Let's talk about the (over?) conservatism of Rivian Nav

[BigSkies]

I'm planning out a multi-day camping trip this summer. I've mapped it out in both ABRP and Rivian Nav. I've done a enough trips that I have more confidence in the ABRP trip times. My trips in Rivian Nav do seem 10%-20% more conservative than my driving experience.

My quick-and-dirty spreadsheet shows that ABRP's time estimates are 13% faster for driving and 19% faster for charging. Rivian thinks I need a 28 minute stop in Monticello that ABRP thinks I can completely avoid.

I do appreciate a slightly conservative number in my nav, as it's better than the other way around. But I'm finding the conservatism to be more limiting than helpful on longer trips. I end up planning for more charging stops than needed.

Does anyone else think better charging time predictions should be on the Rivian roadmap?

*Rivian Nav numbers are calculated in Conserve mode, as the planning stops more closely resembled the ABRP stops.

Sponsored

 

[HaveBlue]

You need someone to follow you on your trip? I usually don't make it east of Moab.
Did you adjust the arrival percentage in the rivian nav settings down low? That helps make bigger stretches.

 

[Riviot]

My trips in Rivian Nav do seem 10%-20% more conservative than my driving experience.

Facts. I drove Seattle-ish to Portland and back today, it consistently initially predicted arriving with about 15 miles less for each leg. I think it has a built-in buffer around 15 miles or +/- 10%. The only time I come under is terrible headwinds.

 

[WhisperPickle]

What do you have your preferred arrival state of charge set for charging stops? I think the default in the Rivian is set fairly high which is going to waste a lot more time at charging stations. Lower it should fall in line.
The other issue is Rivian often has some charger speeds underrated

 

[Glembi2]

The Rivian nav seems to prefer longer and fewer charging stops. ABRP puts more emphasis on the faster charging curve between 10-50% but with more stops.

Just completed a 1200 mile trip using the native nav. I think I could have saved at least an hour using ABRP adding 2 more stops.

(Mainly skipping an overrated EA charger)

 

[RandomMcRandomFace]

I drive up to VT frequently (170 miles); the Nav is 20-25 (or more) miles off regularly. In other words, if I am heading home, it will tell me I will not make it. I, like a true American, ignore this and then get home with 15-20 miles. My main joy in driving is now watching the nav go from negative/red to positive miles. It is like a small victory. I kind of like the conservatism, but I also know I can push the needle. And yes, the baseline arrival charge % is way too high especially if the destination has a charger so I routinely just go to zero and figure it out myself.

 

[BigSkies]

What do you have your preferred arrival state of charge set for charging stops? I think the default in the Rivian is set fairly high which is going to waste a lot more time at charging stations. Lower it should fall in line.
The other issue is Rivian often has some charger speeds underrated

Good call to check. I have them set consistently between the apps.

Some differences I would understand. For example, chargers that split power between two pedestals could have some different assumptions.

But I don’t get the major difference in RAN performance assumptions. Rivian had me charging to 80% in Salida and ABRP has me charging to 83%. This is the first leg of the trip, so starting assumptions are all the same. ABRP thinks it will take 29 minutes and Rivian thinks it will take 49. That’s a pretty massive gap.

 

[Riviot]

ABRP thinks it will take 29 minutes and Rivian thinks it will take 49. That’s a pretty massive gap.

Maybe the charging overhead time is set at 20 minutes by default? "Give them time to learn..."

 

[WhisperPickle]

Good call to check. I have them set consistently between the apps.

Some differences I would understand. For example, chargers that split power between two pedestals could have some different assumptions.

But I don’t get the major difference in RAN performance assumptions. Rivian had me charging to 80% in Salida and ABRP has me charging to 83%. This is the first leg of the trip, so starting assumptions are all the same. ABRP thinks it will take 29 minutes and Rivian thinks it will take 49. That’s a pretty massive gap.

That was my second point - RAN has a lot of chargers that are 350 kw in reality listed as 150 in their system - whereas they are usually correct in ABRP. I think that’s the other big driver of the differences between the two.

 

[defcon888]

When I leave on Mondays to go to work (140 miles away....I stay locally overnight), I start with 290 miles (90%) and when I start my trip is says I will arrive with 93 miles left (I drive ~72mph), When I get to work, it is around 103 to 111.

If I was doing a long trip, I would charge when I can (if I get under 25%), only because I would rather be safe than sorry. We have only done 1 long trip (1,200 miles round trip). I studied PLUG-SHARE like a teenager cramming for an exam for about 2 months prior. When it was time to start our trip, I was confident in the charging stations I was planning on stopping at.

My advice......can't go wrong leaning on the conservative side of things!

 

[Ngkgb]

What consumption do you guys use for ABRP? I have 21” tires. The default is 2.5 I believe. Planning a trip to sequoia and planning to use conserve mode.

 

[SwampNut]

Tesla nav does the same. Think of it this way...would you want to risk your customers having a dead car because they drove stupidly, or whatever? I have always used ABRP to cross check my Tesla recommendations, and change them.

 

[BigSkies]

Tesla nav does the same. Think of it this way...would you want to risk your customers having a dead car because they drove stupidly, or whatever? I have always used ABRP to cross check my Tesla recommendations, and change them.

I agree with being a little conservative. 10-15 miles over a ~300 mile trip seems reasonable.

But it compounds itself over longer distances. My trip is showing multiple hours added for both driving and charging. It seems excessive by a lot. There’s also an entirely unnecessary charging stop in there too. It’s good to know about as a backup, but I’d rather start with a more accurate calculation.

I’ve also had a few trips in the planner where it routes me on longer less sensical routes because of how it estimates charging time.

 

[rjte84]

I did a 250 miles trip and yeah, the Rivian Nav was very conservative. I had 290 miles left and it was telling me that I won’t make it. I charged at the middle (10 min potty break) but without that miles added I would have arrived home with 30-40 miles (driving between 75-80 mph).

Now, I have a question. Is there a way to tell Rivian Nav to add a charge point in a planned stop? I know you can do that in the ABRP app but I couldn’t find that option on the Rivian Nav. There is a rest stop with a 350 kW charger that I would prefer to use as stop rather than the previous/next ones that have 150 kW/66 kW chargers. Rivian Nav add the stop and then suggest to charge somewhere else. I played with the desired charge % but couldn’t make it to add a charge at the rest stop.

Sponsored