10 Day Vacation Vampire Drain Test Results -- 9.3kWh used during 230 hours

[WSea]

I've never tracked vampire drain. Perfect opportunity to track while on vacation for 10 days. Left vehicle in garage plugged in with charging set to 70%. Left Gary on for everywhere. Not as bad as expected. 9.3kWh over 230 hours seems ok to me. Cost would be about one dollar.

Sponsored

 

[Reed]

Is your garage heated?

With that level of drain, you should be able to leave your vehicle parked somewhere while on a backcountry trip and still come back to a stress-free drive home.

 

[WSea]

Is your garage heated?

With that level of drain, you should be able to leave your vehicle parked somewhere while on a backcountry trip and still come back to a stress-free drive home.

No Heat. Daily temps about 32-62 during that period

 

[DTown3011]

I recently did a shorter test as well here: Vampire drain - what's the latest battery % loss people are getting? | Page 16 | Rivian Forums - R1T R1S R2 Owners, News, Discussions, RIVN Stock

Left the Rivian in the garage, unplugged, climate off, audio off.

• Started Thursday at 10am at 40% SoC and 126 miles of range.
• Came back today (Sunday) at 2:30pm to 36% SoC and 111 miles of range.
• Total energy usage was 3.4 kWh.
• 76.5 hours total time.
• Not scientific - lost about 4.7 miles per day, ~1% SoC
• Scientific - Using 0.044 kW/hour when sitting idle for this test or 1.067 kWh per day.

It's not good, and I want it lower, but it's not terrible. 1 kWh per day I can live with if they keep improving over time.

 

[COdogman]

More importantly, where did you go on vacation?

 

[WSea]

I recently did a shorter test as well here: Vampire drain - what's the latest battery % loss people are getting? | Page 16 | Rivian Forums - R1T R1S R2 Owners, News, Discussions, RIVN Stock

Left the Rivian in the garage, unplugged, climate off, audio off.

• Started Thursday at 10am at 40% SoC and 126 miles of range.
• Came back today (Sunday) at 2:30pm to 36% SoC and 111 miles of range.
• Total energy usage was 3.4 kWh.
• 76.5 hours total time.
• Not scientific - lost about 4.7 miles per day, ~1% SoC
• Scientific - Using 0.044 kW/hour when sitting idle for this test or 1.067 kWh per day.

It's not good, and I want it lower, but it's not terrible. 1 kWh per day I can live with if they keep improving over time.

That's about the same as mine- 40.44 watts per hour (9300wh/230hrs)

 

[Dark-Fx]

That's about the same as mine- 40.44 watts per hour (9300wh/230hrs)

Hours cancels out, it's just watts

 

[Andystroh]

I recently did a shorter test as well here: Vampire drain - what's the latest battery % loss people are getting? | Page 16 | Rivian Forums - R1T R1S R2 Owners, News, Discussions, RIVN Stock

Left the Rivian in the garage, unplugged, climate off, audio off.

• Started Thursday at 10am at 40% SoC and 126 miles of range.
• Came back today (Sunday) at 2:30pm to 36% SoC and 111 miles of range.
• Total energy usage was 3.4 kWh.
• 76.5 hours total time.
• Not scientific - lost about 4.7 miles per day, ~1% SoC
• Scientific - Using 0.044 kW/hour when sitting idle for this test or 1.067 kWh per day.

It's not good, and I want it lower, but it's not terrible. 1 kWh per day I can live with if they keep improving over time.

Unfortunately I have realized we cannot we can rely on the 'energy used' in the trip computer for these measurements. I think it is missing something. 3.4 kWh measured, with 15 miles of range lost, would mean 4.4 mi/kWh anticipated efficiency (which I am pretty sure the Rivian does not use as it's internal efficiency measurement).

This is similar to what I've seen in all my testing - the percentage far outweighs the kWh lost measurement.

I've been trying to figure out which is wrong: is it displaying too much % lost, or is it not measuring some amount of loss in the trip computer, and I am leaning towards the latter, but don't have a ton of evidence either way. I just try to compare the % change on my drive after letting it sit, and see if the percentage bounces way up afterwards, and with 1 exception, that is not what I've seen (after camping one night in December I saw it jump up 2% after driving a few miles).

Just a comment based on what I've seen lately... Hopefully the drain drops so low it doesn't even matter

 

[emoore]

Unfortunately I have realized we cannot we can rely on the 'energy used' in the trip computer for these measurements. I think it is missing something. 3.4 kWh measured, with 15 miles of range lost, would mean 4.4 mi/kWh anticipated efficiency (which I am pretty sure the Rivian does not use as it's internal efficiency measurement).

This is similar to what I've seen in all my testing - the percentage far outweighs the kWh lost measurement.

I've been trying to figure out which is wrong: is it displaying too much % lost, or is it not measuring some amount of loss in the trip computer, and I am leaning towards the latter, but don't have a ton of evidence either way. I just try to compare the % change on my drive after letting it sit, and see if the percentage bounces way up afterwards, and with 1 exception, that is not what I've seen (after camping one night in December I saw it jump up 2% after driving a few miles).

Just a comment based on what I've seen lately... Hopefully the drain drops so low it doesn't even matter

I think the opposite, the range lost isn't accurate at all. As the temperature warms up my range goes up with the truck just sitting there not plugged in.

 

[DaveA]

I've never tracked vampire drain. Perfect opportunity to track while on vacation for 10 days. Left vehicle in garage plugged in with charging set to 70%. Left Gary on for everywhere. Not as bad as expected. 9.3kWh over 230 hours seems ok to me. Cost would be about one dollar.

The truck is greedy when it is plugged in though and like someone else said, the app graph cannot be trusted. Leaving it unplugged would give you a more accurate vampire drain picture.

 

[Andystroh]

I think the opposite, the range lost isn't accurate at all. As the temperature warms up my range goes up with the truck just sitting there not plugged in.

That could be; as WSea said, his charger numbers do align with the 'energy used' from the trip computer of DTown.

If this is the case, it seems like there would be far fewer complaints if this was displayed properly; 44 W would be about 1 kWh/day (0.75%?), which frankly I think would elicit a lot fewer complaints than the 2-3%/day (3 kWh) the truck displays.

And then when does it even out I wonder? If the %SOC/Miles are dropping far quicker than the actual (trip computer-calculated) remaining battery, at some point it would either hit zero miles remaining when there is substantial battery remaining, or it would realize the displayed value is far off from the actual value and fix it.

Just blabbering. I don't know what is correct.

 

[WSea]

More importantly, where did you go on vacation?

The truck is greedy when it is plugged in though and like someone else said, the app graph cannot be trusted. Leaving it unplugged would give you a more accurate vampire drain picture.

Wasn't referencing the graph. Are you saying the total energy delivered is incorrect? I would say it's pretty darn close

 

[Andystroh]

Wasn't referencing the graph. Are you saying the total energy delivered is incorrect? I would say it's pretty darn close

I believe he is saying that the truck uses more energy while plugged in than while unplugged, taking advantage of the fact that it is not energy-constrained, so it may not be fair to characterize the vampire drain of the truck from its 'plugged-in' state

 

[DaveA]

I believe he is saying that the truck uses more energy while plugged in than while unplugged, taking advantage of the fact that it is not energy-constrained, so it may not be fair to characterize the vampire drain of the truck from its 'plugged-in' state

Yes, correct. Thank you for your much more eloquent response.

 

[shrink]

This is A LOT better as compared to similar observations I had while away in 1/2023. Car was plugged in the entire time and by day 10, the truck added a whopping 45 kWh of juice.

However, things are much better now since the OTA that fixed the frunk sensor preventing sleep issue. My vampire drain is now about 1-2% per day, which, as others have opined, is still too much but tolerable.

Sponsored