1st Month KWh per mile - owner's results

[cmiller]

If you're concerned about paying a few bucks for electricity then this truck is probably not for you. F150, Silverado, RAM ICE owners probably don't ask how much it costs for gas

I am sure ICE owners would be concerned if they were losing gas just from sitting in the driveway so why shouldn't people be upset that they are losing a decent amount of kWh just sitting around.

Sponsored

 

[No.92]

The concern is paying bucks for electricity that are way above what it should be. Just because the truck is expensive doesn't mean people are willing to fork out money for electricity use that shouldn't be happening. If someone in a Silverado or F150 are only getting 4 mph when they should be getting 10 they would be asking questions. Throwing money out the door is a big deal
.

Agreed, but these are all things that will get fixed I'm sure but I don't think it will be as drastic as causing Rivian to lose mass pre-orders. 4% a day is an annoyance yes but with the frequency of updates happening, I'm sure it will get fixed eventually

 

[No.92]

The concern is paying bucks for electricity that are way above what it should be. Just because the truck is expensive doesn't mean people are willing to fork out money for electricity use that shouldn't be happening. If someone in a Silverado or F150 are only getting 4 mph when they should be getting 10 they would be asking questions. Throwing money out the door is a big deal
.

Be honest, at this point in time, would you mind losing a small amount of money on electricity right now or pay a lot more for an ICE truck and spend a lot more on gas?

 

[Yellow Buddy]

Take away vampire losses:

1038 Miles Driven
498 KWh used

2.08 miles per KWh, with charging losses, which I would be happier with.

and

1038 Miles Driven
438 KWh used

2.39 miles per KWh or 299 miles on a full charge.

My brain just can’t comprehend miles per kWh….

421 wh/mi for anyone else who has owned a Tesla for too long or has a mental block like I do.

Not too bad IMO. About the same as my 2016 Model X

 

[Max]

Agreed, but these are all things that will get fixed I'm sure but I don't think it will be as drastic as causing Rivian to lose mass pre-orders. 4% a day is an annoyance yes but with the frequency of updates happening, I'm sure it will get fixed eventually

The question is if it is hardware issue, not software and Rivian consider it a "small annoyance" as well, will they have a recall for it? or will the owners have to be annoyed for the life of the vehicle?

You are correct; There won't be a big loss of reservation over this but people that are already questioning their choice for other reasons may go over the edge for this.

Be honest, at this point in time, would you mind losing a small amount of money on electricity right now or pay a lot more for an ICE truck and spend a lot more on gas?

I see your point. If I was driving a lot, and was replacing a V8 truck, your math would be correct. But that is not the case for me. Our cars are mostly sitting in the driveway with very few miles going on them every week. I admit buying a new car for my case is as insane as complaining about the waste but It just bugs me. A car's main function is going from A to B. It should not be using energy when it is not working. If you are not OK paying your employee to fiddle around with his phone all day, you should not be OK with this either. If it is not OK leaving your toaster on for three hours everyday with nothing in it, this should not be OK either.

Rivian engineers have spent a ton of time tweaking the design for better aerodynamics so they can save a few watts. I am sure this is not intentional and agree with you that it won't be as much of an issue for future R1s but I am not confident all of the problems causing it can be solved with OTA (I am sure improvements can be made). And for me it is more than minor annoyance but I don't stress about it since I won't be getting mine until 23 and if Rivian is going to fix it, that is plenty of time for them.

 

[urundai]

I am surprised the number of times 'software update will fix it' is used in this forum. Software is not a magic panacea for all troubles (I wish that's the case, as a software engineer). It's going to be limited by hardware design and any fundamental flaws.

Maybe we are spoiled by Tesla software updates but until we hear something concrete from Rivian, this amount of phantom drain is just little difficult to understand on what's causing it.

 

[Jblaze121]

If Rivian is working on this, if there is a God in heaven, it's being called "Project Garlic".

I have not heard any indication that Rivian is working on this. have any owners found a way around it in the settings or any other tricks to minimize the loss?

 

[Attesan997]

I am surprised the number of times 'software update will fix it' is used in this forum. Software is not a magic panacea for all troubles (I wish that's the case, as a software engineer). It's going to be limited by hardware design and any fundamental flaws.

Maybe we are spoiled by Tesla software updates but until we hear something concrete from Rivian, this amount of phantom drain is just little difficult to understand on what's causing it.

It's not so much software is magic, moreso there's plenty of anecdotal evidence to support Rivian was focused on getting vehicles out of the door first. I still remember Doug Demuro saying there's no individual tire pressure gauge in his video and how strange that was for an off roader. I can't recall if he mentioned anything about the then lack of a 360º camera. But both of those items were added after the press drives and reviews but before significant customer deliveries.

I'm certainly not going to say with confidence this drain is a result of a bug that requires a simple fix. But it seems like from that user who used their IR camera that there's a whole lot of activity in a vehicle that should be sleeping. I've said this before but if this level of drain is "normal" for Rivian they're screwed once they've gotten through all the die hard fans that will tolerate this "test/fix" phase. There are many folks, first time EV buyers even, who are going to find themselves sitting on a big $80k+ paperweight a week into ownership. They're going to be doing a lot of calling and emailing trying to figure out what's going on.

 

[Max]

there's a whole lot of activity in a vehicle that should be sleeping

Putin's hackers are watching us

 

[Craigins]

I am surprised the number of times 'software update will fix it' is used in this forum. Software is not a magic panacea for all troubles (I wish that's the case, as a software engineer). It's going to be limited by hardware design and any fundamental flaws.

Maybe we are spoiled by Tesla software updates but until we hear something concrete from Rivian, this amount of phantom drain is just little difficult to understand on what's causing it.

The hardware design would have to have been done by interns to make it as bad as what we are seeing, without the possibility of software fix.

My best guess is that they still have a high amount of logging and debugging going on. Then as they get more data they can cut back on that and let the system truly enter a sleep mode.

 

[tojesky]

My Chevy Bolt (honestly not a comparable vehicle) that I've had for 15 months has an all-in Miles/kWh of 3.93 and a GOM reported 4.31 miles/kWh. And I cannot discern any vampire losses. However, it does not have gear guard or other monitoring services that can consume energy.

As a 1st half 2023 R1S preorder holder, the vampire losses concern me. I am not a high mileage driver having only driven 7350 miles since I bought the Bolt - I sold my Yukon about 4 months after purchasing the Bolt.. (I'm retired, and the Bolt is my only vehicle.) I've taken a few road trips but none more than 600 miles round trip over a weekend. Most charging is 32 amp home charging and the rest is Electrify America DCFC. Average charging losses over the all charging sessions I've owned the Bolt is 8.9%.

 

[kizamybute']

Seems about on par for that speed and that temperature.

The difference between 55 and 75 MPH is pretty big.

To expect 2.5 miles per KWH out of a moving brick (pickup) is not realistic unless driving it very conservatively. My Tesla, I drive it without thought of conserving. One of the most aerodynamic cars in the world and in NORMAL, real world driving, average just over 3 miles per kWh. So, 1.78 out of a truck that weighs 2,500 lbs more and is not aerodynamic, considering 50 degrees is below optimum for an EV and 75 MPH, especially in a moving brick, it's actually not too bad and likely a better gauge of REAL WORLD range owners will experience. I always figured if it would do 200+ miles with my driving style, I'd be happy. This sounds like it will.

 

[Zoidz]

If you're concerned about paying a few bucks for electricity then this truck is probably not for you. F150, Silverado, RAM ICE owners probably don't ask how much it costs for gas

The cost of the phantom electricity isn't the only issue. Excessive phantom power consumption is contrary to Rivian's ethos and mantra. Even if the cost is not an issue to me, I still have a problem with WASTING the power.

 

[Zoidz]

I am surprised the number of times 'software update will fix it' is used in this forum. Software is not a magic panacea for all troubles (I wish that's the case, as a software engineer). It's going to be limited by hardware design and any fundamental flaws.

Maybe we are spoiled by Tesla software updates but until we hear something concrete from Rivian, this amount of phantom drain is just little difficult to understand on what's causing it.

Modern automotive ICs are designed for sleep mode. It's hard to fathom that Rivian designers would not know this and follow best practices on the selection of hardware during the hardware design phase, some/much of which would be assisted/guided/mentored by the chip and board level OEMs. So it is more likely that it can be fixed with software updates via better/quicker sleep mode management. But yes, if a chip designer screws up on the sleep implementation in silicon, that's certainly a problem.

Here's a interesting tutorial with some pretty heavy subsystem OEM names behind it - Bosch, Broadcom, NXP, Visteon, Continental - as well as BMW, Daimler and Renault. This details how sleep/wakeup is architected - "Klemmensteuerung".

This slide is really interesting regarding current drain. I like they included the "Eurpoean Vacation Test Case" of 41 days (I assume they are not referring to the movie, lol).

 

[guernsej]

Be honest, at this point in time, would you mind losing a small amount of money on electricity right now or pay a lot more for an ICE truck and spend a lot more on gas?

Your hot takes are fantastic. My Raptor averages 15-16 mpg, I'm paying CA gas prices, the R1S is absolutely the right vehicle for my family, and I'm definitely concerned about Rivian's poor energy management. Wasting 150 kWh per month to unnecessary standby consumption is irresponsible regardless of cost, and needs to be fixed.

Sponsored