Electrify America Is Shutting Down All Its 150-350kW Chargers Due To Potential Cable Defects (cnet.com)

Electrify America, a Volkswagen subsidiary created as part of the German automaker's $2 billion settlements with California Air Resources Board (CARB) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) over its use of emission test cheating devices in its diesel vehicles, is shutting down all of its high-powered 150- and 350-kilowatt electric chargers due to a potential manufacturing defect with the liquid-cool charging cables. CNET reports: The cables in question come from a supplier called Huber+Suhner. Electrify America's release didn't specify what the defect might be or whether any injuries or damage had occurred. "The safety of our customers is our highest priority," said Giovanni Palazzo, president and CEO of Electrify America. "Out of an abundance of caution, Electrify America is shutting down all of our stations that use the Huber+Suhner high-powered cables until we can confirm that they can be operated safely. We are confident that Huber+Suhner will investigate and resolve this issue as quickly as possible." Thankfully, 50-kilowatt CCS chargers, Level 2 chargers, and CHAdeMO units will still be running.

Comments

Meanwhile, in other Tesla Killer news...

[Rei]

The new Audi E-Tron just opened for configurations, so now we can see its final stats.

Starting price: 80,9k EUR
0-100kph (0-62 mph): 6,6s
Top speed: 200kph (124 mph)
WLTP combined range**: 381km (236 miles)

** WLTP gives more optimistic figures than the EPA. For example, the Model 3 LR AWD is rated for 560km (345mi) WLTP, but only 310mi EPA. Jaguar I-Pace is 467km (290mi) WLTP, but only 234mi EPA.

E-Tron (a 5-seater) also apparently comes with some truly record-smashing energy consumption figures, even worse than the I-Pace: around 250Wh/km and around 400Wh/mi WLTP combined (worse as EPA combined). Double the energy consumption of a Model 3. The latter of which charges at ~117kW on existing Superchargers, faster when V3 comes out. E-Tron would need to be able to charge at ~240kW to beat it in charge times (actual peak rate: 155kW). By far, most of the actual chargers the E-Tron can charge at are only "50kW" nominal, less in practice. Oh, and then there's this news about Electrify America shutting down its (small numbers of) >50kW chargers

What a joke. Can we get a real "Tesla Killer" on the market, please?

Re: Meanwhile, in other Tesla Killer news...

[Rei]

E-Tron is a 5-seater with an interior space is only slightly more than Model 3 (the driver's seat and dash are further back from the front end than in the Model 3, eating up its extra ~30cm length, and part (though only part) of its extra height is a mix of ground clearance and pack thickness; width is basically the same). It does get a larger boot however due to its reduced rear taper (though smaller than the Model S's - 605 vs. 894L; Model 3's is 424L). Overall space is far smaller than a Model X. Yet its energy consumption is way higher than even Model X, which is not only much larger, but also uses an inefficient induction motor (unlike the Model 3). It's just a crazy level of consumption for a 5-seat vehicle. Nothing short of an electric F350 should use that much power on WLTP.

Remember that when someone uses the term "CUV" (or more misleadingly, "SUV", although that's outright wrong), that's a statement of form factor, not size. Even the Kona has been being referred to as a "SUV", and that thing is quite small.

Re:Meanwhile, in other Tesla Killer news...

[Rei]

I doubt many people will be cross-shopping a premium-brand SUV with a cheaply built saloon that isn't actually on sale in Europe yet

1. Your "cheaply built saloon" has the highest resale value retention of any car in the US in the US, from a company with the highest owner satisfaction. But don't let facts interfere with a good attack line.

2. Model 3 is on sale in Europe. First customer cars arrive in Europe on a week from now.

Additionally, the e-tron is ready for high-current chargers that will soon be everywhere

1. There are two primary factors that determine how long you're waiting at charging stations on a road trip: A) the charging power, and B) your vehicle's consumption. As described above, E-Tron is such a guzzler that even if it can charge on 175kW stations it still would only charge at 3/5ths the number of miles/kilometers per minute. Of course, most CCS stations are far from 175kW.

2. "Soon be everywhere" is a funny statement. You know that Ionity network that's supposed to be making them in Europe? You may be surprised to know that the vast majority of what they're actually building is only CCS v1 (capped out at 200A, not 500A as in CCS v2). It's not even clear that they support 800-1000V yet either, rather than just 400-500V. The "350kW" moniker is designed to be a "later upgrade"; they're 350kW "design intent".

3. Even if this weren't the case, they're years behind the Supercharger network.

while Tesla has not yet announced what the maximum charging power will be for the Model 3.

They've pointed out that all of their current production can take powers well faster than current superchargers can deliver, which is ~117kW. The onboard computer, when put into factory mode, shows a current limit of 525A, which would be ~180kW, give or take.

Re:Meanwhile, in other Tesla Killer news...

[JaredOfEuropa]

1) Resale value means bugger all on a relatively new vehicle that is in high demand. I bet that at some point the resale value on Tesla 3's was actually higher than the factory price, since people might be willing to pay for instant gratification.

3) Not over here they aren't. Problem is that they tend to focus on urban charging stations, which sort of makes sense because there are tons of Model S taxicabs here. In the Netherlands, FastNed have way more chargers, and many of them are on the highway. I suspect that Tesla will NOT get a license for Superchargers on the highways unless they open them up to other brands as well. Which they might well do, given that the European Model 3 uses standard CCS Combo 2 charging plugs.

Re:level 2?

[Smidge204]

As defined by EV charging standard SAE J1772:

Level 1: 120VAC (nominal) up to ~2KW

Level 2: 208-240VAC (nominal) up to ~20KW

After that you have "quick chargers" which there is multiple standards for, and all bets are off. They usually involve putting power directly into the battery, bypassing the vehicle's on-board charging hardware.
=Smidge=

Re:Charging stations don't seem to be very viable.

[110010001000]

Tesla just suddenly hiked their charging prices by 33% and then backtracked a bit. It turns out that fueling your Tesla can cost MORE than fueling you gas car: https://www.techspot.com/news/...

But you are right: the economics don't work. You are at the mercy of Tesla, and they will hike the rates as they need more quarterly revenue.

Re:Charging stations don't seem to be very viable.

[Anonymous Coward]

This is the most insane conspiracy theory I have ever heard. I personally used the battery swap at Harris Ranch at eight different times; drove in with a range remaining between 1 and 10 miles, went to the bathroom, and came back to a car with a range of 260 miles remaining. Charging to full takes over an hour, and it was done in less than 5 minutes. There's no way it could be chilled to make it that fast.

Why it failed, though, is that it was:
1) expensive ($40 for a swap)
2) inconvenient for the customer (you had to schedule your swap time ahead of time within a two-hour window to ensure they had a battery charged for you)
3) inflexible for the customer (you have to schedule both swaps to get your original battery back, so either they have to be open 24/7 or you have to schedule your return trip during business hours)
4) a logistical storage nightmare for Tesla upon scaling (batteries have different max charge as they age, so Tesla wanted to get your battery back to you. This means they have to store everyone's batteries and give the right one back to the right customer. If you went to swap and your max range went from 270 to 240, you'd be pissed.)
5) very difficult to scale with different configurations (Tesla's made 70 kwh, 85 kwh, 90 kwh, and 100 kwh batteries for S & X, and now for 3, they've got Long Range, Mid Range, and soon-enough Standard Range, and eventually different battery packs for S & X, and the different packs for the Y, and so on)

The swapping part of the process was fast and easy. If they want to make a reality, you need to change the batteries to be owned by Tesla and leased out, with a guarantee that you'll only get some fraction of the max charge for the battery, so that you can just get any battery pack that they have and not have to worry about getting your own back.

But since charging is "good enough" for most people, Tesla just doesn't have the money to make battery swap a viable service, even if the technical parts are already solved.