The adapter isn’t big. I put it in my pocket sometimes. But it’s worth noting the Tesla plug that does both AC and Fast Dc charging is smaller than the J1772 plug that does AC alone. And the J1772 to Tesla adapter is purely mechanical and conductive, no active components. So it’s cheap and you can buy 3Rd party ones.

I have a Nissan Leaf and have a brick of an adaptor for J1772. I think it's required for some kind of ground fault or other check circuitry because I know the car has its own built in charging system that deals with AC.

Oh, come on. A Tesla (excuse me, "NACS") plug with AC adapter attached is still less than half the size of a CCS connector. This is what it looks like:

https://shop.tesla.com/product/sae-j1772-charging-adapter

It's just a passive connector. All the signaling is handled internal to the car (which actually supports CCS too, there's a equally passive similar-looking CCS adapter you can buy).

The design is open which means that GM or Ford can build their own adapters and their own chargers.

The deal is for access to Tesla's supercharger network.

The superchargers cost money to produce, install and maintain.

The land on which they are installed costs money to lease.

Tesla installed, in US, over 12 thousand chargers and the rumored cost of a supercharger is about $50k. That's $600 million, not counting the land and other costs.

Those chargers are Tesla's property.

It would be preposterous for government to meddle in a business deal where Tesla sells access to their property to others.

Ford and GM are free to build their own supercharger network but I'm guessing that they would rather pay Tesla than spend $600 million and 10 years to build something that is only as good as what Tesla has today.

"developed by an independent trade association to remove undue influence from one company over the process", which is how it should be."

Why should it be that way?

Tesla created the best charger and people want to use it. What's the problem?

They've already opened all their patents. Objectively they are the most free and open car company in history.

I think GM and Ford are paying a licensing fee to use the supercharger network, not to use the connector type.

I would argue it’s 100% bad. Tesla should not have a monopoly on determining whether a car gets to charge when it plugs in.

But apps with accounts and ToS and such should be banned outright IMO for any charger or at least any charger that receives any sort of public funding. Anyone with a compatible car should be able to charge, without an account, just like at a gas station.

Ford has already announced they will support plug and charge on Tesla chargers also

The whole paying on a terminal/using an app thing is the wrong approach I think. Ultimately to charge there is a handshake protocol between two computers, just sort out payment then (and thats the standard NAC supports https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_15118)

Adding a payment terminal is just adding another handshake and computer into the mix, a computer that needs to be (mostly) connected to the internet, exposed to the elements, and vulnerable to skimming devices.

I've yet to see a charger with a card reader or that accepts currency. I suspect it's because there would be too many transactions of small value that the payment processing fees are more than the electricity. Which gets you into the yucky mess of I owed chargepoint $0.11, and they charged me $20 and are going to hold onto the rest of my money forever.

Among other things the "latch" that secures the connector in place (both to make sure the fit is tight and to avoid accidental removal, especially in high voltage modes) is a part of the plastics of the connector on the charge cable in CCS1 and under human mechanical operation but a part of the connector design on the car itself in NACS and firmware operated.

It can be too easy in rough removals to accidentally break the latch on the CCS1 charging cable (and busy car owners may not be careful enough to avoid the rougher removals) and it may be dangerous to operate with a broken latch so some of the software is (usefully) over-cautious about that. Even with the gentlest of usage by people, it's still a mechanical part prone to slow wear and tear from repeated use.

Very much yes it would seem.

Bigger plug also goes with bigger heavier cables, the liquid cables require cooling to charge at high speed, one of the many failure rates is the cooling system which then reverts the chargers to operate at 20% power.

Another of the failures is the locking mechanism, which is obviously strained by the heavy cable.

The plug has to be put in just-so at sort of an awkward alignment/angle, doesn't go in easily like a NACS plug. Presumably the alignment leads to a lot of thrashing wear & tear.

I simply never saw Tesla stalls break at this rate. It isn't getting better either. EA changed brands and some of their NEW stalls begun failing. This after they abandoned maintenance at some sites as they were planning to replace with the new stalls. The other excuse is EA is fully beholden to OEMs for parts whereas Tesla makes their own. So another EA excuse has been they can't get parts.

You don't read about Tesla chargers getting stuck to cars / frying cars / etc as the same rate. Remember in the US there's probably 10x more Tesla cars in the wild, so you should hear charging horror stories at 10x the rate if their chargers were equally bad.

Instead, you hear 10x the CCS horror stories in US than you do Tesla, from 1/10th the population of cars.

Honestly I just don't care about all these "principle of the thing" arguments, I just want to charge my car.

And we aren't going to make a mass EV transition without working, ubiquitous, easy charging. Tesla is the only company to even remotely have this going on right now. And again I say this as a Tesla seller, BMW owner, Elon disliker.

AIUI the connector requires a clip (at least go some vehicles), and if that clip breaks you cannot charge.

At least that happened to me with some L2 chargers.