OMG The freaking OG 180kWh Max Pack was actually made!!!!

[Jonger1150]

Porsche is 800V and more expensive.

I have a Gen1 R1T and I won't replace it with a new Gen if it's not 800V.

Not enough improvement over my 2024 Dual motor large 135kWh.

Sponsored

 

[Dave Cundiff]

I don't know how much extra we'd have paid, but we would have liked to have a choice of 180 kWh.

I'd have wanted a 180-kWh Max Pack for convenience on longer trips.

For daily use, the larger battery could be operated closer to the 50% midpoint State of Charge.

The MaxPack we got (~143 kWh usable) meets our needs, but we would have enjoyed more.

Best wishes!

 

[Electrified Outdoors]

I want a larger pack from Rivian...but...not with a 400v system. The current max pack is pushing the limits of 400v charging. Larger packs will need 800v charging capability either through an 800v arch or through a split pack like what GM uses in the Silverado/Sierra/Escalade IQ. Its the only way to pump that much energy back into the battery in a reasonable amount of time on a road trip.

 

[Phatman113]

Exactly. Sorry, but Rivian doesn’t deserve a 180kWH pack if it can only charge at 220kW. You can only benefit from this size if you do 200 - 250 mile roadtrips with a destination charger at the end.

Or you go off-grid camping and fast charging isn't necessary, or you use it for your jobsite where it sits and runs an office for a few days, or...

Just because you don't see a use for it in your current lifestyle doesn't mean there isn't a valid use...

I don't disagree that thermal management should be better, and faster charging would be nice, but even without those the larger max pack could be useful for several things even with the current setup.

 

[Supratachophobia]

Like a fair amount of other long time 2018-2022 preorder holders, The OG Max pack was around 180kWh usable, as compared to 141kWh like the current version on sale today.

The video is from OutOfSpec as they tour Normal Illinois EV facilities, etc while picking up an OOS Gen2 Max pack on lease. Super cool that Rivian, very early on, was trying to help prop up the community and engage with students to foster an interest in automotive, and EV's specifically. Shout out to Ford as well.

The comment from the tech is incorrect in the OutofSpec video below, it's actually an extra 3 modules. From 9 in the original large pack, to 12 in the max pack. 2 on the back of the pack and one additional module under the rear seats. Which actually aligns with the original under seat storage loss per the spec sheets.

I wonder if the main reason for the max pack being altered to a similar 9 module higher density form factor, was due to some pack incompatibility with the R1S and it's shorter skateboard. I know there was some talk that the payload was too hampered by the additional modules which could have been a further reason for its non production.

I still wish they managed to make it to production, however, given some of the thermal limitations etc, they probably made the right choice.

I was told confidentially from an internal source that one of the main driving forces behind moving away from a 180 KW battery was the inability to have a usable third row seat in the r1s with the physically larger battery they had come up with. The r1t, with its longer wheelbase, could have supported the additional modules in a different form factor. But with r&d and manufacturing costs needing to be considered for the r1s launch, having multiple versions of the max pack, and possibly multiple minor chassis configurations above and beyond the base platform configurations was just too much to juggle.

Btw, this is the same source that explained the chemistry change for max pack was happening instead of a physically larger pack months before it was announced. So I consider all this on good authority.

 

[MountainBikeDude]

I was told confidentially from an internal source that one of the main driving forces behind moving away from a 180 KW battery was the inability to have a usable third row seat in the r1s with the physically larger battery they had come up with. The r1t, with its longer wheelbase, could have supported the additional modules in a different form factor. But with r&d and manufacturing costs needing to be considered for the r1s launch, having multiple versions of the max pack, and possibly multiple minor chassis configurations above and beyond the base platform configurations was just too much to juggle.

Btw, this is the same source that explained the chemistry change for max pack was happening instead of a physically larger pack months before it was announced. So I consider all this on good authority.

It makes perfect sense, as it was speculated the R1S was the main driving factor behind it's ultimate demise. As you said, more room in the frame of the T to allow for the additional modules.

 

[HaveBlue]

The electronics wouldn’t have problems pushing power faster with more packs (assuming you wire them properly for it), but you don’t automatically get more cooling which is also a big charge rate limiter.

So maybe peak charge rate does up proportionally, but real world charge rates will not keep up (unless you do something very different with the coolant loops).

It would be a cool option for people that tow a lot though.

Indeed. Even if they wired their packs for 900V, the limit is in the cell (cooling) and not the wiring to it.

 

[HaveBlue]

I was told confidentially from an internal source that one of the main driving forces behind moving away from a 180 KW battery was the inability to have a usable third row seat in the r1s with the physically larger battery they had come up with. The r1t, with its longer wheelbase, could have supported the additional modules in a different form factor. But with r&d and manufacturing costs needing to be considered for the r1s launch, having multiple versions of the max pack, and possibly multiple minor chassis configurations above and beyond the base platform configurations was just too much to juggle.

Btw, this is the same source that explained the chemistry change for max pack was happening instead of a physically larger pack months before it was announced. So I consider all this on good authority.

Yea they promised 400 miles of range and would have had a lot of people complaining if it wasn't possible in the R1S. So they did what they could and pulled out all the tricks with FWD and bigger capacity cells. I'll still take this over the sneaky games Tesla played on range promises.

 

[A_E]

I was told confidentially from an internal source that one of the main driving forces behind moving away from a 180 KW battery was the inability to have a usable third row seat in the r1s with the physically larger battery they had come up with. The r1t, with its longer wheelbase, could have supported the additional modules in a different form factor. But with r&d and manufacturing costs needing to be considered for the r1s launch, having multiple versions of the max pack, and possibly multiple minor chassis configurations above and beyond the base platform configurations was just too much to juggle.

Btw, this is the same source that explained the chemistry change for max pack was happening instead of a physically larger pack months before it was announced. So I consider all this on good authority.

I personally would have preferred the 180 kwh pack over the small 3rd row but I don't have a family that needs the 3rd row. You would still have the same storage space (likely) when folding down the 3rd row as you would with the larger battery so it would have been ideal for me. Assuming similar efficiency with the new motors you would be looking at almost 500 miles of range (or more) with 180 kwh usable.

Sponsored