News on [dual] charging for CT?

[Ogre]

Not cute at all. The number of decimal places shown are completely warranted by the underlying data. You are again advertising your unfamiliarity with how good estimates are arrived at. I'd like to help you understand but it's clear at this point that that isn't going to happen. It doesn't matter whether you understand where the number comes from or not. What matters is that the charging rate from a single 40 Amp charger is going to be closer to 20 mph than 25 - 30 and that this compares, if you like, to the 30.6 mph I realize when charging my X from such a charger (which, BTW, I do).

Cute that you post the first numbers I posted, but not the ones in the following post where I corrected it. Go back and look what I suggested...

Even with those original numbers.

****Still doesn't make a difference for this conversation****.

You are manufacturing nonsense to try and look smart. Here's a hint... it doesn't work.

Sponsored

 

[ajdelange]

Nope. Not wasting any more time on this. Of course if anyone has a reasonable question or comment I'll address it.

 

[ajdelange]

Or Tesla's old HPWC (High Power Wall Connector) for the Model S's that had dual on-board chargers?
You can still get those slightly used on ebay

That won't do you any good unless the truck is equipped with dual chargers connected to a single port as they were in the early S days or there are dual ports each connected to a separate charger in the truck. Given the direction they have gone with the HPWC I don't think they are going to be making units bigger than 48 A. I'm not really sure why they have down sized them but I think it has to do with the code requirement for an additional lockable disconnect for EVSE on circuits bigger than 60A. And I think it has to do with how they foresee management in apartment buildings, condos, hotels, and convenience stores. So it seems to keep coming back to the two ports. Now if you had two of the old 80A HPWC you can put them in parallel on a 100 A circuit, designate one the master and the other the slave and share 80 A between them to serve 2 vehicles at 40A each or one CT with two ports at 40 A per port. But it looks as if what they are pushing us to do is put two of the newer HPWC on separate 60 A circuits and share up to 96 between two ports (same or different vehicle) via WiFi control of the slave by the master. AFAIK the firmware upgrade necessary to enable this has not been released.

But who knows? Perhaps the 80A charger is coming back.

WRT to Ford's double charger: what I was sure they were doing, given the V2H capability, and fundamental bidirectional nature of a bridge, in use the inverter bridge as a rectifier and DC charging the battery. This turned out not to be the case with Ford but it doesn't mean Tesla couldn't do it.

 

[tidmutt]

No need to WAG when you have reasonable information to work with. The CT is going to have rated consumption close to 450 Wh/Mi. For sure there is ± around that. The X's is 282. That's certain. It's marked right there on the graph. Thus ceteris paribus the CT will charge at 63% of the rate that an X does in terms of miles added per unit time.

You obviously missed the point. I demonstrated how the second port might be of interest to people who occasionally drive more than 200 miles per day. I expect there are more than one or two of us. The question is as to whether Tesla will perceive that there is enough of a market for this option to even offer it. I doubt most people would even understand the concept involved so I doubt the market will be perceived as being there and as much as I'd love to have it I don't see it being offered.

This conversation made me realize I'm an idiot.

I was blissfully thinking I could charge the CT up like the M3 we have but given it's lower efficiency it won't work like that. Pretty much guarantees we'll need to get a Nema 14-50 installed at least... was probably going to anyway, so no big deal.

 

[ajdelange]

I was blissfully thinking I could charge the CT up like the M3 we have but given it's lower efficiency it won't work like that. Pretty much guarantees we'll need to get a Nema 14-50 installed at least... was probably going to anyway, so no big deal.

That's great! I didn't waste my time after all!

 

[tidmutt]

That's great! I didn't waste my time after all!

Indeed, the conversation was useful to me!

 

[rodmacpherson]

That won't do you any good unless the truck is equipped with dual chargers connected to a single port as they were in the early S days...

Isn't that what we were talking about? OP asked will CT have dual chargers, then someone commented that you coulc have a EVSE like ford's that goes to 80A and I just added that HPWC was 80A they just don't sell them anymore, but you can get them on ebay if the CT had dual chargers (or one better capacity charger) that can handle 80A of 240V.

 

[ajdelange]

Isn't that what we were talking about?

I thought it was.

A)Can you charge a CT at 80 A from a Gen2 (80A) HPWC?
1)Yes if it is equipped with dual chargers a-la the old S
2)Yes, if it is equipped with dual charge ports but you will need a 2nd (slave) HPWC

B)Can you charge a CT at 80 A from a pair of Gen 3 (60 A) HPWC?
1)Yes if it has dual ports and each HPWC is commissioned for 40 A charging (50 A breaker)

C)Can you charge a CT at 96 A from a pair of Gen 3 (60 A) HPWC?
1)Yes if it has dual ports and each HPWC is commissioned for 48 A charging (60 A breaker)

D)Do I think Tesla will make a dual port option available?
1)No.

E)Do I think Tesla will bring back the single 80 a charger?
1)No

F)Would I like to be proven wrong on D and/or E?
1)Yes!

Is that clearer?

Sponsored