2027 Rivian R2 EPA Certification w/ specs (range, battery capacity, charging rate, efficiency etc.)

[TomServo2112]

It's almost 900 lbs heavier than the equivalent Model Y. Doing pretty good considering all that extra weight. Wonder if there could be a variant that goes on a diet?

The R2 Weissmach build.

Sponsored

 

[gultin]

TLDR:
Weight: 5250lbs (As Tested)
Battery Capacity: 86.8kwh
Range 21in: 335 miles (All Purpose)
Range 20in: 314 Miles
Built in Battery Health Monitoring on New Software Version
Updated Heat Pump (Again)
2nd Life Battery Disposal Integration (Planned)

Battery pack nominal capacity for Large Pack is 260.8 Ah based on a constant current C/3 discharge rate.
Large Pack: 86.8 kWh.

Headscratcher why they went back to a conventional AC for the R2 launch vehicles when they had a couple of years from Gen 2 R1 to learn lessons and refine their heat pump design.

 

[midnightscavenger]

Sorry I should have been more clear, I was referring to the more accurate 2 cycle test above compared to their numbers.

Just reading the testing difference between a 2 vs 5 cycle testing and the 5 cycle testing seems more accurate to real world whereas the 2 cycle testing takes an automatic 30% reduction off the range to simulate efficiency loss. I could be reading it wrong, which could be the case too so feel free to correct me.

 

[DuoRivian]

Headscratcher why they went back to a conventional AC for the R2 launch vehicles when they had a couple of years from Gen 2 R1 to learn lessons and refine their heat pump design.

Will this lead to better AC performance while still getting the benefit of a heat pump while minimizing NVH.

 

[TexasBob]

Just reading the testing difference between a 2 vs 5 cycle testing and the 5 cycle testing seems more accurate to real world whereas the 2 cycle testing takes an automatic 30% reduction off the range to simulate efficiency loss. I could be reading it wrong, which could be the case too so feel free to correct me.

Seems like that would be the case when you first read it. The better way to think about it is that the 2 cycle is consistently more conservative (as you can see from my earlier data) and it is less susceptible to gaming the test. Neither method is a particularly good proxy of real-world range. It is more useful as a basis for comparison. A 330 mile Rivian = a 305 mile Chevy = a 330 mile Tesla more or less.

If you are trying to guess how far an R2 will go on the highway... if you charge to 100% your usable range is 250 on a nice day at 70mph (10% remaining when you charge). It is 220 at 80mph or at 70 mph in the cold.

AI Explanatory:

• The Base Laboratory Tests: Both the 2-cycle and 5-cycle methodologies derive their foundational data from the same laboratory dynamometer tests (UDDS for city; HWFET for highway). These base tests average less than 50 mph, never exceed 60 mph, and occur indoors with zero aerodynamic drag.
• The Purpose of the 30% Penalty: The 2-cycle method applies a mandatory 0.70 derating factor (a 30% reduction) to compensate for the fact that the laboratory tests do not reflect real-world conditions. For large, non-aerodynamic vehicles, this blunt 30% penalty better captures aerodynamic drag, weather, and the factors.
• The 5-Cycle Illusion: The 5-cycle method introduces additional tests for HVAC efficiency and a brief acceleration loop. Automakers use these to calculate a custom, smaller penalty (typically a 0.75 to 0.77 derating factor).
• The Real-World Disconnect: Crucially, the 5-cycle method applies this more forgiving derating factor back to the same slow, drag-free base tests. It rewards the vehicle for efficient air conditioning.

 

[DuoRivian]

Interestingly on the attachments it states:

02.03.00 Projected annual model-year sales
California: R2 5,000 units
Federal: R2 20,000 units

Does this mean the 25k projected sales will be a different model year to the ones planned in 2027 with LiDAR and RAP1 chip. Also interesting that California is 20% of sales which is not much greater than its population share.

 

[DuoRivians]

It will, that is why it offers a Conserve mode!

On the R1 dual motors, because of EPA testing, Rivian cannot allow permanent AWD mode, and has to always reset back to automatic rear disconnect All Purpose mode after about 4 hours.

I’m saying hopefully, Rivian isn’t forced to do this with the R2 because of this EPA test.

 

[midnightscavenger]

Seems like that would be the case when you first read it. The better way to think about it is that the 2 cycle is consistently more conservative (as you can see from my earlier data) and it is less susceptible to gaming the test. Neither method is a particularly good proxy of real-world range. It is more useful as a basis for comparison. A 330 mile Rivian = a 305 mile Chevy = a 330 mile Tesla more or less.

If you are trying to guess how far an R2 will go on the highway... if you charge to 100% your usable range is 250 on a nice day at 70mph (10% remaining when you charge). It is 220 at 80mph or at 70 mph in the cold.

AI Explanatory:

• The Base Laboratory Tests: Both the 2-cycle and 5-cycle methodologies derive their foundational data from the same laboratory dynamometer tests (UDDS for city; HWFET for highway). These base tests average less than 50 mph, never exceed 60 mph, and occur indoors with zero aerodynamic drag.
• The Purpose of the 30% Penalty: The 2-cycle method applies a mandatory 0.70 derating factor (a 30% reduction) to compensate for the fact that the laboratory tests do not reflect real-world conditions. For large, non-aerodynamic vehicles, this blunt 30% penalty better captures aerodynamic drag, weather, and the factors.
• The 5-Cycle Illusion: The 5-cycle method introduces additional tests for HVAC efficiency and a brief acceleration loop. Automakers use these to calculate a custom, smaller penalty (typically a 0.75 to 0.77 derating factor).
• The Real-World Disconnect: Crucially, the 5-cycle method applies this more forgiving derating factor back to the same slow, drag-free base tests. It rewards the vehicle for efficient air conditioning.

Thank you! Sounds like I’ll still need to stop and pee before I run out of range

 

[mrdel]

It has already been on a diet with over 2000lb less than R1S. That vehicle is 12” longer but that is a huge proportion taken out.

It probably also helps that the R2 has the slope at the rear of the roof to help reduce turbulence/drag at the back. A number of small things can add up for efficiency....

 

[TexasBob]

Thank you! Sounds like I’ll still need to stop and pee before I run out of range

IMO the bigger deal is the charging. If you compare to an iX3 or an EX60:

• iX3
  • 400 EPA miles (2 cycle)
  • 10% - 80% = 280 EPA miles
  • 10% - 80% / 20 minutes
  • Charging Speed 14 miles per minute
• EX3
  • 400 EPA miles (5 cycle) ~370 (2Cycle)
  • 10% - 80% = 260 EPA miles
  • 10% - 80% / 20 minutes
  • Charging Speed 13 miles per minute
• R2
  • 305 EPA miles (2 cycle)
  • 10% - 80% = 213 EPA miles
  • 10% - 80% / 30 minutes
  • Charging Speed 7.2 miles per minute

 

[SANZC02]

It looks like the total depleted in the EPA tests was 88.7kWh, so maybe a 6-8 mile buffer after zero?

4.62 mi/kWh around town and 3.89 mi/kWh on the highway when equipped with the 21" rims.

4.57 mi/kWh around town and 3.75 mi/kWh on the highway when equipped with the 20" AT rims and tires. 4% worse on the highway, and only about 1% worse around town.

Someone should check my math.

That would be great, a little better than my RWD Model S does.

 

[DuoRivian]

IMO the bigger deal is the charging. If you compare to an iX3 or an EX60:

• iX3/EX60
  • 400 EPA miles (2 cycle)
  • 10% - 80% = 280 EPA miles
  • 10% - 80% / 20 minutes
  • Charging Speed 14 miles per minute
• R2
  • 305 EPA miles (2 cycle)
  • 10% - 80% = 213 EPA miles
  • 10% - 80% / 30 minutes
  • Charging Speed 7.2 miles per minute

Is the Volvo using the 2 cycle? I know this was confirmed for BMW.

 

[SANZC02]

R1 is just a chonker, so while the comparison looks good unto iteself, in the larger context the R2 is still a heavy vehicle.

That said, my daily is a Silverado EV which weights as much as a small moon, and I can almost eek out 500 miles, so it's probably more of an aero thing.

I think the R2 weight is pretty good. I’m comparing it to my RWD Model S with a 75 kWh battery that is weighing in at 4990 lbs.

 

[TexasBob]

Is the Volvo using the 2 cycle? I know this was confirmed for BMW.

Hold please....

I was.. INCORRECT. (will fix in a moment). From Gemini so it must be true:


Volvo Testing Methodology: 5-Cycle Adoption
Volvo actually belongs in the same testing category as Rivian, Tesla, and Lucid. While Volvo utilized the legacy 2-cycle testing methodology for its early electric vehicles (such as the initial XC40 Recharge), the company explicitly transitioned to the 5-cycle testing methodology for its newer platforms to maximize advertised range.

This transition began with the C40 Recharge and continues with their current flagship EVs, including the EX90 and EX30.

EX90 Certification and Real-World Disconnect
The mathematical footprint of the 5-cycle test is clearly visible when analyzing the EX90's specifications and its subsequent real-world performance:

• The Hardware: The EX90 utilizes an approximately 111 kWh gross (107 kWh usable) battery pack to propel a 6,000-pound, three-row SUV with a large frontal area.
  
  
  
• The EPA Sticker: By utilizing the 5-cycle methodology to calculate a custom derating factor, Volvo successfully achieved an official EPA rating of 300 to 310 miles for the EX90 (depending on wheel size).
  
  
  
• The Real-World 70 MPH Reality: Recent independent 70 mph highway tests have exposed the exact same highway penalty seen with Rivian. A 2025 EX90 Twin Motor Performance subjected to a sustained 70 mph test depleted its pack in approximately 247 to 250 miles.
  
  

The 2-Cycle Alternative Reality
If Volvo had submitted the EX90 using the legacy 2-cycle methodology and accepted the mandatory 0.70 standard derating factor, the vehicle's official EPA sticker would likely sit right around 250 to 260 miles.

By running the extra tests to justify a custom multiplier (often around 0.75 or higher), Volvo legally inflated the EX90's advertised range by nearly 50 miles, creating a "300-mile SUV" that physically cannot achieve 300 miles at interstate speeds.

 

[VandalSibs]

Headscratcher why they went back to a conventional AC for the R2 launch vehicles when they had a couple of years from Gen 2 R1 to learn lessons and refine their heat pump design.

From Kryptonlogic, who has contacts with Rivian:

I confirmed with Rivian that R2 will launch with the re-designed heat pump from the very beginning including Launch Edition.

So this EPA document is a bit confusing, but we know that the newer heat pump will be present and thus make the EPA numbers here much more possible.

Sponsored