The GOAT of Rivian R2 reviews IS COMING!

[cwq93r]

You can add emoji to the name???

Sponsored

 

[Jeremy3292]

A 100kWh battery would’ve solved all of this. Even 95kWh would’ve helped a lot. 7-10 more kWh would’ve cost probably around $1,000. 88kWh seems like they took out every kWh they could out of the battery pack to just match Tesla on some stupid EPA test and also on price. Sad but true, too obvious what they did on a lot of things from a benchmark perspective.

 

[RoadtripEV]

A 100kWh battery would’ve solved all of this. Even 95kWh would’ve helped a lot. 7-10 more kWh would’ve cost probably around $1,000. 88kWh seems like they took out every kWh they could out of the battery pack to just match Tesla on some stupid EPA test and also on price. Sad but true, too obvious what they did on a lot of things from a benchmark perspective.

You are making some assumptions that they could fit a larger pack. Someone on Twitter posted a picture of the pack and there is just no more room. It is unlikely they will have a Max pack like the R1's.

The improvements will come from the new LG Battery Plant in Arizona where they will make denser cells. That will likely result in a bump (no one knows but could be 10%, maybe more?).

At the end of the day, I'm always for more range, efficiency and more battery. But, more battery comes with more weight. More weight counters improved efficiency and range. There are ALWAYS compromises. I'm quite happy with the compromises they made with the R2 and I'm sure they will improve on those as each successive model year is released.

 

[macb00kemdanno]

A 100kWh battery would’ve solved all of this. Even 95kWh would’ve helped a lot. 7-10 more kWh would’ve cost probably around $1,000. 88kWh seems like they took out every kWh they could out of the battery pack to just match Tesla on some stupid EPA test and also on price. Sad but true, too obvious what they did on a lot of things from a benchmark perspective.

How would a larger battery pack improve efficiency?

If a car gets 19 mpg and I double the gas tank from 15 gallons to 30 gallons, I just have an inefficient car with a larger gas tank. All that does is satisfy the range anxiety nutsos

Besides, a 100kwh battery probably would have pushed the R2 into the mid-60s, which would have been a death sentence.

 

[renderpaz]

But Kyle didn't compare how fast all five windows roll down between the two vehicles....oh wait

All of this data means nothing to me (and most of the masses). The R2 is simply a better looking vehicle (inside and out) and has more off road capability which gives it a win in my book. Go Rivian!

We did not need a video to know that a heavier, boxier car was going to be less "efficient" than a lighter, teardrop shaped car. RJ was silly to mention efficiency based on a flawed EPA test he knows his company has optimized for.

 

[Jeremy3292]

You are making some assumptions that they could fit a larger pack. Someone on Twitter posted a picture of the pack and there is just no more room. It is unlikely they will have a Max pack like the R1's.

The improvements will come from the new LG Battery Plant in Arizona where they will make denser cells. That will likely result in a bump (no one knows but could be 10%, maybe more?).

At the end of the day, I'm always for more range, efficiency and more battery. But, more battery comes with more weight. More weight counters improved efficiency and range. There are ALWAYS compromises. I'm quite happy with the compromises they made with the R2 and I'm sure they will improve on those as each successive model year is released.

That was Hilbe’s post and others commented saying it was possible. Idk personally what is correct. Just making a statement of reality compared to Model Y, saying more kWh would’ve made the range the same given box vs egg.

 

[Jeremy3292]

How would a larger battery pack improve efficiency?

If a car gets 19 mpg and I double the gas tank from 15 gallons to 30 gallons, I just have an inefficient car with a larger gas tank. All that does is satisfy the range anxiety nutsos

Besides, a 100kwh battery probably would have pushed the R2 into the mid-60s, which would have been a death sentence.

Just talking range bc then everyone would’ve just been like “yep box inefficient but those added kWh counteract the egg shape Model Y and now we have the same range”. It would’ve cost Rivian $1,000 more to add 7-10kWh.

Idc personally about the Model Y comparisons. Just saying all this talk and banter would’ve went away if a few more kWh had been added to R2. I’m team big batteries anyways

 

[Jeremy3292]

Sleeping giant in the room is the seemingly crazy newer Model 3/Y battery degradation issues. Kyle said he has content on this coming soon. Here’s my 2024 M3P with 13,000 miles on a road trip a month ago. Best efficiency and furthest I ever got. Doing the math with 62.6 kWh and 89% of the battery used you get an implied roughly 70kWh available pack capacity. My battery test shows I’m at 92-93% full health already. That means full pack was about 75-77kWh new, which makes sense. So even with this really good road trip run at 4.25 mi per kWh efficiency, due to the battery degradation my 0-100% range is under 300 miles. Mind you this wasn’t a straight 266 miles at 80mph either. This was at best averaging 70mph. So in reality R2 could end up being very similar to Model 3/Y in effective range just one year after you purchased it due to these crazy early degradation issues. Not even talking about how much better R2 charging performance is.

Just some interesting thoughts!

 

[RoadtripEV]

Sleeping giant in the room is the seemingly crazy newer Model 3/Y battery degradation issues. Kyle said he has content on this coming soon. Here’s my 2024 M3P with 13,000 miles on a road trip a month ago. Best efficiency and furthest I ever got. Doing the math with 62.6 kWh and 89% of the battery used you get an implied roughly 70kWh available pack capacity. My battery test shows I’m at 92-93% full health already. That means full pack was about 75-77kWh new, which makes sense. So even with this really good road trip run at 4.25 mi per kWh efficiency, due to the battery degradation my 0-100% range is under 300 miles. Mind you this wasn’t a straight 266 miles at 80mph either. This was at best averaging 70mph. So in reality R2 could end up being very similar to Model 3/Y in effective range just one year after you purchased it due to these crazy early degradation issues. Not even talking about how much better R2 charging performance is.

Just some interesting thoughts!

This is valid. I still have a Model Y that I picked up back in very early 2021 and has about 90k miles on it now. The range has been significantly impacted due to battery degradation. I should run the test tonight to see what it reports.

 

[SANZC02]

A 100kWh battery would’ve solved all of this. Even 95kWh would’ve helped a lot. 7-10 more kWh would’ve cost probably around $1,000. 88kWh seems like they took out every kWh they could out of the battery pack to just match Tesla on some stupid EPA test and also on price. Sad but true, too obvious what they did on a lot of things from a benchmark perspective.

I’m curious to see what others are reporting.

My R2 is reporting 91.6 usable kWh using RivianRoamer.

 

[windshieldfarmer]

But Kyle didn't compare how fast all five windows roll down between the two vehicles....oh wait

All of this data means nothing to me (and most of the masses). The R2 is simply a better looking vehicle (inside and out) and has more off road capability which gives it a win in my book. Go Rivian!

I understand why the R2 has less efficiency than the MYP at high speeds, but given their nearly identical EPA range I would have expected a far closer efficiency result at lowee speeds. Not sure why the difference…something seems amiss. It will be interesting to see other tests. Hopefully some owners can chime in with real world average speed and average KWh usage at those speeds. I need to be able to drive 200 miles through a charging desert without stopping.

 

[Jeremy3292]

I’m curious to see what others are reporting.

My R2 is reporting 91.6 usable kWh using RivianRoamer.

That is awesome if so as every extra kWh matters. I just asked Chad if he could show us what the average useable is for R2’s using RivianRoamer.

 

[Jeremy3292]

I understand why the R2 has less efficiency than the MYP at high speeds, but given their nearly identical EPA range I would have expected a far closer efficiency result at lowee speeds. Not sure why the difference…something seems amiss. It will be interesting to see other tests. Hopefully some owners can chime in with real world average speed and average KWh usage at those speeds. I need to be able to drive 200 miles through a charging desert without stopping.

They’re showing 3.1 MPK at 70mph. Somewhere around 2.5-2.6 MPK at 80mph. 88kWh usable capacity according to Rivian. So going 80mph you’d use 90% of the battery going 200 miles.

 

[tivoboy]

I’m curious to see what others are reporting.

My R2 is reporting 91.6 usable kWh using RivianRoamer.

I think it's been reported that Rivian under reports the capacity in the vehicle (and on paper) to what is actually in the total usable including reserve capacity of the pack.

 

[windshieldfarmer]

They’re showing 3.1 MPK at 70mph. Somewhere around 2.5-2.6 MPK at 80mph. 88kWh usable capacity according to Rivian. So going 80mph you’d use 90% of the battery going 200 miles.

That’s what I would have thought but I will have the 20” tires and Kyle’s test would seem to indicate 2.2 MPK at 80 mph with the 21” tires. I suspect the 20” would be closer to 2.0 MPK in this same test.

I currently lease a BMWIX50 that generally does the trip using 2.6 MPK…at about 70 mph. I’m afraid the R2 will be less efficient with an 18% smaller battery than my IX. If the R2 could approach even 2.8 MPK at 70mph I would be golden…just not sure it’s possible if the more aerodynamic IX50 can’t get this type of efficiency.

My order timeframe is Aug/Sept; this is the only barrier I have to purchasing an R2. Like the car otherwise.

Sponsored