
I went to a Tesla Supercharger station to charge the Hyundai Ioniq 9 — here's my pros and cons
Aside from their expensive costs, the other challenge EVs face is convincing people that charging them isn't an inconvenience. The 2026 Hyundai Ioniq 9 intends on making it easier for anyone because it features an NACS (North American Charging Standard port) charging port, instead of the J1772 and CCS ports that Hyundai EVs have used up to this point.
This is a big deal because the NACS port is what Tesla EVs use, which means that the Ioniq 9 can be charged in more places because it has access to the 20,000+ Tesla Supercharger locations around the country. After draining its battery down, I brought it to the closest Tesla Supercharger to see what it's like charging the Ioniq 9. Here's my pros and cons.
Since it natively features a NACS port for charging, you don't need any special adapters to charge the Ioniq 9 at a Tesla Supercharger location. You simply just plug the connector into the port and that's all to it.
Although other EVs can still charge at a Tesla Supercharger, like the Ford F-150 Lightning, they require a special adapter in order to work. On the flip side, the included CCS adapter that comes with the Ioniq 9 is needed if I want to use CCS charging stations like EVgo or ChargePoint.
Even though the Ioniq 9 has an EPA-estimated range of 335 miles, which I'd put in the above-average category for EVs, there are still some people who might not be convinced it's a long distance road warrior. That's why access to a charging station is critical in easing this concern.
Tesla has invested a lot around its charging infrastructure, with now over 20,000 Tesla Supercharger locations scattered around the country. This supplements the over 45,000 DC fast chargers nationwide that the Ioniq 9 can access as well, making it easier than most EVs to charge while on the road.
Get instant access to breaking news, the hottest reviews, great deals and helpful tips.
One of the biggest annoyances I have about EV charging stations in general is that you're often required to download an app and set up an account before you actually begin to charge. It's no different at the Tesla Supercharger station near me, which is an inconvenience if you don't have your phone on you.
Like I said, it's not just a Tesla problem, because many other EV charging stations also force you to download and use their apps. Fortunately, there's one station near me that lets you bypass this because it accepts credit card payments directly.
I went to the Tesla Supercharger station roughly before noon to beat the lunch hour traffic, but parking the Hyundai Ioniq 9 into a spot is just one of the many challenges I faced. After pulling back into the first open spot, I realized that the charging cord's on the shorter side — so I ended up parking in the adjacent spot, which essentially meant taking up two parking spots.
Despite the tight parking spaces, I think it's much more problematic that these Tesla Superchargers have extremely cables.
Once I started charging the Ioniq 9, I paid attention to the recharging rate shown on the driver's display. Initially it started out very low at about 16.5 kW, but it eventually peaked at 126 kW. This is technically Level 3 charging speed and what you want to get the quickest charge in the shortest amount of time.
While 126 kW is a good speed, it could've been faster because I've experienced faster Level 3 speeds elsewhere. During my first test with charging the Ioniq 9, it estimated a time of 36 minutes to go from 19% to 80% — while a full charge would've taken 1 hour and 3 minutes. However, there are a lot of factors that impact the speeds you get at a charging station.
Since I'm charging a non-Tesla vehicle, I'm paying more for my charges at a Tesla Supercharger. The Tesla app shows me the rates, so at least I'm not blindsided when I finish charging. I was charged at the rate of $0.57/kWh during peak hours, which is actually average when compared to the rates at other charging stations.
Still, this is more than what Tesla drivers pay. In order to get the same rates, I'd have to sign up for Tesla membership that would reduce the rate down to $0.41/kWh — but it does come at the cost of $12.99/month. If you're wondering if that's worth getting, just know that the Ioniq 9 has a 110.3 kWh battery. Using the rates I mentioned, it would cost me $62.87 to charge the Ioniq 9 fully, versus $45.22 with the Tesla membership.
After all of that, you might think that it's not worth using a Tesla Supercharger if you don't have a Tesla. Quite the contrary: Most of the complaints I have here are no different from my sentiments about other EV chargers. The biggest benefit here, though, is that the Hyundai Ioniq 9 offers that peace of mind assurance that you can charge it in more places.
I always give the advice to charge EVs at home and reserve charging at a station when you absolutely need to, like when you're on a road trip or vacation. You'll have more savings in the long run that way. But in the event that you need to charge, it's nice knowing that you have more options with the Ioniq 9.
Follow Tom's Guide on Google News to get our up-to-date news, how-tos, and reviews in your feeds. Make sure to click the Follow button.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
France new car registrations down 7.66% in July, Tesla sales drop 26.57%
(Reuters) -New car registrations in France slid 7.66% in July from a year earlier to 116,377 vehicles, data from French car body PFA showed on Friday. Tesla sales in the country fell 26.57% to 1,307 vehicles last month. Since the start of the year, Tesla's sales have slumped by 38.52%, while the overall French market has shrunk by 7.91% over the same period. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data


CNBC
an hour ago
- CNBC
Tesla Autopilot plaintiffs seek $345 million in damages over fatal crash in Florida
Tesla is facing a crucial verdict in a personal injury trial over a fatal Autopilot crash in 2019, the first time Elon Musk's automaker has been in front of a jury on such a matter in federal court. Attorneys for the plaintiffs on Thursday asked the jury to award damages of around $345 million. That includes $109 million in compensatory damages and $236 million in punitive damages. The trial in the Southern District of Florida started on July 14. The suit centers around who shoulders the blame for a deadly crash that occurred in 2019 in Key Largo, Florida. A Tesla owner named George McGee was driving his Model S electric sedan while using the company's Enhanced Autopilot, a partially automated driving system. While driving, McGee dropped his mobile phone that he was using and scrambled to pick it up. He said during the trial that he believed Enhanced Autopilot would brake if an obstacle was in the way. He accelerated through an intersection at just over 60 miles per hour, hitting a nearby empty parked car and its owners, who were standing on the other side of their vehicle. Naibel Benavides, who was 22, died on the scene from injuries sustained in the crash. Her body was discovered about 75 feet away from the point of impact. Her boyfriend, Dillon Angulo, survived but suffered multiple broken bones, a traumatic brain injury and psychological effects. The plaintiffs have included Benavides' surviving family members, and Angulo, who testified in the trial. Angulo is seeking compensation for his medical expenses and pain and suffering, while Benavides' estate is suing for wrongful death, pain and suffering, and other punitive damages. Lawyers representing the plaintiffs argued that Tesla's partially automated driving systems, marketed as Autopilot at the time, had dangerous defects, which should have been known and fixed by the company, and that use of Autopilot should have been limited to roads where it could perform safely. They also argued that Musk and Tesla made false statements to customers, shareholders and the public, overstating the safety benefits and capabilities of Autopilot, which encouraged drivers to overly rely on it. In opening arguments and throughout the trial, the plaintiffs' attorneys and expert witnesses cited a litany of Musk's past promises about Autopilot and Tesla's autonomous vehicle technology. The lawyers said Tesla attorneys countered in court that the company had communicated directly with customers about how to use Autopilot and other features, and that McGee's driving was to blame for the collision. They said in closing arguments that Tesla works to develop technology to save drivers' lives, and that a ruling against the EV maker would send the wrong message. The Benavides family had previously sued McGee and settled with him. McGee was charged in October 2019 with careless driving and didn't contest the charges. While Tesla has typically been able to settle cases or move Autopilot-related suits into arbitration and out of the public eye, Judge Beth Bloom in the Miami court wrote, in an order in early July, that the case could move ahead to trial. "A reasonable jury could find that Tesla acted in reckless disregard of human life for the sake of developing their product and maximizing profit," she wrote in that order. For closing arguments on Thursday, the Benavides family and Angulo were in the courtroom. They looked away from screens anytime a video or picture of the scene of the crash was displayed. --
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
France new car registrations down 7.66% in July, Tesla sales drop 26.57%
(Reuters) -New car registrations in France slid 7.66% in July from a year earlier to 116,377 vehicles, data from French car body PFA showed on Friday. Tesla sales in the country fell 26.57% to 1,307 vehicles last month. Since the start of the year, Tesla's sales have slumped by 38.52%, while the overall French market has shrunk by 7.91% over the same period.