Driving on wet roads in conserve mode

[VSG]

The reasoning is you are asking a lot out of the tires, especially when they get unweighted under acceleration and cornering. Any time they skip or skid, that's a lot of extra wear.

But again, that's true of every front-wheel drive vehicle, and there are many other high-performance front-wheel drive vehicles on the road that don't see excessive wear. These arguments aren't specific to the Rivian. And while the Rivian is heavier than most, the tires are rated for the extra weight. The fact that Rivian is replacing your tires means that your situation is not "expected" - if this was normal expected wear and tear then you would be paying for those new tires on your own.

Sponsored

 

[Dark-Fx]

But again, that's true of every front-wheel drive vehicle, and there are many other high-performance front-wheel drive vehicles on the road that don't see excessive wear.

Really? Name one. My Cobalt SS wore the front tires out much quicker if I didn't rotate them.

The fact that Rivian is replacing your tires means that your situation is not "expected" - if this was normal expected wear and tear then you would be paying for those new tires on your own.

They actually want me to pay for it and I'm fighting them on it.

 

[VSG]

Really? Name one. My Cobalt SS wore the front tires out much quicker if I didn't rotate them.

This goes back to my original statement:

Conserve only uses the front motors, but most cars are front-wheel drive only and I've never ever heard that most cars have excessive wear of the front tires.

As I first said, I have never heard of issues with front tires wearing out early on front-wheel drive vehicles just because they are front-wheel drive vehicles. You have just now provided one example, but it's a problematic one for the sake of argument because now we are talking about two specific cars owned and driven by you that both have excessive wear on the front wheels. That is anecdotal evidence at best.

I could well be wrong, but as I said I've never heard of this problem before with any vehicle. And I've never experienced this problem, even though I've driven front-wheel drive cars for hundreds of thousands of miles. Perhaps I just haven't been reading the right non-Rivian forums where this phenomenon is "well-known", but the first I heard of front-wheel drive vehicles chewing up tires is in Rivian forums where people blame Rivian's Conserve mode for the problem.

If this is indeed something that is a result of using the front-wheel drive Conserve mode, and if it is indeed something that happens on all high performance front-wheel drive vehicles like you imply, then why should you expect Rivian to pay for your new tires? I don't see the logic of blaming Rivian AND portraying this as an inevitable result of powering just the two front wheels.

 

[Dark-Fx]

This goes back to my original statement:

As I first said, I have never heard of issues with front tires wearing out early on front-wheel drive vehicles just because they are front-wheel drive vehicles. You have just now provided one example, but it's a problematic one for the sake of argument because now we are talking about two specific cars owned and driven by you that both have excessive wear on the front wheels. That is anecdotal evidence at best.

I could well be wrong, but as I said I've never heard of this problem before with any vehicle. And I've never experienced this problem, even though I've driven front-wheel drive cars for hundreds of thousands of miles. Perhaps I just haven't been reading the right non-Rivian forums where this phenomenon is "well-known", but the first I heard of front-wheel drive vehicles chewing up tires is in Rivian forums where people blame Rivian's Conserve mode for the problem.

If this is indeed something that is a result of using the front-wheel drive Conserve mode, and if it is indeed something that happens on all high performance front-wheel drive vehicles like you imply, then why should you expect Rivian to pay for your new tires? I don't see the logic of blaming Rivian AND portraying this as an inevitable result of powering just the two front wheels.

My Bolt had the same deal wearing out tires faster. Especially in an EV where you're making the front tires do all the work under braking conditions. It's simple physics that if you don't have your tires rotated, the ones doing the work are going to wear out faster. I really honestly don't understand why you are fighting me on this at all. EVs are heavy, even if you aren't driving it like a performance vehicle, you're stilling going to encounter more wear in conserve mode. The truck is just plain slow because Rivian is trying to save the tires, but it isn't enough.

 

[COdogman]

I specifically asked about this during my test drive in may because it seemed like multiple people in the forum were saying they felt the front tires would wear much quicker. My Rivian host on the drive had what I thought was a perfectly reasonable explanation: She had like 13k miles on her R1T at the time and she said her tires looked like new despite using conserve most of the time. She said her friends claim she drives like a "grandma". She compared that to her supervisor who also had around the same amount of miles and used conserve much of the time but drives much more aggressively and was seeing quite a bit of wear on his front tires.

 

[Craigins]

In other breaking news, heavy vehicles perform poorly when being accelerated by 2 only wheels in poor driving conditions.

Why is this surprising to anyone?

 

[Titanium91352]

Ironic I am reading this post today when yesterday my 8K driven R1T was sitting in the driveway with the wheels turned and the first thing I noticed was how worn the front tires were already. Surprised me. I drive 80% in Conserve mode to make my round trip distance. Seems that might be a mistake.

 

[VSG]

Rivian still has physical rear brakes, right? While the rear motors can't be used for regenerative braking in Conserve mode, because the motor shafts are disconnected, I would think that the rear disk brakes are still active. Whether they are used or not during regen in Conserve mode I don't know, but I would think that for performance they should be.

I really honestly don't understand why you are fighting me on this at all.

I really honestly don't understand why everyone takes for granted the statement that front-wheel drive causes excessive front tire wear, because if that were generally true then literally hundreds of millions of vehicles, including mine, would experience this.

It's simple physics

You don't know this, but I'm actually a physicist, so dismissing a question as "simple physics" doesn't work on me. If it were as simple as you say, then everyone would know this from experience without having to resort to equations of force.

It's quite possible that I've been totally clueless about this long-standing problem with front-wheel drive vehicles that everyone knows about but me; that is exactly why I asked the question about why everyone assumes this is correct when I've never experienced this myself, even though like most people I'm pretty lax about doing proper rotations. What I'm seeing in response is some hand waving and claims that it's obvious.

Front tires don't wear out in a few thousand miles under normal conditions on front-wheel drive cars, despite all the stresses they are subject to. They just don't. The claim being made is that the front tires on Rivians DO wear out extremely quickly when in Conserve mode, and the implication is that this is a fault of Rivian's design so Rivian should pay for new tires. Either this is expected because it's a powerful, heavy vehicle driving only the front wheels, or it's not expected because it doesn't happen to other powerful, heavy, front-wheel drive vehicles. You seem to be arguing that this is expected and even obvious, but that Rivian should also pay for it anyway.

Did you ever think the excessive wear you're seeing might be a problem with the suspension (either the tuning of your particular vehicle or even the overall design of the suspension) rather than blaming it on some fundamental property of front-wheel drive?

 

[ResidualReality]

With 10K miles on my T now, for my part, I only use conserve for trips that are 15+ minutes on the highway. Unless you are going a long distance between times when you will need/be able to charge conserving doesn't give you that much of a gain for the loss of capability.

 

[godfodder0901]

Rivian still has physical rear brakes, right? While the rear motors can't be used for regenerative braking in Conserve mode, because the motor shafts are disconnected, I would think that the rear disk brakes are still active. Whether they are used or not during regen in Conserve mode I don't know, but I would think that for performance they should be.

I really honestly don't understand why everyone takes for granted the statement that front-wheel drive causes excessive front tire wear, because if that were generally true then literally hundreds of millions of vehicles, including mine, would experience this.

You don't know this, but I'm actually a physicist, so dismissing a question as "simple physics" doesn't work on me. If it were as simple as you say, then everyone would know this from experience without having to resort to equations of force.

It's quite possible that I've been totally clueless about this long-standing problem with front-wheel drive vehicles that everyone knows about but me; that is exactly why I asked the question about why everyone assumes this is correct when I've never experienced this myself, even though like most people I'm pretty lax about doing proper rotations. What I'm seeing in response is some hand waving and claims that it's obvious.

Front tires don't wear out in a few thousand miles under normal conditions on front-wheel drive cars, despite all the stresses they are subject to. They just don't. The claim being made is that the front tires on Rivians DO wear out extremely quickly when in Conserve mode, and the implication is that this is a fault of Rivian's design so Rivian should pay for new tires. Either this is expected because it's a powerful, heavy vehicle driving only the front wheels, or it's not expected because it doesn't happen to other powerful, heavy, front-wheel drive vehicles. You seem to be arguing that this is expected and even obvious, but that Rivian should also pay for it anyway.

Did you ever think the excessive wear you're seeing might be a problem with the suspension (either the tuning of your particular vehicle or even the overall design of the suspension) rather than blaming it on some fundamental property of front-wheel drive?

Excessive wear on the front wheels of a front wheel drive car is not normal, and can often be attributed to other factors (alignment, failing suspension parts, overloading, driving practices, etc.). Accelerated wear, however, is VERY common for driven wheels of any drivetrain when compared to non-driven wheels. I have seen this on every vehicle I have over owned or driven, from Honda Civics and Chevy Camaros, to Toyota Siennas and even 18-wheelers.

https://www.tirebuyer.com/education...which allows for front to rear tire rotations.

 

[RBR1S]

OR - get this idea.... It could automatically switch between all purpose and conserve on it's own under the appropriate conditions, you know, detected by all those chips that are part of the chip shortage that is causing us all to wait on getting our R1 T/S. #annoyedsarcasm

Seriously though, why can't the Rivian figure out how to do this on it's own without switching modes manually. This is as bad as having locking hubs that you have to get out into the mud and click over. Savages.....

Freeway speeds, automatically go into conserve but be ready to switch to all purpose instantly when traction requires it. Stopping - all 4 motors should equally resist for optimal traction unless one detects slippage and automatically reduces resistance, you know like that ancient technology "anti-lock brakes". Accelerating onto the freeway, all purpose until you get up to speed or the accelerator is backed off; for that matter sport if you floor it.

This is a computer people, NOT manual hubs, not a stick shift, not a differential. It's software that needs to be WAY smarter and take on real world situations with more nuance.

 

[eddybarckx]

This seems like a gross misuse of Conserve mode. You should be driving like granny in the right lane behind a cement truck before reaching for the Conserve setting. Or are you just bad at route planning / afraid of public chargers and the public in general / too impatient to wait a few extra minutes by driving slower or charging more often / too cheap to pay anything but utility rates for electricity at home.

I guess you didn't read my disclaimer when I first posted- let me rephrase: I'm new to this world so excuse my ignorance. Based on your comment, I'm a fearful cheapskate who doesn't know where he's going, can't read a map who can't navigate CharePoint/EA/Evgo.

Can we stick to the topic and not libel each other?

 

[domoplaytime]

Can we stick to the topic and not libel each other?

Just teasing of course, but you're right that it was off topic.

 

[s4wrxttcs]

I'm big fan of conserve mode for extending the range on long freeway trips, but I don't see any reason to use it around town.

Around town you're giving up so much for what's likely a very marginal amount in extra range.

You're giving up traction
You're giving up more equal tire wear
You're giving up acceleration which you'll certainly need in the PNW to get away from idiots.
You're forcing regen to happen with two motors versus four. In certain situations this leads to less regen.

 

[JoelD]

My Bolt had the same deal wearing out tires faster. Especially in an EV where you're making the front tires do all the work under braking conditions. It's simple physics that if you don't have your tires rotated, the ones doing the work are going to wear out faster. I really honestly don't understand why you are fighting me on this at all. EVs are heavy, even if you aren't driving it like a performance vehicle, you're stilling going to encounter more wear in conserve mode. The truck is just plain slow because Rivian is trying to save the tires, but it isn't enough.

Maybe it’s the driving style? I’ve had 2 Bolts, a 2017 and a 2020, put about 30,000 miles on the 2017 before I traded it, no tire issues, and then about 25,000 on the 2020, no tire wear issues..

Sponsored