kanundrum
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 2, 2020
- Threads
- 216
- Messages
- 3,971
- Reaction score
- 12,103
- Location
- Washington, DC
- Vehicles
- Giulia QV, R1S (S00N)
- Occupation
- IT
- Thread starter
- #1
Sponsored
Announcing our new "CLUBS" section where you can join or create a Rivian club or group! You can use this new feature to conveniently plan and discuss local events, gatherings or other club/group related topics.
So we encourage you to join (or start) special-interest and regional-based Rivian clubs at: https://www.rivianforums.com/forum/group-categories/clubs-groups.1/
I actually like mi/kwh because it's akin to mpg and I can easily tell if I'm doing better/worse than the EPA rated mi/kwh (about 2.4 for this vehicle). Suppose you could do the same with the equivalent wh/mi, but what makes them different?Looks great except for 3 things:
A)Consumption shown as mi/kWH. Hope that can be changed to Wh/mi in some submenu
B)No utilization vs miles or SoC vs miles graphs. Hope those are coming.
C)Can only charge to 3 preset levels (hope the presets can be changed in a submenu
Confirms that we can AC charge at less than 48A if we want to. Good news.
Obviously the information in 2.4 mi/kWh and 416 Wh/mi (= 0.416 kWh/mi) is exactly the same and one is easily obtained as the reciprocal of another. One's preference is largely, at first, going to be based on what he is used to. Hence your current preference for mi/kWh. I, OTOH, have been driving BEV for a couple of years as I result of which I have come to prefer Wh/mi.I actually like mi/kwh because it's akin to mpg and I can easily tell if I'm doing better/worse than the EPA rated mi/kwh (about 2.4 for this vehicle). Suppose you could do the same with the equivalent wh/mi, but what makes them different?
What Tesla does, in response to your input of a route, is plot out a graph of what will be in the battery (its SoC) at each point along the route based on the rated consumption of the car, the terrain, and speed limits along the route. As you start to drive the route this graph is updated to reflect, at each point reached, the actual SoC there. Going forward it apparently uses a weighted average over the recent history. I don't know the details. This single display is the most valuable display to the driver of any provided by the car. The single most important piece of information on it is, of course, the estimated SoC at the completion of the journey. I will be extremely disappointed if Rivian does not supply something like this graph as it lets me see past and future at every point along the way but obviously I could live with the single end point number if I had to and were it as accurate as Tesla's.For my benefit, what information would these provide? One thing to note, the range meter is dynamic, meaning it is extrapolating based on recent driving conditions, drive mode, possibly even weather. It also remembers this for each unique driver profile. So, it's not like a Tesla which just extrapolates based on remaining SoC and the EPA rated consumption, right?
Fixed it for you.One's preference is largely, at first, going to be based on what he is used to. Hence your current preference for mi/kWh. I, OTOH, have been drivingBEVTesla for a couple of years as I result of which I have come to prefer Wh/mi.
The ID.4 will let us pick mi/kWh, km/kWh, or kWh/100km. Note the metric units are available in both forms but the US units are only available in the mpg analog. Most other countries use the L/100km format (and metric units).Fixed it for you.
Most (all?) other EV manufacturers use mi/kWh.
Perhaps but don't we want Rivian to be a leader, not a follower?Most (all?) other EV manufacturers use mi/kWh.
As with which pedal to use for regen, the way consumption is presented is a personal preference.Perhaps but don't we want Rivian to be a leader, not a follower?
Ultimately, forcing people to use harmonic arithmetic is asking a lot of them. But then again the manufacturers are going to have to dumb these things down quite a bit if they want broad acceptance.
The only person who is dumb is me for responding to this.No reason to call people that understand the first more easily than the second "dumb".