Anyone have experience with the Clipper Creek CS-100

Anyone have experience with the Clipper Creek CS-100

Hi everyone. Model S ordered a couple weeks ago. At my business I'm not sure if I should get the Clipper Creek CS-100 or the Tesla HPWC. Has anyone used the CS-100 and charged at 80amps? Couple concerns I have is using the HPWC outside year around. Will it be reliable? Here in the Chicago area it can rain for hours at a time. With the Clipper Creek I have to use the J-1772 adapter. Will that be reliable in the rain? Does anyone have any input?



djp | 9 settembre 2013

I have used a Clipper Creek CS-100 for two years. Started with our LEAF, and added a MS 6 months ago. Ours is outdorrs, but we live in Hawaii. Flawless operation so far.

DouglasR | 9 settembre 2013

The Clipper Creek CS-100 is the charge station of choice when you want to serve the widest variety of EVs. It works great with Model S, Roadster, Leaf, Volt, etc. The down side is that it is more expensive than the HPWC, and also that TM apparently now requires you to buy the HPWC if you choose the option for twin chargers.

Doug H | 9 settembre 2013

I used one at Auburn University in Auburn, AL. My MS charged at 70 amps. It worked great.

lazyav8tr | 9 settembre 2013

The CS90's are common here in Canada and give 68-70 amps for my MS. I would have thought the CS100 should give 80. Does the Tesla limit J1772 input to 70 amps?

DouglasR | 9 settembre 2013

@lazyav8tr - No, it is a limitation of Clipper Creek charging station. The CS-90 charges at 72A, which works for Roadsters but does not permit the Model S to charge at the 80A it is capable of. The CS-100 is currently limited to 75A. However, that limit has apparently just now been lifted. I am told that the newest units shipping will have the ability to charge at the full 80A with a second push of the button, thereby making it compatible with Roadsters, Leafs, Model S, etc. See post 21 in the following thread (hope this works):!

DouglasR | 9 settembre 2013

What I don't know is whether the stations already installed can be easily upgraded to do this.

tes-s | 9 settembre 2013

CS100 gives maximum of 75amps to the vehicle according to Clipper Creek.

100A Circuit Breaker. The maximum current for the
vehicle is 75A, set by the duty cycle of the Pilot

tes-s | 9 settembre 2013

...but it sounds like they have made a change and not updated the specifications yet.

Earl and Nagin ... | 9 settembre 2013

We've been using a CS-100 (firmware downgraded to CS-90) to charge our Roadster and Leaf for 3 years. It definitely sets the standard for J-1772.

jat | 9 settembre 2013

@tes-s - the pilot signal can represent 80A with a 96% duty cycle - see

So they just didn't do it, for whatever reason.

DouglasR | 9 settembre 2013

@jat - There is apparently a bug in the Roadster that prevents it from charging at all from a station that can deliver over 72A (@Earl and Nagin, perhaps you can confirm). In any event, the Clipper Creek stations may have been limited to permit the Roadsters to use them. After all, before the Model S, no EVs needed these high amperage stations except for the Roadster.

I believe that Clipper Creek originally made the Roadster HPC, the 70A TS-70. The new changes in the CS-100 will permit them to be used by the Roadster, Leaf, and Model S, all at their respective maximum charge rates.

Brian H | 11 settembre 2013

As noted, the twin chargers and HPWC are now a set, inseparable, so the OP question is moot.

eichtolu | 11 settembre 2013

@Doug H -- where is the 70A charger in Auburn? Looking on PlugShare it appears that there is one at The Hotel at Auburn University? Is this where you charged? If so, did they let you charge without staying there? We travel 5 or 6 times a year between Atlanta and the panhandle of Florida and this would be a great spot to charge. Do you rememember if it was 240 or 208V? Previously, I have been using the RV Park in Auburn to charge at 240V/50A.

DouglasR | 11 settembre 2013

@Brian H - There is a discussion going on in a private thread, the upshot of which is that some people have been able to order the twin chargers and then delete or return the HPWC for a $1,200 credit. This is not a sure thing -- at least one purchaser was unable to get any assurances that he could do so. But apparently you can buy the twin chargers without the HPWC if you have a good reason: can't install the HPWC where you live, already have an HPWC, need J1772 for another car, etc. Admittedly splitting this bundle is a hassle, but apparently it's not impossible.

Earl and Nagin ... | 12 settembre 2013

The reason that the Roadster didn't handle the J-1772 signalling for the higher current was that it was built BEFORE J-1772 specified higher current. I don't know the exact detail the prevents the backward compatibility.
Remember that the J-1772 committee, an SAE committee was dominated by American automobile manufacturers, all of whom would be much happier if they could continue selling ICE forever and didn't want to be bothered with the cost of retooling for EVs. The only one that had plans to make EVs planned to make one with an ICE too so the last thing they wanted was to obviate the ICE by enabling reasonably fast charging.
I suspect that if it weren't for Tesla, J-1772 would have never added a high current capability.
If you buy an CS-100 from Clipper Creek and want to be able to charge a Roadster, just tell them and they'll do the simple firmware modification so it only sends out the 70 amp signal.

S4WRXTTCS | 12 settembre 2013

@BrianH - My interpretation of his question was he was looking for a solution at WORK.

Where he already had the TwinChargers/HPWC at home, but wanted a work solution that could handle weather conditions.

The Clipper Creek CS-100 is the only one that can handle outdoor weather. So that's his answer.

Alex K | 12 settembre 2013

@S4WRXTTCS | SEPTEMBER 12, 2013: The Clipper Creek CS-100 is the only one that can handle outdoor weather. So that's his answer.

Actually the HPWC can be mounted outside. It is weather sealed

S4WRXTTCS | 13 settembre 2013

@Alex K - Thanks. That's good to know.

I didn't see that listed on the webpage, but apparently I didn't dig far enough. It's on the summary sheet though.