How close do you think real world range will be to EPA range?

[kanundrum]

The problem is I think 2 mi/kWh is too high for the big, heavy truck. I think these calculations are optimistic, and depressing because I never wanted to stop every 227 miles in my ICE car. My diesel E320 will go 600 miles on the highway before I have to stop to fill it up to 100%, not 80%.

I think the 2 might be a bit pessimistic imho lets look at the following.

Tesla Model X: 2.848242 mi/kWh according to EPA (96MPGe) average
Model X Weight: 5,648 lbs
Rivian R1T Weight: 5886 lb (est)
Rivian R1S Weight: 5842 lb (est )

Lets take off 10% for extra 200lbs, and any Aero Disadvantages. Even at 2.5kWh/mi average with a 90% usable 180kw (162kWh) pack assuming its actually 180 I think 400 can be achieved but again that is probably the High Average Figure.

I think the 2 would be a "worse case" scenario but I think these vehicles can be efficient and have great mileage just need to control throttle a little. I am coming from my Hyundai Ioniq which even if I tried I cant get below a 3.5kWh/mi rating haha. I am hopeful anyways, my friend just got his Mach E and has been averaging 3+ including highways. Not sure if its condition related or just careful driving.

Sponsored

 

[skyote]

I think the 2 might be a bit pessimistic imho lets look at the following.

Tesla Model X: 2.848242 mi/kWh according to EPA (96MPGe) average
Model X Weight: 5,648 lbs
Rivian R1T Weight: 5886 lb (est)
Rivian R1S Weight: 5842 lb (est )

Lets take off 10% for extra 200lbs, and any Aero Disadvantages. Even at 2.5kWh/mi average with a 90% usable 180kw (162kWh) pack assuming its actually 180 I think 400 can be achieved but again that is probably the High Average Figure.

I think the 2 would be a "worse case" scenario but I think these vehicles can be efficient and have great mileage just need to control throttle a little. I am coming from my Hyundai Ioniq which even if I tried I cant get below a 3.5kWh/mi rating haha. I am hopeful anyways, my friend just got his Mach E and has been averaging 3+ including highways. Not sure if its condition related or just careful driving.

I think 2.5 mi/kWh is possible, which is 400 Wh/mile, at least for R1S.

Also, we know the SUV will be a tad more efficient due to aero, and we've only seen one set of estimates; if they're being conservative for the truck, the R1S should be even better.

 

[DucRider]

I think 2.5 mi/kWh is possible, which is 400 Wh/mile, at least for R1S.

Also, we know the SUV will be a tad more efficient due to aero, and we've only seen one set of estimates; if they're being conservative for the truck, the R1S should be even better.

I'm thinking the same ballpark.
320 miles on 128 kWh (useable) is my current guess

 

[mkennedy1996]

I think 2.5 mi/kWh is possible, which is 400 Wh/mile, at least for R1S.

At 70 mph? I'll wager money against that.

 

[skyote]

At 70 mph? I'll wager money against that.

I was thinking for real world mixed city/highway. My WAG for pure highway at 70-75 is 450Wh/mi.

 

[mkennedy1996]

I was thinking for real world mixed city/highway. My WAG for pure highway at 70-75 is 450Wh/mi.

I don't know the answer, obviously. I hope you are right. It will be interesting to see what the real numbers turn out to be. We are really close to launch to still have to guess on such an important element of the vehicles. But, if the published info doesn't change, with a rated range of about 428Wh/mi, highway travel at 70-75 for a premium of just 22Wh/mi will be difficult with the frontal area of R1S/T.

Out of curiosity, I looked up a recent trip to Kansas City and back in my X. I averaged 437Wh/mi with nearly all of it being highway travel. That is a 27.8% premium over the rated range.

 

[skyote]

Out of curiosity, I looked up a recent trip to Kansas City and back in my X. I averaged 437Wh/mi with nearly all of it being highway travel. That is a 27.8% premium over the rated range.

We know how Tesla games the EPA ratings somewhat, so that factors in as well. I'm also curious, how fast were you going?

 

[mkennedy1996]

We know how Tesla games the EPA ratings somewhat, so that factors in as well. I'm also curious, how fast were you going?

Tesla is aggressive in their range projections. I agree that factors in. Hopefully, Rivian is NOT like Tesla in their gamesmanship of the range numbers.

On that trip, it looks like I mostly used cruise control at 77mph. Averge speed 75.

 

[mkhuffman]

I don't know the answer, obviously. I hope you are right.

Same here. But the Rivians are going to be pushing a lot of air. A lot more than the X.

 

[SANZC02]

Same here. But the Rivians are going to be pushing a lot of air. A lot more than the X.

I'm curious what the actual drag number comes back as, it is not only the size but how the air flows. I read one article (can't find it now) where they interviewed RJ and he was talking about the effort to get the flow right but did not share any numbers. It might be less than we are speculating without seeing the actual test.

I know looking at the front of this car, I would think it would not be great but comes in close to the model S. I also have a Jeep Grand Cherokee that has a pretty big front, I've seen it is around a .37 but still can get about 24 MPG on freeway trips doing 75 to 80. The flat bottom of the R1S and T should help the drag quite a bit.

 

[Rivianmd]

The R1’s would have to be 25% less efficient than a MX to exceed 450wh @70mph (ideal conditions, 20”) RJ seemed very confident in the aero of the vehicles and the weight is not dramatically more...hoping we get 450wh or better

 

[Babbuino]

The R1’s would have to be 25% less efficient than a MX to exceed 450wh @70mph (ideal conditions, 20”) RJ seemed very confident in the aero of the vehicles and the weight is not dramatically more...hoping we get 450wh or better

Probably they're aren't enough people interested, but someone should do a 3d image of the vehicles and to a sim to get the drag coefficient. ?

 

[mkhuffman]

The R1’s would have to be 25% less efficient than a MX to exceed 450wh @70mph (ideal conditions, 20”) RJ seemed very confident in the aero of the vehicles and the weight is not dramatically more...hoping we get 450wh or better

Unfortunately, I think the Rivian will be at least 25% less efficient than the X. This link is to a test performed in Germany that compares the Model X, e-tron, and I-Pace. The Audi was 23% less efficient and he Jag was 26% less efficient.

https://nextmove.de/autobahn-test-tesla-model-x-beats-audi-e-tron-jaguar-i-pace/

Model X: 399 Wh/mi
E-tron: 491 Wh/mi
I-Pace: 503.7 Wh/mi

It is reasonable to assume the Rivian will be less efficient than the smaller I-Pace and smaller E-tron, but maybe they will surprise us all. In the meantime, the 2 mi/kWh (or 500 Wh/mi) is a very reasonable estimate. IMO.

BTW - I am only referring to highway efficiency, not city driving efficiency. I am sure the Rivians will do better with city driving, as most BEVs do. If we assume the EPA range will be 400 miles (which includes city driving and very slow highway driving), then we get 400/(180*.9) = 2.46 kWh/mi (or 405 Wh/mi).

 

[mkennedy1996]

Model X: 399 kWh/mi
E-tron: 491 kWh/mi
I-Pace: 503.7 kWh/mi

Thanks for the video.

I agree with you that 500Wh/mi is reasonable. The base is projected to be 428Wh/mi. Add highway speeds with the shape of the Rivians and it will be somewhere between 450 and 500Wh/mi.

Note: In your numbers, you need to drop the k from kWh/mi to just Wh/mi. 399 kW per mile would be pretty high consumption. Recharge after 1/3rd of a mile.

Model X: 399 Wh/mi
E-tron: 491 Wh/mi
I-Pace: 503.7 Wh/mi

 

[Babbuino]

Thanks for the video.

I agree with you that 500Wh/mi is reasonable. The base is projected to be 428Wh/mi. Add highways speeds with the shape of the Rivians and it will be somewhere between 450 and 500Wh/mi.

Note: In your numbers, you need to drop the k from kWh/mi to just Wh/mi. 399 kW per mile would be pretty high consumption. Recharge after 1/3rd of a mile.

Model X: 399 Wh/mi
E-tron: 491 Wh/mi
I-Pace: 503.7 Wh/mi

Here is an article with the etron and the ipace at 70mph. I agree with the ~500Wh/mi, but the Rivians look boxier, so who knows...

E-tron: 508 Wh/mi
I-Pace: 478Wh/mi
They also had the Polestar 2 and M3p.
P2: 380 Wh/mi
M3P: 350 Wh/mi

https://arstechnica.com/cars/2020/08/teslas-model-3-beats-competitors-in-70mph-range-test/

Sponsored