Sponsored

What would you do? Get LE version (300+) or wait for MaxPack (400+)?

What do you think?

  • Get the truck sooner, and sacrifice the extra 100 miles

  • Be patient and wait for that MaxPack


Results are only viewable after voting.

TessP100D

Banned
Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2021
Threads
0
Messages
587
Reaction score
429
Location
So cal
Vehicles
Tesla 2017 P100D MS
speed = wind. There is some miscommunication between you and the service manager, or he doesn't know what he's talking about. There's a reason EPA consumption for EVs is less in city than on the highway, and why hybrid vehicles generally have higher city mpg values than highway. There's a reason MPGe is higher in the city cycle than highway for both the Model 3 and R1T, and it's not because city driving is more efficient. All things equal start/stop uses more energy, yes. But cruising at 75 uses more energy than the typical start/stop in a city at lower speeds.

1631577093337.png
I agree that driving fast uses a lot of energy too. The EPA figures are not realistic. Not in a ICE and certainly not in a Tesla. does anybody actualy drive like the EPA tests?

andā€¦ the RT1 will less efficient for sure.

buyer beware is how I will end this ongoing debate. Good luck to all of you.
Sponsored

 

SANZC02

Well-Known Member
First Name
Bob
Joined
Feb 11, 2021
Threads
29
Messages
5,260
Reaction score
8,863
Location
California
Vehicles
Tesla Model S, LE - R1S
Occupation
Retired
I think the key here is that stop/start is always less efficient than constant cruise at the same speed; this is straightforwardly because regen can only capture ~70% or less of the energy taken to accelerate back up to speed after stopping.

But faster is (generally) less efficient, at least at non-trivial speeds. The EPA cycle "highway" tests are at pretty low speeds (all below 60mph and mostly below 55 - Detailed Test Information (fueleconomy.gov)) . When we think intuitively of "highway travel," we're thinking of something much more like constant 65-75mph travel, which requires dramatically more energy (especially over 70mph) than lower speeds.

EPA highway range is pretty much in an efficiency sweet spot versus stop and go, and is going to be more efficient. But stop and go around town compares favorably to 75mph on the interstate.
I think a big difference is using the accelerator as an on/off switch with hard starts and short stops (especially in CA where side streets have 40 and 50 MPH speeds between 1/2 mile stop lights) it does not help. There is a reason my wife uses almost 30 watts per mile on average less than I do when I drive our Model S.
 

SeaGeo

Well-Known Member
First Name
Brice
Joined
Jan 12, 2021
Threads
47
Messages
5,237
Reaction score
9,677
Location
Seattle
Vehicles
Xc60 T8
Occupation
Engineer
I'm honestly considering the 300 mile pack more than I thought I would. I've been playing with websites that help with trip planning to figure out what my needs really are. I started with the view that I "needed" the max pack. I'm no longer so sure given the extra $ and weight.
I really need to know when Rivian is getting that charger in Ludlow, CA. Seems like a hole in my needed charger coverage (chargers in Barstow and Needles are fine for E/W travel but not for exploring).
Exactly. Unless you have a routine trip that definitely requires that extra ~80 to 100 miles of range between chargers or you're frequently towing a large load uphill it's a pretty poor use of $$$. If you make a once a year boat trip to Tahoe from CA and can't make it with the large pack but you can the max pack you can rent a hell of a nice truck a lot of times before spending that $10,000 that the max pack costs. Or shit, rent the boat in Tahoe and avoid towing something. lol.

An example location where I would be hesitant with the 300 mile range is if you live in say... South Dakota. The combination of weather and ~250 mile distance between 150+kW charging points along the interstate likely makes it so nobody is going to feel particularly good about driving north from Sioux Falls for example on anything other than a warm day with no wind. Which is basically never. However, the *vast* majority of the time when people will be driving long range is likely along the interstate, and even now EA has most of the Country blanketed within every roughly 100 miles along major routes. ABRP pegs a trip from Seattle to Cheyenne, WY at 25:15 hours with the large pack, with the longest distance between stops being 150 miles. The max pack cuts that trip down by about an hour. In both cases that's assuming you're driving 88 mph through southern Idaho. Where will infrastructure be in 2 years with RAN, EA, and EVGO buildouts more developed? And a (in theory) opened up supercharger network?

I'll gladly slow down once in a literal while to avoid $10,000 in added cost if needed. The question is really at what point does frequency of high consumption drives and inconvenience become more valuable than the $10,000.

Honestly I suspect the bigger annoyance is going to be waiting at chargers due to congestion in the next few years. And that's what we'll have RAN for (hopefully). It doesn't seem like the max pack helps a ton with that problem anyway.
 

R1Tr8000

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2021
Threads
0
Messages
72
Reaction score
65
Location
The Rockies
Vehicles
ā€˜99 SLK230, 22 Sequoia, 17 GLE43, 14 CnAm SxS
Occupation
Aerospace retired
How about letā€™s just see when Rivain releases the truck, and real world tests are done. Right out of the gate Rivian is 10 years behind Tesla in battery management, etc.

folks. When you buy an electric vehicle, range matters. A LOT. Think hard before your short yourself on such a big expensive purchase.
Yeah..Iā€™m thinking that a higher percentage of future Rivian owners - truck or SUV, compared to other current EVs - are intending to either tow and / or use them off road. Both of those ā€˜use casesā€™ will chew up the battery / range.
In my case I want to be able to drag the trailer 50-75 miles from here, and then be able to start exploring numerous avenues of dirt roads, photo ops etc. Where Iā€™m talking will not have any chargers for a very, very long time; likely never..
Sure, Iā€™m planning some work arounds to be able to add range and extend my stay while boondocking (yes, 3rd party hardware and more $$). But for me Iā€™ll need the Max Pack to make even that feasible.
 

SeaGeo

Well-Known Member
First Name
Brice
Joined
Jan 12, 2021
Threads
47
Messages
5,237
Reaction score
9,677
Location
Seattle
Vehicles
Xc60 T8
Occupation
Engineer
I think the key here is that stop/start is always less efficient than constant cruise at the same speed; this is straightforwardly because regen can only capture ~70% or less of the energy taken to accelerate back up to speed after stopping.

But faster is (generally) less efficient, at least at non-trivial speeds. The EPA cycle "highway" tests are at pretty low speeds (all below 60mph and mostly below 55 - Detailed Test Information (fueleconomy.gov)) . When we think intuitively of "highway travel," we're thinking of something much more like constant 65-75mph travel, which requires dramatically more energy (especially over 70mph) than lower speeds.

EPA highway range is pretty much in an efficiency sweet spot versus stop and go, and is going to be more efficient. But stop and go around town compares favorably to 75mph on the interstate.
Exactly. And implied in my point is that the EPA highway cycle is still less efficient than the city cycle, even though it's not a 70 mph constant run.

It's also just obvious in my observed consumption when driving around down at like 3.8 miles/kWh with my ID.4 vs down to about 3.2ish when driving on the highway.
 

Sponsored

kylealden

Well-Known Member
First Name
Kyle
Joined
Feb 25, 2021
Threads
20
Messages
1,393
Reaction score
4,254
Location
Seattle
Vehicles
Rivian R1T LE, Tesla Model Y, Zero DSR/X, '69 CJ5
Occupation
Product Management
The question is really at what point does frequency of high consumption drives and inconvenience become more valuable than the $10,000.
And it bears repeating, if you're an LE holder with the free wheel upgrades etc., and with the risk of major restrictions to the EV tax credit, there's a very real chance that for some buyers "$10K" is more like "20K."

Prices change over time (anyone who rushed to buy a Tesla before the credit expired only to watch prices plummet by approximately one tax credit immediately after knows this...), but it's worth considering as a risk.
 

SeaGeo

Well-Known Member
First Name
Brice
Joined
Jan 12, 2021
Threads
47
Messages
5,237
Reaction score
9,677
Location
Seattle
Vehicles
Xc60 T8
Occupation
Engineer
I agree that driving fast uses a lot of energy too. The EPA figures are not realistic. Not in a ICE and certainly not in a Tesla. does anybody actualy drive like the EPA tests?

andā€¦ the RT1 will less efficient for sure.

buyer beware is how I will end this ongoing debate. Good luck to all of you.
They're also not actually wrong for what they're testing. But they do require people to understand what those tests are. The only time I hear people complaining about the EPA "range" is because of the testing method for highway range, and 70 mph tests tend to test out with lower range than what the EPA combined cycle predicts. Suggesting their highway efficiency at a constant high speed should be even lower than shown.
 

SeaGeo

Well-Known Member
First Name
Brice
Joined
Jan 12, 2021
Threads
47
Messages
5,237
Reaction score
9,677
Location
Seattle
Vehicles
Xc60 T8
Occupation
Engineer
I think a big difference is using the accelerator as an on/off switch with hard starts and short stops (especially in CA where side streets have 40 and 50 MPH speeds between 1/2 mile stop lights) it does not help. There is a reason my wife uses almost 30 watts per mile on average less than I do when I drive our Model S.
yeah, I get the feeling Tess slams on their breaks a lot rather than relying on one pedal driving in their tesla. Toss in slamming on the accelerator and you can definitely chew through the energy. That's just not how the normal person drives though.
 

Blur1t

Well-Known Member
First Name
Andy
Joined
Nov 25, 2020
Threads
4
Messages
259
Reaction score
252
Location
Mason
Vehicles
R1T Launch, Subaru Cross trek
Occupation
Enrolled Agent
I am a launch edition R1T preorder holder (Apr 2019), but I am considering changing my order to the MaxPack. I know this will push me out of the LE group and delay my delivery, but I really want that 400-mile range for some of the road trips I plan to take. I talked to a CS rep and they said if I end up changing I will still maintain my preorder rank among the non-LE group. And they recommended I wait and talk to my guide before making any decisions, since they might have more info at that time regarding delivery timing of each one.

What are your thoughts on the dilemma?
  1. Get the truck sooner, and sacrifice the extra 100 miles
  2. Be patient and wait for that MaxPack
Iā€™m in that exact scenario too. Iā€™m Sept 2019 Pre order and 296 miles outside of Normal so it would only push it out till early next year. My wife seems to think this is the last car Iā€™ll ever own ? so permission granted to shell out the $ for the max pack and 20ā€™s. Since so much rides on range and kills it, the more I have the better I will feel. My first ev too, all in. Still waiting my guide, saved a ton with the insurance unexpectedly so that was a plus.
 

TessP100D

Banned
Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2021
Threads
0
Messages
587
Reaction score
429
Location
So cal
Vehicles
Tesla 2017 P100D MS
Yeah..Iā€™m thinking that a higher percentage of future Rivian owners - truck or SUV, compared to other current EVs - are intending to either tow and / or use them off road. Both of those ā€˜use casesā€™ will chew up the battery / range.
In my case I want to be able to drag the trailer 50-75 miles from here, and then be able to start exploring numerous avenues of dirt roads, photo ops etc. Where Iā€™m talking will not have any chargers for a very, very long time; likely never..
Sure, Iā€™m planning some work arounds to be able to add range and extend my stay while boondocking (yes, 3rd party hardware and more $$). But for me Iā€™ll need the Max Pack to make even that feasible.
Yes. 75 miles of towing will prob cost you 150 miles. So if you start at 100% charge on 20ā€™ā€™ tires, that would be about ā€¦ what 265-275? So you would only have about 125 left When you get there. Charging required to get back.
 

Sponsored

TessP100D

Banned
Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2021
Threads
0
Messages
587
Reaction score
429
Location
So cal
Vehicles
Tesla 2017 P100D MS
yeah, I get the feeling Tess slams on their breaks a lot rather than relying on one pedal driving in their tesla. Toss in slamming on the accelerator and you can definitely chew through the energy. That's just not how the normal person drives though.
That would be wrong for young think that. I use one pedal driving in the streets and drive rather conservatively. i let the Regen slow the car down, feathering the right pedal. I only need the brakes to actually make a stop or in case of a light charge or traffic related forced breaking. Regen does not add to your city stop and go range. It might extend what your using efficiency but does not add range.
you can believe it or Not
 

Ventura

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2021
Threads
1
Messages
126
Reaction score
264
Location
Ventura County, California
Vehicles
R1T Red Canyon 20" / Prius
That would be wrong for young think that. I use one pedal driving in the streets and drive rather conservatively. i let the Regen slow the car down, feathering the right pedal. I only need the brakes to actually make a stop or in case of a light charge or traffic related forced breaking. Regen does not add to your city stop and go range. It might extend what your using efficiency but does not add range.
you can believe it or Not
Arguing semantics? Regen decreases how much range you lose due to stop and go. Decreased wind resistance due to lower speed is what makes city driving more efficient than freeways. If you don't maximize the regen you might not see as much gain from decreased speed.
Driving slow on highways works too. I always get better mileage in Oregon due to their low speed limit.
 

SeaGeo

Well-Known Member
First Name
Brice
Joined
Jan 12, 2021
Threads
47
Messages
5,237
Reaction score
9,677
Location
Seattle
Vehicles
Xc60 T8
Occupation
Engineer
Regen does not add to your city stop and go range. It might extend what your using efficiency but does not add range.
you can believe it or Not
Ok, so let's clarify here. It generally recovers about 70% of the energy through breaking.

When you're saying it doesn't "add" range are you saying that having an EV in stop and go traffic with only mechanical breaks and no regen would have the same range as an EV with regen? Because that's how people interpret what you're saying.
 

TessP100D

Banned
Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2021
Threads
0
Messages
587
Reaction score
429
Location
So cal
Vehicles
Tesla 2017 P100D MS
Ok, so let's clarify here. It generally recovers about 70% of the energy through breaking.

When you're saying it doesn't "add" range are you saying that having an EV in stop and go traffic with only mechanical breaks and no regen would have the same range as an EV with regen? Because that's how people interpret what you're saying.
Iā€™m saying there is zero effect on the range meter.

I went 8 miles in stop and go city streets and it cost me 12 Miles of total range.

without regen would it have cost me 13? I donā€™t know.
 

SeaGeo

Well-Known Member
First Name
Brice
Joined
Jan 12, 2021
Threads
47
Messages
5,237
Reaction score
9,677
Location
Seattle
Vehicles
Xc60 T8
Occupation
Engineer
Iā€™m saying there is zero effect on the range meter.

I went 8 miles in stop and go city streets and it cost me 12 Miles of total range.

without regen would it have cost me 13? I donā€™t know.
That's weird, because a hybrid Rav4 is somehow a lot more efficient than an ICE only Rav4. Guess Tesla's just don't have any regen. ?
Sponsored

 
 




Top