Sconces

Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2022
Threads
2
Messages
15
Reaction score
41
Location
OC
Vehicles
BMW M2 Comp/Rivian R1T
This weekend i had a mini trip to LA and averaged 2.6+ miles/kWh on 20 ATs with conserve mode which made me wonder if conserve mode efficiency has secretly improved… and then this video popped up on recommendation that tells a similar story…




Tl; Dr is that this guy did 2.77 miles/kWh on 22s over a 900 mile trip.

Also Alex on Auto averaged 2.6+ kwh on all purpose mode with 21s. Has efficiency

 

SeaGeo

Well-Known Member
First Name
Brice
Joined
Jan 12, 2021
Threads
43
Messages
4,259
Reaction score
8,313
Location
Seattle
First Name
Brice
Vehicles
Xc60 T8
Occupation
Engineer
Are you determining the energy consumption based on the trip meter? Any idea what the total % of a charge you used over the 900 miles (ie like 250%)? I've seen a few times where the trip meter seems to have a calculation error in the energy usage, so just trying to think if another way to confirm the consumption you saw.
 
OP
OP

Sconces

Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2022
Threads
2
Messages
15
Reaction score
41
Location
OC
Vehicles
BMW M2 Comp/Rivian R1T
Are you determining the energy consumption based on the trip meter? Any idea what the total % of a charge you used over the 900 miles (ie like 250%)? I've seen a few times where the trip meter seems to have a calculation error in the energy usage, so just trying to think if another way to confirm the consumption you saw.
Hm yeah my number was just based on the consumption meter. This video however was not mine
 

ja_kub_sz

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2020
Threads
8
Messages
454
Reaction score
906
Location
Central Illinois
Vehicles
2020 LR Discovery, 2019 LR Range Rover Velar
I 100% believe my range to be well beyond 310 miles (22" wheels) in my R1T if I'm driving in conserve mode and below 70mph (average speed).

Seems like the more I read car magazines the more they knock the R1T's range.

Love how MT says the "lightning has a longer range with its EPA 320 miles" (didn't know EPA estimates were a reliable thing)... I have zero belief in that range estimate and would encourage more Lightning owners to post there ranges, average speeds and kWh consumption.
 

Dark-Fx

Well-Known Member
First Name
Brian
Joined
Jul 15, 2020
Threads
35
Messages
1,675
Reaction score
2,870
Location
Michigan
First Name
Brian
Vehicles
Polestar 2, Volt, R1T, Livewire One
Occupation
Engineering
I 100% believe my range to be well beyond 310 miles (22" wheels) in my R1T if I'm driving in conserve mode and below 70mph (average speed).

Seems like the more I read car magazines the more they knock the R1T's range.

Love how MT says the "lightning has a longer range with its EPA 320 miles" (didn't know EPA estimates were a reliable thing)... I have zero belief in that range estimate and would encourage more Lightning owners to post there ranges, average speeds and kWh consumption.
EPA range is done in All-purpose mode, not conserve.
 


kurtlikevonnegut

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2021
Threads
12
Messages
1,216
Reaction score
3,308
Location
SC/TX
Vehicles
Mazda CX 5, Jeep Cherokee (XJ)
I have been incredibly impressed with Conserve Mode so far tbh. Not only is it very efficient, but it's also surprisingly pleasant for driving around. I have found myself staying in Conserve much more than I expected to as it's very comfortable for driving around town. I thought I'd only use it for long range highway driving, but that's not the case at all.

Major props to the Rivian engineers for the technical aspects of the clutch disconnect that allows for Conserve Mode and how much it impacts the vehicle efficiency.
 

astonius

Well-Known Member
First Name
Ryan
Joined
Oct 5, 2021
Threads
23
Messages
734
Reaction score
1,647
Location
Nashville
First Name
Ryan
Vehicles
2022 Rivian R1T Adventure
I have been incredibly impressed with Conserve Mode so far tbh. Not only is it very efficient, but it's also surprisingly pleasant for driving around. I have found myself staying in Conserve much more than I expected to as it's very comfortable for driving around town. I thought I'd only use it for long range highway driving, but that's not the case at all.

Major props to the Rivian engineers for the technical aspects of the clutch disconnect that allows for Conserve Mode and how much it impacts the vehicle efficiency.
Rivian service told me not to drive around in Conserve unless I absolutely needed to for extra range. He mentioned tire wear, which should be alleviated somewhat with rotations. I also assume it would put uneven wear on the front motors since the rears are completely disconnected.

Just seems odd this would be their recommendation with a prominent drive mode. There's no indication on the screen it should be used sparingly.
 

Budman

Active Member
First Name
Rick
Joined
Oct 22, 2021
Threads
4
Messages
42
Reaction score
88
Location
Minnesota
First Name
Rick
Vehicles
Honda CRV
In conserve at 55-70 mph on a mix of freeway and state highway I'm consistently getting 340 miles or better. 368 miles of range one time on a 155 mile run back from our northwoods cabin, 2.95 miles/kWh. This is on the 21" road tire.

EDIT: Some asked what size battery pack is used in the range calculation, I used 125 kWh.
 
Last edited:

Sgt Beavis

Well-Known Member
First Name
Rick
Joined
Sep 28, 2021
Threads
30
Messages
794
Reaction score
1,487
Location
Colorado
First Name
Rick
Vehicles
2021 Jeep Wrangler Rubicon, 2018 Mini Countryman
Occupation
Overpaid Computer Nerd
In conserve at 55-70 mph on a mix of freeway and state highway I'm consistently getting 340 miles or better. 368 miles of range one time on a 155 mile run back from our northwoods cabin, 2.95 miles/kWh. This is on the 21" road tire.
These ranges are crazy. Sure does a great job of curing any range anxiety.
 


SASSquatch

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2022
Threads
17
Messages
601
Reaction score
1,120
Location
Washington DC
Vehicles
BMW i3s Ford C-Max Hybrid
Occupation
Semi-Autonomous Yeti

kurtlikevonnegut

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2021
Threads
12
Messages
1,216
Reaction score
3,308
Location
SC/TX
Vehicles
Mazda CX 5, Jeep Cherokee (XJ)
Rivian service told me not to drive around in Conserve unless I absolutely needed to for extra range. He mentioned tire wear, which should be alleviated somewhat with rotations. I also assume it would put uneven wear on the front motors since the rears are completely disconnected.

Just seems odd this would be their recommendation with a prominent drive mode. There's no indication on the screen it should be used sparingly.
Seems really odd. For tire wear, how is it any different from a normal rear or front wheel drive vehicle? Regarding motor wear, is anyone expecting these motors to "wear out" before the 175,000 mile warranty period? I seemed to think that outside of total failure for one reason or another, electric drive units are basically bulletproof.
 

Andystroh

Well-Known Member
First Name
Andrew
Joined
Mar 18, 2021
Threads
5
Messages
135
Reaction score
243
Location
Colorado
First Name
Andrew
Vehicles
VW ID.4
What is everyone using for “available kWh” when calculating range based on a driven efficiency, 135 kWh? I seem to remember a video mentioning available battery is closer to 125kWh…

if I calculate a “100%” battery using the consumption listed in the trip details and the % battery used it does seem to be closer to 125 kWh available, but also hasn’t been totally consistent (but could be rounding errors between a full percentage point and a full kAh).
 

kurtlikevonnegut

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2021
Threads
12
Messages
1,216
Reaction score
3,308
Location
SC/TX
Vehicles
Mazda CX 5, Jeep Cherokee (XJ)
What is everyone using for “available kWh” when calculating range based on a driven efficiency, 135 kWh? I seem to remember a video mentioning available battery is closer to 125kWh…

if I calculate a “100%” battery using the consumption listed in the trip details and the % battery used it does seem to be closer to 125 kWh available, but also hasn’t been totally consistent (but could be rounding errors between a full percentage point and a full kAh).
I use 127 as I believe that's the actual available capacity. It might be 127.7 so 128 might be a more accurate number to use.
 

 
Top