? Official EPA Range and MPGe Numbers for R1T & R1S

[kanundrum]

After reading everyone's comments I'm thinking some of you won't be able to get out of your driveway, lol.

AT tires 15%
Tow full load 50%
Too cold or too hot 20%
Toys on the rack 20%

So looking at a 105% hit on range. Back to the drawing board Rivian!

This is a joke on the math don't @ me

@Sean Ban Hammer Time!

Sponsored

 

[SeaGeo]

Here's what I did....

Went to https://www.fueleconomy.gov/ and found the R1S. I then personalized the settings for 90% highway and it returned a value of 51 kWh per 100 miles or 510Wh per mile. There might be a better way but I feel like that gets me closer to reality.

I’ve only just started fiddling around with ABRP yesterday, so I could be missing something. However, since the battery pack setting is fixed, I altered the Wh/mi number to .415 (135kWh/316mi = .415).

The EPA values aren't for a fixed 65 mph, but it should be pretty close. I provided the highway kwh/100mi earlier here in rely to Kanundrum. You use that to get what should be closer to the ABRP reference value. We will get more detail once we see what people get with some range tests.

Grabbed it for ya: Highway 51 kWh/100 Mi

 

[flabyboy]

Wouldn't surprise me that they're still tweaking what they want to do with the specifics there. And I'm not sure CS has ever said anything is set in stone unless it's published on the website as "final".

I basically asked if it even exists. I mentioned the motortrend review

 

[SeaGeo]

I basically asked if it even exists. I mentioned the motortrend review

Guess we will find out. Your experience sounds like mine trying to drill through the Alexa garage door experience. They acted like having a garage door opener integrated into the car was a national secret yet to be announced.

 

[flabyboy]

She also mentioned that the epa testing was determined with a mix of the different driving modes, all purpose, sport, ect

 

[Cactus]

@kanundrum- Real world mileage is almost always worse.

 

[kanundrum]

IIRC they also do different temperatures as well in EPA testing as well.

So it includes summer/winter + hvac use

 

[SeaGeo]

She also mentioned that the epa testing was determined with a mix of the different driving modes, all purpose, sport, ect

That's probably their real world data to justify an alternative adjustment factor.

 

[kanundrum]

@kanundrum- Real world mileage is almost always worse.

Not really, a lot of examples where Out of Spec and Inside EVs get more mileage than EPA.

 

[805Badger]

So was this one of the government agencies we were waiting for?

 

[SeaGeo]

So was this one of the government agencies we were waiting for?

Probably

 

[DuckTruck]

I know Rivian is marketing to off-road enthusiasts as that sells. I've looked at the R1T from the beginning when I first saw it as a sports truck with 4 motors, kinetic suspension, many of their team are from McLaren. Remember, RJ loves Porsche's since his youth. RJ has also stated he was driving a Porsche Cayenne for a long time as a comparison during R1T development. I started thinking about the 20" wheels after the reviews from Duck and others, but I think the 22's will be great on road. I'm in NC, so no real fear of snow, just need to be good in the rain. Just my opinion.

BigE,

If I knew I was going to drive either Rivian solely on the pavement, I'd surely go with the 22's. Better road handling and range.

 

[opnwide]

275/55R21 is the stock size for Rivian. That tire has a 6" sidewall according to tiresize.com

The Toyota Tacoma comes with a 265/60/R18 tire. That tire has a 6.3" sidewall according to the same website.

Do you really think 6" is not sufficient for potholes? Do you think that 0.3" is likely to make a significant difference for most people?

I think the 21's will do just fine for even neglected urban roads. The downside to the 21's, is really the odd size. It may be harder to find replacements, and they may be expensive since there isn't any competition.

I think you may have missed the bigger jest of my post in that a 10-15% loss in range to have the capability of the better looking/performing AT 20’s, 7” sidewall and especially “free” for a LE holder vs the $1800 cost otherwise, over a smaller side wall, odd-looking 21” wheel, with limited size options, makes not only financial sense, but common sense. (No question, the 22” wheel “looks” much better on the R1S than the T, IMO). Granted, I live in the Rocky Mountains and have cracked 3, 20” smaller profile Range Rover wheels in the city of Denver alone, but yes, the YT TFL guys’ LR Defender 20” with 2 broken 6” sidewalls will argue…7” is definitely better. (And I’ve hit potholes in Cleveland, OH bigger than that rock on Red Cone Pass. CO). Although I don’t discount parking at the local mall an “adventure”, it’s just less of an “adventure vehicle” on 21’s or 22’s, which you’re right, is fine for lots of folks. Get the 21’s if you want Commodore…I’ll pass ya at Whole Foods with 30 less miles in range on mine, but I’ll still make it home easily.

 

[DuckTruck]

When you crack your 21" or 22" wheel and sidewall on a rock or pothole, the EPA range estimate drops even more dramatically.

The silver lining in this case is that your power usage per 24 hrs. may drop to 0 for a few days. That is, of course, unless you opted for the spare tire. ?

 

[brianmartin]

we need official wheel weights. the 22s give a ten percent penalty. those in search of max range from the large pack will want to know how much all the wheels weigh. if the 20" wheels weigh significantly less than the 21's, then max range will be achieved with the 20's, and the tires switched out for all seasons.

Sponsored