Sponsored

Has your efficiency notably changed with the latest update (2025.10)?


  • Total voters
    130

LivingInKaos

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2022
Threads
8
Messages
514
Reaction score
998
Location
Oregon
Vehicles
R1T Launch Green Forest Edge
Occupation
Own Fabrication Company
Clubs
 
I'm not exaggerating when I say: I've _NEVER_ had >2.0 mi/kWh efficiency on the graph for the entirety of my trip
Ok, this is the key.... You said Graph - there was a change to the graph metrics recently that it now will include the Regen offset where it has not in the past. This is why recently you've been seeing people with graphs showing above 4mi/kwh where we never had before. Although, this change occurred with 2025.06, so I'm wondering if you just hadn't noticed until now.
Sponsored

 

ThirteenElectrics

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2024
Threads
28
Messages
428
Reaction score
487
Location
USA
Vehicles
R1S, R1T, XC40 Recharge
Oh that is a good point - something I absolutely noticed after either the most current or last update was that my lie-o-meter actually would go _above_ 4! In all the time I've owend the car, no matter how much downhill we were driving it always pegged right at 4 or 3.99 (which happened at some point in the software update process). On a recent trip down from the mountains It was reading 6-7+ during some of my downhill stints!
This is a useful feature, as one can now tell if regen is limited by cold when going downhill from a mountain when blended braking is turned on. I often drive my truck up high only to lose energy to the cold when driving back down due to regen turning off.
 

Singletracker

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2022
Threads
33
Messages
971
Reaction score
924
Location
Nevada
Vehicles
2023 R1T quad motor w/AT 20ā€
Can’t say that the latest software update affected efficiency that dramatically, for me. However, over the last 6-8 months my efficiency has sky rocketed. Before that time, I would have been thrilled to see 2.24 M/kWh, on any given drive. Now, I scoff at that measly figure. During the 2023-2024 winter, I averaged about 2.06 M/kWh. This last winter, since mid-November, I’m averaging 2.20 M/kWh. I’m currently tracking every drive on a spread sheet. I drive around 1000 miles per month. My figures for the last few months are - Dec. 2.16, Jan. 2.13, Feb. 2.22, Mar. 2.26, and so far in April 2.39!! Clearly, the milder weather is positively affecting efficiency, but 2.39 M/kWh equates to an astounding 313 miles of potential range! I have to wonder how high this will go with the weather warming even more, but I suspect it will settle down a bit from the insane 2.39. I drove on a 100 mile trip the other day, at about 70 mph (temp around 70 degrees) and got 2.29 or about 300 miles of potential range. Since 1/1/2025, I’m averaging 2.22 m/kWh or 291.71 miles of potential range, and climbing, based on 131 kWh of useable battery. So, I don’t know what happened, but some time around late last fall something changed rather dramatically.

For the record, I have a 2023 QM R1T on 20ā€ wheels and was running my Blizzak winter tires from mid December until last week. I have now changed back to my OEM Pirelli A/T’s. I have not experienced any noticeable difference in efficiency between the two tires, but the annoying drone from the Pirellis will drive me FN crazy 😔 The Blizzaks were so smooth and quiet. They spoiled me.
 

zefram47

Well-Known Member
First Name
Aaron
Joined
Feb 6, 2022
Threads
16
Messages
2,469
Reaction score
4,040
Location
Denver, CO
Vehicles
Rivian R1T, Alfa Romeo 4C
Occupation
Software Engineer
Not to derail the thread, but I absolutely love them:
  • Stellar in the snow
  • Quiet
  • Great wearing (have about 15k miles on them and just went past 80% using the integrated wear gauge)
  • Look great
  • Good off-road in the small amount I've taken them on (mainly loose gravel/baby heads on steep incline)
  • Price is great
Biggest drawbacks:
  • Small hit in efficiency. We do a ton of road-trips and I drive fast, so it's a bit tough to say exactly with so many variables (and I track our efficiency closely), but I'd estimate around 5% versus when the Pirellis were new (Pirellis got much more efficient as they wore, just like I'd expect the nAT to as well).
  • Not great on ice (but to be expected in a 7000lb SUV)
We have a Land Rover Discovery 5 (wife) and Jeep Wrangler JL (son) as well. Both of them run Toyo Open Country AT3s - which I also love. But if I could, I'd switch my wife's Disco to the nAT (sadly no 19" available). We've owned tons of different AT tires: Duratracs (Range Rover), Scorpions (Rivian), K02 (Wrangler), OC AT3s (LR4, Disco, Wrangler) and some I'm sure I'm forgetting on our LR3, Toureg, etc. nAT and OC AT3 are the best and it's not really close for us. The nAT is $150 cheaper than the OC AT3, so it makes it an easy decision.

-Rich
Thanks. I don't really care about winter performance as I've been running Blizzak LT on a separate set of wheels. Asked here as I wasn't sure if you were on the nAT thread. And yes, I also observed the stock tires getting more efficient as they wore, up to as much as 2.34 mi/kWh (over 2.2k miles) when I pulled them off again in November and around 6/32nds with 20k miles.
 

zefram47

Well-Known Member
First Name
Aaron
Joined
Feb 6, 2022
Threads
16
Messages
2,469
Reaction score
4,040
Location
Denver, CO
Vehicles
Rivian R1T, Alfa Romeo 4C
Occupation
Software Engineer
For the record, I have a 2023 QM R1T on 20ā€ wheels and was running my Blizzak winter tires from mid December until last week. I have now changed back to my OEM Pirelli A/T’s. I have not experienced any noticeable difference in efficiency between the two tires, but the annoying drone from the Pirellis will drive me FN crazy 😔 The Blizzaks were so smooth and quiet. They spoiled me.
I notice the Blizzaks LT are surprisingly efficient on a warm day (50-60F) and the HVAC temperature control turned off. I did a 15 mile roundtrip with over 600 ft elevation change and got over 2.5 mi/kWh. And yes, they are so damn quiet compared with the Pirelli ATs.
 

Sponsored

OP
OP
R1Thor

R1Thor

Well-Known Member
First Name
Joe
Joined
Aug 9, 2023
Threads
8
Messages
1,291
Reaction score
1,940
Location
Lancaster, PA
Vehicles
23QM R1T, Limestone + Ocean Coast, 21" & UBS
Occupation
Mechanical Engineering Lead
Clubs
 
Ok, this is the key.... You said Graph - there was a change to the graph metrics recently that it now will include the Regen offset where it has not in the past. This is why recently you've been seeing people with graphs showing above 4mi/kwh where we never had before. Although, this change occurred with 2025.06, so I'm wondering if you just hadn't noticed until now.
Except you ignored the part where I used 25% versus 35% SoC.

If it was ONLY the graph showing some sort of efficiency, I'd agree with you 100% that it was all tomfoolery (smoke and mirrors) within the efficiency graph.

If it IS tomfoolery, I'll be interested to see if my battery drops precipitously on my way home today. Will report back!
 

zefram47

Well-Known Member
First Name
Aaron
Joined
Feb 6, 2022
Threads
16
Messages
2,469
Reaction score
4,040
Location
Denver, CO
Vehicles
Rivian R1T, Alfa Romeo 4C
Occupation
Software Engineer
Except you ignored the part where I used 25% versus 35% SoC.

If it was ONLY the graph showing some sort of efficiency, I'd agree with you 100% that it was all tomfoolery (smoke and mirrors) within the efficiency graph.

If it IS tomfoolery, I'll be interested to see if my battery drops precipitously on my way home today. Will report back!
Back to either the December or January update they started doing something goofy with the reported battery capacity as evidenced by ElectraFi data on the battery graph. That change resulted in some weirdness on reporting phantom drain. It's possible this update reverted that change, but I don't have enough data yet to be able to tell. That said, I haven't seen any major change in efficiency that I can't attribute to dramatically warmer weather and using HVAC with temperature control turned off.
 

2kwik4u

Well-Known Member
First Name
Michael
Joined
Jan 8, 2025
Threads
3
Messages
140
Reaction score
173
Vehicles
2024 Rivian R1T ; 2018 Nissan Rogue
Back to either the December or January update they started doing something goofy with the reported battery capacity as evidenced by ElectraFi data on the battery graph. That change resulted in some weirdness on reporting phantom drain. It's possible this update reverted that change, but I don't have enough data yet to be able to tell. That said, I haven't seen any major change in efficiency that I can't attribute to dramatically warmer weather and using HVAC with temperature control turned off.
Where abouts can I find similar data in ElectraFi? We can see if it tracks with yours.
 

aim2023

Active Member
First Name
D
Joined
Dec 8, 2023
Threads
8
Messages
29
Reaction score
19
Location
SE Pennsylvania
Vehicles
Rivian R1S. Tesla Model Y
Clubs
 
My efficiency has been noticeably great since the previous update, haven't noticed anything with the latest update though. I have been averaging 2.5 to 3.3 KwH for the past 2 months.

But one thing I noticed for the last couple of days is, when I plug in to a level 2 charger at gym or a restaurant (shell recharge mostly) - it instantly bumps by miles by 5. For eg: 245 goes to 250 the second it starts charging.
 

Singletracker

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2022
Threads
33
Messages
971
Reaction score
924
Location
Nevada
Vehicles
2023 R1T quad motor w/AT 20ā€
May I suggest that anybody sharing an observation regarding their vehicle please include vehicle details, if not in your signature. They are far from all the same. What year is it? What model is it? Is it a QM, DM, TM, 20ā€/21ā€/22ā€ wheels, with what tires, etc., etc.?
 

Sponsored

zefram47

Well-Known Member
First Name
Aaron
Joined
Feb 6, 2022
Threads
16
Messages
2,469
Reaction score
4,040
Location
Denver, CO
Vehicles
Rivian R1T, Alfa Romeo 4C
Occupation
Software Engineer
Where abouts can I find similar data in ElectraFi? We can see if it tracks with yours.
Under Charges and then Battery Report. It doesn't track battery capacity directly, but you can see that on the top bar with all the other current status items and if you watch it enough you'll see it dip and rise seemingly at random, but seems to be correlated at least somewhat on outside temperature or possibly battery temperature. IIRC, I've seen as low as 125 kWh, but prior to the update at the end of December 2024 (2024.47.1) it was always within a small range 130-131 kWh.

Rivian R1T R1S Efficiency boost from 2025.10 update? Anyone else seeing this? Screenshot from 2025-04-15 12-59-55
 

2kwik4u

Well-Known Member
First Name
Michael
Joined
Jan 8, 2025
Threads
3
Messages
140
Reaction score
173
Vehicles
2024 Rivian R1T ; 2018 Nissan Rogue
Under Charges and then Battery Report. It doesn't track battery capacity directly, but you can see that on the top bar with all the other current status items and if you watch it enough you'll see it dip and rise seemingly at random, but seems to be correlated at least somewhat on outside temperature or possibly battery temperature. IIRC, I've seen as low as 125 kWh, but prior to the update at the end of December 2024 (2024.47.1) it was always within a small range 130-131 kWh.

Screenshot from 2025-04-15 12-59-55.png
Interesting. I don't have software markers in mine.

Rivian R1T R1S Efficiency boost from 2025.10 update? Anyone else seeing this? 1744751132092-k8
 

Kaiju

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2024
Threads
2
Messages
69
Reaction score
138
Location
Texas
Vehicles
R1T
I don't suppose you have a way to measure the charger input or see a history?

If we can map a change in the number of electrons that would be fairly conclusive.
 
OP
OP
R1Thor

R1Thor

Well-Known Member
First Name
Joe
Joined
Aug 9, 2023
Threads
8
Messages
1,291
Reaction score
1,940
Location
Lancaster, PA
Vehicles
23QM R1T, Limestone + Ocean Coast, 21" & UBS
Occupation
Mechanical Engineering Lead
Clubs
 
I don't suppose you have a way to measure the charger input or see a history?

If we can map a change in the number of electrons that would be fairly conclusive.
I agree!

I wish I did; I don't. Maybe someone else will.

I do find it somewhat improbable that Rivian charged my truck to 90% and 'hid' the extra load in the graph/data/efficiency/numbers/algorithm. But I wouldn't be surprised if that number was ~1-3% either, as we've definitely seen historical tomfoolery with vampire drain numbers, charging curves, etc.
 
OP
OP
R1Thor

R1Thor

Well-Known Member
First Name
Joe
Joined
Aug 9, 2023
Threads
8
Messages
1,291
Reaction score
1,940
Location
Lancaster, PA
Vehicles
23QM R1T, Limestone + Ocean Coast, 21" & UBS
Occupation
Mechanical Engineering Lead
Clubs
 
Interesting update.

So, I get the ideation that this was weather-related phenomena, as yesterday was quite comfortable compared to recent history. I've returned with more data.

This morning I still had a 7% improved SoC consumption over my average for this commute. (I used 28% SoC to get to work). That's still (35/28 = 1.25 = 25% improvement). That's still pretty darn significant, in my book.

7%

Today's thermometer says 43F. Heat on, driving into headwinds (weather app says 20 mph, but I don't think they were directly normal to my line of travel, so take that with a small grain of salt. That said, wind load is definitely a killer on this commute--it got me on my way home yesterday).

So, if it is an anomaly, it's still an anomaly!
Sponsored

 
 








Top