Rivian announces 7-Seat version with longer range

State11

Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2019
Messages
17
Reaction score
25
Location
San Francisco
Vehicles
Landrover LR3 (soon to be donated) 2019 LR Discovery (emergency bridge vehicle to Rivian), Landrover Defender D90, Tesla 3
All these recent developments regarding the S, its range and availability have me completely confused as to what to do. We live in SF and have a place in Tahoe City. For our daily lives in SF or Tahoe, range doesn't matter. So I'd probably go with the first available. The problem is driving to Tahoe. We typically leave early in the morning & can get there in 3 hours without stopping. Leaving in the afternoons can be 5-6 hours. My wife has a model 3 and I can tell you range anxiety is for real. There are no chargers between Rocklin (west Sacramento & Truckee) and the second you start climbing, the range drops like crazy. When we've driven her car, I can't bring myself to try to make it. Hence, I was going to go for the 400 mile S. If you guys were in my shoes, what would you do? As an aside, I had to buy a bridge vehicle, so other than being impatient, I can wait.





Advertisement

 

Babbuino

Well-Known Member
First Name
Manuel
Joined
Aug 1, 2020
Messages
645
Reaction score
872
Location
Florida
First Name
Manuel
Vehicles
Audi A3
Occupation
DESIGN engineer
All these recent developments regarding the S, its range and availability have me completely confused as to what to do. We live in SF and have a place in Tahoe City. For our daily lives in SF or Tahoe, range doesn't matter. So I'd probably go with the first available. The problem is driving to Tahoe. We typically leave early in the morning & can get there in 3 hours without stopping. Leaving in the afternoons can be 5-6 hours. My wife has a model 3 and I can tell you range anxiety is for real. There are no chargers between Rocklin (west Sacramento & Truckee) and the second you start climbing, the range drops like crazy. When we've driven her car, I can't bring myself to try to make it. Hence, I was going to go for the 400 mile S. If you guys were in my shoes, what would you do? As an aside, I had to buy a bridge vehicle, so other than being impatient, I can wait.
BtW, looks like there is a 150kwh charger in Sacramento so you could top it before going up.
If you have a heavy foot you'll definetily have to stop, so up to you if you are OK stopping or not.
Does stopping for ~20 min makes that much difference to you that you think it's worth to pay 10K more and wait longer?

Screenshot_20201123-210856_ABRP.jpg


Screenshot_20201123-210738_ABRP.jpg
 

thrill

Well-Known Member
First Name
billy
Joined
Jan 14, 2020
Messages
335
Reaction score
556
Location
South Carolina
First Name
billy
Vehicles
i3s, z4m, hp4, (r1t)
All these recent developments regarding the S, its range and availability have me completely confused as to what to do. We live in SF and have a place in Tahoe City. For our daily lives in SF or Tahoe, range doesn't matter. So I'd probably go with the first available. The problem is driving to Tahoe. We typically leave early in the morning & can get there in 3 hours without stopping. Leaving in the afternoons can be 5-6 hours. My wife has a model 3 and I can tell you range anxiety is for real. There are no chargers between Rocklin (west Sacramento & Truckee) and the second you start climbing, the range drops like crazy. When we've driven her car, I can't bring myself to try to make it. Hence, I was going to go for the 400 mile S. If you guys were in my shoes, what would you do? As an aside, I had to buy a bridge vehicle, so other than being impatient, I can wait.
The 350kw chargers in Rocklin and Truckee are 80 miles apart with 5000 feet elevation change, which is about 1.2 degrees slope. This guy says he loses in his Tesla-S about 2/3 range going 40 miles with 2.5 degrees slope. So, your trip seems doable to me...

Is this poor range performance up a hill, typical of Tesla S? — Tesla Forums

1606184114522.png
 

ajdelange

Well-Known Member
First Name
A. J.
Joined
Aug 1, 2019
Messages
1,593
Reaction score
1,051
Location
Virginia/Quebec
First Name
A. J.
Vehicles
Tesla X Extended Range Plus 2019, Lexus, Landcruiser, SR5
Occupation
EE Retired
The EPA range is calculated based on drag results from a dynamometer and then some calculations to account for aerodynamics.
As the vehicle itself is actually stationary during a dynamometer test it drag cannot be measured. Drag is measured with the real vehicle by bringing it up to speed and then observing it's deceleration. This allows the test engineers to determine the drag as a function of speed. That relationship is fit with a polynomial and the coefficients of the polynomial fed to the dynamometer in order that the brake can simulate drag as a function of wheel speed.

No data from the actual road.
As noted in the previous paragraph the drag model is derived from road (track) testing.

Show me any independent test that correlates to the EPA range ratings across multiple vehicles.
Untitled 3.jpeg




A rating where I can drive my Taycan aggressively and exceed the EPA rating by 50% and then drive my Model X conservatively and fall short by 30% is not a reliable metric.
I can't speak to the Taycan but if I can obtain useful and quite accurate data from the EPA ratings of X's you can too. This parameter is quite well engineered for its purpose and it fills it quite well. You just need to understand better what it is and how to interpret it.


I would not trust any EPA range or efficiency rating without real world data. So whatever rating Rivian gets for the R1S won't tell you much until we get some results from Independent testers.
As I said in my previous post the results one gets relative to the EPA number represents his driving (where, when, how) relative to the conditions of the EPA test. A prudent man, understanding how this works, will immediately set out to determine how his driving effects the range relative to the EPA range. I understand the physics well enough to be able to do the interpretation as does any numerate person with an interest and it is, of course, in that fact that the value of the EPA range specification lies. Were this not the case why would anyone bother with it? Thus the Rivians estimated values are quite useful. They are built into A Better Route Planner which will give you a pretty good idea as to what to expect driving a Rivian. ABRP includes models for terrain and drag so you can get a pretty realistic idea as to how the car will perform under conditions that are not close to the EPA profiles. ABRP cannot predict weather and, as we know, simple rain can knock 30% or more off range.

There are several journalists along with YouTubers conducting decent real world tests the provide much better data.
That's practically a contradiction in terms. Most of the "tests" I have seen published are a joke. This is from the perspective who spent most of his career designing tests, collecting data and analyzing it. For starters I'll point out that you don't draw conclusions from a single test. An ensemble of data is required. The data In the picture I posted above shows the data, relative to rated, of hundreds of cars and makes it quite clear that the average driver does quite well relative to the EPA rating in the summer and not so well in the winter. An important part of the message is that one must understand why this is in order to know when to apply it.


Here is an example using Bjorn's data.
You would be well advised to draw conclusions from the ensemble data rather than these annecdotal ones.
 
Last edited:

Cactus

Member
First Name
Doug
Joined
Nov 11, 2020
Messages
14
Reaction score
12
Location
Scottsdale, AZ
First Name
Doug
Vehicles
Feb 2014 Tesla Model S
Occupation
Professor
It was disappointing that Rivian didn't offer the longer range, larger battery pack during recent configuration. An even bigger disappointment, if true, is that 400+ mile battery pack won't be available at all!
Being an owner of a Model S for almost 7 years, my advice to people is ALWAYS buy the largest battery pack. Range is obviously longer and charging is quicker.
By relying on EA charging (lucky you find one that works as rated), and now possibly losing the 400+ mile option. I am close to asking for my deposit back. Too bad Rivian doesn't communicate their intentions more effectively.
 

davrow_R1T

Well-Known Member
First Name
David
Joined
Oct 16, 2019
Messages
280
Reaction score
389
Location
Riverside, CA
First Name
David
Vehicles
2 Toyota Siennas
An even bigger disappointment, if true, is that 400+ mile battery pack won't be available at all!
Here seems to be the newest FUD from a 2 poster.

Not something I have heard anywhere else. Unless he means the 180 battery pack is now the Max pack. But that didn't decrease announced range. Hmm.:confused:
 

ajdelange

Well-Known Member
First Name
A. J.
Joined
Aug 1, 2019
Messages
1,593
Reaction score
1,051
Location
Virginia/Quebec
First Name
A. J.
Vehicles
Tesla X Extended Range Plus 2019, Lexus, Landcruiser, SR5
Occupation
EE Retired
It was disappointing that Rivian didn't offer the longer range, larger battery pack during recent configuration. An even bigger disappointment, if true, is that 400+ mile battery pack won't be available at all!
THere is little to suggest that. I have a deposit on a truck with the 400+ mile Max Paclk.



Being an owner of a Model S for almost 7 years, my advice to people is ALWAYS buy the largest battery pack.
Extra range is sort of like chicken soup. It cant hurt to have it and it increases the driver''s options. Sse No. 40.


and now possibly losing the 400+ mile option. I am close to asking for my deposit back. Too bad Rivian doesn't communicate their intentions more effectively.
There is no reason to suppose that we will lose the 400 mile option. They did not remove that option from the list of available configurations. They just the delivery of it out 7 months or so. he Chicken Littles may surmise that there is some problem with the battery, the BMS, the inverter/rectifiers that drove the decision which problem was so severe that they could not have delivered 400 mi trucks initially but it is equally likely that they are on the brink of new and better technology which will push the eventual Max battery range to closer to the CT's 500 mile range.
 

McMoo

Active Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2020
Messages
34
Reaction score
34
Location
St. Louis
Vehicles
Tesla Model 3 Performance
The 400+ mile R1S isn’t a sure thing at this point. They specifically use longer range wording for the R1S instead of 400+ like they do for the R1T. There is a lot of speculation they can’t fit a large enough pack while keeping 7 seats. It’s possible they keep delaying until cell density improves more so they can get more kwh out of the same number of cells.

F189BA46-20CA-4E5B-96CB-58A4C2B4991B.jpeg
 

ajdelange

Well-Known Member
First Name
A. J.
Joined
Aug 1, 2019
Messages
1,593
Reaction score
1,051
Location
Virginia/Quebec
First Name
A. J.
Vehicles
Tesla X Extended Range Plus 2019, Lexus, Landcruiser, SR5
Occupation
EE Retired
The 400+ mile R1S isn’t a sure thing at this point.
The 400+ mile R1S is a sure thing (or as sure as we can be about anything these days). What we are not so sure about is a 7 seat 400+ mile R1s. The idea that there would be a 400+ mile 7 seat R1S is fairly new. It was not promised way back when most of us made our reservations. The reason for this is that the additional seat cut into the space where the extra range battery had to go. Battery volumetric requirements are going down daily. Eventually batteries dense enough for a 7 seat design will become available but I don't know when that will be.
 

electruck

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2019
Messages
1,353
Reaction score
2,211
Location
Dallas, TX
Vehicles
2018 Volvo XC60
The 400+ mile R1S is a sure thing (or as sure as we can be about anything these days).
If the 400+ mile 5 seat R1S were in the configurator with an initial delivery date in early 2022 like the R1T then I would agree with your statement. But it wasn't and they merely reference a "longer range" Max pack becoming available in the future. We can say with relative confidence that the Max battery pack is a sure thing but we can no longer say the same about 400+ miles range for the R1S. Hopefully Rivian clues us in sooner than later regarding this evolution of the Max pack.
 

manitou202

Active Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2020
Messages
32
Reaction score
109
Location
Colorado
Vehicles
Taycan Turbo S, Audi E-tron, R1S Launch Edition Reservation
As the vehicle itself is actually stationary during a dynamometer test it drag cannot be measured. Drag is measured with the real vehicle by bringing it up to speed and then observing it's deceleration. This allows the test engineers to determine the drag as a function of speed. That relationship is fit with a polynomial and the coefficients of the polynomial fed to the dynamometer in order that the brake can simulate drag as a function of wheel speed.

As noted in the previous paragraph the drag model is derived from road (track) testing.


Untitled 3.jpeg




I can't speak to the Taycan but if I can obtain useful and quite accurate data from the EPA ratings of X's you can too. This parameter is quite well engineered for its purpose and it fills it quite well. You just need to understand better what it is and how to interpret it.


As I said in my previous post the results one gets relative to the EPA number represents his driving (where, when, how) relative to the conditions of the EPA test. A prudent man, understanding how this works, will immediately set out to determine how his driving effects the range relative to the EPA range. I understand the physics well enough to be able to do the interpretation as does any numerate person with an interest and it is, of course, in that fact that the value of the EPA range specification lies. Were this not the case why would anyone bother with it? Thus the Rivians estimated values are quite useful. They are built into A Better Route Planner which will give you a pretty good idea as to what to expect driving a Rivian. ABRP includes models for terrain and drag so you can get a pretty realistic idea as to how the car will perform under conditions that are not close to the EPA profiles. ABRP cannot predict weather and, as we know, simple rain can knock 30% or more off range.

That's practically a contradiction in terms. Most of the "tests" I have seen published are a joke. This is from the perspective who spent most of his career designing tests, collecting data and analyzing it. For starters I'll point out that you don't draw conclusions from a single test. An ensemble of data is required. The data In the picture I posted above shows the data, relative to rated, of hundreds of cars and makes it quite clear that the average driver does quite well relative to the EPA rating in the summer and not so well in the winter. An important part of the message is that one must understand why this is in order to know when to apply it.


You would be well advised to draw conclusions from the ensemble data rather than these annecdotal ones.
Look, I understand that a lot of work has gone into developing the EPA test, and I'm sure there are a lot of smart engineers along with some sophisticated equipment and mathematical models producing these ratings, but that still doesn't mean they are useful for consumers and/or represent real world conditions. They are tests performed in a laboratory, and not real world results. Now I also acknowledge that random tests from journalists maybe not provide the answer either, but several (Bjorn as an example) have provided fairly reasonable test setups and results. When you combine all of these different sources together it paints a very similar picture which is very different than the EPA ratings.

I'll use the Taycan 4S and Model S LR as an example again along with Bjorn's data. Now I understand Bjorn isn't testing the vehicles in a perfectly controlled environment, but if you watch his videos he goes a long way to make them fairly consistent. He drives the same route, and sets the speed based on a GPS box. I removed all of the cold weather data for better consistency in the charts I posted earlier.

So if you are cross shopping the Taycan 4S and the Tesla Model S LR, what does the EPA range tell you? The Taycan has a 203 mile range rating and the Model S LR has a 402 mile range rating. It appears that the Model S would go almost twice as far as the Taycan. Most consumers are going to look at these ratings and come to same conclusion. But, looking at the 74.4mph (120 km/hr) data from Bjorn, he drove the Taycan 4S 264 miles and the Model S LR Raven 273 miles. Sure there are a lot of variables, but by keeping the vehicles at a consistent speed in similar weather conditions the range shouldn't vary significantly. The difference is range between the two vehicles was 9 miles. Not 199 miles as implied by the EPA ratings. When you combine his results from many other sources on the Taycan and Model S you get a very similar conclusion. That these two cars are fairly close in range on the highway, and the Model S performs far lower than the EPA rating, and the Taycan far exceeds it.

If the EPA ratings are so significantly different than actual driving data from the same driver, in similar conditions, then I ask what use is the EPA rating? Maybe the EPA rating more accurately predicts the range at slower speeds? Maybe it more accurately predicts the range in the city? Obviously it doesn't seem to accurately predict typical highway speeds. So what does the rating tell you?

My guess is that a new test method needs to be developed that uses either real world driving data, or at least better simulates the real world in the laboratory. They probably need to include the range ratings for several conditions: low speeds driving, highway driving, and city driving. But the current single rating doesn't tell you much about how the actual vehicle will perform.

So it's anyones guess what the rating will be for the R1T and R1S. Based on a various EPA ratings they could be anywhere from 30% below to 33% high. That is such an enormous range that it essentially makes the rating useless.

This is why I urge caution in jumping to any conclusions about an EV's performance based on the EPA rating alone. I put a deposit down on a Taycan several years ago. Last fall I had locked in my build and was excited to take delivery in February. Then the EPA rating for the Taycan Turbo S was published at 192 miles. Based on my experience and other real world data from my Model X, I assumed that the Taycan would perform well below the EPA rating on the highway just like the Tesla. I ended up canceling my order as a result. Several months later actual Taycan buyers and numerous journalists showed that the Taycan far exceeded the EPA rating. I was able to borrow a demo Taycan for a couple of days from my dealer and confirm these results in my own driving. Obviously I ended up buying a Taycan now knowing that the EPA rating was meaningless.
 

McMoo

Active Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2020
Messages
34
Reaction score
34
Location
St. Louis
Vehicles
Tesla Model 3 Performance
Look, I understand that a lot of work has gone into developing the EPA test, and I'm sure there are a lot of smart engineers along with some sophisticated equipment and mathematical models producing these ratings, but that still doesn't mean they are useful for consumers and/or represent real world conditions. They are tests performed in a laboratory, and not real world results. Now I also acknowledge that random tests from journalists maybe not provide the answer either, but several (Bjorn as an example) have provided fairly reasonable test setups and results. When you combine all of these different sources together it paints a very similar picture which is very different than the EPA ratings.

I'll use the Taycan 4S and Model S LR as an example again along with Bjorn's data. Now I understand Bjorn isn't testing the vehicles in a perfectly controlled environment, but if you watch his videos he goes a long way to make them fairly consistent. He drives the same route, and sets the speed based on a GPS box. I removed all of the cold weather data for better consistency in the charts I posted earlier.

So if you are cross shopping the Taycan 4S and the Tesla Model S LR, what does the EPA range tell you? The Taycan has a 203 mile range rating and the Model S LR has a 402 mile range rating. It appears that the Model S would go almost twice as far as the Taycan. Most consumers are going to look at these ratings and come to same conclusion. But, looking at the 74.4mph (120 km/hr) data from Bjorn, he drove the Taycan 4S 264 miles and the Model S LR Raven 273 miles. Sure there are a lot of variables, but by keeping the vehicles at a consistent speed in similar weather conditions the range shouldn't vary significantly. The difference is range between the two vehicles was 9 miles. Not 199 miles as implied by the EPA ratings. When you combine his results from many other sources on the Taycan and Model S you get a very similar conclusion. That these two cars are fairly close in range on the highway, and the Model S performs far lower than the EPA rating, and the Taycan far exceeds it.

If the EPA ratings are so significantly different than actual driving data from the same driver, in similar conditions, then I ask what use is the EPA rating? Maybe the EPA rating more accurately predicts the range at slower speeds? Maybe it more accurately predicts the range in the city? Obviously it doesn't seem to accurately predict typical highway speeds. So what does the rating tell you?

My guess is that a new test method needs to be developed that uses either real world driving data, or at least better simulates the real world in the laboratory. They probably need to include the range ratings for several conditions: low speeds driving, highway driving, and city driving. But the current single rating doesn't tell you much about how the actual vehicle will perform.

So it's anyones guess what the rating will be for the R1T and R1S. Based on a various EPA ratings they could be anywhere from 30% below to 33% high. That is such an enormous range that it essentially makes the rating useless.

This is why I urge caution in jumping to any conclusions about an EV's performance based on the EPA rating alone. I put a deposit down on a Taycan several years ago. Last fall I had locked in my build and was excited to take delivery in February. Then the EPA rating for the Taycan Turbo S was published at 192 miles. Based on my experience and other real world data from my Model X, I assumed that the Taycan would perform well below the EPA rating on the highway just like the Tesla. I ended up canceling my order as a result. Several months later actual Taycan buyers and numerous journalists showed that the Taycan far exceeded the EPA rating. I was able to borrow a demo Taycan for a couple of days from my dealer and confirm these results in my own driving. Obviously I ended up buying a Taycan now knowing that the EPA rating was meaningless.
All great information. I don’t think the 2nd gear use is optimized on the EPA test for the Taycan.

Also, I have read that Tesla has about a 4% bottom buffer once the car hits 0 miles. They use this buffer on the EPA testing. The VW group doesn’t have a buffer like that so 0 miles is 0.

Driving 70-75 mph I get about 240 miles out of my model 3 stealth performance from 100-0% in normal conditions. Cold brings that down to 200 miles or less. This is with 290 miles indicated at 100%.

It’s not at all a problem for me but add in towing and other things Rivian owners might expect, and getting real world data becomes incredibly important for many buyers.

It’s clear the EPA test doesn’t work for EVs and it’s not just due to conditions.

Byorn and outofspecmotoring/insiders have tons of good info.
 

ajdelange

Well-Known Member
First Name
A. J.
Joined
Aug 1, 2019
Messages
1,593
Reaction score
1,051
Location
Virginia/Quebec
First Name
A. J.
Vehicles
Tesla X Extended Range Plus 2019, Lexus, Landcruiser, SR5
Occupation
EE Retired
Look, I understand that a lot of work has gone into developing the EPA test, and I'm sure there are a lot of smart engineers along with some sophisticated equipment and mathematical models producing these ratings, but that still doesn't mean they are useful for consumers and/or represent real world conditions.
But they are useful to consumers - savvy consumers. You just don't happen to be in that group. Accept that and stop trying to convince others that you know what you are talking about here.
 

ajdelange

Well-Known Member
First Name
A. J.
Joined
Aug 1, 2019
Messages
1,593
Reaction score
1,051
Location
Virginia/Quebec
First Name
A. J.
Vehicles
Tesla X Extended Range Plus 2019, Lexus, Landcruiser, SR5
Occupation
EE Retired
Also, I have read that Tesla has about a 4% bottom buffer once the car hits 0 miles. They use this buffer on the EPA testing. The VW group doesn’t have a buffer like that so 0 miles is 0.
You, nor i nor anyone else outside of Tesla has any idea about how big Tesla's "buffers" are.

Driving 70-75 mph I get about 240 miles out of my model 3 stealth performance from 100-0% in normal conditions.
Tip: don't run your battery down to 0 % nor charge it to 100%!

Cold brings that down to 200 miles or less. This is with 290 miles indicated at 100%.
This is the sort of thing you should be taking note of. They are indicative of how, when and where you drive. 83% isn't too bad for 70 -75 mph. And 70% isn't that bad for cold weather either (depending on how cold you are talking about).

It’s not at all a problem for me but add in towing and other things Rivian owners might expect, and getting real world data becomes incredibly important for many buyers.
Well we understand what the EPA number tells us and we understand how to interpret it but it is obviously important that we have real world data RE our own driving in order to be able to use it effectively for trip planning and we want to see ensemble (fleet data) in order to see how we compare to others.

It’s clear the EPA test doesn’t work for EVs and it’s not just due to conditions.
It is pretty clear it does work for EVs. As I did in another post I will ask why anyone would bother with it if it didn't work.
 

manitou202

Active Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2020
Messages
32
Reaction score
109
Location
Colorado
Vehicles
Taycan Turbo S, Audi E-tron, R1S Launch Edition Reservation
But they are useful to consumers - savvy consumers. You just don't happen to be in that group. Accept that and stop trying to convince others that you know what you are talking about here.
I apologize. Clearly I'm not a savvy consumer and have no idea what I'm talking about.
 

Advertisement





 


Advertisement
Top