Max Pack vs Large Pack range test (by Out of Spec)

[Throwdown]

Currently in the middle of a road trip from Denver to Chicago...return trip next week. I found that 15-20 min of charging didn't bother me at all, but the extra 10-15 min to get 30-35 min of charging up to 70 or 80% for a longer stint was unpleasant. Add in having to wait for chargers to open up at two locations yesterday and it made for an unpleasant day. Since the curve we've seen thus far for max pack doesn't appear to be any better, you'd actually be talking slightly longer charging times to reach the same SoC, but similar times if only looking at kWh added.

I'm driving back to Denver from New Orleans Friday. 20 min charges are totally fine with me as well, by the time the family goes to the bathroom and I walk the dogs 20 mins is gone, I tend to start full, do a 20 min stop then a longer 30-40 and get food. That's covers around 10 hours of driving time

Sponsored

 

[zefram47]

Agree. It's a mistake by OOS (@OutofSpecKyle) to choose only 15 minutes of charging for their "10% challenge". I hope someday a 15 minute DC will be meaningful and realistic, but it's not currently.

Kia EV6 and Porsche Taycan are pretty much 15 min charges before rolling again. The fact that most EVs aren't high-power 800V charging monsters is irrelevant. The test is valid because 15-20 min is sort of ideal and somewhat comparable to an ICE vehicle with a refill and quick bathroom stop...and some EVs can do similar.

I'm driving back to Denver from New Orleans Friday. 20 min charges are totally fine with me as well, by the time the family goes to the bathroom and I walk the dogs 20 mins is gone, I tend to start full, do a 20 min stop then a longer 30-40 and get food. That's covers around 10 hours of driving time

I did Denver to Saint Louis on the first day...it was rough. Wound up doing basically 3.5 hours of charging and about 12.25 hours of driving to do 860 miles. Most of my charges were about 20 min and one was almost 40 min, but that was because it was only 80 kW. My bigger issue was charger spacing out here on the plains combined with the cold (10-20F) and 30+ mph winds, so I was really only doing 100-150 miles per charge after 180 miles on the first stint. I'm planning to do a full writeup once I get home. I'm hoping the weather will be more favorable on the return, but I'll also be going up almost 6000 ft in the process.

 

[Supratachophobia]

I

Kia EV6 and Porsche Taycan are pretty much 15 min charges before rolling again. The fact that most EVs aren't high-power 800V charging monsters is irrelevant. The test is valid because 15-20 min is sort of ideal and somewhat comparable to an ICE vehicle with a refill and quick bathroom stop...and some EVs can do similar.



I did Denver to Saint Louis on the first day...it was rough. Wound up doing basically 3.5 hours of charging and about 12.25 hours of driving to do 860 miles. Most of my charges were about 20 min and one was almost 40 min, but that was because it was only 80 kW. My bigger issue was charger spacing out here on the plains combined with the cold (10-20F) and 30+ mph winds, so I was really only doing 100-150 miles per charge after 180 miles on the first stint. I'm planning to do a full writeup once I get home. I'm hoping the weather will be more favorable on the return, but I'll also be going up almost 6000 ft in the process.

I70 thru Kansas is soul sucking in an EV...

 

[KootenayEV]

Higher density cells actually degrade faster.....

You've said this in a few threads now without any caveats but I'm interested in seeing a link to a study showing this...

If it were universally true, nobody would have bothered to try creating higher density cells, no?

(I have said something similar in the past, but with the added caveat of something along the lines of "it is possible it will have worse degradation based on what we saw when Tesla switched chemistry from the 85 to 90 pack")

 

[Throwdown]

I

I70 thru Kansas is soul sucking in an EV...

Yes

 

[Supratachophobia]

You've said this in a few threads now without any caveats but I'm interested in seeing a link to a study showing this...

If it were universally true, nobody would have bothered to try creating higher density cells, no?

(I have said something similar in the past, but with the added caveat of something along the lines of "it is possible it will have worse degradation based on what we saw when Tesla switched chemistry from the 85 to 90 pack")

I'm curious myself on other examples besides Tesla. Would LFP be a good argument for lower density having less degradation?

 

[Denver_Paulie]

Kia EV6 and Porsche Taycan are pretty much 15 min charges before rolling again. The fact that most EVs aren't high-power 800V charging monsters is irrelevant. The test is valid because 15-20 min is sort of ideal and somewhat comparable to an ICE vehicle with a refill and quick bathroom stop...and some EVs can do similar.



I did Denver to Saint Louis on the first day...it was rough. Wound up doing basically 3.5 hours of charging and about 12.25 hours of driving to do 860 miles. Most of my charges were about 20 min and one was almost 40 min, but that was because it was only 80 kW. My bigger issue was charger spacing out here on the plains combined with the cold (10-20F) and 30+ mph winds, so I was really only doing 100-150 miles per charge after 180 miles on the first stint. I'm planning to do a full writeup once I get home. I'm hoping the weather will be more favorable on the return, but I'll also be going up almost 6000 ft in the process.

You probably know this, but make sure you time your stops to hit the Burlington chargers instead of the Electrify America chargers in Flagler. That EA charging location in Flagler has to be the worst in the network. I made this mistake on my drive from Lawrence, KS back to Denver in September - I spent an hour charging at 35kW in Flagler since all the chargers were power limited just to get enough energy to make it to Limon and leverage the faster chargers there.

 

[zefram47]

I70 thru Kansas is soul sucking in an EV...

Indeed. At least Highway Assist worked beautifully and made it easy.

You probably know this, but make sure you time your stops to hit the Burlington chargers instead of the Electrify America chargers in Flagler. That EA charging location in Flagler has to be the worst in the network. I made this mistake on my drive from Lawrence, KS back to Denver in September - I spent an hour charging at 35kW in Flagler since all the chargers were power limited just to get enough energy to make it to Limon and leverage the faster chargers there.

Thanks. My first stop was definitely Burlington. It was really fun though since the 200 kW units were down, so I was stuck on the 125 kW shared units that only do 80 kW on a Rivian (200A cables). The parking lot was also a thick sheet of ice...so glad I got out before the 2nd wave of the storm hit. I was basically trying to outrun the storm until I hit Salina where I stayed ahead of it.

 

[BigE]

Here it is. Max pack definitely not worth the cost.

$909.00/kwh is insane. God Bless RJ for every one he can sell.

 

[KootenayEV]

I'm curious myself on other examples besides Tesla. Would LFP be a good argument for lower density having less degradation?

I can't find a definitive generalized article on the subject, but in searching did come across this article on a new record for energy density for a LiB back in April of this year.

https://physicsworld.com/a/lithium-ion-batteries-break-energy-density-record/

Two things I found of note:
1) They do note in the last paragraph that the cycle-performance is lower and they are working to improve it; ie implying that reduced cycle-life is inherent when attempting to increase density
2) The graph at the beginning shows timeline of commercialized cells vs energy density; they don't show it on the graph, but my understanding is that battery manufacturers have both increased energy density by 3x since the early 90's but at the same time have increased cycle life too

Some other interesting data points - data sheets for different Samsung 2170 cells:

INR21700-33J: 3270 mAh, 12 Wh, 62g, cycle life 75% capacity after 2000 cycles with 0.5C charge/discharge
INR21700-48G: 4700 mAh, 17 Wh, 69g, cycle life 500 cycles but with 0.3C charge and 1C discharge

The above comparison seems to support the idea that higher energy density has higher degradation; however look at the next 3 below...

INR21700-30T: 3000 mAh, 69g, cycle life 250 cycles but with 1.25C charge and 4C discharge!
INR21700-50E: 4900 mAh, 69.5g, cycle life 500 cycles to 80% capacity with 0.5C charge and 1C discharge
INR21700-50G: 4900 mAh, 69.5g, cycle life 1000 cycles to 80% capacity; noted as an energy cell

The problem is that they don't seem to be using a standardized testing methodology for their own spec sheet over the years, so it is almost hopeless trying to compare them.

In any event, I don't think it is clear-cut that increased energy density = decreased longevity; there are so many other factors that come into play.

If anyone else can find something more conclusive that would be awesome.

 

[R1 EVY]

I got Max pack. I'm an early buyer, business owner. The price difference was negligible and I get to write the car off.

 

[Supratachophobia]

I can't find a definitive generalized article on the subject, but in searching did come across this article on a new record for energy density for a LiB back in April of this year.

https://physicsworld.com/a/lithium-ion-batteries-break-energy-density-record/

Two things I found of note:
1) They do note in the last paragraph that the cycle-performance is lower and they are working to improve it; ie implying that reduced cycle-life is inherent when attempting to increase density
2) The graph at the beginning shows timeline of commercialized cells vs energy density; they don't show it on the graph, but my understanding is that battery manufacturers have both increased energy density by 3x since the early 90's but at the same time have increased cycle life too

Some other interesting data points - data sheets for different Samsung 2170 cells:

INR21700-33J: 3270 mAh, 12 Wh, 62g, cycle life 75% capacity after 2000 cycles with 0.5C charge/discharge
INR21700-48G: 4700 mAh, 17 Wh, 69g, cycle life 500 cycles but with 0.3C charge and 1C discharge

The above comparison seems to support the idea that higher energy density has higher degradation; however look at the next 3 below...

INR21700-30T: 3000 mAh, 69g, cycle life 250 cycles but with 1.25C charge and 4C discharge!
INR21700-50E: 4900 mAh, 69.5g, cycle life 500 cycles to 80% capacity with 0.5C charge and 1C discharge
INR21700-50G: 4900 mAh, 69.5g, cycle life 1000 cycles to 80% capacity; noted as an energy cell

The problem is that they don't seem to be using a standardized testing methodology for their own spec sheet over the years, so it is almost hopeless trying to compare them.

In any event, I don't think it is clear-cut that increased energy density = decreased longevity; there are so many other factors that come into play.

If anyone else can find something more conclusive that would be awesome.

Great digging. Here's what those we know about batteries. They are all beholden to the following:

1. Charge cycles
2. Weight
3. Cost
4. Charge/discharge rates
5. Capacity

The Holy Grail has always been a magic battery that can do all five of those things without compromise. What reality dictates is that in order to succeed at some, you have to make sacrifices in others. LFP is a great example of a huge weight and capacity penalty, possibly a sacrifice in charge rate, but pretty decent cost and charge cycles. I'm perfectly willing to accept we still don't know enough about the specific cell to know what traits were sacrificed.

The 52T or whatever variant Rivian is using for max, we know it excels at capacity, great on weight, and not really any worse at charge rates (certainly more of a function of the mediocre pack cooling). And at $1000 per kWh pack cost, the only real unknown is charge cycles, a.k.a. degradation. So does it stand to reason that the only thing that *could* be lacking is charge cycles since we accounted for the other 4 already? Logically, maybe.

 

[ridgetopview]

$10K for an extra 22 miles is crazy! how can you justify that. No way a charger can't be found in that 22 mile radius as stated.

Save the $10k buy a wall charger, NEMA 14-50 wire kit and a 12,000 watt generator. Cost $2,500 and unlimited range adder.

Yes, there is not a non-tesla fast charger between southwestern WI and northeastern WI in upper Door County, WI. For this reason, I opted for the max pack and waited 4 years for its delivery. I value a non-stop drive from our farm to our house on the lake and if I would need to charge the Rivian it would be a major challenge. In my Tesla, it's not a problem whatsoever as there are superchargers all along the route. I exchanged my 2018 Tesla Model 3 for the 2022 Model S Long Range for the same reason, increased range. (As an early Rivian reservation/buyer the price difference was negligible between the large and max pack.)

 

[Miketz]

The warranty seems to be the same 100k miles but I would not be surprised if the cells used can do an extra 200 charging cycles due to newer/better chemistry. If true, it may be worth the extra $$$ to have a pack that can do an extra 60k miles.

 

[Vik]

I was about to change my reservation to a PDM/Max from a Quad/Large, but now I am hesitating. Since I am a pre-march pricing holder, the price difference is $6,500.

Sponsored