Daily 10% Battery loss while Parked

[Max]

That's rather ego centric. To Rivian it is the consideration of the majority of what they consider to be their customer base that matters and undoubtedly they did surveys from which they determined that the majority of that base wanted the features that this phantom drain fuels. I for one would be more than willing to pay an extra $100/yr for those features and if Stats and TeslaFi do versions for the R1T I will certainly sign up and pay another $100 for the value those apps return.

You are saying rest of us shouldn’t have the option to turn off some of the automated functions or niceties you like when we leave our cars at the airport because those functions are important to you and you label me as ego centric? That is rich. Why would I have the option to turn on or off gear guard. Rivian should just check what majority wants or better yet, what you like and leave it there. All I am asking for is an off switch that works, I am not saying you should set your vehicle on off. The recent software update indicates that Rivian agrees with the rest of us that there is a problem. If you like spending more energy, you can just plug a lightbulb to your R1 and charge it with your solar cell and bask in the glow of Luxury. It is perfectly fine with me. My understanding of life of luxury is having more choices not less. Less expensive cars don’t have gear guard. Rivian has it and gives you an off button for it. I want that off button for anything else that uses energy when car is at rest. Majority of folks on this thread want the same thing. I would look at the mirror next time I use the word ego, if I were you.

Using the US average of 1,000 miles a month I find someone who drives a BEV requiring 500 Wh/mi when he could drive one using 200 thus wasting 3.6 MWh/yr who whinges that 0.73 MWh/yr phantom drain is a waste to be at least as hypocritical as Rivian in claiming their mission is an environmental one.

By that logic, it would be hypocritical not to walk instead of using a more efficient EV. I can’t see how you can possibly equate getting from A to B using more energy to going nowhere spending more energy. I rather be a hypocrite in motion than one going nowhere. To each their own.

Sponsored

 

[Attesan997]

‘You are presenting a false choice here. Just because I like to turn on the light in my living room at night when I read, it does not mean it has to be on 24/7. Either Rivian is unable to or unwilling to give me a functional light switch. All or nothing is an idiotic choice for a company if they wish to sell more products.

Wish I was able to express this in my earlier post. It doesn’t have to be all or nothing and to pose that is ludicrous.

 

[Attesan997]

Yes or rather a number of perspectives.

This is actually exactly what is required. For example Sentry mode on the Teslas. It uses a lot of phantom to buy security. Where that isn't needed (e.g. at home in your locked garage) you turn it off thus saving phantom. Where you can't afford the phantom (i.e. in an airport parking lot) you can turn it off at the cost of losing the security. It;s there because customers asked for it.

I think we know the answer to that especially for the Rivian which is a brand new vehicle.

No, not at all as I hoped my posts have made clear but I guess they haven't.

I'm not trying to convince you that you are in error. I'm trying to give you the perspective that will enable you to see that if you want something you will probably have to pay for it. The blue paint option costs $2000. A logging app will cost you 1% phantom. drain. One way to reduce phantom drain is to forego features. Another is to make sure those features that use phantom energy use it as efficiently as possible. That's where software/hardware tweaking comes in.

Then you need to cancel your Rivian order and order something with much more reasonable consumption (and less phantom drain). In transporting you 100 miles the Rivian will use nearly 50 kWh of energy as opposed to 20 - 25 in a more reasonable sized/shaped BEV. That's 25 - 35 kWh "burned" by you if you stay with the Rivian.

Or you could move to Quebec or the PNW where you will have to pay for the phantom but the source is renewable (hydro).

Perspective!

I think you missed my point about nuance but I appreciate your efforts.

 

[ajdelange]

The software engineers need to give them control over some of the phantom loads.

You are saying rest of us shouldn’t have the option to turn off some of the automated functions or niceties you like when we leave our cars at the airport because those functions are important to you and you label me as ego centric? That is rich.

So it's clear that you aren't reading what I post. There is, therefore, no point in any further response.

 

[MNLightning]

So it's clear that you aren't reading what I post. There is, therefore, no point in any further response.

Dude you are entitled to your opinions no matter how repeatedly condescending and arrogant they appear to be. I think everyone is clear on where you stand now.

I like the idea of using the button at the end of the shifter stalk for a Exiting Kill Switch. Just hold it for a few seconds until everything shuts down. And I couldn't give 2 shats about Tesla having the same issue..

 

[zefram47]

Using the US average of 1,000 miles a month I find someone who drives a BEV requiring 500 Wh/mi when he could drive one using 200 thus wasting 3.6 MWh/yr who whinges that 0.73 MWh/yr phantom drain is a waste to be at least as hypocritical as Rivian in claiming their mission is an environmental one.

Sure. But now factor in someone trading two vehicles for one and the extra consumption of the Rivian starts to balance out. If you swap a thirsty ICE (~15 mpg) and an efficient EV (~4 mi/kWh) then you're talking about a less efficient EV that's still far more efficient than the ICE, likely lower insurance costs, less parking space occupied, etc, etc, etc. Not everyone's situations are the same. Imagine that. For the 11 millionth time, the amount of vampire drain on the R1s is still far too high. Blaming it being a luxo-barge isn't appropriate when other high-end EVs that aren't Teslas have almost zero vampire drain. If your vehicle consumes near 1/3 of the energy used by driving 12k mi/year just by sitting in your garage...that's a problem. More so if your vehicle is less efficient to start with.

 

[ajdelange]

For the 11 millionth time, the amount of vampire drain on the R1s is still far too high.

No. It's about right (at a couple of %/da - not at the pre OTA update level of 2 or more times that) for a vehicle at Rivian's level of luxury.

Blaming it being a luxo-barge isn't appropriate when other high-end EVs that aren't Teslas have almost zero vampire drain.

For example Lucid for which you see threads similar to this one.

If your vehicle consumes near 1/3 of the energy used by driving 12k mi/year just by sitting in your garage...that's a problem.

If you understood simple economics and engineerng you wouldn't say that. Your numbers siggest 5.5 kWh/day phantom drain. Most Rivian and Tesla users experience more like 2. But I have double that because I am running background processes that use an extra 2 per day. I know what they are. I know what they do. I want the services they provide. I am willing to pay for those services. So no, it is not a problem for me nor for other people who understand this simple reality. There are several people hhere who don't who are willing to continue to advertise their lack of perspective. I don't think that adds to the dialogue.

There is one place where high phantom drain really is a problem and that is where someone needs to leave his vehicle unattended for an extended period. The design should allow people in that application to minimize vampire drain by turning off background services.

I'll finish up with a suggestion from the Lucid group for minimizing vampire drain: store the carabiner in a Faraday cage. The theory is that if the vehicle can't find it it will go to sleep.

 

[JWU]

5.5kwh is a lot of energy for electronics, I don't think the services will consume even close to that order. Microcontrollers and processors are very powerful and efficient nowadays... just look at your phone. The drain is more like conditioning, like the battery or cabin.

 

[dleewla]

whats the drain with gear guard off?

 

[ajdelange]

5.5kwh is a lot of energy for electronics,

It is indeed. If power is improperly budgeted or code is not well designed... then you can get really high consumptions like 5.6 kWh/day and you can sometimes fix that as rivian has done simply by changing code or parameters (how often some voltage is checked for example) and Rivian has done that and now seems to be taking more llike 2 kWh/day which is in line with Tesla unless you use logging applications (none available for Rivian yet that I am aware of).

I don't think the services will consume even close to that order.[ Microcontrollers and processors are very powerful and efficient nowadays.

You may not think it but it is demonstrably true.

All this has been explained previously. I don't want to get into another

do
see post saying that phantom drain is excessive in Rivian and Tesla
explain why it isn't
while (TRUE)

loop. If you want to know how this all works read the earlier posts in the thread.

 

[nc10]

whats the drain with gear guard off?

Another data point
Over 11 hours last night, my R1T went from 246 miles to 244 miles range in Conserve mode. This would scale to 1.5-2% loss/day (~5 miles). Gear guard, outlets, A/C, door proximity unlock were all off. Garage temp in low 80's.

 

[ajdelange]

I don't think the services will consume even close to that order.

Let's revisit this. Remember that the logging services use radio transmitters in addition to computing but I believe the real reason that their power consumption is so high is that they keep the vehicle from sleeping. As long as the vehicle is in an awake state housekeeping is going on. One can hear motors, fans, and relays clicking when the vehicle is in idle, for example.

 

[JWU]

Let's revisit this. Remember that the logging services use radio transmitters in addition to computing but I believe the real reason that their power consumption is so high is that they keep the vehicle from sleeping. As long as the vehicle is in an awake state housekeeping is going on. One can hear motors, fans, and relays clicking when the vehicle is in idle, for example.

Well, that's exactly what I meant. The processors, radios, and modems don't consume energy anywhere close to the reported loss. It's the other things that weren't turned off, for reasons we probably don't understand.
For silicon chips, even 1kwh a day is a lot and will require massive heatsinks.

 

[Max]

Nuclear Option: let’s say you have to leave your R1 somewhere without electricity for 2 months and can’t afford two percent loss a day. Here is the question:

Is there a fuse you can remove to disconnect the 12V battery from the system? And if you do, will it kill the battery sooner because battery won’t hold the charge that long?

When you put the fuse back on, will you just lose all your settings and configurations or you will have to calibrate some serious stuff before you can move?

Basically is there a safe but inconvenient loophole around this?

 

[ajdelange]

1kwh a day is a lot and will require massive heatsinks.

That's 42W. Spread out over all the functions in a truck/car I don't see any "massive" heat sinks.

More to the point, it seems that if you want to get phantom drain down the way to do it is get your vehicle to sleep or, more probably, don't do anything to prevent it from sleeping. This would include the Lucid formum suggestion of keeping fobs (or carabiners) in a Faraday container and NOT using third party polling apps unless you want the data more than you don't want the phantom drain.

Sponsored