| ▲ | bluGill 3 days ago | |||||||||||||
Data, but it needs someone to take a deep dive to understand it. Is this mostly a trivial detail missing that in practice nobody cares about or does this means most chargers are useles? | ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | parkgraph 3 days ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||||||||
[flagged] | ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | gizmo686 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||||||||
This number is pretty much meaningless. The standards being measured are: 1) four CCS ports 2) 150 kW each 3) within 1 mile of a designated corridor 1 is worth something, but not much as the industry has been migrating to NACS. When I bought my used CCS car, it came with a fast-charge NACS->CCS converter, so dealing with a NACS charger is not that big of a deal. Requiring 4 ports in general is a more useful standardad. The data does keep a seperate count of dc fast ports, so you could check for 4 ports if you want to, but the pass/fail does not consider non-ccs ports. 2 is reasonable. 3 is just a sign that you are completly mis-applying the standard. Probably because you are a computer. | ||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||