1986 Jeep Comanche Xls on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Which electric cars can charge at a Tesla Supercharger?

The difference between Tesla charging and non-Tesla charging. Electrify America; Tesla Tesla's advantage has long been its charging technology and Supercharger network. Now, more and more automakers are switching to Tesla's charging tech. But there are a few things non-Tesla drivers need to know about charging at a Tesla station. A lot has hit the news cycle in recent months with regard to electric car drivers and where they can and can't plug in. The key factor in all of that? Whether automakers switched to Tesla's charging standard. More car companies are shifting to Tesla's charging tech in the hopes of boosting their customers' confidence in going electric.  Here's what it boils down to: If you currently drive a Tesla, you can keep charging at Tesla charging locations, which use the company's North American Charging Standard (NACS), which has long served it well. The chargers are thinner, more lightweight and easier to wrangle than other brands.  If you currently drive a non-Tesla EV, you have to charge at a non-Tesla charging station like that of Electrify America or EVgo — which use the Combined Charging System (CCS) — unless you stumble upon a Tesla charger already equipped with the Magic Dock adapter. For years, CCS tech dominated EVs from everyone but Tesla.  Starting next year, if you drive a non-Tesla EV (from the automakers that have announced they'll make the switch), you'll be able to charge at all Supercharger locations with an adapter. And by 2025, EVs from some automakers won't even need an adaptor.  Here's how to charge up, depending on which EV you have:  Ford 2021 Ford Mustang Mach-E. Tim Levin/Insider Ford was the earliest traditional automaker to team up with Tesla for its charging tech. Current Ford EV owners — those driving a Ford electric vehicle already fitted with a CCS port — will be able to use a Tesla-developed adapter to access Tesla Superchargers starting in the spring. That means that, if you own a Mustang Mach-E or Ford F-150 Lightning, you will need the adapter in order to use a Tesla station come 2024. But Ford will equip its future EVs with the NACS port starting in 2025 — eliminating the need for any adapter. Owners of new Ford EVs will be able to pull into a Supercharger station and juice up, no problem. General Motors Cadillac Lyriq. Cadillac GM will also allow its EV drivers to plug into Tesla stations.

FCA profits surge in second quarter

Fiat Chrysler Automobiles gave the cash register a beating in the second quarter, improving its net profit to 333 million euros ($364M US), which is a 263-percent jump over its reported Q1 profit of 92 million euros ($108M US). At the same time, FCA improved its global profit margin to 7.7 percent. Compared year-over-year, in Q2 2014 FCA reported net profit of 197 million euros making this year's Q2 a 69-percent increase, and profit margins a year ago were 4.9 percent. The two big factors for this increase are strong NAFTA sales and Jeep. In the US alone, Jeep sold 222,940 units in Q2 this year, a jump of almost 20 percent over the same period last year. Revenue in the NAFTA region totaled $18.8 billion, adjusted earnings before interest and taxes were $1.45 billion, both of those numbers more than doubling compared to 2014. The vastly better numbers come on marginally more global sales, 1,181,000 units sold in Q2 2014, 1,193,000 units sold in the same span this year. In the US, FCA began charging dealers one-percent more for vehicles to up the margins, a move that helped boost its US margin from 4.1 percent a year ago to 5.8 percent the first half of this year. The company is holding steady on its guidance of global deliveries at 4.8 million and its net profit guidance at $1.1 to $1.3 billion. It has increased its adjusted outlook for the year to $120.5 billion in revenue, and EBIT to "over $4.93 billion." News Source: Automotive News - sub. req.Image Credit: AP Photo/Carlos Osorio Earnings/Financials Chrysler Fiat Jeep FCA

In Michigan, car hackers could face life imprisonment

Car hackers may not want to mess with vehicles in and around the Motor City. A pair of Michigan lawmakers introduced legislation Thursday that would punish anyone who infiltrates a vehicle's electronic systems with penalties as harsh as life imprisonment. Senate bill 927 says that "a person shall not intentionally access or cause access to be made to an electronic system of a motor vehicle to willfully destroy, damage, impair, alter or gain unauthorized control of the motor vehicle." Offenders will be deemed guilty of a felony, and may be imprisoned for any number of years up to life in prison. The proposed legislation is one of the first attempts nationally to address the consequences for car hacking, which has become a top concern throughout the auto industry. Critics have accused executives of being slow to respond to the threats, which were first known as long as six years ago but gained attention last July when a pair of researchers remotely controlled a Jeep Cherokee. In January, the industry established an Information Sharing and Analysis Center to collectively evaluate security measures and counter breaches. But the Michigan bill isn't noteworthy only because of the life penalty prescribed; it's noteworthy for what's missing in its details. Language in the bill doesn't delineate between independent cyber-security researchers and criminals who intend to inflict harm or havoc. Under its provisions, it's possible Charlie Miller, pictured below, and Chris Valasek, the researchers who demonstrated last summer that the Cherokee could be remotely commandeered and controlled, could face life behind bars. Provisions of the legislation that prevent a person from "altering" the motor vehicle could ensnare car enthusiasts or gearheads who tinker with electronic systems to boost performance, increase fuel efficiency or add aftermarket features. In that context, Senate Bill 927 seems like the latest measure in a running feud between independent researchers, gearheads and big automakers. Car companies don't like third parties poking around their electronic systems and would prefer the researchers not reveal security weaknesses. Researchers, on the other hand, say many carmakers are either slow to fix or unwilling to repair security holes unless they're able to publish their findings.