Anyone got bored of plugging in everyday?

The term "planned obsolescence" has been bandied about for over a century, and it's really a meaningless term in lieu of conclusive proof that is was indeed "planned." The truth is that any manufacturer can make any product to any quality they like, which has a corresponding lifespan. It's basically a marketing decision, and the market usually decides whether they will continue to buy such products. Toyota has proved over the years that producing products with long lifespans has been a sustainable strategy.

 

Do you know what the J1772-2010 safety interlocks are and how they work? I do. When things go wrong, the GFI cutting off the power is usually what does not happen.

Based on what?

Maybe we should get the facts before deciding the verdict. Also, what is over-engineered aviation wise? (Or to rephrase the question, what aviation standards should be eased?)

"Software Bomb". Seriously?

 

by the time these cables start failing, they will be under a hundred dollars.

 

Just a worthwhile thought. There is nothing preventing one charge cable from servicing lots of different cars. Think of a fleet of PiP Taxis. In five years, one cable may see multiple lifetimes of service use. This may be what Toyota is considering.

 

The current J1772 standard seems to have been set in 2009, with release and adoption in production charging schemes beginning in 2010.

Seems like the Leaf was one of the first to adopt the standard as one of its charging systems in 2010, followed by the Volt in 2011, and then the PiP in 2012. We'll see when we first begin seeing reports of cables reaching this feared limit.

 

I agre with the last sentence, but the rest is problematic... For one thing, Chinese small-shop "factories" most certainly cannot 'make any product to any quality they like'. They may want to build well, and simply fail to do so. Also, there is ample documentaion of American car companies in the last century using planned obsolesence as a way to keep sales high, both in terms of styling elements that 'went out of style' and mechanical engineering that was already near-obsolete when used, like mechanical brakes...

 

My guess is that there is a surge arrestor in the EVSE. The type known as MOV (Metal Oxide Varistor) have a limited number of surges they can cope with (the same applies to many computer cable surge arrestors, see their instructions) the circuit typically counts them and locks out the supply at a fixed limit often 15-20 surges to protect the supplied equipment. Just a few pennies to replace the MOV at the end of its life.

The surge arrestor circuit will protect the car from nearby lightning strikes which if they got into the car's circuits would create mayhem with the electrics.

 

I have to disagree there. Any manufacturer has the option to say "good enough" at any point in the design or manufacturing process, any time they like. Not having tested your product does not prove you have done your best. It depends on whether your goal is just to sell as many of your products as possible before most people wise up, or to sell a product which will require a certain amount of servicing and parts, or to make something which will last a very long time and build solid brand loyalty, the manufacturer is certainly in control of these factors.

 

planes are REGULARLY torn apart and ALL worn parts MUST be replaced. Even parts that are still usable due to no signs of wear ... FAA rules state you either replace it or no new air worthy cert's for you. You gotta have standards, because many ignorant know-it-all's will try to take short cuts - save a buck or beat the system, all too often at the expense of others. They want to cry, & sue everybody when things go wrong.
.

 

Are arguing for obsolescence based on time? And no, most of those WWII aircraft still flying are still mostly original. That's because common sense has prevailed. If they had all been trashed years ago just because they were "old," a lot of the smaller airlines would not have existed.

 

If that's the case, wouldn't a separate surge arrest mechanism ahead of it in the power chain catch any surges instead? It'd just need to be able to handle the maximum current + buffer.

 

Okay, so let's recap. Electronics can fail. Electronics do fail. Toyota's EVSE can fail at any time. If it fails before the "end of life" as calculated by the internal counter, are you claiming that's inherently safer than if it would be after that internal counter reached its "maximum" (if, hypothetically it doesn't cut off the EVSE from working) count?

Based on what?

Are you saying that the J1772-2010 spec has a provision for a fixed number of charges before it must self-disable?

Based on what?

Are you saying that a software counter that disables a device isn't a software bomb?

Based on what? A definition of a software ("logic") bomb is "To be considered a logic bomb, the payload should be unwanted and unknown to the user of the software. As an example, trial programs with code that disables certain functionality after a set time are not normally regarded as logic bombs."

Here, others report there's a counter embedded. We know there's a pre-end-of-life warning as described in the light blink patterns. What we DON'T know is what Toyota's "end of life" count is. Read the definition above of logic bombs. If Toyota provides the consumer information that the EVSE will function for x charge cycles, it's not a logic bomb. Under the situation today, we don't know that number and I maintain that comports solidly with the definition of "logic bomb."

 

I don't know about you guys, but I don't want to have someone telling me when it's time to throw something away and buy a new one. Especially from someone who has a monopoly over that particular product.

I prefer to make those decisions myself.

 

i don't agree with the 'fixed number of charges thing'. the manual simply states that if the light comes on, it's cooked and you need a new one. this can happen to any product. it's a protection mechanism and does not mean they have calculated a specific number. i'm sure they do lifespan testing like any product, and knowing toyota, most are going to last longer than we have the cars. others will fail under warranty and some will fail at different points after warranty. toyota does not have a monopoly on the evse, and of course, you're welcome to repair and re use if you're capable.

 

The manual strongly implies that, and I have also read it elsewhere, although I can't remember where. There is also a previous thread where this subject was discussed at length: Disposable charging cable? | PriusChat

 

i guess i'm just reading it differently. i don't see any strong implication in the page pic you posted. i could be wrong, but i'm not chuffed about it either way.

 

I agree. But then what's with:
1. The fact there's a warning light pattern telling you it's reaching end of life. (How?)
2. The fact that others who have opened the EVSE up and poked around document there's an EPROM counter. (Why, if not for determining the "end of life?")

 

both good questions, not sure they can be answered here without guessing. even if there is a counter, it's probably tied to expected battery life. seems like a lot of worry over nothing.okay, going back to the other thread, it all makes sense. why it had to be brought up again in this thread (complete derailing) starting in post #56, i have no idea. but again, imo, much ado about nothing. it's been 2 years since the other thread, and we have yet to see any problem.

 

How can anyone say that Toyota has a monopoly on 120v EVSE's?? You can build a DIY unit - or you can buy one of a half dozen different units made by the OEM's.
.

 

If you have information that disproves whether the EVSE requires an electronic handshake between the charger and the car, please share it.