Not liking one pedal driving

[RexRemus]

Yes, that was my point. Turning off regen will typically (almost always) reduce range but to say that, “It absolutely will.” isn’t accurate.

Maybe I was being pedantic, but my point is that when people use absolutes they can undermine credibility in the eyes of their audience if the reader can think of one or more exceptions.

If the probability of said exception is so low as to be almost entirely irrelevant to the discussion and both parties know that, but it's being used simply to show that "an exception exists" despite it being probable 0.001% of the time - then yes it's being pedantic JUST to be pedantic and arguing just to argue.

Passenger planes are quite likely cable of running their flight paths 180 degrees inverted. The probability of that is likely very, very, near zero. But it COULD happen... trying to use such a point JUST to "disprove" someone saying "Passenger planes can't fly their routes inverted" really doesn't add any value. It just leans toward "well actually..." when the reality is that the speaker likely understands that the capability EXISTS, but are speaking from a place of probabilities - implying that regardless of the minimal possibility, it will almost certainly NEVER happen for a myriad of practical, real-world, reasons.

I find that this kind of thing is rampant in internet discussions

Sponsored

 

[trez63]

It's funny, I thought this would be an issue for me and I've actually grown to really like the one-pedal driving in the R1T. It took a bit of getting used to but overall very intuitive.

 

[SoCal Rob]

If the probability of said exception is so low as to be almost entirely irrelevant to the discussion and both parties know that, but it's being used simply to show that "an exception exists" despite it being probable 0.001% of the time - then yes it's being pedantic JUST to be pedantic and arguing just to argue.

Passenger planes are quite likely cable of running their flight paths 180 degrees inverted. The probability of that is likely very, very, near zero. But it COULD happen... trying to use such a point JUST to "disprove" someone saying "Passenger planes can't fly their routes inverted" really doesn't add any value. It just leans toward "well actually..." when the reality is that the speaker likely understands that the capability EXISTS, but are speaking from a place of probabilities - implying that regardless of the minimal possibility, it will almost certainly NEVER happen for a myriad of practical, real-world, reasons.

I find that this kind of thing is rampant in internet discussions

I tend to be driven by data and facts so when someone goes out of their way to add inaccuracy to a statement via an absolute then I think it’s worth noting that inaccuracy. I become especially sensitive to it when someone is relying on the inaccuracy they introduced to convince me of something. My personality and my opinion are both in play here so I understand if you see things differently.

If I were a huge proponent of OPD I’d probably say something like, “OPD should optimize regen and regen almost always maximizes range. Even if you don’t like it at first, I think it’s worth trying to get used to it for at least a month because you may not get the advertised range without regen.”

Since it’s mostly an issue related to communication and writing, this may help: http://blog.writersdomain.net/almost-always-beware-the-absolute-statement/

 

[ajdelange]

I tend to be driven by data and facts so when someone goes out of their way to add inaccuracy to a statement via an absolute then I think it’s worth noting that inaccuracy.

The statement was that removing regen from the vehicle would absolutely change the mileage. In testing that statement with gedanken experiments we found that it was necessary to compare to drivers who never, ever touch the brakes. And as there aren't any such drivers or at least since none of us will ever meet such a driver I think we can stand by the original assertion with the "absolutely" in there. We all understand that, for example, "absolute alcohol" is not pure alcohol.

I didn't get into it earlier but absolutely does not only mean completely or perfectly. It can also be used to indicate full or enthusiastic agreement and given the context it is plain that this is what was was meant here. Keeping that hidden led us into some interesting terrain but to claim that the statement was inaccurate is ridiculous. Absolutely ridiculous.

 

[SoCal Rob]

I didn't get into it earlier but absolutely does not only mean completely or perfectly.

I never wrote that it only meant that. However, the top definition per Webster’s definition of “absolutely”

1: in an absolute manner: such as​

a: completely or totally​

I freely admit that seeing exaggerations as troublesome in a factual discussion could very well be a “me” thing and others may feel differently.

I don‘t know how many people think that absolutely doesn’t most commonly mean completely. Since it is literally the top Webster’s dictionary definition, I’d hope that would show it was entirely reasonable for me to interpret what you wrote as I did. In light of this information I hope you’d reconsider your opinion that I kept something hidden simply because I got that meaning (absolutely = completely) from what you wrote.

Feel free to have the last word; I suspect that we’re not going to agree and this is clearly off-topic. My apologies to everyone else for bringing this up.

 

[ajdelange]

I’d hope that would show it was entirely reasonable for me to interpret what you wrote as I did.

Absolutely!

 

[MichaelD]

Absolutely ridiculous.

I see what you did there!

 

[BigNerd]

That would violate the laws of physics. As soon as net thrust becomes negative momentum and speed start to decrease.

Man... you went all Einstein on me.

Test it yourself, get in an ICE car (especially a big one), accelerate to say maybe 40mph... and let go of the pedal... depending on type of road, you may still accelerate, coast at the same speed... or decelerate.

I can't be the only one who has experienced this violation of physics.

 

[ajdelange]

Test it yourself, get in an ICE car (especially a big one), accelerate to say maybe 40mph... and let go of the pedal... depending on type of road, you may still accelerate, coast at the same speed... or decelerate.

If the grade is negative then yes. If positive or 0 then no.

I can't be the only one who has experienced this violation of physics.

You nor anyone else has experienced it because you can't violate physics. Speeding up requires that net thrust/gravity act in the direction of travel. Absent that and you will slow. Because of drag, rolling resistance and engine braking the thrust is negative when one's foot is off the pedal. On the level gravitation force in the direction of motion is 0 and if on an upgrade it is negative.

 

[BigNerd]

Missing my point but I don’t feel like going back to school.

 

[Frankiefiggs]

Definitely takes getting used to the R1T regen braking. It was way stronger than the EV I was used to. When I did the test drive I got used to it by the end. Didn't have to touch the brake one time in the 30 minute drive. It's one of my favorite features. I could see it being jarring if you don't have much EV driving experience though. Any new car takes some time to feel normal.

 

[Craigins]

If the grade is negative then yes. If positive or 0 then no.

You nor anyone else has experienced it because you can't violate physics. Speeding up requires that net thrust/gravity act in the direction of travel. Absent that and you will slow. Because of drag, rolling resistance and engine braking the thrust is negative when one's foot is off the pedal. On the level gravitation force in the direction of motion is 0 and if on an upgrade it is negative.

You have one faulty assumption in your argument.

Removing your foot from an ice vehicle does not bring the forward force to zero.

And what speed that force can maintain is dependent on the vehicle. Growing up my mom had a mercury sable that would idle at 25mph lol. Made learning to drive interesting.

 

[ajdelange]

I actually assumed that the creep speeds would be commensurate with the creep speeds of any of the ICE vehicles I have ever driven in my lifetime i.e. a few mph. Such a vehicle would not accelerate from 40 mph upon removing ones foot from the throttle unless on a hill. But he says to discuss things like that miss his point and refuses to clarify.

Twenty-five mph creep? Surely that was not the spec!

 

[pc500]

I am not liking OPD in my new Rivian. I wish I could turn it off. I know that it saves energy but for me it is dangerous and annoying.
I have about 1200 miles and 2 weeks in my Rivian. The OPD will really throw you forward in your seat if you let all the way up while doing 25 mph or so. I breaks so hard that I worry about the car behind me hitting me. If I let up while looking to the left to clear for a merge it makes my head bob and is very disorienting.
It makes my passengers have a much less smooth ride. I am the smoothest driver in my family and seldom make anyone motion sick on the curvy roads to our lake cabin. But not with OPD, I just about made myself sick last weekend.
When I get back in a normal vehicle I get surprised the first stop I come to before I switch my mind back to normal driving. There are so many new things to get used in a new vehicle this just makes it that much harder.

I figured I would get used to it but I don't seem to be making any progress.

I am thinking of calling my guide and putting in a feature request but though I would get some feedback here first.

What I don't like is that it isn't optional. At least the leaf would regenerate with brakes, up to the one pedal Regen limit. Im guessing rivian did it for epa ratings.

 

[ajdelange]

What I don't like is that it isn't optional. At least the leaf would regenerate with brakes, up to the one pedal Regen limit. Im guessing rivian did it for epa ratings.

Yes they did it for EPA ratings AND because drivers love it.

Sponsored