GM electric vehicles can now access Tesla Superchargers

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

NACS / CCS Standardization and Compatibility

  • Many welcome GM (and others) moving to Tesla’s NACS plug, seen as smaller, lighter, and less clunky than CCS1.
  • Several clarify that “NACS” is now J3400 and effectively CCS signaling with a different connector; long‑term, CCS protocol survives with a NACS plug.
  • Compatibility is messy: newer Teslas (≈2019+) speak CCS over the Tesla plug; older ones need a paid hardware retrofit. Some V2 Superchargers will never support non‑Teslas.
  • Concerns raised about confusion when older Teslas or non‑Tesla EVs see a physically compatible plug that still won’t work without the right hardware or adapter.

Supercharger Access, Pricing, and Business Impact

  • Tesla charges higher kWh prices for non‑Teslas in the US; some feel this should be regulated away, others liken it to member fuel discounts.
  • Debate on whether opening the network helps or hurts Tesla:
    • Pro: new recurring revenue, higher utilization of underused sites, and future ability for Teslas to charge everywhere.
    • Con: loss of a key exclusivity advantage and more congestion/lines, potentially making Tesla ownership worse.
  • Some argue Tesla opened up largely to access US federal infrastructure subsidies.

User Experience: Tesla vs Other Networks

  • Strong consensus that Tesla’s network is far more reliable, denser, and easier to use (plug‑and‑charge, good route planning).
  • Many describe non‑Tesla DC fast charging as “bleak”: few stalls, frequent outages, app hassles, payment failures, and poor integration in navigation.
  • Others report decent CCS experiences in specific regions (e.g., Germany, parts of Texas), suggesting quality is highly location‑dependent.

Policy, Regulation, and International Differences

  • EU mandated a common connector (CCS2) and is now mandating contactless payment; this is credited with better, more competitive infrastructure.
  • US approach described as subsidy‑driven and slower to standardize; recent rules now push a national standard and open APIs.

Adapters, Retrofits, and Automaker Execution

  • Tesla CCS retrofits are relatively cheap and done via mobile service, often including a CCS adapter.
  • GM’s own NACS→CCS adapter ordering is widely panned as convoluted and buggy, with backorders and poor digital UX.
  • Warnings about some third‑party adapters (e.g., Lectron) being unreliable and not supported at Superchargers.

Broader EV Market and Future Considerations

  • Discussion touches on US automaker software incompetence, tariffs protecting legacy OEMs from Chinese competition, and the possibility that standardization plus competition will eventually make non‑Tesla charging “good enough.”
  • Brief mention of structural batteries as a longer‑term technology that could lighten EVs and extend range.