The car will take 630A but the most any charger in the US can deliver is 600.
"I bought this hammer to kill flies in my house but now I have tons of holes in my walls!"
Damn, this is such a good way to frame it
now I feel like an idiot myself!
"It was also clear that the 29 minute charging time was going to be under some pretty optimistic (and unrealistic) scenarios (it requires 600A+ chargers!)."
There are battery density limits. Tesla cannot put any more batteries in a model Y without building a non skateboard battery pack or using 2 layers of batteries
Don't care about Model Y at all. Talking about R2. This is a Rivian forum.
The point is you can't put 100kWh in a vehicle of this size without using a non skateboard battery. Rivian won't do that. They also won't build 2 layer battery packs like they did for R1
True, they are dimensionally limited with this design I suppose. Need higher Wh/kg then.
Tests not done on a full 100% charge and rely on the car's percentage indicator are not good tests.For those comparing to the new IX3, it fell short on range tests as well by about 86 miles at 110km/hr (68mph). So goes back to certification tests not reflecting real world conditions. Only 1 person so far has done a real world test thus far.
Of note, the iX3 was initially touted as 400 miles of range, but was since recertified as 434 miles of range by BMW. Real world range was 348 miles.
Bc it's all EPA rated miles, same as Tesla does. It is so STUPID they do this that's why I always have % battery as the only thing showing in the car. If you need miles use the navigation which relies on the current driving speed and conditions for calculating.The question I really have is, WHY does the CAR think it can go so much farther? The EPA games and inaccuracies aside, I’d like the IN CAR experience to at least be close to accurate.. but if we look at the data reported, distance travelled, for the first 75% nearly of SOC the R2 THOUGHT it could go ~ 300 mile at least.. heck at 75% SOC the car had already travelled 65.5 MILES and the in dash display STILL listed 253 miles of range?
Is the RANGE estimate an estimate of the TOTAL range in TOTAL? I would think that the in dash RANGE estimate is still the REMAINING range available?
At 50%, they had travelled 128 miles, and the in car display still showed 150 miles of “range”.. just simple maths would make me think that CAR at least would have/can travel 300 miles? And yet, the car was only able to manage 80% of that remaining 150 miles indicated at most. Till DEAD?
For you Rivian owners, is this the expectation of the capability of the in car real range reporting? Does one always have to 2nd guess things?
As a Tesla M3LR owner, getting whatever range one is going to get is a moving target, but, BUT the IN CAR reporting remaining available distance is usually in the end within about 1-2%, and yes it takes a little time at speed on highways for the car to adjust with where it’s going and how you are driving, but the adjusted IN CAR indicators are at least accurate.
The whole reason rivian made 2 layer R1 batteries is because they were wrong about battery density. They lied about ranges they thought were possible.
