CCS1 vs. CCS2: The Ultimate Comparison Guide

Nevertheless, because of regional differences in electrical grids, namely, the distinction between single-phase and three-phase power, two different standards were created: CCS1 and CCS2. For ev owners, operators, and exporters, there is no technicality in the main difference between the two, but it is a business decision that is vital. The choice of the incorrect standard leads to incompatible hardware and high sunk costs. These technical and geographical boundaries are crucial to understanding infrastructure reliability and long-term returns on investment in the fast-changing world of ev charging. This guide is a comprehensive comparison that assists owners, operators, and ev users to overcome the challenges of global EV charging.

What is a CCS1 Connector?

The ccs type 1 connector is the standard that has been developed mainly in the North American and South Korean markets. It is a variant of the J1772 (Type 1) AC plug, on which American charging has been based more than ten years. The industry has added two large dc contacts at the bottom to form a combo port which enables a vehicle to receive both slow AC charging at home and rapid DC charging at highway stops without having two separate inlets on the car body.
CSS1 is technically a single-phase standard. In North America, single-phase or split-phase power is used to construct residential and most light-commercial electrical systems. Due to this fact, the AC component of the CCS1 plug only uses a single port layout to supply power. This design was very logical in a market where three-phase power is seldom supplied to homes or small businesses, making the charging experience straightforward for the average user.

What is a CCS2 Connector?

The european standard equivalent is CCS2, which is quickly becoming the dominant standard in the rest of the world, not in North America, China, and Japan. It is constructed on the Mennekes (Type 2) AC plug. The CCS2 connector was a three-phase AC connector, unlike its American counterpart, which was built on a different design to accommodate three-phase AC power.
Three-phase power is the standard of both industrial and residential distribution in Europe and much of Oceania and Asia. CCS2 enables vehicles to draw much more power when charging slowly in AC mode with the Type 2 base, which can be as high as 22kW. The two DC pins at the bottom make it a high-speed charging connector that is physically larger and rounder than the CCS1 but has a higher ceiling to performance across the board.

CCS1 vs. CCS2: An In-depth, Comparative Analysis of the Major Differences

In order to maneuver through the intricacies of EV implementation in the world, it is necessary to look beyond the plastic casing. The table below and the analysis below further subdivides the fundamental technical differences between these two standards.

Comparison Table: CCS1 vs. CCS2

Differences in Physical Design

The regional origin and the electrical systems supported by CCS1 and CCS2 define the physical difference between the two. Although both are based on the same two-pin DC setup at the bottom to enable quick charging, the upper part of the two is very different in shape and size, number of pins, and locking systems.

Shape and Size of Connector

The electrical standards supported by each connector are directly reflected in the physical footprint and silhouette of the connector. Although the two systems have the same large DC pins at the bottom, the upper parts are very different in shape and size.

• CCS1 (The “Nozzle” Style):
  The CCS1 connector is defined by its circular top profile, which still retains a shape that resembles a classic fuel nozzle. The upper housing is a little narrower than the CCS2 due to its construction around a 5-pin layout of single-phase AC charging. Its general design is usually more focused on a more industrial form factor, usually with a longer handle to give the user a solid grip.
• CCS2 (The “Integrated” Style):
  The CCS2 connector has a more streamlined and modern appearance, with a flat top and a profile that is D-shaped. It is typically broader and stronger than the CCS1 – a technical requirement to accommodate the 7-pin format needed to support three-phase AC power. This wider size gives the plug a more solid feel, giving it a flush, built-in look when it is in the inlet of the vehicle.

Pin Layout and Electrical Architecture

The main structural variation is in the AC (alternating current) part of the connector:

• CCS1 (Combo 1):
  According to the North American Type 1 (J1772) standard. It has 5 pins on the upper part. The layout is simpler and smaller since it is intended to be used in single-phase electrical grids.
• CCS2 (Combo 2):
  According to the European Type 2 (Mennekes) standard. It has 7 pins in the upper part. The extra pins enable it to take three-phase AC power, which makes the upper housing a little broader than the CCS1.

This technical split describes the existing split in the world markets. The industry in North America is quickly moving towards the NACS (SAE J3400) of Tesla. Since the North American grid is mostly single-phase, the fact that CCS1 could not handle three-phase power was not a big loss. NACS being a single-phase-native design as well, it was an easy transition to the US market to switch to the smaller Tesla standard. On the other hand, the CCS2 7-pin layout is an unavoidable necessity in Europe due to the use of three-phase power. This technical requirement makes CCS2 the unquestioned regional standard, since no single-phase connector (such as NACS or CCS1) can make full use of the capacity of the European grid.

Safety and Locking Mechanisms

How the connector attaches itself to the vehicle is the greatest functional difference between the two standards, which affects both the day-to-day usability and the long-term reliability.

• CCS1 (Manual Mechanical Latch):
  CCS1 has a thumb-operated button on the handle. This lever needs to be pressed by the user to connect or disconnect the plug to the inlet of the vehicle, producing a physical clicking sound like a conventional gas pump. The CCS1 Achilles heel is the Manual Latch. Since the latch is a plastic moving component that is exposed to the elements, it is likely to break when it falls on frozen pavement. A faulty latch will cause the car not to recognize a locked state and will not start a high-voltage charge.
• CCS2 (Automatic Electronic Lock):
  CCS2 connector has no external buttons or moving components. The locking is instead done by an electronic actuator which is safely placed in the inlet of the vehicle. After the plug is inserted, the computer (ECU) of the car pins the plug automatically. The Electronic Lock of CCS2 is installed in the car in a safe place. This is a high-reliability design, which means that the electrical connection is not live until the physical lock has been verified by the vehicle ECU. This greatly minimizes the chance of arcing in case of accidental disconnection and offers a far greater degree of tamper resistance.

Technical Performance and Electrical Specifications

In addition to the physical interface, the practical use of these connectors is defined by their electrical architecture and software that controls the flow of energy.

Speed and Power Output Charge

• CCS1:
  A single-phase electrical grid designed to fit the North American and South Korean electrical grids. It is normally restricted to 7.4 kW or 11 kW in the AC (slow charging) world. In the case of DC fast charging, although theoretically it can be charged at up to 350 kW, older infrastructure may only allow it to be charged at 200A, potentially causing high-capacity batteries to charge more slowly.
• CCS2:
  Designed to operate on the three-phase power grids common in Europe, Australia and most of Asia. This enables much faster AC charging rates of up to 22 kW (or even 43 kW) at public stations, reducing overnight or workplace charging time by almost two-thirds. CCS2 is more robust in DC applications, frequently capable of supporting up to 500A and 1000 V with greater reliability.

Although the technical specifications are in kilowatts, the real effect is in time. The efficiency difference is dramatic in the case of a typical 100 kWh battery in 2026. A CCS2 system can provide a 90 percent charge in a standard four-hour work charge, compared to a CCS1 system that provides approximately 28 percent, leaving the vehicle nowhere near being ready. This is also extended to overnight charging, with CCS2 taking 4.5 hours to complete a full cycle, as opposed to 13.5 hours in CCS1. In addition to pure speed, CCS2 ensures grid stability through balancing the electrical load on three lines, eliminating the voltage drops and cable overheating hazards of the heavy single-line draw of CCS

Grid Integration and Communication Protocols

The technical richness of a charging standard is determined by the capability of the standard to communicate between the vehicle and the electrical grid. Although CCS1 and CCS2 have similar foundations, their directions in 2026 have been different depending on regional priorities and the development of smart-grid technology.

• The Landscape of CCS1 and the NACS Pivot:
  CCS1 relies on Power Line Communication (PLC) and HomePlug Green PHY standard to allow the car and the charger to shake hands. Although it facilitates simple data exchange, more complex ISO 15118 functionality (such as Plug & Charge) has been rolled out in North America in a piecemeal fashion because of the local transition to the NACS (Tesla) standard. This shift has practically frozen the R&D of CCS1-based bidirectional charging. This is a legacy trap to operators developing infrastructure of a smart city, since CCS1 does not offer the energy management capabilities of the future that are being emphasized in other markets.
• CCS2 and the V2X Advantage:
  CCS2, like CCS2, is based on the PLC/Green PHY base, but has a far more developed implementation of the ISO 15118 protocol. By 2026, this standard has been required in many regions in the public infrastructure, allowing smooth Plug and Charge and advanced Vehicle-to-Grid (V2G) functionality. This renders CCS2 the better option in smart-grid management and commercial fleet operations of large scale. CCS2 has taken the lead in the V2X race by moving faster to standardize ISO 15118-20; its hardware is inherently prepared to perform the secure handshaking needed to transform EVs into home batteries, and provides a degree of grid integration that CCS1 cannot yet match.

Cooling Systems and Thermal Stability

• CCS1:
  CCS1 stations with high power usually use air-cooled or simple liquid-cooled cables. Due to the fact that the manual mechanical latch may occasionally permit some movement or accumulation of debris, contact resistance may be augmented when subjected to heavy loads. This sometimes causes so-called thermal throttling, in which the charger is forced to lower its power output to avoid overheating the handle.
• CCS2:
  Has very advanced liquid-cooling manifolds, which circulate a glycol-water mixture directly around the conductors. Since the electronic lock provides an accurate and fixed connection between the pins and the vehicle inlet, micro-arcing and heat generation is minimized. This enables CCS2 systems to sustain peak charging rates over extended periods without causing power cutbacks due to safety reasons.

Distribution Regional and Market

The international separation between CCS1 and CCS2 is a direct indication of regional electrical grids. This technical split compels companies to either go local with specialization or global with scalability.

• CCS1: CCS1 is based on single-phase AC grid architecture such as the split-phase system used in North America, and is mostly found in North America, South Korea, and Taiwan. Its market position is however changing. In North America, the fast uptake of the NACS standard by Tesla has moved CCS1 to a legacy specialty. To global operators, CCS1 compatibility is no longer a strategic move to international expansion but a tactic to be applied to particular territories. It is still a required criterion to maintain the current infrastructure in East Asia and North American legacy projects, but it is no longer a driver of global growth.

With NACS as the North American standard in 2026, CCS1 owners will have to live in an interim period characterized by adapter-reliance. The efficiency of these adapters is usually reduced by 1-3 percent to heat, which may cause thermal throttling and reduce the speed of charging during high-power sessions. Also, the protocol translation required can introduce a delay of 10-15 seconds to the first handshake between the charger and the car. To be safe, one must not compromise on the use of UL 2251-certified hardware; otherwise, the hardware will not have the thermal sensors required to prevent the welding of connectors to the port when the current is high.

• CCS2: CCS2 is the unavoidable standard of the rest of the world. It is optimized to work with high-efficiency three-phase power grids, and is the required or de facto standard in Europe, Oceania, South America, Southeast Asia, and the Middle East. Commercially, CCS2 provides unmatched coverage. Due to the ability of one hardware architecture to be deployed in different continents with little localization, it has become the foundation of global supply chain optimization. Beyond China and the NACS-centric US, CCS2 is the least expensive route to international scalability, with the greatest payback in terms of its extensive geographic reach.

What are the Pros and Cons of CCS1 and CCS2 Connectors?

The choice between CCS1 and CCS2 is based on the trade-off between regional infrastructure needs and technical performance, security, and long-term hardware durability.

CCS1 Connector (North American Standard)

The simplicity of CCS1 is characterized by its mechanical simplicity, which is its greatest weakness. The tactile click is user friendly, but the exposed plastic latch is notorious in breaking in high traffic public stations. Moreover, its failure to accommodate three-phase power restricts its use among users who need high-speed AC charging in the workplace or during shopping.

CCS2 Connector (European/Global Standard)

CCS2 is the technically better standard, which focuses on high power delivery and security. It enhances the capability of the current electrical grids by supporting three-phase electricity. This however comes at the expense of ergonomics; the cables are bulky to some users and the electronic locking mechanism introduces a level of software-hardware complexity that CCS1 does not have.

What Electric Vehicle Models are Compatible with CCS1 and CCS2?

The CCS1 standard is most commonly used in the North American and South Korean markets, where it is the main fast-charging port of the Ford F-150 Lightning, the Hyundai Ioniq 5 (US-spec), and the Chevrolet Bolt. Also, more recent American-made electric trucks such as the Rivian R1T use CCS1 as their high-speed charging system.

Conversely, the CCS2 standard has emerged as the unquestioned world leader particularly in Europe and Australia. Examples of representative models with this port are the European versions of the Volkswagen ID.4, the Porsche Taycan, and the Polestar 2. It is noteworthy that Tesla has a proprietary plug in the United States, but in Europe and Australia, its Model 3 and Model Y have native CCS2 ports to align with local power grids.

One should keep in mind that the compatibility of vehicles is frequently defined by the area of sale, but not the brand. An example would be a Hyundai Ioniq 5 sold in California will have a CCS1 port, whereas the same model sold in Berlin or Sydney will be assembled with a CCS2 port. This is the main cause of the prevalence of adapters when importing cars, but they usually have the safety and efficiency compromises mentioned above.

Interoperability and Pitfalls to Avoid: The Reality of Converters

Is it possible to export a US-spec CCS1 car to Europe or the Middle East and simply put in a converter? The technical response is yes, but the reality on the ground is a collision of hardware and software standards.

The AC Grid Mismatch

The initial obstacle is power phase. Single-phase onboard chargers are used in North American CCS1 vehicles. Because European and Middle Eastern grids are three-phase, an adapter can frequently reduce your charging rate, which is 11kW to a pathetic 3.7kW as the car is only fed on a single line. Other intelligent stations can even deny the connection altogether to prevent an unbalanced load.

Communication “Dialects”

Although both standards are based on Power Line Communication (PLC), they are based on different regional dialects. A delay of 100ms in the handshake signal may result in a Communication Error. It is these timing differences and differences in Control Pilot (CP) duty cycles that cause many adapters to not start a session.

Passive vs. Active Solutions

Not every converter is equal and selecting the wrong one may cost a lot.

• The Risk of Passive Adapters:
  These are plain plastic shells with no internal logic. They pose a risk to high-power DC charging since they do not have thermal sensors. A passive adapter may overheat and melt the charging port at 200kW+ speeds before the car or station notices something is wrong.
• Safety of Active Controllers:
  Active converters of professional grade are real time translators. Their internal chips rectify CP and PP signals to make a successful handshake. Above all, they have thermal monitoring to reduce power in case of temperature increase to safeguard the circuitry of your vehicle.

The Ultimate Solution: Hardware Retrofitting

A complete hardware upgrade is the standard of permanent reliability. It is not just a matter of simple adapters, but a physical replacement of the CCS1 inlet with a native CCS2 module and a full adaptation of the high-voltage wiring harness.
But hardware is not everything. A digital alignment is needed to make sure that the vehicle properly reads three-phase power and communication signals. To operators or owners who might want to take this route, the following data-driven disaggregation shows the realistic costs and technical risks of a professional retrofit:

How to Choose Between CCS1 and CCS2 Connectors?

The choice of the appropriate standard is concerned with the matching of hardware to the local infrastructure to prevent technical and financial losses in the long run.

• Personal Owners: It is up to your local grid. The single-phase power used in North American CCS1 vehicles does not match the three-phase grids used in Europe and the Middle East. The importation of a CCS1 car to such areas can frequently lead to a permanent slow-charging handicap – limiting AC power to 3.7kW instead of the 11kW or 22kW of native CCS2 cars.
• Charging Point Operators (CPOs): In the transitional markets such as Southeast Asia or South America, the vehicle fleet is usually a combination of regional standards. Dual-gun chargers (CCS1 and CCS2) are the safest investment to maximize ROI and future-proof your site. This will make sure that you are able to serve all drivers irrespective of the origin of their vehicle and at the same time be flexible to local power changes.
• Exporters: One of the biggest commercial risks is to export a vehicle that does not fit the grid of the destination. It handicaps the usefulness of the car, causing negative reviews and reduced resale. To secure your brand, always match the charging version of the vehicle with the native infrastructure of the destination. In case a mismatch cannot be avoided, package the car with a certified active converter instead of leaving the customer to take the risk of unsafe, uncertified third-party repairs.

It doesn’t matter whether you are operating in a mixed-standard market or are trying to achieve the best performance in a single region, the appropriate hardware partner is it all. This is where the flexible charging solutions of BENY come in.

Future Developments and Trends

The EV landscape is shifting as regional standards evolve to meet higher power demands and smarter grid integration.

• The Rise of NACS and the Decline of CCS1:
  In North America, the SAE J3400 (NACS) standard has effectively replaced CCS1. Nearly all major automakers are transitioning to this more compact, reliable connector by 2026. For existing CCS1 owners, this shift means a future of using adapters to access the expanding NACS-dominated infrastructure. This consolidation aims to solve the mechanical fragility and communication “handshake” issues that often plagued the CCS1 standard.
• V2X and the Strength of CCS2:
  Europe is currently the global leader in Vehicle-to-Everything (V2X) technology, with CCS2 serving as the primary backbone. Because CCS2 natively supports the ISO 15118-20 protocol, it allows EVs to function as “batteries on wheels.” This enables Bi-directional charging (V2G/V2H), letting cars stabilize power grids or power homes during outages.
• Why Europe Sticks to CCS2:
  Despite the buzz around NACS, Europe remains committed to CCS2 due to its three-phase power grid. The 7-pin design of CCS2 handles three-phase AC charging natively, allowing for speeds up to 22kW. Switching to a NACS-style connector would require a massive, expensive downgrade of European electrical infrastructure.
• The Megawatt Charging System (MCS):
  For heavy-duty trucking, even 350kW fast charging is insufficient. The upcoming Megawatt Charging System (MCS) scales CCS communication logic to deliver over 1.2MW of power. Designed for long-haul freight, MCS allows massive batteries to recharge in under 30 minutes. While the plug is a ruggedized new design, its software “brain” remains rooted in the proven CCS framework.

Conclusion

The choice between CCS1 and CCS2 is rarely a matter of preference; it is a matter of location and grid physics. CCS1 remains the legacy champion of the North American single-phase grid, despite its mechanical vulnerabilities. CCS2 is the versatile, high-speed powerhouse that has conquered most of the world through its three-phase AC capability and robust electronic locking.

For the user, the goal remains the same: a seamless connection that delivers power safely and quickly. By understanding the technical underpinnings of these two giants, and choosing infrastructure partners like BENY who prioritize safety and global compliance, we move one step closer to a world where “plugging in” is as simple and reliable as the turn of a key once was.

FAQs