Sponsored

Deleted member 3282

Guest
The range is fine, but I’m a bit disappointed in the overall efficiency. Sad to see Rivian at the bottom of the efficiency list.
 

dleewla

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 13, 2021
Threads
92
Messages
2,314
Reaction score
2,498
Location
WA
Vehicles
Rivian, Toyota, Lexus
Clubs
 
Yikes, 10-15% loss of range on the 20" wheels. That means on a cold day we could be talking under 200 miles real range highway.
I don't think it'd be quite that bit a hit in cold weather. Some impact yes but Rivian has been saying they have put a lot of time and technology into battery management and tested a lot in cold weather so I think it wouldn't be that low.
 

dleewla

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 13, 2021
Threads
92
Messages
2,314
Reaction score
2,498
Location
WA
Vehicles
Rivian, Toyota, Lexus
Clubs
 
He must have been confused. According to the EPA, the R1S is less efficient than the R1T.
No, he's quoting RJ correctly. He said the R1S was more aerodynamic than the R1T. What I don't get is if the truck is more efficient, how does the SUV have 2 miles more range?
 

Sponsored

DucRider

Well-Known Member
First Name
Gary
Joined
Oct 21, 2019
Threads
17
Messages
1,657
Reaction score
3,156
Location
ORegon
Vehicles
Polestar 2, Ioniq, R1S
No, he's quoting RJ correctly. He said the R1S was more aerodynamic than the R1T. What I don't get is if the truck is more efficient, how does the SUV have 2 miles more range?
Two possible factors:
  • The EPA docs show it takes more energy to recharge the R1S, so it somehow has more battery capacity available (or a less efficient on-board charger). The difference is ~2% so cell variation could account for this - or they have opened up more of the pack to make sure the R1S had greater range than the R1T as has been promised all along.
  • They also used the standard derating of 30% for the R1S as opposed to 28% for the R1T, even though both used the 5 cycle test. In order to justify a rating different than the default 30%, the manufacturer must have real world data to back it up. They have extensively tested the R1T - not so much the R1S.
 

nfrank

Well-Known Member
First Name
Nathan
Joined
Sep 30, 2019
Threads
16
Messages
351
Reaction score
519
Location
Bay Area, CA
Vehicles
F-150
Here's my math to convince me that I should wait for the max pack, especially considering I want 20" wheels: (I only consider highway range in my calcs because I will never go that long a distance in city driving in a day where I won't be able to charge at night

293*.85*400/300*.85*.85*.9= 216 mile highway range

293 = LE rated highway range
.85 correction for 20" wheels
400/300 ratio to get to the max pack
.85 for end of life battery capacity
.85 correction for me driving too fast
.9 because I don't want to run the battery down to 0% and risk getting stuck.

Therefore with the 400+ mile max pack I can guarantee that I can always at least do 216 miles between charges on a road trip for as long as I own the vehicle.

I'm not even taking into account anything loaded on the roof rack or bed of the truck to hurt wind resistance.
 

Atlrivian

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2021
Threads
12
Messages
582
Reaction score
962
Location
Atlanta
Vehicles
Grand Cherokee, XC90
Clubs
 
Validates my max pack choice. I've got a 270 mile all highway trip I regularly take with 3 kids 6 and under (including a newborn). We start it around their bedtime. I want as few stops as possible. There's no way I'm going to gamble on future OTA updates to increase range. If the official EPA estimate had been 300 miles with ATs, I might have considered it.

On a side note, I've been watching the EPA's website for months like a hawk and am very upset Kanundrum beat me to the update today (though not surprised).
 

lg3103

Well-Known Member
First Name
Lars
Joined
Nov 16, 2020
Threads
25
Messages
320
Reaction score
769
Location
Denver, CO
Vehicles
VW Atlas, Mini SE
Occupation
Director
There will be a lot of other factors such as roof racks, tents, weight in the car. I live in Colorado and I’ve always wondered why people drive around with their ski racks and/or cargo boxes all year. Those ski racks are like a break on the roof and reduce MPG quiet a bit. They drive around in their Subarus with “Save National Parks” stickers on the bumper and burn a load of extra gas because they are too lazy to spend 5 minutes removing the parachute on their roof.
 

dleewla

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 13, 2021
Threads
92
Messages
2,314
Reaction score
2,498
Location
WA
Vehicles
Rivian, Toyota, Lexus
Clubs
 
Well, just to make things a little more interesting, I spoke with CS today and they said there was no 2WD Conserve Mode

8347F05C-466D-45AA-ADC3-2732EBDAA628.jpeg
Did MT find something they weren't supposed to? Are the CS misinformed? Rivian, what's going on?
 

Sponsored

nfrank

Well-Known Member
First Name
Nathan
Joined
Sep 30, 2019
Threads
16
Messages
351
Reaction score
519
Location
Bay Area, CA
Vehicles
F-150
There will be a lot of other factors such as roof racks, tents, weight in the car. I live in Colorado and I’ve always wondered why people drive around with their ski racks and/or cargo boxes all year. Those ski racks are like a break on the roof and reduce MPG quiet a bit. They drive around in their Subarus with “Save National Parks” stickers on the bumper and burn a load of extra gas because they are too lazy to spend 5 minutes removing the parachute on their roof.
I'm more inclined to leave my racks on with the Rivian than with my ICE vehicle. Mileage is so cheap with electricity and I have the ability to recharge every night. The only time I might take the racks off the Rivian is if I plan on testing the limits of its range.
 

ja_kub_sz

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2020
Threads
11
Messages
510
Reaction score
957
Location
Central Illinois
Vehicles
2020 LR Discovery, 2019 LR Range Rover Velar
1630701872590.png

1630701965437.png

You won't believe this, but I got a straight answer out of CS. Looks like some handcuffs are off them! Sweeeeeet. More details on those other options in the near future too.
Surprised by this... Isn't two motors driving all that weight less efficient?

Single Motor Tesla Model 3 vs Dual motor?
 

Dohmar

Well-Known Member
First Name
Ben
Joined
May 30, 2020
Threads
3
Messages
92
Reaction score
56
Location
Adelaide, Australia
Vehicles
Nissan Skyline R32 GTR, Subaru Forester Turbo SH9
Occupation
IT Professional
It's the AT tires - this has nothing to do with the size. If anything, the 20's should be slightly more efficient if you match the tire compound and tread pattern as the 21's since they're likely to weigh less.
Cool - do we have any info on what rubber/compound they'd be using?
M/T's or Geolandars or something similar?
I have G016's on my forester and they're pretty decent for city driving but I can see that big knobbly tyres would be less efficient...
 

Churrodecoco

Active Member
First Name
Frank
Joined
Dec 5, 2020
Threads
0
Messages
25
Reaction score
43
Location
Minnesota
Vehicles
Audi eTron
Occupation
IT Manager
Clubs
 
Regen braking doesn’t add any range to city driving. None
Are you trying to say that regen breaking is already factored in to the EPA test? Because regen breaking by definition puts energy back into the battery pack that can then be used for range. Obviously you cold go a lot further if you never touched your breaks, because regen breaking doesn’t put back 100% back. On the Audi eTron about 30% of it’s city range comes from regen breaking (best in class).
Sponsored

 
 




Top