Sponsored

InsideEVs: Rivian R1T First Drive Review

ajdelange

Well-Known Member
First Name
A. J.
Joined
Aug 1, 2019
Threads
9
Messages
2,883
Reaction score
2,317
Location
Virginia/Quebec
Vehicles
Tesla XLR+2019, Lexus, Landcruiser, R1T
Occupation
EE Retired
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.
 

cmugler

Well-Known Member
First Name
charles
Joined
Sep 22, 2021
Threads
17
Messages
100
Reaction score
60
Location
santa barbara
Vehicles
Kona EV, Sprinter Bambi conversion
Occupation
retrired
The red canyon paint color in the review video looks much better than on the Rivian website, deeper richer

Rivian R1T R1S InsideEVs: Rivian R1T First Drive Review canyon red
 

billyt293

New Member
First Name
Bill
Joined
Mar 13, 2021
Threads
0
Messages
4
Reaction score
3
Location
Washington DC
Vehicles
Mercedes E350 - Jeep Wrangler - VW Atlas
Occupation
Sales
Wow looks great! Really like that red. That was some pretty aggressive off roading and it handled it easily.
 

Dbeglor

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2021
Threads
1
Messages
511
Reaction score
828
Location
TX
Vehicles
Yes
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.
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?

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?
 

Sponsored

IPTV65

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 19, 2020
Threads
10
Messages
254
Reaction score
374
Location
Mount Pleasant SC
Vehicles
Jeep JLU Sahara,Jeep JKU, Infiniti G37X, R1S
Occupation
Engineering Exec
Clubs
 
Decent high level review but he narrator is the driest of the bunch. Show a little enthusiasm man. Your diving my next car and I want you to be emotionally charged about that. ....like I would be if it were me driving!
 

ajdelange

Well-Known Member
First Name
A. J.
Joined
Aug 1, 2019
Threads
9
Messages
2,883
Reaction score
2,317
Location
Virginia/Quebec
Vehicles
Tesla XLR+2019, Lexus, Landcruiser, R1T
Occupation
EE Retired
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?
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.

While what you are familiar with will guide your initial preference how you use the information may change that. In real time you want to monitor how you are doing relative to the nominal (rated) performance of the car. WARNNG: The following is my personal perspective which is colored by my experiences driving BEV but ever more, probably, by a long career as an engineer. Engineers look at mechanical/electrical/numerical things differently than other people. While many (and not exclusively tech types) come to see the benefits of reckoning in terms of the fuel consumed in going a mile as opposed to the miles you can go on a unit of fuel, many don't.

Drivers want to know why their vehicle goes 2.4 miles on a kWh or really what they want to know is if it is using more or less energy than that and why. They know that this kWh is divided up among 6 loads viz. 1))drive train loss, 2)slip loss, 3)rolling resistance, 4)inertial load, 5)gravity load, and 6)drag. The total load, 1 kwh/mi, is the sum of the individual loads Lt = L1 + L2 + L3 + L4 + L5 + L6 each expressed in Wh/mi. One can express each of these loads in terms of their reciprocals (mi/kWh) but then one would have to use the harmonic sum to calculate the total or the effect of a change. As an example a Rivian driver might assume or lean from driving the truck that the 416 Wh/mi load is distributed a 125 Wh/mi each for slip, rolling resistance and drag with about 50 Wh/mi for drive train loss on level ground at EPA rating speeds. He knows immediately that increasing speed by 10% will increase drag by 20% to 150 Wh/mi, an increase of 25 Wh/mi or about 6%. And a change on a consumption meter from 416 to 441 is easier to interpret, IMO, than from 2.400 to 2.262.



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?
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.
 
Last edited:

DucRider

Well-Known Member
First Name
Gary
Joined
Oct 21, 2019
Threads
17
Messages
1,652
Reaction score
3,143
Location
ORegon
Vehicles
Polestar 2, Ioniq, R1S
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 Tesla for a couple of years as I result of which I have come to prefer Wh/mi.
Fixed it for you.
Most (all?) other EV manufacturers use mi/kWh.
 

timesinks

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2020
Threads
6
Messages
570
Reaction score
1,851
Location
Seattle
Vehicles
R1T, ID.4, Sprinter
Fixed it for you.
Most (all?) other EV manufacturers use mi/kWh.
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).

Since mi/kWh and Wh/mi are just reciprocals of each other, I think it's silly to have both forms for km but not for miles. I would definitely display Wh/mi if it were available. Supporting both forms for km but only the mi/kWh form for our silly units was a really weird decision on VW's part.

All that to say I think most manufacturers here use mi/kWh only because our country's desire to be stubbornly difficult has led us to buck the metric system and express our fuel consumption as the reciprocal of almost everyone else as well. But since it is just a simple calculation to turn one into the other (and since the ID.4 is already doing that for km!), letting the user pick their preferred units seems like the best possible approach.
 

ajdelange

Well-Known Member
First Name
A. J.
Joined
Aug 1, 2019
Threads
9
Messages
2,883
Reaction score
2,317
Location
Virginia/Quebec
Vehicles
Tesla XLR+2019, Lexus, Landcruiser, R1T
Occupation
EE Retired
Most (all?) other EV manufacturers use mi/kWh.
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.
 
Last edited:

Sponsored

DucRider

Well-Known Member
First Name
Gary
Joined
Oct 21, 2019
Threads
17
Messages
1,652
Reaction score
3,143
Location
ORegon
Vehicles
Polestar 2, Ioniq, R1S
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.
As with which pedal to use for regen, the way consumption is presented is a personal preference.
Fortunately, the mi/kWh vs Wh/mi is easy to implement as a user setting if they find that their customers want to use the Tesla methodology.

For most, looking at the "tank" containing kWh and multiplying by mi/kWh is a straightforward way to estimate range.

2.3 mi/kWh x 100 kWh = 230 miles
or
(100 kWh * 1000)/435 Wh/mi = 230 miles

No reason to call people that understand the first more easily than the second "dumb".
 

Rhidan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2020
Threads
9
Messages
585
Reaction score
1,505
Location
Denver
Vehicles
R1T



Love that Tom Moloughney put a deposit down on the R1T after he got home from the Breckinridge press event, and he said that several other journalists at the press event also put deposits down after the event.

And they are talking with Rivian to get a R1T for DC fast charging tests.
Sponsored

 
 




Top