Dual Motor Max Pack more efficient than Dual Motor Large Pack?

[DuoRivians]

I've doubled checked that these fueleconomy.gov figures are both for the R1T, perf dual motor, 21" wheels. The only difference is the battery pack.

According to these figures, it says the max pack is more efficient than the large pack.

Combined city/hwy figures:

• Max pack: 84 mpge
• Large pack: 78 mpge

Alternatively, kWh per 100 miles:

• Max pack: 40 kWh
• Large pack: 43 kWh

So, is the max pack more efficient than the large pack?

Sponsored

 

[pc500]

I wonder if its just a newer software, better efficiency, that wasn't tested in the old one at the time of EPA?

I'd like to see the refreshed EPA test results for all trucks.

 

[DuoRivians]

I wonder if its just a newer software, better efficiency, that wasn't tested in the old one at the time of EPA?

I'd like to see the refreshed EPA test results for all trucks.

Could be software. Could be the new cells used in the max pack generate less heat, so more efficient?

 

[Ripped]

It's all just numbers on paper until there is a reasonable sampling of forum members with maxpacks out on the road and reporting back.

 

[240vPlug]

I doubt the battery makes any difference in efficiency. Either thr efficiency improved with a software update or they are running a different tune on the max pack vehicles. The only way the battery could be involved in an efficiency increase.... that im aware of... is if it can take higher regen or longer regen.

Like ripped said we need real world testing. Its a significant increase though. What would the range on DM large be with those efficiency ratings?

Probably 360-375 mi is my guess. All we can do is speculate at this point.

 

[Dark-Fx]

Could be software. Could be the new cells used in the max pack generate less heat, so more efficient?

Lower C rate will lead to higher efficiency. I'd be surprised if it was this large of a difference though.

 

[pc500]

It's possible the entire fleet has improved efficiency due to software but they haven't retested the pre-max pack and can't advertise it.

We saw efficiency improvements from 2022 to 2023 from the EPA perspective, but reality is all the trucks see the same. However that was quad to quad with no other changes.

 

[aAlpine]

I'm also skeptical a different battery can change the efficiency, but I'm no chemical or electrical engineer.


How is the MPGe number calculated I wonder. Is it just derived based on the EPA cycle range and energy required to recharge the vehicle? We do know that manufacturers can adjust the results of the EPA test (I think/hope only more conservatively?). Maybe this MPGe number is just a result of a less conservative range number on the max pack, which I could imagine them choosing to do to achieve 400 miles. The R1S EPA range is _exactly_ 400, is it not?

 

[CharonPDX]

$81,300‽? That must be the original pricing, but I thought they weren't honoring that for dual motor. Which also means a max pack COULD be configured at under the $80k limit.

 

[vandy1981]

$81,300‽? That must be the original pricing, but I thought they weren't honoring that for dual motor. Which also means a max pack COULD be configured at under the $80k limit.

That price includes the destination fee which doesn't count towards the IRA incentive limit. It's $79500 without the destination fee.

 

[vandy1981]

I doubt the battery makes any difference in efficiency.

You would gain efficiency if the battery has lower internal resistance. The size of the tank could be the same in a lower resistance battery pack, but more energy would be delivered to the wheels since less energy is lost to heat.

 

[AgentOfEntropy]

You would gain efficiency if the battery has lower internal resistance. The size of the tank could be the same in a lower resistance battery pack, but more energy would be delivered to the wheels since less energy is lost to heat.

From what I can tell, both the 50G and 53G have an IR of 14mOhms, so that doesn’t seem to explain the difference.

Sponsored