Received wrong battery pack in my R1T - Large Pack (instead of standard)

[Autolycus]

I definitely wouldn't draw conclusions off of the range estimates. We don't know how those are calculated. It could easily be simple math like SOC% * mileage factor. In that case, if the software has the SOC wrong because it also thinks a different pack is in there, the range estimate will be wrong.

I think the charging session test is going to be the best option for evaluating what the pack's "capacity" is. Note the SOC at the start of the charging session, note how much the charger thinks it has sent to the vehicle. The longer the charge session (and higher kW added), the more reliable this will be. Don't forget to factor in losses from charging inefficiencies.

Sponsored

 

[vandy1981]

This has got me intrigued. I might have to DCFC my Std+ R1T to see what that curve looks like.

What is your configuration (wheels, off-road package, etc.) and payload capacity on your door sticker? If it's the same as an identically-configured large pack (see list on this thread) you probably have a software-limited large pack.

We know they aren't using different packaging. At most, they reduced the number of modules. Given the chemistry is still the same it might be more likely they are all just large packs. Removing modules would involve more than just physically taking them out of the pack wouldn't it? Physically removing the modules doesn't seem practical to me especially when they know they are moving to LFP anyway.

The more I think about this the more it seems likely they nerfed large packs with software. Ok, someone with standard pack needs to go to the CAT scale to see if there is any weight difference.

Exactly, it's not worth the engineering $$$ to reconfigure a battery pack with fewer modules if this is a stopgap prior to introduction of an LFP battery.

There's no need to go to a CAT scale, just look at the payload on the door sticker and compare that to an identically configured large pack.

 

[vandy1981]

I'm pretty sure Dwight Schrute would agree with my logic, LOL.

 

[dcfurbflrm]

I definitely wouldn't draw conclusions off of the range estimates. We don't know how those are calculated. It could easily be simple math like SOC% * mileage factor. In that case, if the software has the SOC wrong because it also thinks a different pack is in there, the range estimate will be wrong.

I think the charging session test is going to be the best option for evaluating what the pack's "capacity" is. Note the SOC at the start of the charging session, note how much the charger thinks it has sent to the vehicle. The longer the charge session (and higher kW added), the more reliable this will be. Don't forget to factor in losses from charging inefficiencies.

Yes, I plan to drive it down to below 10% charge and charge it back to 100% to see how much kWH is delivered by my home charger. I’ll keep everyone updated.

 

[s4wrxttcs]

I suspect that at some point Rivian will discover that some SW flag to set the Software limitation of the large pack wasn't set correctly.

So really the question the OP has to ask themselves is if they want to be the ones that inform Rivian of the mistake or do they want to wait till the inevitable day where Rivian discovers the error.

In my case Rivian failed to inform me that the wire transfer failed to go through. This was a good 6 months after I bought the vehicle. I immediately informed them of the issue, and got it fixed. I did because of ethical reasons, and also not wanting to deal with the repercussions of what could happen if I simply pretended I didn't see that.

I'm not sure what I would have done if it simply didn't have the SW flag to lock the large pack to a standard pack. I'd probably assume they'd eventually fix it, but I don't think I'd tell them about it. It's not like I underpaid them. Since the sale was already made they'd only lose out on money in the event that they sell an unlock, and I don't buy it because I already had the unlock gifted by incompetency.

In another example I got a refund for a Dyson Robotic vacuum cleaner, but I never asked for a refund. So I called them up and told them that the refund was in error, but they never followed up on fixing it. I simply used the money to buy another Dyson. The laser one so I can be OCD about my floors.

When its all said and done my position on this kind of issue is less a moral one, and more of an Engineer that wants things to be exact.

But, I'm also lazy so I'll do the bare minimum to correct for something unless I was robbed. If I was robbed I'll spend all night and all day correcting it.

 

[NitroNick]

What is your configuration (wheels, off-road package, etc.) and payload capacity on your door sticker? If it's the same as an identically-configured large pack (see list on this thread) you probably have a software-limited large pack.



Exactly, it's not worth the engineering $$$ to reconfigure a battery pack with fewer modules if this is a stopgap prior to introduction of an LFP battery.

There's no need to go to a CAT scale, just look at the payload on the door sticker and compare that to an identically configured large pack.

It's Dual Motor, Standard+, 20"A/T w/spare, Underbody shield, No Tonneau. It does make sense that they would simply software limit the battery pack at this stage with the LFP releasing in the future. If that's truly the case I wonder if they would ever offer an unlock to the rest of the available capacity.

 

[UnsungZero_OldTimeAdMan]

It's Dual Motor, Standard+, 20"A/T w/spare, Underbody shield, No Tonneau. It does make sense that they would simply software limit the battery pack at this stage with the LFP releasing in the future. If that's truly the case I wonder if they would ever offer an unlock to the rest of the available capacity.

If the battery capacity is there but soft locked, I would think so. It's additional revenue stream and could possibly be subscription based; unlock for as long as you need it. Time will tell.

 

[vandy1981]

It's Dual Motor, Standard+, 20"A/T w/spare, Underbody shield, No Tonneau. It does make sense that they would simply software limit the battery pack at this stage with the LFP releasing in the future

Yeah, your payload is pretty much equivalent to the DM 20" Large pack w/ skid plate so you've gotta have a software locked large pack.

 

[EvAdventure13]

I took my standard pack R1T to an EA 350 kw DCFC after work today. Not the best test as I had 70% SOC on arrival. Here is my charge rate as a function of SOC.

I went from 70% to 96% in 21 minutes, 33 kWh added

SOC	Rate
70	175
71	178
72	146
73	147
74	147
75	147
76	146
77	140
78	126
79	129
80	125
81	119
82	114
83	117
84	103
85	99
86	92
87	87
88	81
89	77
90	80
91	63
92	57
93	51
94	45
95	41
96	33

 

[jjswan33]

I took my standard pack R1T to an EA 350 kw DCFC after work today. Not the best test as I had 70% SOC on arrival. Here is my charge rate as a function of SOC.

I went from 70% to 96% in 21 minutes, 33 kWh added

SOC	Rate
70	175
71	178
72	146
73	147
74	147
75	147
76	146
77	140
78	126
79	129
80	125
81	119
82	114
83	117
84	103
85	99
86	92
87	87
88	81
89	77
90	80
91	63
92	57
93	51
94	45
95	41
96	33

This is actually a perfect test. Honestly probably deserves it's own thread.

Exactly matches what I predicted earlier if the standard pack was a software limited large pack. Very interesting.

 

[EvAdventure13]

This is actually a perfect test. Honestly probably deserves it's own thread.

Exactly matches what I predicted earlier if the standard pack was a software limited large pack. Very interesting.

I feel it should be done with a lower starting SOC. I read in another threat that the SOC at arrival can impact when the rate starts to drop due to thermal management.

 

[jjswan33]

I feel it should be done with a lower starting SOC. I read in another threat that the SOC at arrival can impact when the rate starts to drop due to thermal management.

That is a true statement but the R1T has a very specific charging curve at 70-85% and it doesn't matter much the starting SOC.

 

[EvAdventure13]

That is a true statement but the R1T has a very specific charging curve at 70-85% and it doesn't matter much the starting SOC.

I posted the curve on the general forum to get more input. I can go back this weekend with a lower SOC and run the test again.

 

[JeremyP]

Considering that the large pack doesn't seem to get near that charging power level at 70% it makes sense to me that it could be a large pack software limited at the top end, allowing it to charge faster over its available capacity.
https://www.rivianforums.com/forum/...48-recent-dc-fast-charging-l3-sessions.22635/

 

[HaveBlue]

I've negotiated on almost every vehicle I've bought either for price or features. Prices for the same vehicle can often vary at different times. A price was agreed and a vehicle was delivered. If both parties were happy, the deal is done. Pretty much every time I've rented a car it's, " we're out of the car you reserved but how about this free upgrade to this model?" My Rivian came delivered differently than I picked from the shop as well. They moved a car quick at year end and I did well. Be happy.

Sponsored