GM-influenced saboteurs, it's said, created NEC625 to sabotage EV1
charging. They did this even BEFORE there were EV1s! Showing how
far ahead GM worked to kill the EV1.

NEC625 governs only 240v power, outlets and plugs. It requires any
EV charger to be permanently wired to a dedicated circuit, unlike
regulations for an RV.

So you can plug-in an RV, but not an EV. Ironically, most RV parks
have 50A circuits, all 14/50 outlets, and the plugs are regularly
used and with no problems. We saunter in, park in an RV spot, and
use the same plug...CONTRA NEC 625!!! Oh, the shame of it all...

About the most you can transfer via a standard 14/50 240v plug is 12
kW, about 50A. To do more, you need a special round connector that
is used by ACPropulsion.com and probably will be used by Tesla.

The same ordinary, household two-pronged plug can do BOTH 240v and
120v charging. It just takes a little ingenuity, and allows us to
s***-can NEC625. GM would probably have to modify NEC625 to stop us!

For a 40-mile-range EREV, which is exactly a 40-mile-range EV and a
genset to run it when the battery is empty, you can charge it via a
regular 110 outlet at 15A or 30A (delivering 2 kW or 4 kW) which can
fill up 8 kWh EREV in 4 or 2 hours. The EV goes 4 to 6 miles per
kWh.

And this can be done via regular household plug, immune to poisoning
via NEC625..

Now 14/50 plug is illegal to use on an EV, thanks to NEC625, but
many of us use it, defying NEC625 and "breaking the law". In fact,
we carry a stupid magnecharger in the back seat of the Toyota RAV4-
EV, the cord of the TAL just barely reaches the stupid magnecharger
input port without having to move the stupid magnecharger (if you
position it with the paddle toward the passenger side rear door).

In an EV1, a pedestal stupid magnechager cord would JUST reach the
input port if you mounted it behind the EV1 seat, in that small
ledge there. The standard stupid GEN-II or original stupid
magnechagers would not reach, you had to carry them in the trunk and
lift them out when you needed to charge, carry them physically to
the front of the EV1, then plug them into a 14/50 and then plug the
paddle into the input port.

So women supposedly "too delicate" to plug in a 14/50 plug would not
only do that, but would lift the 70 lb. stupid magnechager and carry
it to the front of the EV1! Making GM look even stupider and more
insidious than they already do.

But here's the deal: the 14/50 outlet contains both phase 1 and
phase 2 (you get 240v by combining two properly-timed phases of 110v
or 120v). The 14/50 plug has phase 1 going to one of the straight
tines, and phase 2 going to the other straight tine. The neutral
wire goes to that round thing at the top, while the ground goes to
the lone tine at the bottom (if it's present at all, usually the
neutral and ground are commoned and wired to the round thing, the
neutral line).

So if you take a 14/50 outlet, and plug-in a specially designed
14/50 plug (one that only has phase 1 connected to the hot wire of a
120v line, with neutral being connected to the neutral line of the
120v line) you can convert, essentially, the 14/50 240v outlet to a
120v outlet.

Thus, allowing you to charge it legally, and pfaugh to GM's NEC625.

Now, if you do the SAME THING with phase-2, and feed it into the on-
board charger, you can LEGALLY charge with the 14/50, and don't need
the dedicated circuit or other NEC625 junk.

Essentially, you are charging via TWO 120v cords, both common
household outlet cords, and easy to plug in.

The whole scare-campaign about "220 power" and how "dangerous" it
is, and how "delicate flowers" can't manage to plug them in, and the
crappola about the stupid magnecharger, is a sham designed to short-
circuit EV charging and isolate the EV from the grid.

The lesson here is that no matter how hard GM works to screw up the
EV and its connection to the grid, ingenious engineers and EV
drivers can figure out ways to confound dastardly GM.

Evil GM, the laughing-stock of the stock market.

/Doug


--- In electric_vehicles_for_sale@yahoogroups.com, "randycarter2001"
<rwcarter.wa@...> wrote:
>
> There is no indication that any of the old J1772 standard is
left.
> All I can get my hands on are briefs and proposals, and drafts.
The
> new standard wont be finalized until late 2009. It will cost $60
to
> get a copy when it is available.
>
> Oops my mistake. The picture I found was one of the RAV4-EV's.
Now
> that I look at it, it's not the right one. The new plug has 5
pins,
> 3 large and 2 small. The picture I found has 8 pins. I
eventually
> found a drawing of the new plug, it's a little smaller. My
question
> is how much force it will take to shove the plug in? With the
AVCON
> you had leverage on your side to seat those 400 amp contacts.
This
> new plug is a straight in shove to seat 100 amp contacts. I don't
> know how the frail among us will be able to get the plug all of
the
> way in.
>
> http://www.zefiro.com/ev/evrav43.jpg
>
> This is CARB talking about the 110v. The SAE is not mentioning
110v
> at all either. I don't know about the full details of how the new
> chargers are going to work. If they will have the ability to down
> shift to 110v or not. This is tied up in another Jxxx standard
from
> the SAE that I don't have the $60 to buy. The plug is wired for
220
> and since there is only ground, no neutral, 110v is not available
> unless the charger can, like I said, down shift to 110 volts.
>
> CARB wants all of the electric cars to recharge in less than 4
> hours. You just can't do that on 110v especially with Tesla's 57
kWh
> pack. A car with a universal input (100-240 VAC 50-60 hertz) wont
> care it will adapt. and use what's available. The CARB draft was
> written so that what the SAE says goes. CARB probably does
realize
> the charging stations have got to be simple, only 1 kind of plug,
> not 2 or 3.
>
> This only covers public charging stations where there are going to
> multiple car brands and hookups and disconnects every day. What
you
> put in your own garage is up to you, within the limits of NEC 625.
>
>
>
> --- In electric_vehicles_for_sale@yahoogroups.com, Larry Paul
> <larry.paul@> wrote:
> >
> > So for what you understand that is a done deal?
> >
> > I was under the impression from an e-mail conversation with a
carb
> > member that it is still in consideration.
> >
> > I am totally against 220VAC charging on PHEV vehicles with a
range
> of
> > 40 miles or less as this will be a barrier to adoption-and it
will
> > actually increase pollution and burden the infrastructure as it
> will
> > encourage people to charge during the day.
> >
> > Just curious, what Honda did you see with a Yazaki plug on it?
My
> > Honda EV Plus had a 110VAC 15A "convenience charger" that was a
> > standard wall plug on one end and an AVCON on the other with a
box
> in
> > the middle that turned it on/off. This charged at 1/3rd of the
> rate
> > of my 220VAC AVCON charger. 110VAC charging is ideal for PHEV.
> >
> > Are you also sure that you can't put 110VAC or 220VAC on the
> Yazaki
> > conductive (just like the Avcon compatibility with both 110 and
> 220)?
> >
> > FYI: Chrysler Epic used the Level 3 chargers if I recall.
> >
> > Thank you for the information. I don't know why I am surprised-
but
> I
> > am very annoyed if they have finalized that decision. Although
I
> > don't love the Yazaki solution, I could be ok with it if it
also
> > supports use of EITHER 110VAC or 220VAC for PHEV and Type 1 EV's.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Larry
> >
>