Tesla Supercharger Network

WetEV said:

GRA said:

jlv said:

I keep seeing "best is the enemy of good enough" and really think that applies here.

Click to expand...

I posted because it's not yet good enough,

Click to expand...

Not good enough for you, perhaps. You are not the average person.

Click to expand...

Which is exactly what I said, that it wasn't good enough for people like me who traveled to remote areas off the interstates, and who parked their cars in places with no access to charging (or electricity FTM).

WetEV said:

Remember my neighbors in suburban Boston, the longest trip they ever took by car was to Springfield? That's Springfield, MA and not some other state's Springfield. They had flown to Hawaii, Florida, Europe, ....

https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Springfield,+MA/Marlborough,+MA

With a Bolt or a 2018 Leaf with a 60kWh battery, this trip and every other trip they take could be charge at home only. No public charging needed. The average is probably between them and you.

WetEV said:

You are not average, and they are not average. To sell 1%, 2%, 4%, 8%, 16%, 32%, or 64% of vehicles as BEVs, BEVs don't need to meet your needs. They need to meet the needs of the people buying them. Which doesn't include you, we get that.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

You do? Glad to hear it, because you and others keep trying to tell me that I must own a BEV to understand its advantages. My point throughout, and the point you have consistently (until now, at least) refused to acknowledge, is that I do understand their advantages and disadvantages, have evaluated my car needs, have compared the capabilities that BEVs currently provide to those needs, and have determined based on practical and financial grounds that they are a poor fit for people like me at this time.

GRA said:

My point throughout, and the point you have consistently (until now, at least) refused to acknowledge, is that I do understand their advantages and disadvantages, have evaluated my car needs, have compared the capabilities that BEVs currently provide to those needs, and have determined based on practical and financial grounds that they are a poor fit for people like me at this time.

Click to expand...

And you make a point of consistently pointing the disadvantages of BEVs.

I have a modest suggestion for you.

GRA said:

My point throughout, and the point you have consistently (until now, at least) refused to acknowledge, is that I do understand their advantages and disadvantages, have evaluated my car needs, have compared the capabilities that BEVs currently provide to those needs, and have determined based on practical and financial grounds that they are a poor fit for people like me at this time.

Click to expand...

So what do you drive? Because its all about need... so lets start with your need?

WetEV said:

GRA said:

My point throughout, and the point you have consistently (until now, at least) refused to acknowledge, is that I do understand their advantages and disadvantages, have evaluated my car needs, have compared the capabilities that BEVs currently provide to those needs, and have determined based on practical and financial grounds that they are a poor fit for people like me at this time.

Click to expand...

And you make a point of consistently pointing the disadvantages of BEVs.

I have a modest suggestion for you.

Click to expand...

I make a point of pointing out where specific technologies work well and where they don't. Feel free to make any suggestions you like, just as I do.

DaveinOlyWA said:

GRA said:

My point throughout, and the point you have consistently (until now, at least) refused to acknowledge, is that I do understand their advantages and disadvantages, have evaluated my car needs, have compared the capabilities that BEVs currently provide to those needs, and have determined based on practical and financial grounds that they are a poor fit for people like me at this time.

Click to expand...

So what do you drive? Because its all about need... so lets start with your need?

Click to expand...

I drive a 2003 Subaru Forester 2.5XS (bought new) which replaced my '88 Subaru Turbo 4WD Wagon (also bought new) when that was stolen. I have no brand loyalty, it's just when I've winnowed down the possible choices I started with (IIRR, 15 or so in 2003, but only 3 in 1988), specific Subarus have come closest to meeting my requirements the last two times I bought cars. Which isn't all that surprising, as I fit their 'active outdoors' customer demographic to a T, and owing to their rallye heritage they also meet my performance/driving dynamic requirements.

As to need, I need a car (now) primarily for road trips, as inexpensive a possible to buy (every 15 years or so the price of the car that best meets my needs seems to increase about $10k, so my next car should go out the door for no more than $35k), which has to be reliable for the long term (at least 15 years), inexpensive to maintain, achieve high safety ratings (IIHS/NHTSA) with as many of the latest safety features as are available without jacking the price too much or adding too many unneeded and unwanted gimmicks (like HVAC control touch screens and Falcon Wing doors etc.), good ergonomics and intuitive controls that allow me to keep my eyes and brain on the road, adequate acceleration to safely pass on two-lane mountain roads at density altitudes up to 12,000 ft. or so, a range of at least 4 hours (my current Subie does 5 or 6) at freeway speeds under all but the worst conditions, plus a reserve sufficient to get me to the next refueling/recharging station (but not less than 30 miles) under the same conditions and more if I stretch it, the best gas mileage possible while meeting other requirements, and a spare tire (full size preferred) and jack to cope with flats miles from the nearest paved road, and highly preferred that it stores in its own dedicated space and doesn't take up cargo volume. For an ICE I also insist on a manual transmission, but for a BEV/PHEV/FCEV I'd want several levels of regen from zero to lots, preferably on paddles, and a multi-speed automatic rather than a CVT is also preferred.

Among major wants are good driving dynamics (especially handling and steering feel), AWD so I don''t have to put chains on in the winter when I go on ski trips except when I really need them (owing to California's method of imposing chain restrictions, this is a major convenience issue), the flexible utility over the long term to meet my evolving needs provided by either a small CUV, wagon or squared-off hatch (e.g. VW Golf, Subaru Impreza) body style so that I can carry a large variety of people and/or outdoor equipment in/on it, including carrying a single bike inside or be able to sleep in it stretched out flat with the rear seats folded down, plus can carry roof racks for bikes and kayaks (and hang gliders should I get into that).

GRA said:

WetEV said:

GRA said:

My point throughout, and the point you have consistently (until now, at least) refused to acknowledge, is that I do understand their advantages and disadvantages, have evaluated my car needs, have compared the capabilities that BEVs currently provide to those needs, and have determined based on practical and financial grounds that they are a poor fit for people like me at this time.

Click to expand...

And you make a point of consistently pointing the disadvantages of BEVs.

I have a modest suggestion for you.

Click to expand...

I make a point of pointing out where specific technologies work well and where they don't. Feel free to make any suggestions you like, just as I do.

Click to expand...

IMO the value of that depends on the relative differences vs nit picking. In this case it seems pretty nit picky at best.

EVDRIVER said:

GRA said:

WetEV said:

And you make a point of consistently pointing the disadvantages of BEVs.

I have a modest suggestion for you.

Click to expand...

I make a point of pointing out where specific technologies work well and where they don't. Feel free to make any suggestions you like, just as I do.

Click to expand...

IMO the value of that depends on the relative differences vs nit picking. In this case it seems pretty nit picky at best.

Click to expand...

You are entitled to your opinion just as much as I'm entitled to mine. I'm a fan of the widest possible range of views being expressed, so that every person can decide for themselves which ones they find most persuasive.

It's like saying I don't like one flavor of ice cream so the entire brand is flawed. I see no value in it. If you were pointing out the HUGE issues with DC fast charging it would make more sense comparatively and in perspective. What's your opinion on EVGO advertising 50Kw charging and providing as little as 30kw with no good reason yet charging per minute? Seems like a scam since you don't get what you pay for. Another topic for another thread I suppose.......

EVDRIVER said:

It's like saying I don't like one flavor of ice cream so the entire brand is flawed. I see no value in it. If you were pointing out the HUGE issues with DC fast charging it would make more sense comparatively and in perspective. What's your opinion on EVGO advertising 50Kw charging and providing as little as 30kw with no good reason yet charging per minute? Seems like a scam since you don't get what you pay for. Another topic for another thread I suppose.......

Click to expand...

You ought to check what I've written about Blink. I've had my share of comments re eVgo as well, especially before they revised their pricing. I devote more attention to Tesla's SC network because they've promised the most, done the most and also fallen short the most. The tag line in my original sig read "When nurturing a new technology, under-promise and over-deliver rather than the opposite". Tesla's continual violation of that policy, which I regard as vital as well as basic business ethics (at least it was for me designing and selling AE) is why I pound on them so much. If they'd stop promising the moon and instead put out conservative schedules that they routinely achieve and usually exceed, they'd get zero criticism and lots of praise from me on that score. Instead, we get idiocies like I-94 which may well be put back another year and promised for 2019, just as it was previously promised for 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2018.

IM oft-stated opinion, until they've got a contract with the property owner, permits granted and construction contract awarded with project start date known, i.e. the project is shovel-ready, they simply shouldn't be listing any SC as 'Coming soon' or putting them on the SC map.

I think coming soon is a general city location and not a specific site in some cases so any delays or changes are clearly not predictable. On the flip side people want to know where stations are being targeting and in the works. On the flip side there are some SC stations not listed on the map I know are being developed which indicates those are likely replacements for the other locations nearby. In relative terms I think they have done well based on the many obstacles to build high-power stations in single locations. In fact, it's quite remarkable. As a report card for delivering as promised based on other auto makers and network promises it is an A in comparison to a D- or F. Relative terms I can't see any reason to complain.

EVDRIVER said:

I think coming soon is a general city location and not a specific site in some cases so any delays or changes are clearly not predictable. On the flip side people want to know where stations are being targeting and in the works. On the flip side there are some SC stations not listed on the map I know are being developed which indicates those are likely replacements for the other locations nearby. In relative terms I think they have done well based on the many obstacles to build high-power stations in single locations. In fact, it's quite remarkable. As a report card for delivering as promised based on other auto makers and network promises it is an A in comparison to a D- or F. Relative terms I can't see any reason to complain.

Click to expand...

We disagree, as I regard routine completion shortfalls of 30% or more year after year as unacceptable for any business, and destructive of its credibility, I'd give them at best a C-minus; the only thing they have going for them is that everybody else, as you state, rates a D- or F (I expect EA will be an exception to this).

If people want to know where Tesla is contemplating putting stations some day that's fine, just don't list them as 'Coming soon' when that's not the case. I suggest using 'Proposed' or 'Anticipated' for such stations - that way everyone knows that nothing is solid, there may be major changes and no time frame for completion is forecast. This is easy to do, and any business that wasn't depending on hype would do it. I've also suggested that Tesla should always have some stealth sites underway, so that the occasional unavoidable SC completion shortfalls due to acts of god type events can be balanced out by these unannounced stations. But making sure that an SC site has all its ducks in a row (permits/contracts/start date) before it changes to 'Coming soon' status will eliminate virtually all criticisms of Tesla re its SC network forecasts.

GRA said:

EVDRIVER said:

GRA said:

I make a point of pointing out where specific technologies work well and where they don't. Feel free to make any suggestions you like, just as I do.

Click to expand...

IMO the value of that depends on the relative differences vs nit picking. In this case it seems pretty nit picky at best.

Click to expand...

You are entitled to your opinion just as much as I'm entitled to mine. I'm a fan of the widest possible range of views being expressed, so that every person can decide for themselves which ones they find most persuasive.

Click to expand...

Please don't dominate the rap jack, if you got nothing new to say.

WetEV said:

GRA said:

EVDRIVER said:

IMO the value of that depends on the relative differences vs nit picking. In this case it seems pretty nit picky at best.

Click to expand...

You are entitled to your opinion just as much as I'm entitled to mine. I'm a fan of the widest possible range of views being expressed, so that every person can decide for themselves which ones they find most persuasive.

Click to expand...

Please don't dominate the rap jack, if you got nothing new to say.

Click to expand...

How many of us who've been here for a while have had anything new to say? Seems like you and I keep repeating the same points over and over. For example, in another topic, you just wrote re the rate of uptake of EVs

Every journey happens a step at a time

Click to expand...

a point you've made repeatedly in argument with me and maybe others. When responding to other people's posts I state my views and the reasons for them, just as you do.

GRA average post per day, mostly FUD at electric cars or promotion of hydrogen: 3.50 posts per day
WETEV average post per day, widely ranging across topics, answering people's questions and more: 0.94 posts per day

Your only interest in electric cars is finding an alternative to any car car: ie bicycles for everyone. "New Urbanism".

WetEV said:

GRA average post per day, mostly FUD at electric cars or promotion of hydrogen: 3.50 posts per day
WETEV average post per day, widely ranging across topics, answering people's questions and more: 0.94 posts per day

Your only interest in electric cars is finding an alternative to any car car: ie bicycles for everyone. "New Urbanism".

Click to expand...

Uh, no, as perusal of my posts will show, I post on a wide range of topics: https://www.mynissanleaf.com/search.php?st=0&sk=t&sd=d&sr=posts&author=gra

I don't try and force the choices I've made on anyone; that doesn't work. I will suggest options that I think will work for someone, especially if I think they may not have considered them, but everyone will have their own priorities and make their own choices. Answering people's questions? I do lots of that as well, although less so than when this forum was new and there were so many people with no experience of deep-cycle battery-based systems and their foibles. Here's an example of my approach, in that and my subsequent posts in that topic:

GRA said:

IssacZachary wrote:

I still keep throwing around the idea of a new Prime though. I still see some for around $25,000, which with the tax credits could put it at $15,000. If I can sell the Beetle for around $7,000 too I would just about break even in the end!

Click to expand...

If you can swing that I think it would be an excellent way to go. An Ionic PHEV lists even less, and looks more normal. Worth comparing, and you might want to look at the Niro PHEV as well, which should be priced in the same range as the Prime.

Click to expand...

https://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=24950&start=70#p531084

I do post a fair amount about FCEVs/H2, but it's tech I'm interested in and only a few others here are, so my posts on the subject tend to outnumber everyone else's. Many if not most of my posts in those areas are replies to others like yourself who have negative views of the two tech's chances for commercial success (I consider it difficult but not impossible, and worth pursuing for now), and are merely repetitive arguments between us.

A Canadian Take on Tesla's Supercharger Network

Note: Glen Estill is a good friend and colleague in Ontario, Canada. He was a successful entrepreneur when he changed careers and installed one of the first commercial wind turbines in the province--the first of many to come. Estill is also a savvy observer of the provincial political scene and many an Ontario bureaucrat has felt the sting of his wit. He's been a longtime advocate of the local ownership of renewables and has invested accordingly. Estill leads by example and that's why he was an early Model 3 reservation holder. He powers his Tesla with solar PV in the "Great White North" of Ontario's Bruce Peninsula.


I've owned my model 3 (extended range version) for 3 months now, and driven 4,800 km (~3,000 miles). I have been to a Tesla Supercharger only 3 times, picking up about 200 km (~125 miles) of range at a cost of ~$8. The Tesla superchargers are for the most part relatively well located, and easy to get to, and seem to be located in shopping malls. So far, for the few number of extra kilometers I have purchased, it has taken less than 20 minutes in total to charge. The model 3 has been charging at Superchargers at up to 650 km/hour (400 miles/hour)! I haven't even had time to get a coffee! I haven't yet been on any major road trips, but that usually only happens once or twice a year. Tesla charges about 24 cents/kWh to charge--roughly double their cost of electricity.

What has Tesla figured out that the others haven't?

1. Charging stations will have great difficulty finding a revenue model that works. With an ICE (Internal Combustion Engine), 100% of "charging" must be done at a gas station. With electric cars, 95% of charging is done at home. There may be an exception for city dwellers who do street parking, or for condo's, although it would likely be far more cost effective to ramp up availability of Level 2 chargers in cities, rather than send EV owners to Superchargers.

2. Tesla has 1,332 Superchargers in North America. They have sold 200,000 cars. The model X and S include a certain amount of free charging, whereas there is a fee to charge the Model 3. The estimated cost of building a charging station is $275,000 (max), so they have spent up to $366 million building their charging network so far. This works out to an investment of $1,830 per car sold. The stations likely run at breakeven for Model 3's. Tesla's network, though, has been built for the future, and with shipments ramping up, it is reasonable to say the investment per car shipped will drop dramatically in the future, even as the network expands. If Tesla ships 250,000 cars per year for two years, the cost per charging station could drop to ~$500per car sold.

3. Superchargers are not a profit maker. But they are a market enabler. They enable a consumer to buy a pure electric car with confidence that it will fulfill all their needs, including road trips. A Tesla EV is not just an "around town car". Tesla has figured out that Superchargers are a marketing expense.

4. GM spent $3.1 billion on advertising in the US in 2014, and shipped about 6 million cars in North America. That works out to $500 per car. (Superbowl commercials don't come cheap.) Tesla spends virtually nothing on advertising.

5. As the number of Tesla's that have a fee for charging increases, the revenue model for the Supercharger will improve. Someday, it may be a small money maker. Based on local survey's of the busyness of Tesla Superchargers, the number of vehicles using them can be increased several fold with little expansion required. There is also scope to increase the price per kWh, as the current price drastically undercuts the cost of gasoline. And drivers would not be upset, because they do so little charging on the road.

6. GM, Nissan, BMW and others seem to be waiting for the market to develop the high speed charging network. It won't happen. The revenue model is simply not there, nor will it be for a long time. The network will be incomplete, subject to out of order stations (no revenue to support maintenance), and hard to find, as there will be multiple vendors.

The Supercharger network is a major and unrecognized strategic advantage that Tesla has over other EV vendors. And it is a smart marketing expense.

paulgipe said:

The Supercharger network is a major and unrecognized strategic advantage that Tesla has over other EV vendors. And it is a smart marketing expense.

Click to expand...

Nice write-up. My only minor complaint is the use of the word unrecognized above.

jlv said:

paulgipe said:

The Supercharger network is a major and unrecognized strategic advantage that Tesla has over other EV vendors. And it is a smart marketing expense.

Click to expand...

Nice write-up. My only minor complaint is the use of the word unrecognized above.

Click to expand...

It is recognized by owners and that's about it in practical terms. The general non-EV pubic has little awareness of it and the advantages.

I just came back recently from a 5,500+ mile road trip (wedding, Glacier National Park, several family home visits, friend visits, etc) in our Tesla Model X. I did I80 on the way out and I70 on the way back. (I90 is from the previous year)

I drove with AutoPilot for 95% of the trip. It was fantastic for the highway driving. Drove with hand(s) lightly on the wheel with much less cognitive work and allowed me to enjoy the scenery while staying refreshed/alert.

I used Tesla SuperChargers for all (~95% of miles) but northern MT (RV plug at a campground, siblings house welding plug, and siblings cabins electric dryer plug).


** This map includes the more northern route I've taken in the past in my previous X (top I90, mid I80, lower I70). Lot of options with the Tesla SuperCharger network. It also includes the counter-clockwise roadtrip I did in early July 2018 with an old friend.

scottf200 said:

I just came back recently from a 5,500+ mile road trip (wedding, Glacier National Park, several family home visits, friend visits, etc) in our Tesla Model X. I did I80 on the way out and I70 on the way back. (I90 is from the previous year)

I drove with AutoPilot for 95% of the trip. It was fantastic for the highway driving. Drove with hand(s) lightly on the wheel with much less cognitive work and allowed me to enjoy the scenery while staying refreshed/alert.

I used Tesla SuperChargers for all (~95% of miles) but northern MT (RV plug at a campground, siblings house welding plug, and siblings cabins electric dryer plug).

** This map includes the more northern route I've taken in the past in my previous X (top I90, mid I80, lower I70). Lot of options with the Tesla SuperCharger network. It also includes the counter-clockwise roadtrip I did in early July 2018 with an old friend.

Click to expand...

This is what we all want to do with our Bolts, our Leafs, and even our VWs. We're a long ways from there though and that's why Glen Estill's comments hit home.

Paul