How long is "longer range" R1S - any intel?

SANZC02

Well-Known Member
First Name
Bob
Joined
Feb 11, 2021
Messages
471
Reaction score
894
Location
California
First Name
Bob
Vehicles
Tesla Model S, Jeep Grand Cherokee; (LE - R1S)
Occupation
IT
Personally I have never understood why Rivian is unable to install the 180 pack in the R1S with a folding third row. It seems to me the usable floor space is the same at the third row as at the second row. See the diagram below:

1621030293517.png


Of course this diagram is not to scale, but it demonstrates to me there is room for a folding third row, as long as the seats are able to fold down as low as the second row folds. My opinion is ignorant, though, because there is obviously a reason why they removed the 180 pack from R1S marketing material. Maybe they will find a way to fit the pack in, but from what they have released so far, it seems they are not sure it can be done.

My assumption has been the R1S max pack will be more than 135, but less than 180. Time will tell if that assumption is correct or not. I hope Rivian finds a way to make the 180 work, because a lot of people will be disappointed if they can't. Including me. Although I am leaning toward the R1T 180 pack version, because it will have the ability to add the Aux battery module shown in the drawing above. I doubt the R1S will ever have the Aux pack option.
Probably because of the R1S having a 14.9 inch shorter wheelbase than the R1T.





Advertisement

 

mkhuffman

Active Member
First Name
M
Joined
Nov 9, 2020
Messages
41
Reaction score
41
Location
Virginia
First Name
M
Vehicles
Mercedes E320, Cadillac XT5, VW Jetta
After just posting the above comment, I thought more about it and maybe the problem is the APU. From what I have read the R1S wheelbase is shorter than the R1T by 14 inches, so probably the APU needs to sit up higher, on top of the tail end of the battery pack. That takes away from the third row floor space. I bet that is the reason they cannot fit the 180 pack into the R1S and keep the third row.
 

electruck

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2019
Messages
1,300
Reaction score
2,070
Location
Dallas, TX
Vehicles
2018 Volvo XC60
After just posting the above comment, I thought more about it and maybe the problem is the APU. From what I have read the R1S wheelbase is shorter than the R1T by 14 inches, so probably the APU needs to sit up higher, on top of the tail end of the battery pack. That takes away from the third row floor space. I bet that is the reason they cannot fit the 180 pack into the R1S and keep the third row.
APU? Are you perhaps referring to the inverter? That is an integral part of the motor assembly (on top).
 

mkhuffman

Active Member
First Name
M
Joined
Nov 9, 2020
Messages
41
Reaction score
41
Location
Virginia
First Name
M
Vehicles
Mercedes E320, Cadillac XT5, VW Jetta
APU? Are you perhaps referring to the inverter? That is an integral part of the motor assembly (on top).
I realize the diagram I posted is really rough and not a real design document, but I assumed the APU is where they show it in the diagram - between the battery pack and the rear wheels on the R1T. Since there is less space between the rear wheels and the pack in the R1S, they have to make the battery pack smaller to fit the APU behind it and keep the floor flat. See the photo below that seems to show the APU (or maybe the inverter) behind the pack and at the same level as the pack.

Whatever it is, it is clearly not a battery in that space. And if they move the wheels closer together, it has to go somewhere. I think originally it was going to go on top of the rear of the pack, which would mean there is no foot room for the rear seats. When many people complained about the lack of a third row, I think Rivian heard the complaints and determined the third row is more important than fitting the largest pack into the R1S.

Just speculation, and maybe they will find a way to fit the 180 pack in the R1S.

1621351933886.png
 

cwoodcox

Well-Known Member
First Name
Corey
Joined
Mar 31, 2021
Messages
178
Reaction score
187
Location
Montreal, QC
First Name
Corey
Vehicles
2012 Ford Expedition
Occupation
Software Engineer
See the photo below that seems to show the APU (or maybe the inverter) behind the pack and at the same level as the pack.
It’s not an inverter. The inverters are on top of the motors, hence the 2 DC high-voltage cables going up there. It’s either a charger (probably not) or some other kind of battery management system. The Chevrolet Bolt has a BMS controller built into the pack in a similar fashion.
 

electruck

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2019
Messages
1,300
Reaction score
2,070
Location
Dallas, TX
Vehicles
2018 Volvo XC60
I realize the diagram I posted is really rough and not a real design document, but I assumed the APU is where they show it in the diagram - between the battery pack and the rear wheels on the R1T. Since there is less space between the rear wheels and the pack in the R1S, they have to make the battery pack smaller to fit the APU behind it and keep the floor flat. See the photo below that seems to show the APU (or maybe the inverter) behind the pack and at the same level as the pack.

Whatever it is, it is clearly not a battery in that space. And if they move the wheels closer together, it has to go somewhere. I think originally it was going to go on top of the rear of the pack, which would mean there is no foot room for the rear seats. When many people complained about the lack of a third row, I think Rivian heard the complaints and determined the third row is more important than fitting the largest pack into the R1S.

Just speculation, and maybe they will find a way to fit the 180 pack in the R1S.

1621351933886.png
Ok, I see the disconnect here. That patent (and accompanying diagrams) references components that don't actually exist in the LE Rivians and may never actually exist in any Rivian product. To my knowledge there is no Auxillary Power Unit (APU) in the production R1S/T.
 

Autolycus

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 2, 2021
Messages
97
Reaction score
127
Location
ATL
Vehicles
ICE only :(
We know from other information that the larger pack in the R1T will take up the space beneath the back seats. The extra 45 kWh of cells will be on top of the main skateboard. I assume the problem with the R1S is that there's not as simple a place to stack the extra cells because they want to preserve the ability to lay all the seats flat.
 

MountainBikeDude

Well-Known Member
First Name
Adam
Joined
Jun 20, 2019
Messages
176
Reaction score
388
Location
Vancouver
First Name
Adam
Vehicles
2010 Nissan Xterra (El Cap R1T Max pack)
This probably isn't what most want to read or see, but...
Here are screenshots of the R1T and R1S platforms on the Rivian site (likely the 135kw pack in each) You can see that the R1T has the room to spare for the additional pack (APU) but the R1S is constrained in how it accommodates the APU. This is likely why they refer to the R1S being a "longer range" version rather than calling it 400+

Perhaps the reason for the delay in the R1S long range launch is due to some minor platform revision to allow for the 3rd row seating, or they managed to get the range they specified long ago @ 250, 300, 400 miles respectively, but the packs are more efficient and are no longer the previously advertised size in Kw hence the change in pack name to "standard pack, Large Pack, MAX PACK".

Edit * I reference APU in this post just because others got on that train, The different sized packs are likely all one piece and not modules outside the main pack. That being said, It has been referenced a couple of times long ago that the MAX PACK would compromise space in the r1T under the rear seats, but having reached out to CS a few times on this issue, they said they made it work without compromising any storage space under the seats or gear tunnel. Taking it with a grain of salt until I see it in writing on their site, but fits in line with the photos below, and my speculation on the packs having less capacity, but still delivering the same range due to advances in algorithms etc.

R1T
1621360804471.png

R1S
1621360829207.png
 
Last edited:

Wanderer

Active Member
Joined
May 28, 2021
Messages
39
Reaction score
66
Location
Texas
Vehicles
Etron
Road & Track's comment re: range:

"Rivian is making bold claims about the range of its trucks. The automaker says the 105-kWh R1T will do over 230 miles on a charge, the 135-kWh will do over 300, and the 180-kWh will do over 400 miles. The R1S betters each of those figures by 10 miles. We'll have to wait for EPA-certified numbers to know for sure, but these are impressive numbers"

My point is that Rivian came out with these numbers and got pub throwing it out there & it still remains in the Auto Industry's largest magazines.....the counter, which is that the range has been pulled back, has received no pub.

So.....my earlier point remains (I have a deposit down for a R1S and given my extensive experience with EV's, I want the higher range....300 at highway speeds often becomes 240 or less so a 400 would provide 320 or more.....and that's without the other factors of elevation, wind, temp, weight, etc.)
Sounds like your experience is with Tesla. My experience (etron) is that stated range more or less equals Highway range (often I get more). That’s been true for most other modern evs and I expect the same from Rivian. It’s the only range that matters.

Of course that is a baseline of 75+ degree temps. I don’t understand how people up north deal with winter range loss.
 
Last edited:

mkhuffman

Active Member
First Name
M
Joined
Nov 9, 2020
Messages
41
Reaction score
41
Location
Virginia
First Name
M
Vehicles
Mercedes E320, Cadillac XT5, VW Jetta
Sounds like your experience is with Tesla. My experience (etron) is that stated range more or less equals Highway range (often I get more). That’s been true for most other modern evs and I expect the same from Rivian. It’s the only range that matters.

Of course that is a baseline of 75+ degree temps. I don’t understand how people up north deal with winter range loss.
The EPA range rating is combined city and highway. BEVs have worse range driven at a steady 75 mph than the rated EPA range. The only exception would be for a vehicle the automaker has significantly under reported the EPA test cycle range. Maybe your Etron is an example of that, like the Tycan. But normally, that is not the case, and I will be shocked if the stated range from Rivian is equivalent to highway range.

In fact, I think that is impossible based on the current technology in use. The 400 mile R1T will likely have 162 KWh of usable battery capacity (90% of 180) and on the highway it will be hard for the big brick to achieve 2 mi/kWh. So from 100% charge to 0% charge (which almost nobody will do) your maximum highway range will be 325 miles. Which is actually great, so I doubt it will be that great. In the winter or when it is raining, you might get 1.5 mi/kWh or less, which is 243 miles of range.

In reality if Rivian is able to do 2 mi/kWh on the highway with the largest pack, it will have the one of the longest highway range BEVs in the market, not including Lucid. Do we count Lucid yet? ;-)
 

Wanderer

Active Member
Joined
May 28, 2021
Messages
39
Reaction score
66
Location
Texas
Vehicles
Etron
The EPA range rating is combined city and highway. BEVs have worse range driven at a steady 75 mph than the rated EPA range. The only exception would be for a vehicle the automaker has significantly under reported the EPA test cycle range. Maybe your Etron is an example of that, like the Tycan. But normally, that is not the case, and I will be shocked if the stated range from Rivian is equivalent to highway range.

In fact, I think that is impossible based on the current technology in use. The 400 mile R1T will likely have 162 KWh of usable battery capacity (90% of 180) and on the highway it will be hard for the big brick to achieve 2 mi/kWh. So from 100% charge to 0% charge (which almost nobody will do) your maximum highway range will be 325 miles. Which is actually great, so I doubt it will be that great. In the winter or when it is raining, you might get 1.5 mi/kWh or less, which is 243 miles of range.

In reality if Rivian is able to do 2 mi/kWh on the highway with the largest pack, it will have the one of the longest highway range BEVs in the market, not including Lucid. Do we count Lucid yet? ;-)
I get 2.4-2.6mi/kWh at Highway speeds, which is an extrapolated range over 200 miles and equal to epa range. And that is for the least efficient EV on the market, as it was retrofitted from an existing platform.

I’m expecting the R1S to achieve similar efficiency, basically the offset of better engineering but a larger form factor. At 2.4mi/kWh you only need 125 kwh useable battery to hit 300.
 

ajdelange

Well-Known Member
First Name
A. J.
Joined
Aug 1, 2019
Messages
1,456
Reaction score
939
Location
Virginia/Quebec
First Name
A. J.
Vehicles
Tesla X Extended Range Plus 2019, Lexus, Landcruiser, SR5
Occupation
EE Retired
Sounds like your experience is with Tesla. My experience (etron) is that stated range more or less equals Highway range (often I get more). That’s been true for most other modern evs and I expect the same from Rivian. It’s the only range that matters.
My experience with Tesla is that I get a bit more than the EPA rated range as shown on the graph below. Readers need to understand what the rated range number means. It is an estimate of what the car will do if driven under conditions similar to those in the EPA protocol and in a way similar to that simulated in the protocol. I have found that if you do that you will realize or best the rated number. If you do not drive it in such fashion you should expect to get augmented or reduced performance and understand why. If most of your driving is on freeway at 75 - 80 mph in cold weather then expect performance appreciably less than the EPA rating and don't blame the manufacturer. He did a set of tests following EPA direction and EPA approved his results. The EPA tests blend numbers from low speed and high speed runs but the high speed run does not approach 75 to 80 by any means. At higher speed consumption goes up as its square.
IMG_3332EAD57484-1.jpeg


The graph is from data collected by Stats from all models of Tesla that use this app. The guy won't tell me how many cars that is but the gaussian appearance of the curve tells us its enough that central limit theorem applies (I'd guess its a few thousand). It's clear from the graph that some appreciable number of drivers realize or exceed the rated performance. It's also clear that the average driver gets about 90%. This varies with season (weather) and what you get in a given season depends on where, how and when you drive. Some of those things are under your control more than others.

Now the point of this is not to respond to the Tesla bashing so much as it is to point out that there is going to be a similar picture for the Rivians whatever size battery you wind up with. Rivian is going to have to do the same set of test runs and calculations and will have to satisfy EPA that they have met their requirements. Some of you will get better range than what the EPA ratings promise and some worse. Most likely the guys getting less than the EPA number will grumble but so it goes.
 

mkhuffman

Active Member
First Name
M
Joined
Nov 9, 2020
Messages
41
Reaction score
41
Location
Virginia
First Name
M
Vehicles
Mercedes E320, Cadillac XT5, VW Jetta
This is why steady state, 75 mph highway range will always be worse than slower, around town range on a BEV. A BEV can be designed like a bullet to reduce aerodynamic drag, and drive on metal wheels to reduce rolling resistance, and then maybe it will have similar highway range. But nobody will buy it because it will look like a bullet and drive like a freight car.

Thankfully the Rivian is not designed like a bullet. But there are consequences...


1622296397396.png


Original study if you are interested. Great information about wheel ventilation resistance.

https://publications.lib.chalmers.se/records/fulltext/176302/176302.pdf
 

mkhuffman

Active Member
First Name
M
Joined
Nov 9, 2020
Messages
41
Reaction score
41
Location
Virginia
First Name
M
Vehicles
Mercedes E320, Cadillac XT5, VW Jetta
I get 2.4-2.6mi/kWh at Highway speeds, which is an extrapolated range over 200 miles and equal to epa range. And that is for the least efficient EV on the market, as it was retrofitted from an existing platform.

I’m expecting the R1S to achieve similar efficiency, basically the offset of better engineering but a larger form factor. At 2.4mi/kWh you only need 125 kwh useable battery to hit 300.
I think it will be hard for the Rivians to be as efficient as your Etron given their size and weight. But maybe they will be. I hope so. Maybe Rivian could actually release real range estimates instead of their general ratings. They say the results are being validated, but I don't think they need to be validated before Rivian releases them. Rivian knows the range, so why are they not sharing?
 

Advertisement





 


Advertisement
Top