ABRP 4.5.0. gets a major upgrade

[TexasBob]

I'm glad some people this is working really well for but for the two trips I used it for the route it picked was very risky and required stopping at level 2 chargers to make sure I had enough to make it to level 3 chargers. Then the level 3 charger was not working at 100% according to plugshare and confirmed when I arrived there (after taking a different route).

Here is the trip I planned out in advance with plugshare and google. The stops are for bathroom breaks. The second Walmart was only charging at 35 instead of 350 both going down and back.

Here is what the Nav system calculated (stops added to force route ~172 miles in first part)


This route while 10 miles shorter had zero chargers nearby. Yes the car could have made it but if anything happened and it added distance there were no chargers really on those roads requiring 20+ miles of driving to get to one.

I'm glad others haven't had issues but I'm not impressed with the navigation and it needs major improvements to catch up.

I think the problem is your charging network, not your trip planner.... by this time next year you will not worry about it.

Sponsored

 

[WorldComposting]

I think the problem is your charging network, not your trip planner.... by this time next year you will not worry about it.

I agree it will help once I can pull into a Tesla Charger especially going north on the NJ Turnpike. But right now it should be routing in a more normal way that all the other maps would recommend. Then update my time based on traffic. From Newport News to Corolla the arrival time was over an hour off where Waze and Google Maps were spot on.

I do like certain thing about the map itself I just with the Navigation was better.

 

[HeyEllwood]

About to do an Austin > Bay Area drive. I routed it out on ABRP and it seems to be fine? Is Plug Share the other option to get a better idea if the route on ABRP is even a good one?

 

[SeaGeo]

Try to use ABRP to drive from Austin, TX to Lost Maple State Park and then compare it to google maps. ABRP adds 20+ miles w/o ANY reason. Also, the expected drive time is 30% off in ABRP.

That's interesting, it looks like ABRP is favoring highways more than local roads. If you toss Blanco in as a stop, it gets it "right" per Google. The irony here is my FIL won't use Google because it doesn't route him "correctly" on the back roads in MN and wastes time.

The expected drive time in ABRP is very dependent on your inputs. I'd argue that Google is very off on long distance drives for me because of what they assume for the speed people are driving when long distance.

Or try to plan a route from Austin to Rockport, TX. 211 miles only, but it insists you can not make it even when you specify 2.9 miles per kW for 65mph and set arrival SoC to 10%. But what's worse ABRP insists you charge at a nonworking charger (for more than a few months).

You should try again, it worked fine for me and said I'd get there with 31% SOC with the ABRP settings I use for my truck.

 

[SeaGeo]

They need to stop spending time and money for nothing - just integrate Car Play / Android Auto and mark it done.

It's not for nothing. CP and AA have positives and negatives. I'm not going to say they shouldn't add CP or AA, but saying they should stop working on and improving their system and become beholden to external companies is silly.

The question how do you know? The way to see if it is working good or not, check alternatives, You will be surprised to see what Rivian NAV will suggest and what Google Maps will do. Google will usually have a better route. I also thought it is working fine, until I realized I am spending too much time driving than I need.

See below from @SANZC02 . As an example, Google and Rivian nav both like to route me along two different routes to work, neither of which are optimal. Rivian will generally offer up the more optimal route more often though. Apple is also going to give a different answer than Google at times. None are perfect. Is Google and Apple going to be better than ABRP for an optimum route more often than not? Sure. Is Google going to do a better job navigating your EV if the EV isn't providing data to google? No. Is google collecting EV charging data? No.

I can test any navigation system and find some routes that are not optimal.

Nothing is going to be 100% just seems you found a route you use a lot that has an issue. I used it from IL, to MA, to FL, back to CA including lots of obscure backroads over 5100 miles with no issues.

Was using some of the downtime while charging to verify the routes with Google and. Apple Maps during the trip and all were very similar.

The rating system on plugshare may be useless, but I've never tried to use it, I go straight to the chargers I need to use and read the comments, it takes just a few seconds to get a firm grasp on whether the comments are valid or not, and how recent they are, so it's very very good at giving you data regarding whether you can rely on any specific charging station or not.

Agreed. I do the same thing. My point was basically that none of the solutions are perfect. With Plugshare being owned by EVGO and continuing to say "any charge" is a good charge they're refusing to fill a quality of life hole that ABRP and Rivian are at least trying to acknowledge it seems.

 

[shap]

That's interesting, it looks like ABRP is favoring highways more than local roads. If you toss Blanco in as a stop, it gets it "right" per Google. The irony here is my FIL won't use Google because it doesn't route him "correctly" on the back roads in MN and wastes time.

The expected drive time in ABRP is very dependent on your inputs. I'd argue that Google is very off on long distance drives for me because of what they assume for the speed people are driving when long distance.


You should try again, it worked fine for me and said I'd get there with 31% SOC with the ABRP settings I use for my truck.

Yep, I know the trick My point was that you should be aware of all of these tricks and check google maps and then plug share - as ABRP will probably route you using the non-working charger or a longer route or both

In 2023, when you have pretty good AI for such tasks, why nobody can build a reliable EV navigation app - is beyond my comprehension. It is not difficult to connect all charger companies' API to the real-time monitoring system, which will be able to report and predict charger availability and assign reliability scores for each charger.

Then, as a driver, you will be able to select the "safest" route or more "risky" route , etc.

Maybe one day ...

 

[SDH]

I just don't have enough confidence in the R1's navigation yet (unlike I had in my Tesla). Did a return trip to Tahoe from the Bay recently and had Google maps running side-by-side. Google is still superior. At one point we had the same route but ABPR said 20mins slower, then as we neared it just lopped off that 20mins. I also don't think it reacts as fast as Google to traffic build ups, diversions or 'new roads'.

 

[ElGuapo]

FWIW I've used ABRP several times and it's been very efficient. Routing me around accidents, construction, etc. You do have to fine tune the settings a lot. It's not perfect by any means. It wanted be stop twice yesterday on a trip - one time for 11 minutes, and an hour or so later for five minutes. I stopped for 14 minutes on the first stop and then skipped the second. Super strange.

I wish they'd just "port" all of ABRP to Rivian Nav rather than adding random "features". There are too many random charging apps right now, but that's a reflection of the absurd EV infrastructure (or lack thereof).

Rivian Nav is awful and insanely conservative. It always wants me to charge well more than I need to. To be fair, Tesla nav is also terrible and have been for a decade. I never use either one. They just don't pay attention to traffic and take the most random, inefficient routes.

Like others, if I am not charging a bunch, I just use Waze.

Car Play and Android Auto are not happening. It's a revenue and data issue for Rivian. People have complained for years to Tesla and still no CP or AA. Rivian follows Tesla's playbook exactly. If you want CP or AA, buy a different car. Sorry, not trying to be harsh, but I think it's reality.

 

[ElGuapo]

I just don't have enough confidence in the R1's navigation yet (unlike I had in my Tesla). Did a return trip to Tahoe from the Bay recently and had Google maps running side-by-side. Google is still superior. At one point we had the same route but ABPR said 20mins slower, then as we neared it just lopped off that 20mins. I also don't think it reacts as fast as Google to traffic build ups, diversions or 'new roads'.

You had confidence in your Tesla nav? I've tried to use it for over 10 years and it's been awful and woefully wrong about 85% of the time. I do have a friend who loves it. One thing it really is not good at is legit real time traffic - which is odd because that comes from Google...but maybe Google keeps the good stuff for Waze.

 

[Dustyshades]

A lot of ABRP hate from people that I feel like don’t understand what it’s for. ABRP isn’t for trips where you need only 1 charging stop (or no charging stops).

It’s for a full day drive with multiple stops, and it’s super useful because it plans for your charging curve to optimize when you stop to charge and what percent to charge to at each stop to minimize your total on road time over the duration of the trip.

 

[GaryGR]

I am glad you have a good experience. Try to use ABRP to drive from Austin, TX to Lost Maple State Park and then compare it to google maps. ABRP adds 20+ miles w/o ANY reason. Also, the expected drive time is 30% off in ABRP.

Or try to plan a route from Austin to Rockport, TX. 211 miles only, but it insists you can not make it even when you specify 2.9 miles per kW for 65mph and set arrival SoC to 10%. But what's worse ABRP insists you charge at a nonworking charger (for more than a few months).

So I am glad it is working for you, but for me, it is really not.

Yes! I had a similar experience routing from Buda to Corpus and back the day after the update that integrated ABRP routing. Before the update it routed me correctly using the shortest route (down 123), only 181 miles and starting at 100% so no need at all for charging stops. The new Rivian nav with ABRP kept insisting on routing me way out of the way (30+ additional miles) for charging stops, no matter what settings I tried, and would not give me any option for the most direct route or completely removing charging stops. I ended up having to find a spot about halfway in between to navigate to on the way down and the way back. Going there I arrived with 28%, on the way back I got home with 33%, driving a bit over the speed the whole way.

 

[shap]

A lot of ABRP hate from people that I feel like don’t understand what it’s for. ABRP isn’t for trips where you need only 1 charging stop (or no charging stops).

It’s for a full day drive with multiple stops, and it’s super useful because it plans for your charging curve to optimize when you stop to charge and what percent to charge to at each stop to minimize your total on road time over the duration of the trip.

I disagree - ABRP should be able to route you correctly regardless of the number of stops.
I can bring you several other examples, where few stops were needed and ABRP was choosing a slow 50kW expensive charger instead of using a 150kW charger nearby.

This is a matter of trust - right now you can not trust ABRP for routing - you need to verify each stop and see what people (plug share), EV Connect/EA/EVGO/etc. application is saying, and make adjustments. Semi-automatic work I would say.

 

[MrMusAddict]

ABRP has been completely useless in trying to plan trips, I can't be alone with this opinion.

Example I drive Dallas to Bentonville every 1-2 months, it's 400 miles each way, I know where the chargers are, so I use plug share and know which ones are currently working and which ones aren't. IF I try to use ABRP it adds 100 miles to the trip, using chargers that are inoperable.

Why Rivian bought them I don't really understand, at least for me, it's not just worthless, if I blindly went along using it it would turn a 7 hour trip into a 10+ hour trip.

Man that has not at all been my experience. Definitely seems like a regional hit or miss.

One thing I do know is that you can deprioritize specific chargers, and prioritize certain charge networks. So if you know which ones you prefer, it should hardly have that sort of problem again.

 

[Dustyshades]

I disagree - ABRP should be able to route you correctly regardless of the number of stops.
I can bring you several other examples, where few stops were needed and ABRP was choosing a slow 50kW expensive charger instead of using a 150kW charger nearby.

This is a matter of trust - right now you can not trust ABRP for routing - you need to verify each stop and see what people (plug share), EV Connect/EA/EVGO/etc. application is saying, and make adjustments. Semi-automatic work I would say.

I just don’t understand why you would want to use it in those scenarios. It’s not useful. The example route above sounds like a specific edge case on one short route.

As far as incorporating charger status, how do you think that would work? It seems like they have launched a solution here with user feedback to try to get at what you are complaining about anyway

 

[shap]

I just don’t understand why you would want to use it in those scenarios. It’s not useful. The example route above sounds like a specific edge case on one short route.

As far as incorporating charger status, how do you think that would work? It seems like they have launched a solution here with user feedback to try to get at what you are complaining about anyway

Well, the good example why is when I want to drive from Austin to Rockport and back. I think it is a very valid scenario. ABRP would route me to unworking charger despite it marked unavailable for 2 months by EV connect and plug share.

As for user feedback on ABRP - why to create another place for reporting instead of just using plug share and actual data from EV charger providers !?

Sponsored