R2 Range Limitations and Rivian's Response

[Dark-Fx]

So, who’s gonna be the first to take the R2 off-roading and/or overlanding in Death Valley? When battery size is important, not just for highway range but for adventuring.

If I remember, the R1 battery size is barely big enough for this excursion.

I hope it's you, let us know before you go.

Sponsored

 

[DuoRivians]

I hope it's you, let us know before you go.

Not me, I’m too afraid of being stranded out there haha

 

[s4wrxttcs]

... still waiting for someone to share how their regular EV road trip was affected by the results these range tests.

Ultimately this comes down to use case.

My use case is to drive 220 miles or so from point A to point B where I don't want to either stop or pay for charging. This drive is 2 or 4 times a month.

I currently have an 2022 R1T with the large pack and it has no issues going this journey without charging. This is one of the things I love about this vehicle.

It impacts my specific drive because I'm basically at the range that the R1T barely supports with the 90% to 10% range, but where the R2 doesn't quite match up.

It's up in the air as to whether it changes my buying decision. But, I did just get a 3 year extended warranty on my R1T.

 

[s4wrxttcs]

So, who’s gonna be the first to take the R2 off-roading and/or overlanding in Death Valley? When battery size is important, not just for highway range but for adventuring.

If I remember, the R1 battery size is barely big enough for this excursion.

I think the R2 might be better for this as you'd likely bring a generator so total efficiency wins.

 

[Tony S]

I don’t see anything wrong in here that requires Rivian to do anything different. EPA estimates are NOT highway range estimates @70 mph. I have been driving EV for the last four years and never thought 250 mile range was an issue.

 

[rbdavis808]

OoS Kyle's a smart guy who does very useful testing, regardless of what one might think of his video style. He's not a one-off genius, however, and if anybody thinks that at least six dozen R2 engineers and everyone in between (and including) them and RJ did not already know that R2 range would suffer badly in comparison with Model Y, I'm sure there's a nearby bridge available right now at a very special price. Rivian has been laser-focused on R2 v. MY comparison from the get-go and they absolutely must have known.

One might also assume they would have expected the inevitable fan-sh1t collision that would occur as soon as independent real-world testing was made public, so I bet that was an interesting discussion deep within the bowels of marketing: pump sales to gullible newbs who buy the Moronroney sticker OR avoid the disdain of the better-informed who'll trash you all over the utube? Guess it was yes-on-#1.

Technically they can wave their hands and hide in the murky depths of the EPA test regime all they like, but I must say I'm disappointed by the marketing subterfuge -- this despite the fact that the range inferiority affects my own personal use case not at all. And it was all so unnecessary, with R2 being superior to MY in so many other regards and the large number of buyers looking for any good reason at all to buy a Notesla.

But everybody still believes that Autonomy+ will be point-to-point (like MY!) by EOY, right?

 

[kanefsky]

I don’t see anything wrong in here that requires Rivian to do anything different. EPA estimates are NOT highway range estimates @70 mph. I have been driving EV for the last four years and never thought 250 mile range was an issue.

You aren't likely to get 250 in real life. 250 was in good weather, flat roads, not driving faster than 70mph, and most importantly going from 100% to 0%. Under real-world road-trip conditions you will likely get far less than that.

No one is complaining that the EPA estimates should match the 70mph test. The problem is that two cars with the same EPA rating shouldn't vary by around 25% in the same test running side-by-side (not just the 70mph test but even in the city driving simulation and at every other speed). You can blame the EPA for allowing different test paths but if Rivian knew that the results would be misleading then I think they deserve a little blame as well.

 

[rbdavis808]

The problem is that two cars with the same EPA rating shouldn't vary by around 25% in the same test running side-by-side (not just the 70mph test but even in the city driving simulation and at every other speed). You can blame the EPA for allowing different test paths but if Rivian knew that the results would be misleading then I think they deserve a little blame as well.

This. R2 was substantially less efficient than MY at every speed from 80 all the way down to city.

 

[Zathras]

The thing is Rivian hasn’t done anything wrong. We can sit here all day and agree the numbers don’t match but neither Rivian nor the EPA broke any rules. The EPA tests allow way too much flexibility in what can be reported. The whole system is broken and Rivian isn’t the first to abuse it.

We were talking about inaccurate EPA ratings in the 1970s. This is nothing new.

 

[Zathras]

For me and my family, 200 highway miles is about the limit of bladder comfort.

This right here is the key to peace of mind (and bladder).

 

[Count Orlok]

The Count is flummoxed that the discussion of the R2's range has anything to do with an econobox washing machine. Who would cross shop?

 

[Bullwinkle]

There are numerous tests now that show the R2 has somewhere between less and a lot less range than Rivian's marketing department and EPA testing suggested. I wonder if something changed between the EPA test mules and production? I wonder if this has actually caught Rivian management by surprise--were they anticipating more range off the production line? I further wonder what Rivian's response will be if the tested 250-mile range provides real sales headwinds and RIVN is also affected.

In the short term, is there a software update or a manufacturing tweak that can bring the range closer to 300 miles? Longer term, is there space for extra cells, or could more energy-dense cells be used? If so, could this be done before the Lidar/CPU update? If battery/range improvements add cost, could the Lidar/CPU update provide cover for a small price increase? If better cells were used in the near future, perhaps the old cells could be used up in the $45k R2?

Sorry. Quite a few questions. Not many answers.

Bad form to quote yourself...but in my defense...if I wanted to rehash all the stuff that Kyle and Jose did with Jose's new R2...I would have just posted to this thread: https://www.rivianforums.com/forum/...est-by-out-of-spec.61979/page-23#post-1063623
I quoted myself so we can reference the thread starter.

More interesting than blaming or defending Rivian or the EPA, and more interesting than whether there is a valid use case for longer range EVs, and more interesting than whether teardrops or boxes are better, and more interesting than whether there are important things R2 does better than MY is this fact:

Rivian designed R2 to radically grow the company and they intelligently targeted the #1 selling EV in the US and the world. Until a week ago, most of us thought the execution was nearly flawless. The surprising problem is that Jose's R2 went only 80% as far as the MY even though most folks had nearly identical mileage expectations for the two vehicles. Obviously, most Rivian fans have some concern, and certainly, Wall Street will have some strategy questions at the next shareholders' meeting.

I assume nobody thinks this will be helpful to R2 sales or RIVN.

So let's take a poll, "What do you think the reduction in orders will be because of this?"

0-5%
5-15%
15-30%
Over 30%

What I was really hoping to hear with this thread is, What will Rivian do to address this?

I think it is a damn smart and good company. They won't sit still.

 

[Bullwinkle]

Bad form to quote yourself...but in my defense...if I wanted to rehash all the stuff that Kyle and Jose did with Jose's new R2...I would have just posted to this thread: https://www.rivianforums.com/forum/...est-by-out-of-spec.61979/page-23#post-1063623
I quoted myself so we can reference the thread starter.

More interesting than blaming or defending Rivian or the EPA, and more interesting than whether there is a valid use case for longer range EVs, and more interesting than whether teardrops or boxes are better, and more interesting than whether there are important things R2 does better than MY is this fact:

Rivian designed R2 to radically grow the company and they intelligently targeted the #1 selling EV in the US and the world. Until a week ago, most of us thought the execution was nearly flawless. The surprising problem is that Jose's R2 went only 80% as far as the MY even though most folks had nearly identical mileage expectations for the two vehicles. Obviously, most Rivian fans have some concern, and certainly, Wall Street will have some strategy questions at the next shareholders' meeting.

I assume nobody thinks this will be helpful to R2 sales or RIVN.

So let's take a poll, "What do you think the reduction in orders will be because of this?"

0-5%
5-15%
15-30%
Over 30%

What I was really hoping to hear with this thread is, What will Rivian do to address this?

I think it is a damn smart and good company. They won't sit still.

Has anybody ever replied to themselves twice consecutively…ick!
My guess is 15-30%

 

[Sharmon]

It's looking like the numbers are the numbers regarding highway range. I'm not sure how much Rivian will be able to squeeze with the current hardware and battery size (though I think aspects of the R1S/R1T charging did improve with some later updates).

I don't think the range numbers will result in a huge hit to orders (so 0 to 5% would be my vote). Rivian already knows (and has stated often) the average amount of DC charging stops per car they have sold (though I don't remember the number they quote). Most drivers are charging at home. So if they lose out, I think it will be to those mighty few that rack up tons of highway miles.

If you read this Jose, could you chime in on how the R2's performance in charging speed compares to the Model Y? (granted, both are 400V architecture and both slower than 800V EVs)

I thought Kyle mentioned some numbers in the R2 charging speed video of how much more kWh were gained compared to the MY over the same amount of time (and I thought it was maybe overall faster (but maybe I'm mistaking that for just more kWh / minute (since the R2 has a bigger battery to charge)).

Because if R2 gets worse range but charges faster, how would that compare to the potential longer range and slower charging of the Model Y? Has anyone seen (or could generate) those type of numbers, on say a 400 mile trip, Model Y vs. R2 where each would have to stop at least once to charge up enough to make it to the destination?

Range certainly still makes a difference though (if your destination is 300 miles away by highway, you can make it without a charging stop in a Model Y, and not going to be possible in an R2). In a 400 mile trip everyone is stopping at least once though, so then the charging speed makes a difference.

 

[Yamazaki]

So, who’s gonna be the first to take the R2 off-roading and/or overlanding in Death Valley? When battery size is important, not just for highway range but for adventuring.

If I remember, the R1 battery size is barely big enough for this excursion.

That's actually one of the places we go with our vehicle (means we will be going there with the R2 if we ever get the invite to order). I also plan to go deep into the Grand Canyon Parashant area... where the closest chargers are in St George, UT. So I will definitely be testing the potential limits of off-the-beaten-path areas with the R2. We carry extra gas cans with the Forester in these places...

However, I am sure others will have done the same and posted about it by the time we get the chance to do so.

Sponsored