? Official EPA Range and MPGe Numbers for R1T & R1S

[SeaGeo]

Dang - that's not what I was expecting (anticipated 250+). Real world...bites.

Gotta be careful about what we call real world here if you're new to EVs. He's just saying generally speaking if you're on a road trip and fast charging you'll want to stop charging before you hit 80% SOC. Most EVs charging rate slows down a lot above that point. And most people don't have the guts to run down to less than 5% SOC. If you really need the full 270ish miles in a single run, it should be there depending on various factors like how much you like to accelerate and if it's windy or rainy, etc.

Sponsored

 

[ajdelange]

It's not known if its toward the Ford/VW side of the scale or Tesla. That 268-284 miles could be real world miles, understated or inflated by 15%. I can assure you I get no where near the EPA rating on my Tesla.

But I do - on average. The car is rated 282 Wh/mi and I think I averaging 279 right now.

It's been reported that Rivian does the full 5 test suite so their EPA number should be pretty accurate as is Tesla's - when the EPA conditions are matched. As soon as you go to a different tire or add something which adds weight or drag or drive on a different substrate (dirt road, sand...) then all bets are off and you will see dramatic changes in consumption.

I understand why some of the companies sandbag: no one will ever complain he got more than he thought he should but I don't want to believe that Rivian will sandbag. Thus they will be subject to the same whining that we see from Tesla drivers who think Tesla exaggerates its range capability and that they are being somehow cheated. In a way I look forward to seeing the drivers' responses to this as the cars hit the road.

"Real world miles" means real world and drivers need to recognize that going uphill with a bed full of bricks on a muddy road and a tail wind isn't going to give them the same performance as going downhill with a tailwind and that neither of those conditions comes close to sitting on a dynamometer in a lab. Sometimes you will get better that the EPA rated number (on average I do but not by much) and sometimes you won't.

The challenge for a driver new to BEV is to know when to expect better and when to expect worse and if he observes better or worse to understand why. This is a challenge for some. For others its a piece of cake.

 

[sub]

The EPA thinks that people average 48mph on a "highway". If you're driving faster than that you shouldn't be surprised that you get worse range than the EPA got in their highway test.

 

[Edax Rerum]

lots of posts on this, but Tesla does a 5 cycle test with the EPA that (in theory) should be more accurate. Because the EPA is a mixed cycle (even their highway test), it doesn't equate to going say... 70mph constantly. So Tesla's are known not to high their rated "range" on the highway. Other manufacturers use a less expensive and accurate test that has a fudge factor applied to it, and then they can also choose to de-rate the range. FOr example, Ford lowered the range from what the EPA would say on the Mach e. The Taycan is famous for this. EPA range of like 207 miles or something, but people routinely get 270 miles on the highwayl.

Yes, the worst range I've seen from my Taycan was 200 miles, and that was in the middle of winter with temps around 0 F. Most of the time, my range is in the 260-280 range, but I've seen posts/reviews from other people that have managed over 300 miles on a single charge. I just can't drive that conservatively.

Apologies if someone else addressed this. Way too many posts for me to wade through all of them.

 

[SeaGeo]

Yes, the worst range I've seen from my Taycan was 200 miles, and that was in the middle of winter with temps around 0 F. Most of the time, my range is in the 260-280 range, but I've seen posts/reviews from other people that have managed over 300 miles on a single charge. I just can't drive that conservatively.

Apologies if someone else addressed this. Way too many posts for me to wade through all of them.

I think you may be our first confirmed Taycan owner!

 

[ajdelange]

The EPA thinks that people average 48mph on a "highway". If you're driving faster than that you shouldn't be surprised that you get worse range than the EPA got in their highway test.

Yes and that seems to be a pretty good number for most highway driving in the eastern part of the country anyway. On limited access roads with 65 mph speed limits with traffic low enough that you can actually average 65 mph then, of course, you should expect higher consumption and in the West where speed limits are even higher you should expect higher consumption still. That's why I keep saying that your first job as a new BEV driver is to learn how your vehicle performs in various conditions under your driving style.

 

[WylieD]

Thank you in advance to the folks here who will soon take delivery of their R1Ts and begin posting real-life numbers and reporting their experiences.

This will be invaluable to those of us waiting (and waiting) for our Rivians. It will also help distract us from our envy of you pioneers.

 

[Rivianmd]

On the pack size, here's a post I made a while ago relatively shortly after we got word of a new Samsung SDI cylindrical cell with 91% nickel content. These EPA numbers definitely suggest larger capacity that I expected.



There are few possible explanations for all of this: 1) The EPA numbers are conservative and my pack capacity numbers were pretty close to accurate 2) They're using more capacity than the published spec on those cells 3) They're using different cells than the public knows exist from Samsung SDI 4) The module configuration is different and they've got extra cells in each module or 5) They're using 10 modules instead of 9 for the "large" pack.

If it's #5, 10 modules would be 156.78kWh, which actually hits the target pretty close for backing out pack size from the efficiency and range #s the EPA shows. (49 Wh/mi * 316 miles for the R1S gives you 154.84 kWh usable).

Thank you for putting this together. Complete SWAG, but I think they added the extra module because it was too hard to thread the range needle, as well as positive press on the conservative approach of first Porsche and then Ford vs. Tesla on real world vs. EPA. Probably cost them 2-3k extra per vehicle, but worth it for perception and their warranty position. I’d be surprised if the EPA numbers are not very conservative. If they took the Tesla track I bet they could come in at 430 wh per mile or less. What will be interesting is whether they do the same on the max pack. Assume not for S due to space, but possible for T.

 

[DucRider]

Thank you for putting this together. Complete SWAG, but I think they added the extra module because it was too hard to thread the range needle, as well as positive press on the conservative approach of first Porsche and then Ford vs. Tesla on real world vs. EPA. Probably cost them 2-3k extra per vehicle, but worth it for perception and their warranty position. I’d be surprised if the EPA numbers are not very conservative. If they took the Tesla track I bet they could come in at 430 wh per mile or less. What will be interesting is whether they do the same on the max pack. Assume not for S due to space, but possible for T.

He forgot the the EPA numbers are "from the wall". Back out that 10% and you are back to 135kWh and 9 modules.

 

[Autolycus]

He forgot the the EPA numbers are "from the wall". Back out that 10% and you are back to 135kWh and 9 modules.

Yep, thanks for pointing that out. I guess I should go edit my post so it’s clear.

 

[Edax Rerum]

I think you may be our first confirmed Taycan owner!

I put in a reservation for an R1S in January 2019, but by the end of the year I was just getting impatient. I had my previous car for over 10 years at that point and just wanted something new, preferably an EV. Rivian made me truly excited about the possibility, so I had a lot of research done by the time the Taycan was officially announced.

I took possession of the Taycan probably around the same time I was hoping to have had the Rivian, barring any manufacturing delays that ultimately occurred. I cancelled my Rivian reservation, but I'm still excited to see them on the road. My anticipation for seeing them is probably close to the level of those eagerly awaiting delivery.

 

[JeremyP]

I looked up the dodge Durango hellcat for fun since a lot of specs are similar to the r1s (size, power, 0-60, price-88k as motortrend tested it). In the motortrend article reviewing it I thought it was entertaining to see the kwh/100 miles listed (converted from gas used). The city economy is 281kwh/100 miles!

 

[Daedalus]

In the updated Motortrend article released today, I found the following statement intesting:

"Our range dropped to zero with at least 10 miles to go, prompting various dire warnings, but Rocky soldiered on and reached the charger."

While no guarantee, knowing that they went 10 miles past the zero (range) mark gives some idea of the rage buffer (sandbagging) that the Rivian has.

 

[Lucanjo]

Apologies in advance if this has been asked/answered but I didn’t see it anywhere and it’s been bugging me for a few days. This will be my first EV and I’ve seen all the back and forth about range impacts from headwinds, tailwinds, hills, rain, snow, wind resistance, towing, the boggeyman, etc. ok maybe not the last one but I’m sure there is someone on the forum ready to argue it.

My question / assumption is wouldn’t the same efficiency impacts occurs in an ICE vehicle. Obviously their are some variables (drag coefficient wrt wind, weight wrt hills, etc.). If I was driving a vehicle powered by an ICE into 40mph headwinds and someone next to me was driving the same car powered by BEV, would we experience the same range drop? Or does the efficiency of the propulsion have and impact as well?

 

[timesinks]

Apologies in advance if this has been asked/answered but I didn’t see it anywhere and it’s been bugging me for a few days. This will be my first EV and I’ve seen all the back and forth about range impacts from headwinds, tailwinds, hills, rain, snow, wind resistance, towing, the boggeyman, etc. ok maybe not the last one but I’m sure there is someone on the forum ready to argue it.

My question / assumption is wouldn’t the same efficiency impacts occurs in an ICE vehicle. Obviously their are some variables (drag coefficient wrt wind, weight wrt hills, etc.). If I was driving a vehicle powered by an ICE into 40mph headwinds and someone next to me was driving the same car powered by BEV, would we experience the same range drop? Or does the efficiency of the propulsion have and impact as well?

For the most part, yes, the ICE cars have the same hits to range. The reason people care about it less is 1) gas stations are everywhere, and 2) you can go from empty to full in less than 5 minutes. Since EV infrastructure is less common (but improving), you can't necessarily just hop off the freeway and expect to be able to top up, requiring more planning. And since charging can take 20-40 minutes (or longer if you find an unexpectedly slow charger), stopping just for the sake of charging can feel more painful.

It's a trade off. Never needing to stop to refuel on a day to day basis is great. On longer trips, if you can double up charging stops with things like lunch breaks, dog walks, and needed restroom/stretch breaks, you may not find charging inconvenient at all. But given the current infrastructure, it definitely requires some planning and general awareness that ICE road trips don't.

Sponsored