YouTube Video: The 2025 Rivian R1T Tri-motor Max Pack Does Its Best With All Terrain Tires! 70-MPH Range Test

[Donald Stanfield]

Regarding range comparison - this is the most apples-to-apples comparison that can be made of the new tri motor drivechain - it largely removes the impact of the change of wheels tyres from the equation and actually lets us see how much of an impact moving from 4 bosch motors to an enduro and pair of asents makes. The findings here match what ive been seeing too - that at normal highway speeds in AP mode the tri motor config is less efficient than the original quad was - and ends up with around the same range mostly as a result of other changes - namely the ~9kWh larger battery.

Again, why are you testing efficiency not in the most efficient mode? The tri is more efficient in conserve, which is what you should be using if range is your concern.

Sponsored

 

[mkhuffman]

Just like I don’t understand why we are comparing range on the least efficient tires I don’t understand why we are comparing budget. Is it any surprise a used car is going to be a better value than a new one?

Any vehicle in the six figure price range isn’t going to be a good value. That’s not what these are for.

Yep.

I have never leased a vehicle, but I think leasing makes a lot of sense if people are worried about depreciation. Lease it for three years and let Rivian take the depreciation risk. And at the end of the three years, offer to buy it at less than market value, or turn it back in and lease a new one. That is probably the direction I am going to go. Probably.

 

[Donald Stanfield]

Yep.

I have never leased a vehicle, but I think leasing makes a lot of sense if people are worried about depreciation. Lease it for three years and let Rivian take the depreciation risk. And at the end of the three years, offer to buy it at less than market value, or turn it back in and lease a new one. That is probably the direction I am going to go. Probably.

I was going to do so as well but buying it worked out cheaper. Yes it will depreciate but I bought my gen 1 in cash so I had too much equity to roll over and I didn’t want to go through the hassle of selling it considering Rivian offered me the most on the trade.

leasing is an option if the numbers work for you. The MF on a tri was way too high compared to the finance rate for me to go that route

 

[Kelvn]

what about conserve gen1 vs conserve gen2?

 

[portdirect]

@JeromePowell @jjswan33

It seems that you are both "correct" -- from:

https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/fuel-economy-and-ev-range-testing


Fuel Economy Testing
EPA is responsible for defining the methods used to calculate the fuel economy estimates that are posted on the window stickers of new cars and light trucks. EPA confirms approximately 15% of all test results, but it is the manufacturers that are responsible for providing the fuel economy data used for labeling. Automakers are required to follow very specific test procedures and submit the fuel economy data to EPA for all their models each year. In general, vehicles are tested over 5 defined test cycles that were created to represent typical driving conditions in the U.S.:


I will let the reader decide whether or not 15% of tests confirmed by EPA equates to EPA testing the vehicles in a hollistic sense. Also, no clarity on which vehicles have been confirmed vs. not.

Also worth mentioning that Rivian have not even bothered to submit a full application for the R1T, and use the R1S numbers for each in their marketing. Honestly I would like them to get audited - they are doing funky stuff with the 2025 model year applications. There was a lot on this in the thread over here a few weeks ago: https://www.rivianforums.com/forum/...ts-r2-talk-with-rj-scaringe.38397/post-695851

 

[ElGuano]

Thanks for the link to that thread.

I will say that the estimated range has changed a few times on the tri max.

I believe it used to read 380mi estimated? Now it's 371, but it's still an "EPA est." I'm not sure if the "est." is just how the official EPA number needs to be described, or if the final number still isn't available yet and it's still a speculative estimate.

Also, when I purchased, there was a note saying "401 miles in Conserve," but that's gone now. I don't know why it disappeared (either that number is no longer valid, or there are restrictions about advertising alternative settings along with the official EPA number).

It's not just Rivian of course. If you look at the Cybertruck, the EPA numbers are a shambles. The Foundation Series used to say 340mi est. for road ties, but for non-Foundation, it dropped to 325. But the numbers for their tri-motors and for the other wheel/tire combos didn't change as much, so we're left wondering what the hell was going on there, too.

I think if you tout "estimated but not final numbers" like a lot of car makers are doing now, you end up creating a lot of confusion for buyers that you probably aren't going to be in a good position to answer.

 

[portdirect]

Again, why are you testing efficiency not in the most efficient mode? The tri is more efficient in conserve, which is what you should be using if range is your concern.

This test by out of spec was in conserve mode for the Tri Motor. My observations were made driving my car like a normal human being - where I just drive the thing - and consistently note that efficiency is around 0.1m/kWh less than it was in my 2023 Quad.

 

[Donald Stanfield]

This test by out of spec was in conserve mode for the Tri Motor. My observations were made driving my car like a normal human being - where I just drive the thing - and consistently note that efficiency is around 0.1m/kWh less than it was in my 2023 Quad.

My tri max is higher than my 22 quad was. If we are talking same conditions.

 

[portdirect]

My tri max is higher than my 22 quad was. If we are talking same conditions.

That's great - what were you getting in your quad, and what are you now seeing in your tri-max? No one else I've spoken to has actually seen what you are seeing - most of us have found the real world efficiency in AP to be a bit lower, and the overall range to be about the same (which is a result of the extra 9kWh in the battery)

edit: adding out of spec numbers from their two tests in similar conditions:
1) 2022 R1T Quad motor and 20" AT tires in conserve: 2.3m/kWh
2) 2025 R1T Tri motor and 20" AT tires in conserve: 2.1m/kWh

 

[UhOh]

I'm following this thread with interest, but I don't understand why someone hasn't done the test we really need: drive two R1S's (or R1Ts) with the same wheels & tires on the same route at the same time in the same conditions in Conserve Mode at the same height. One car is G1 QM and one is G2 TriMax. For a content creator like OOS, that seems like a no-brainer.

 

[portdirect]

I'm following this thread with interest, but I don't understand why someone hasn't done the test we really need: drive two R1S's (or R1Ts) with the same wheels & tires on the same route at the same time in the same conditions in Conserve Mode at the same height. One car is G1 QM and one is G2 TriMax. For a content creator like OOS, that seems like a no-brainer.

100% This! The current video from OOS is as close as we have right now (but is still pants - 2 years apart for a start!) I'd do it myself - but don't have a quad anymore - these media/influencers could pull this off in a day or two.

 

[Tejkalra]

It’s not at all slower. Idk why you keep claiming this BS

Trust me I am not too sure if it's mine only. I did compare it to my friends QM with all purpose mode only, not sport mode. Results were not that promising. I don't know what to say. I don't know what m I doing wrong. Was it a big difference... No.. Like I said marginally slow. Never ever tried sports mode so can't say anything about that. Or launch mode. Not only that... After this update the acceleration looks like even need more effort above 50 mph. Finally decided to throw this thing in conserve mode and chill I guess.

 

[Donald Stanfield]

Trust me I am not too sure if it's mine only. I did compare it to my friends QM with all purpose mode only, not sport mode. Results were not that promising. I don't know what to say. I don't know what m I doing wrong. Was it a big difference... No.. Like I said marginally slow. Never ever tried sports mode so can't say anything about that. Or launch mode. Not only that... After this update the acceleration looks like even need more effort above 50 mph. Finally decided to throw this thing in conserve mode and chill I guess.

Why would you not try sport mode? That's what you're doing wrong. That's the entire purpose of sport mode.

 

[DayTripping]

Why would you not try sport mode? That's what you're doing wrong. That's the entire purpose of sport mode.

Based at least on the testing on my G1 quad, it really only impacts the initial launch to about 25 mph.. From that point up, they are pretty close for AP vs Sport. At some speeds, and some charge levels, AP mode was quicker than Sport mode. Go figure.

The only think I am pretty certain of is if I engage AP mode, I add almost exactly .25 seconds to my Sport mode time. If I take TC off in either Sport or AP mode, and floor the throttle at 30 mph, it is going to spin the tire regardless of mode. It clearly feels softer at launch in AP mode. After that, I can't really feel much of a difference.

 

[Donald Stanfield]

Based at least on the testing on my G1 quad, it really only impacts the initial launch to about 25 mph.. From that point up, they are pretty close for AP vs Sport. At some speeds, and some charge levels, AP mode was quicker than Sport mode. Go figure.

The only think I am pretty certain of is if I engage AP mode, I add almost exactly .25 seconds to my Sport mode time. If I take TC off in either Sport or AP mode, and floor the throttle at 30 mph, it is going to spin the tire regardless of mode. It clearly feels softer at launch in AP mode. After that, I can't really feel much of a difference.

So you don’t have a Trimax? I do, and I had a gen 1 quad. Both live in sport mode and I can tell you definitively the tri is a whole different beast. It has more power in the whole range and the difference between sport and AP is substantial.

Sponsored