As 6.6kW on-board chargers (OBCs) become increasingly common in EVs, electric motorcycles, and EV conversion projects, one question continues to divide users:
Do you really need CAN communication in a 6.6kW OBC — or is it just unnecessary complexity?
For some, CAN is non-negotiable.
For others, it’s exactly what makes a charger harder to use.
Let’s explore both sides of the debate.
What Does CAN Communication Actually Do in an OBC?
CAN (Controller Area Network) allows the on-board charger to communicate directly with other vehicle systems, such as:
- Battery Management System (BMS)
- Vehicle Control Unit (VCU)
- Thermal management systems
In a CAN-enabled 6.6kW OBC, charging behavior is no longer fixed. Instead, it can be dynamically adjusted based on:
- Battery voltage and current limits
- Temperature feedback
- State of charge (SOC)
- Fault and safety conditions
This is why CAN-based chargers are widely used in OEM EV platforms.
The Case FOR CAN Communication
Supporters argue that a CAN-controlled OBC is the only “proper” solution for modern EV systems.
Key Benefits:
- ✔ Real-time coordination with the BMS
- ✔ Optimized charging curves for battery health
- ✔ Advanced fault detection and diagnostics
- ✔ Better system-level safety and protection
From an engineering perspective, CAN enables a fully integrated charging system, not just a standalone power supply.
For OEMs and high-end EV projects, CAN communication is often considered essential, not optional.
The Case AGAINST CAN: “Do We Really Need This?”
On the other side of the debate are DIY builders, retrofit projects, and cost-sensitive users.
Their argument is simple:
More communication doesn’t always mean better usability.
Common Complaints:
- ✖ Increased system complexity
- ✖ Longer setup and debugging time
- ✖ Compatibility issues between OBCs and third-party BMS
- ✖ Steeper learning curve for non-engineers
For many projects, a non-CAN (analog or fixed-logic) 6.6kW OBC already delivers stable, predictable charging — without the headaches.
Plug-and-Play vs Smart Control
This debate often comes down to one fundamental question:
Do you want simplicity or full system control?
-
Plug-and-play OBCs
-
Faster installation
-
Minimal configuration
-
Ideal for conversions and aftermarket upgrades
-
-
CAN-enabled OBCs
-
Deep integration with BMS and VCU
-
Greater flexibility and safety logic
-
Best suited for OEM and advanced projects
-
Neither approach is inherently right or wrong — it depends entirely on the application and user experience you want.
CAN OBCs and Compatibility: A Real-World Challenge
One overlooked issue in CAN-based charging systems is protocol compatibility.
Not all BMS units speak the same CAN “language.”
Mismatched protocols can lead to:
- Charging refusal
- Limited current output
- Communication errors
This is why many users still prefer simpler 6.6kW OBC designs, especially in mixed-brand or DIY systems.
So, Is CAN in a 6.6kW OBC Necessary?
The truth lies somewhere in the middle.
-
For OEM EV platforms and fully engineered systems → CAN is a powerful tool
-
For DIY EV conversions, electric motorcycles, and aftermarket upgrades → CAN can feel like overengineering
The ongoing debate shows that there is no one-size-fits-all solution.
Join the Discussion 👇
We’d love to hear your experience.
- Do you prefer a CAN-controlled 6.6kW OBC, or a plug-and-play charger?
- Have you ever struggled with CAN compatibility between an OBC and BMS?
- Would you sacrifice system simplicity for smarter charging control?
👉 Share your thoughts in the comments below.
Your real-world feedback helps others make better decisions.
🔍 SEO Keywords (Naturally Embedded)
6.6kW OBC, CAN communication OBC, EV on-board charger CAN, BMS CAN protocol, CAN vs non-CAN OBC, EV charger communication, EV conversion charger, smart EV charging