Towing Spy Shot - R1T Tows ATC Trailer

[Eager2own]

I mean, look...

If a 7,000 ICE truck towed 11,000 pounds behind it and its range was cut roughly in half...

...Then the 7,000 R1T towing 11,000 pounds behind it will have its range cut roughly in half.

ICE vs EV literally doesn't make a difference here. Energy is energy,

But that premise is wrong.
Yes, the energy needed to pull an 11,000 lbs trailer for 200 miles is the same whether the towing vehicle is ICE or BEV.
However, the assumption that the additional load will impact range on both vehicles equally is incorrect. That’s not even true for ICE vehicles. The impact of that additional load on an F150 with a 4-cylinder engine is not the same as it would have on an F150 with a V8 or a Diesel engine.
Energy is energy, but power plant efficiency and impact to it from additional loads is not the same for all vehicles.

Sponsored

 

[mindstormsguy]

The other tricky bit it's that the Rivian is way more aerodynamic than a normal 1/2 ton. So it uses less energy when driving without a trailer. So adding the drag of a trailer to a F150 is comparatively less impactful (the drag was bad to begin with) than adding the same amount of trailer drag to something like the Rivian which started off with very little.

 

[stumptown85]

You all are fishing for an answer you won’t get. It appears people want Rivian to some how fess up to a number larger than 50%.

That 50% is likely worst case because if you overlay the power curves of an electric motor and an ice engine, they don’t match at high torque. ICE motors lose efficiency at the top end where electric motors are most efficient. This is why in the efficiency mode, you get more range. Two motors under double the torque are more efficient.

That said, the argument that energy is energy is absolutely true. I say this as an a mechanical engineer. Drag and rolling resistance are the biggest factor, by a lot. Motor efficiency is peanuts…and ICE vehicles don’t regen. I know everyone on here is excited, but this is literally just like refilling a gas vehicle except it takes more and longer fill ups to do it. That’s ok for some and not for others. If you’re the type that gets anxiety over a low battery, being an early adopter may not be a great choice.

But that premise is wrong.
Yes, the energy needed to pull an 11,000 lbs trailer for 200 miles is the same whether the towing vehicle is ICE or BEV.
However, the assumption that the additional load will impact range on both vehicles equally is incorrect. That’s not even true for ICE vehicles. The impact of that additional load on an F150 with a 4-cylinder engine is not the same as it would have on an F150 with a V8 or a Diesel engine.
Energy is energy, but power plant efficiency and impact to it from additional loads is not the same for all vehicles.

 

[koersontap]

You all are fishing for an answer you won’t get. It appears people want Rivian to some how fess up to a number larger than 50%.

That 50% is likely worst case because if your overlay the power curves of an electric motor and an ice engine, they don’t match at high torque. ICE motors lose efficiency at the top end where electric motors are most efficient. This is why in the efficiency mode, you get more range. Two motors under double the torque are more efficienct.

That said, the argument that energy is energy is absolutely true. I say this as an a mechanical engineer. Drag and rolling resistance are the biggest factor, by a lot. Motor efficiency is peanuts…and ICE vehicles don’t regen. I know everyone on here is excited, but this is literally just like refilling a gas vehicle except it takes more and longer fill ups to do it. That’s ok for some and not for others. If you’re the type that gets anxiety over a low battery, being an early adopter may not be a great choice.

I know, people seem like they're just looking for something to pick on.

What's going to make them happy? A multi-variable chart trending trailer weight, trailer coefficient of drag, elevation gain, prevailing winds, and how many burritos you ate for lunch to kWhr/mi? Just look it up on the chart!

I mean, jeebus, they told us what the impacts are. ~50% at full towing capacity. Have you ever seen Ford provide even as much towing information as Rivian has already? You pretty much just get how much they can tow, and tongue weight.

 

[CharlieSA]

Had to create an account just to share Jasons video. Numbers in proof and all. For the curious ones I’m sure you can substitute his numbers by others of your choosing

 

[Zoidz]

But that premise is wrong.
Yes, the energy needed to pull an 11,000 lbs trailer for 200 miles is the same whether the towing vehicle is ICE or BEV.
However, the assumption that the additional load will impact range on both vehicles equally is incorrect. That’s not even true for ICE vehicles. The impact of that additional load on an F150 with a 4-cylinder engine is not the same as it would have on an F150 with a V8 or a Diesel engine.
Energy is energy, but power plant efficiency and impact to it from additional loads is not the same for all vehicles.

And that's exactly why I said "Give or Take" in my original reply. Might it be 5% different? Of course. But it's not going to be 50% reduction on an ICE and 20% reduction on a BEV (as some people have assumed or claimed). This has already been proven by other EVs towing. Rivian did not create any Magic Sauce that changes this.

 

[Zoidz]

What's going to make them happy? A multi-variable chart trending trailer weight, trailer coefficient of drag, elevation gain, prevailing winds, and how many burritos you ate for lunch to kWhr/mi? Just look it up on the chart!

Also, don't forget to include compensation factors for temperature, and rain and snow rolling resistance impact!

 

[nfrank]

I have towed an 8,000lb, boxy camping trailer with my eco boost F-150 for tens of thousands of miles. That truck would get over 20mpg on the highway going 60mph on cruise control. With that trailer I would get 9-10mpg. My range on my 26 gal tank was effectively 220 miles.

I think with a max pack R1T my range leaving from home would be similar enough. Problem is when I stop to buy gas I go from 5% to 100% in less than five minutes and a BEV will really only get me to 80% charge on DCFC and will take 45 minutes.

 

[DucRider]

I have towed an 8,000lb, boxy camping trailer with my eco boost F-150 for tens of thousands of miles. That truck would get over 20mpg on the highway going 60mph on cruise control. With that trailer I would get 9-10mpg. My range on my 26 gal tank was effectively 220 miles.

I think with a max pack R1T my range leaving from home would be similar enough. Problem is when I stop to buy gas I go from 5% to 100% in less than five minutes and a BEV will really only get me to 80% charge on DCFC and will take 45 minutes.

This is a case where going slower may be faster. Dropping your speed by 5-10 mph can make a huge difference and reduce charge times more than the longer drive time.

But you also need to factor in cold weather - if you are towing in freezing temps, you have lots of waste heat from an ICE to keep you warm. In an EV cabin heat comes (primarily) from the battery at the expense of range.

 

[kylealden]

I've extensively towed a tall 3500lb trailer behind a Model Y. I saw a 30-40% range hit in a variety of conditions (freeway, country highway, mountains, extreme heat). This was the max rated tow weight and tongue weight for the Y.

Based on that, for the R1T I am fairly confident in the 50% number as "worst case," assuming reasonable speed and not extensive hill climbing etc. Of course losses are additive so you won't make it very far towing towing an 11,000 lb parachute-shaped trailer at 85mph up a 40% grade in the snow. But 50% seems reasonable for a box at roughly the max rated tow on flat ground at reasonable speeds (probably 55-65mph).

The trolls who keep asking for "the facts" are chasing a red herring. There is never going to be a single definitive towing number (or even curve) that applies to most circumstances with any specificity. Aerodynamics of the trailer, loading, tires, number of axles, speed, surface, grade, etc. are all huge variables and it would be insane to expect Rivian to do that just to appease a few grouses on the forum.

The fact that Rivian gives a "50%" number is more than any other manufacturer offers and is a surprisingly candid rule of thumb. For any more specificity than that, you'll have you opportunity to load up your pitchforks with anecdotes soon enough.

 

[JeremyP]

I've extensively towed a tall 3500lb trailer behind a Model Y. I saw a 30-40% range hit in a variety of conditions (freeway, country highway, mountains, extreme heat). This was the max rated tow weight and tongue weight for the Y.

Based on that, for the R1T I am fairly confident in the 50% number as "worst case," assuming reasonable speed and not extensive hill climbing etc. Of course losses are additive so you won't make it very far towing towing an 11,000 lb parachute-shaped trailer at 85mph up a 40% grade in the snow. But 50% seems reasonable for a box at roughly the max rated tow on flat ground at reasonable speeds (probably 55-65mph).

The trolls who keep asking for "the facts" are chasing a red herring. There is never going to be a single definitive towing number (or even curve) that applies to most circumstances with any specificity. Aerodynamics of the trailer, loading, tires, number of axles, speed, surface, grade, etc. are all huge variables and it would be insane to expect Rivian to do that just to appease a few grouses on the forum.

The fact that Rivian gives a "50%" number is more than any other manufacturer offers and is a surprisingly candid rule of thumb. For any more specificity than that, you'll have you opportunity to load up your pitchforks with anecdotes soon enough.

What trailer model do you have?

My 4runner will get 16-17mpg on the highway not towing because it's not stock and about 10 towing a tall 5000lb camper. I'm already used to stopping in less than 150 miles while towing because of the gas tank size.

 

[Smithery]

But that premise is wrong.

Yes, the energy needed to pull an 11,000 lbs trailer for 200 miles is the same whether the towing vehicle is ICE or BEV.

First part of your reply says "that premise is wrong" then in your very next sentence you state "I acknowledge that your premise is correct"

However, the assumption that the additional load will impact range on both vehicles equally is incorrect. That’s not even true for ICE vehicles. The impact of that additional load on an F150 with a 4-cylinder engine is not the same as it would have on an F150 with a V8 or a Diesel engine.

Agreed.
There are 4-cylinder engines in existence that could easily tow that load more efficiently than a popular V8 or Diesel out there.
There's also popular V8 and Diesels in existence that could easily tow that load more efficiently than a popular 4-cyl that's out there.

If your argument is "different power trains have different inefficiences in them!!!!" then I agree.
If your argument is "a more efficient power train will tow with a smaller range loss!!!!" then I agree.

The powertrain part of the loss here is *negligible* compared to aerodynamics and the rolling friction of moving 18,000 pounds over the roadway.

If the load we're talking about here makes an ICE vehicle lose roughly half its range, then it will also make an equivalent size/weight EV lose roughly half its range.

Yes, power train losses will vary those numbers *a little bit*... But what you may be forgetting is....

Energy is energy, but power plant efficiency and impact to it from additional loads is not the same for all vehicles.

Have I got news for you... Electric motors without transmission losses are more efficient than the above!

 

[Bumble1978]

Baby the Go pedal while in Conserve Mode until you get on the Highway taking roads that are flat or slightly down hill, but only if it's about 60 degrees outside. Then once on a highway, tailgate a Semi with a slight tail wind until the next charging station that you've already prepared to stop for about a half hour at.

Repeat. ?

By my Mathamagical Algorithms based on the alignment of corresponding neutrinos in the Ethosphere and the current low Earth orbit location of SpaceX Satellite Clusters refracting Venusian Swamp Gas...here's your given consumption...

Only ~32.8% loss of efficiency compared to not towing. ?

Drive slow. Charge More frequently. Don't sweat the small stuff. ???

 

[kylealden]

What trailer model do you have?

My 4runner will get 16-17mpg on the highway not towing because it's not stock and about 10 towing a tall 5000lb camper. I'm already used to stopping in less than 150 miles while towing because of the gas tank size.

This was with an Airstream Basecamp (rented for a couple weeks, not owned, but we put several thousand miles on it). My Wh/Mi average with the trailer was about 400, closer to 500 at high speeds on the interstate. Mix of coastal highways and mountain roads in the Olympic peninsula and down the 101.

I did plan to stop every 100-150 miles for charging, either supercharging or charging overnight at RV parks and campsites. It was never a real issue - it's not like I wanted to shotgun thousand mile days with a trailer anyway. But if you're frequently hauling livestock from coast to coast it might not be for you.

 

[exprexxo]

Demostrating how to charge with a trailer. 90 degreess offset with front port to back station and ICEing an ICE Jeep LOL

Sponsored