is looking for partners to share/expand the Supercharger network and they have opened their patents up, as Zythryn mentioned:
"...Sure, any of the others could start from scratch to build a slower network, but why when one already exists?"
From what I read, Tesla is looking for partners to share/expand the Supercharger network and they have opened their patents up, as Zythryn mentioned:
"...Sure, any of the others could start from scratch to build a slower network, but why when one already exists?"
There are really only two standards: CCS and CHAdeMO. Tesla uses the same signaling protocol as CCS. Just a different plug. So it would be easy to have an adapter. CHAdeMO is a different story. It's a totally different beast. It's also proprietary.
If Tesla owns the chargers I don't see why it shouldn't be allowed to extend charging privileges or not as it sees fit. Other than the usual hype, the only thing "super" about the Tesla chargers is the battery storage. It's a very slick and innovative solution.
From experience I'd say that "DC Fast Charging" is an oxymoron. Even with the regulatory limit a gas pump would take less than 30 seconds to deliver more energy than any EV battery can hold. Maybe it should be called "DC Faster Charging"?
If Tesla owns the chargers I don't see why it shouldn't be allowed to extend charging privileges or not as it sees fit. Other than the usual hype, the only thing "super" about the Tesla chargers is the battery storage. It's a very slick and innovative solution.
From experience I'd say that "DC Fast Charging" is an oxymoron. Even with the regulatory limit a gas pump would take less than 30 seconds to deliver more energy than any EV battery can hold. Maybe it should be called "DC Faster Charging"?
That was an idea but we haven't seen any evidence of this. Seems like the danger was overblown.Supercharging can't be good for the battery.
Careful. Tesla is using CCS signaling for A/C charging, and it switches to DCFC with the same 5% pilot signal. But once it switches it talks with CANBus signaling instead of the Homeplug greenphy that a CCS station would use.There are really only two standards: CCS and CHAdeMO. Tesla uses the same signaling protocol as CCS. Just a different plug. So it would be easy to have an adapter. CHAdeMO is a different story. It's a totally different beast. It's also proprietary.
http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/show...harger-protocol-for-diy-CHAdeMO-adapter/page3
And actually, there are four DCFC possibilities, because Tesla uses different plugs in the US and in Europe (3 phase power is more common over there, and EU rules may have required the Mennekes 2 port that they modified to take deeper plugs to handle the supercharger DC current.
In a lot of ways, the supercharger standard makes more sense from what I can tell - the common plug means it's always the same compact, simple outlet, the signaling is more flexible (full CANBus,) and the standard allows more power (at least 120 kW vs CHAdeMO's 50 kW and something similar for CCS I believe.)
But of course it's proprietary, and certainly having multiple standards is inconvenient and hurts growth for all EVs.
I don't think we'll see supercharging-like capability for MY 2016. We might see faster L2, maybe up to 6.6kw.
That's not what I've understood. Here is a Q&A with Straubel:Careful. Tesla is using CCS signaling for A/C charging, and it switches to DCFC with the same 5% pilot signal. But once it switches it talks with CANBus signaling instead of the Homeplug greenphy that a CCS station would use.
Q: What about the communication protocol of the Combo Connector? It’s considered essential for V2G.
A: That’s fine. We’re definitely commonizing with all of that. The only thing that’s up for debate in all of these standards is the physical geometries of the pins and sockets. Everything else is pretty easy to adapt to. The communication standards are pretty universal. We’re 100% compliant with all the J1772 communication levels, signaling, voltage, everything. (emphasis supplied).
I think both CCS and CHAdeMO will handle 100 kW.
And that's true. But J1772 is just the AC signaling - the only part of DCFC it covers is the signal a DCFC CCS box uses to tell the car that it does DCFC. If you read the thread I linked above, you'll see that curious Tesla owners discovered that when a Model S sees that 'I am a DCFC station' 5% pilot signal, it responds very differently from a CCS car.That's not what I've understood. Here is a Q&A with Straubel:
Q: What about the communication protocol of the Combo Connector? It’s considered essential for V2G.
A: That’s fine. We’re definitely commonizing with all of that. The only thing that’s up for debate in all of these standards is the physical geometries of the pins and sockets. Everything else is pretty easy to adapt to. The communication standards are pretty universal. We’re 100% compliant with all the J1772 communication levels, signaling, voltage, everything. (emphasis supplied).
I think both CCS and CHAdeMO will handle 100 kW.
21 - 31 of 31 Posts
- This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
GM Volt Forum
A forum community dedicated to Chevy Volt electric car owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about hybrid performance, modifications, classifieds, troubleshooting, maintenance, reviews, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Recommended Communities
