My Max Pack Rivian Delivered! ?

[Hayseed_MS]

@jmchilders reviving this older thread to get an update on the max pack after quite a few months. Range living up to the claims? Any regrets?

Sponsored

 

[Kurt44]

I too am watching this tread. I own a Max pack R1T, took delivery in November. Currently at 3,500 miles. One longish trip, with one likely this summer down the Pacific Coast. I have no regrets on spending the additional money for the Max pack. I like charging up to 80% and having about 330 mile range. As well as when I do go on a longer trip Charging up to 100% and having 410 mile range. My long distance trips were ski trips so with the cold temps it was re-assuring to have the extended range.

 

[BrentInCO]

For what it may be worth, as of last month, I have a 1 year old R1S Quad Launch Edition with 30k miles and a new R1S Dual Max Pack (both w/ 20" wheels) . . . unfortunately, I'm not seeing improved efficiency, nor more real world range. My first drive after delivery of the Dual Max was a drive across Colorado that I've done 20+ times in the Quad over the last year, in every kind of weather / road conditions, year-round, and in the Max I experienced the worst efficiency (1.83 miles per kwh) ever. Temperatures in the 30s & 40s, which is warmer than many trips in the Quad, may have had a headwind, but far less noticeable than many trips in the Quad. I had to stop at the Lake Fork Campground charger 225 miles from Denver to charge because it was 11pm and I only had 40 miles of range to go another 40 miles to the Montrose Rivian charger, with one more mountain pass to go over. That was after being 100% charged in Denver with a supposed 360 miles of range (20" wheels). There's little to no cell coverage along this drive, so I wasn't going to chance being stranded. My Quad shows 312 miles of range in Conserve mode when 100% charged. And driving around town since then, I'm also experiencing lower efficiency than in my Quad; it's in City driving that the up to 400 miles of range is supposed to be achievable. I have around 1k miles on the Dual Max Pack now. I'll continue testing / comparing, but I'll say I feel ripped off, duped, and I'm upset about this situation … feel like Rivian cooked the books on the EPA range (which I've always felt, but I hoped would not be the reality). Build quality is also worse. I’ve had 4 service tickets to address wheel alignment, rattles (passenger door), ticking (steering wheel), wind noise (windshield / A pillars), and more. First world problems, I know, but I had no such issues with my Launch Edition. The stereo / speakers are way worse in the Dual. Honestly, I have nothing positive to say about this new vehicle, there’s nothing better about it. I’ve seen Out of Spec Kyle’s recent videos showing the max pack has worse range than the large pack. I’m setting aside that it took 3 appointments (45 minute drive one way) for the service center to actually let me pick up a full size spare like they told me I could before the first, and that Rivian wouldn’t let me add / order a compact spare until I actually took delivery, which happened to result in a delay due to a parts shortage of potentially receiving it in mid May rather than at time of my vehicle delivery in mid March.

 

[SeaGeo]

ve seen Out of Spec Kyle’s recent videos showing the max pack has worse range than the large pack.

His testing showed it had more range, but not as much as you would want at highway speeds.

I hope your issues are due to alignment.

 

[Epicloop]

For what it may be worth, as of last month, I have a 1 year old R1S Quad Launch Edition with 30k miles and a new R1S Dual Max Pack (both w/ 20" wheels) . . . unfortunately, I'm not seeing improved efficiency, nor more real world range. My first drive after delivery of the Dual Max was a drive across Colorado that I've done 20+ times in the Quad over the last year, in every kind of weather / road conditions, year-round, and in the Max I experienced the worst efficiency (1.83 miles per kwh) ever. Temperatures in the 30s & 40s, which is warmer than many trips in the Quad, may have had a headwind, but far less noticeable than many trips in the Quad. I had to stop at the Lake Fork Campground charger 225 miles from Denver to charge because it was 11pm and I only had 40 miles of range to go another 40 miles to the Montrose Rivian charger, with one more mountain pass to go over. That was after being 100% charged in Denver with a supposed 360 miles of range (20" wheels). There's little to no cell coverage along this drive, so I wasn't going to chance being stranded. My Quad shows 312 miles of range in Conserve mode when 100% charged. And driving around town since then, I'm also experiencing lower efficiency than in my Quad; it's in City driving that the up to 400 miles of range is supposed to be achievable. I have around 1k miles on the Dual Max Pack now. I'll continue testing / comparing, but I'll say I feel ripped off, duped, and I'm upset about this situation … feel like Rivian cooked the books on the EPA range (which I've always felt, but I hoped would not be the reality). Build quality is also worse. I’ve had 4 service tickets to address wheel alignment, rattles (passenger door), ticking (steering wheel), wind noise (windshield / A pillars), and more. First world problems, I know, but I had no such issues with my Launch Edition. The stereo / speakers are way worse in the Dual. Honestly, I have nothing positive to say about this new vehicle, there’s nothing better about it. I’ve seen Out of Spec Kyle’s recent videos showing the max pack has worse range than the large pack. I’m setting aside that it took 3 appointments (45 minute drive one way) for the service center to actually let me pick up a full size spare like they told me I could before the first, and that Rivian wouldn’t let me add / order a compact spare until I actually took delivery, which happened to result in a delay due to a parts shortage of potentially receiving it in mid May rather than at time of my vehicle delivery in mid March.

Interesting, thanks for the info. I just recently clocked 310miles on the same configuration & have been wavering on how much I need the extra 7% or 10/11kwh.
Image was mostly freeway ave. speed was skewed by long border wait.

 

[Supratachophobia]

His testing showed it had more range, but not as much as you would want at highway speeds.

I hope your issues are due to alignment.

The EPA results for city driving is where the improvements are. Straight up normal increase on highway per extra kWh in battery.

 

[SeaGeo]

The EPA results for city driving is where the improvements are. Straight up normal increase on highway per extra kWh in battery.

I know. My understanding is that he is seeing *less* range.

 

[BrentInCO]

His testing showed it had more range, but not as much as you would want at highway speeds.

I hope your issues are due to alignment.

This is the video I am referring to. He surprisingly showed the results upfront in this 2+ hour video. See attached screenshot for the part that caught my attention, where he referenced results from other Rivians

And we can play with the data from his results on his website. https://outofspecstudios.com/70-mph-range

 

[SeaGeo]

This is the video I am referring to. He surprisingly showed the results upfront in this 2+ hour video. See attached screenshot for the part that caught my attention, where he referenced results from other Rivians

And we can play with the data from his results on his website. https://outofspecstudios.com/70-mph-range

Yeah, so you're ignoring the direct comparison results there. When he did the range test of the max pack, he also did one of a dual motor large pack on the same wheels. The max pack has the same highway efficiency, but went slightly further. On the day referenced above the dual motor large went something like 15 or 20 miles further than in the first test.

 

[KootenayEV]

This is the video I am referring to. He surprisingly showed the results upfront in this 2+ hour video. See attached screenshot for the part that caught my attention, where he referenced results from other Rivians

And we can play with the data from his results on his website. https://outofspecstudios.com/70-mph-range

the graphs etc are pretty but he hasn’t made any attempt to normalize them to standard conditions so they are essentially useless for direct comparisons (unless the two vehicles were tested the same day in same conditions).

 

[BrentInCO]

Later this year I’ll be able to drive both of my R1S’s across Colorado at the same time and report the results. And those results are the only ones that truly matter to me. Maybe I’ll do a 6+ hour livestream of it on YouTube! But based on my March experience in the Max Pack, it doesn’t have longer range than my Quad in Conserve mode, for my use case.

 

[BrentInCO]

Later this year I’ll be able to drive both of my R1S’s across Colorado at the same time and report the results. And those results are the only ones that truly matter to me. Maybe I’ll do a 6+ hour livestream of it on YouTube! But based on my March experience in the Max Pack, it doesn’t have longer range than my Quad in Conserve mode, for my use case.

Last weekend, to perform an apples to apples comparison, my friend and I drove both of my R1S’s 300+ miles while staying within sight of each other. Results are that the efficiency was exactly the same, at 2 miles/kwh. So, my Max pack should theoretically be able to go 20 more miles than my Large Pack, on road trips like this. Womp, womp. I just saved you from a 7 hour livestream. This warmish (temps in 30s to 50s, with some rain and headwinds) weather test yielded similar results as my first winter drive of just the Max pack on a route I’d driven my Large pack dozens of times. Dang. I’m torn on which to sell, but would probably lean toward selling my Max pack if I could come close to being made whole on the purchase, in the $90s.

Launch Edition Large Pack. Left Denver at 100% 310 miles of range, and arrived at Rifle ChargePoint with 78 or 25%, used 232 miles of range to go 192.8 miles, 83% of rated range. 2.04 miles/kWh. Used 94 kWh, 2 hrs 59 minutes, 64 mph avg.

Max Pack. Left Denver at 100% or 360 miles of range, and arrived with 113 or 31%, used 247 miles of range to go 192.3 miles, 78% of rated range. 2.0 miles per kWh. Used 96 kWh, 2 hrs 59 minutes, 64 mph avg.

Launch Edition charged to 224 miles or 71%, and arrived at Montrose ChargePoint with 95 or 30%, used 129 miles of range to go 114.7 actual driven miles, 89% of rated range. 2.06 miles per kWh, used 56 kWh, 1 hr 44 minutes, 66 mph avg.

Max pack charged to 252 or 69%, arrived at Montrose ChargePoint with 113 or 31%, used 139 miles of range to go 114.4 actual driven miles, 82% of rated range. 2.07 miles per kWh, used 55 kWh, 1 hr 44 minutes, 66 mph avg.

I had problems initiating charging via my new Bluedot app, and it only allows linking of one vehicle, can only initiate charging one at a time, and in Montrose the 2 chargers share the 200 kw, splitting power 120/80, so I couldn’t compare charging curve apples to apples, but I have no reason to think they are different.

Configurations are exactly the same other than battery size and # of motors. See my signature for details.

 

[Supratachophobia]

Last weekend, to perform an apples to apples comparison, my friend and I drove both of my R1S’s 300+ miles while staying within sight of each other. Results are that the efficiency was exactly the same, at 2 miles/kwh. So, my Max pack should theoretically be able to go 20 more miles than my Large Pack, on road trips like this. Womp, womp. I just saved you from a 7 hour livestream. This warmish (temps in 30s to 50s, with some rain and headwinds) weather test yielded similar results as my first winter drive of just the Max pack on a route I’d driven my Large pack dozens of times. Dang. I’m torn on which to sell, but would probably lean toward selling my Max pack if I could come close to being made whole on the purchase, in the $90s.

Launch Edition Large Pack. Left Denver at 100% 310 miles of range, and arrived at Rifle ChargePoint with 78 or 25%, used 232 miles of range to go 192.8 miles, 83% of rated range. 2.04 miles/kWh. Used 94 kWh, 2 hrs 59 minutes, 64 mph avg.

Max Pack. Left Denver at 100% or 360 miles of range, and arrived with 113 or 31%, used 247 miles of range to go 192.3 miles, 78% of rated range. 2.0 miles per kWh. Used 96 kWh, 2 hrs 59 minutes, 64 mph avg.

Launch Edition charged to 224 miles or 71%, and arrived at Montrose ChargePoint with 95 or 30%, used 129 miles of range to go 114.7 actual driven miles, 89% of rated range. 2.06 miles per kWh, used 56 kWh, 1 hr 44 minutes, 66 mph avg.

Max pack charged to 252 or 69%, arrived at Montrose ChargePoint with 113 or 31%, used 139 miles of range to go 114.4 actual driven miles, 82% of rated range. 2.07 miles per kWh, used 55 kWh, 1 hr 44 minutes, 66 mph avg.

I had problems initiating charging via my new Bluedot app, and it only allows linking of one vehicle, can only initiate charging one at a time, and in Montrose the 2 chargers share the 200 kw, splitting power 120/80, so I couldn’t compare charging curve apples to apples, but I have no reason to think they are different.

Configurations are exactly the same other than battery size and # of motors. See my signature for details.

I'm not sure the highway energy efficiency was under dispute. The question is how much extra highway range does that 11kw get you. And if efficiency is the same, we have our answer.

Sponsored