? Official EPA Range and MPGe Numbers for R1T & R1S

[SeaGeo]

i don't really see 4Runner owners who are enamoured with their trucks like Tesla owners

You should spend more time with 4Runner enthusiasts. lol.

But seriously, I bet if you make a thread on comparison shopping the R1S vs other vehicles you'll get a better response from folks. I don't think the reaction you're getting is fanboyism, as much as people expressing confusion over apparent (though you've clarified this) disappointment in the efficiency when Rivian delivered what they said they would.

Sponsored

 

[crashmtb]

However, i don't really see 4Runner owners who are enamoured with their trucks like Tesla owners...

every single vehicle-specific forum has its share of ardent foaming at the mouth enthusiasts. Especially 4Runner/Tacoma ones.

although they don’t seem to venerate Akio Toyoda like the Tesla partisans do their mr. musk.

 

[mkennedy1996]

There is no surprise in the efficiency. They have given us this information all along. With a 135kW pack and 316 miles of range, the R1S uses approximately 427.2 Wh/Mile.

Back in March, they gave us enough data that I calculated it to use 428 Wh/Mile.

They have published some data that guides us to the efficiency. While this information is still the current information posted, we don't know if it has evolved as the vehicles have developed.

They publish charging speeds for two different chargers. They do not specify which vehicle these are for, nor do they give specifics on the wheel configuration, which can have an impact on range.

The mobile charger provides 7.68kW of power and adds 16 miles per hour of range.
You have to deduct a percentage of that power that is lost during the charging process in order to come to the power available to add range. In this case I use a charging loss of 8% and 10%.

At a 10% charging inefficiency loss, you have 6,912 watts available to add range. Their spec indicates this would add 16 miles of range (with rounding this could be 15.51 to 16.49):
432Wh/mile - with rounding this could be between (419 to 446Wh/mile)

At an 8% charging inefficiency loss, you have 7,066 watts available to add range. Their spec indicates this would add 16 miles of range (with rounding this could be 15.51 to 16.49):
442Wh/mile - with rounding this could be between (428 to 456Wh/mile)

The hard wired charger provides 11.5kW of power and adds 25 miles per hour of range.

At a 10% charging inefficiency loss, you have 10,350 watts available to add range. Their spec indicates this would add 25 miles of range (with rounding this could be 24.51 to 25.49):
414Wh/mile - with rounding this could be between (406 to 422Wh/mile)

At an 8% charging inefficiency loss, you have 10,580 watts available to add range. Their spec indicates this would add 25 miles of range (with rounding this could be 24.51 to 25.49):
423Wh/mile - with rounding this could be between (415 to 432Wh/mile)

This at those scenarios:
432Wh/mile - with rounding this could be between (419 to 446Wh/mile)
442Wh/mile - with rounding this could be between (428 to 456Wh/mile)
414Wh/mile - with rounding this could be between (406 to 422Wh/mile)
423Wh/mile - with rounding this could be between (415 to 432Wh/mile)
The average of these comes to 428Wh/mile or between (417 to 439Wh/mile)

Based upon available data, that is my best guess.

 

[Zeroemit]

You should spend more time with 4Runner enthusiasts. lol.

But seriously, I bet if you make a thread on comparison shopping the R1S vs other vehicles you'll get a better response from folks. I don't think the reaction you're getting is fanboyism, as much as people expressing confusion over apparent (though you've clarified this) disappointment in the efficiency when Rivian delivered what they said they would.

Yes, i guess you are right. I should've have just stuck to the R1S only post about other vehicles considered.

 

[ajdelange]

Yes, and hence the moniker - fanboy, Tesla Cult .

However, i don't really see 4Runner owners who are enamoured with their trucks like Tesla owners.... and maybe, looks like Rivian owners now.

I've had both and at the time I loved the 4-Runner but it pales in comparison to the Telsa. Now unless Lucid and Rivian are much less capable than the Teslas, and all evidence is to the contrary, I think I would have had the same reaction to them. Tesla was the first "real" electric car. It won't matter whose badge is on any of these comparable newer offerings. People will become fanboys. Call us "electric fanboys".

 

[Zeroemit]

every single vehicle-specific forum has its share of ardent foaming at the mouth enthusiasts. Especially 4Runner/Tacoma ones.

although they don’t seem to venerate Akio Toyoda like the Tesla partisans do their mr. musk.

Lol, yes. Its more like Dear Leader Musk to some of them.

 

[SeaGeo]

Lol, yes. Its more like Dear Leader Musk to some of them.

just wait till you run into some of our neighborhood tesla trolls.

 

[crashmtb]

just wait till you run into some of our neighborhood tesla trolls.

Shhh you’ll wake them!

 

[Ventura]

There's still a potential environmental cost associated with most people's energy that they may be concerned about. At the end of the day it may just mean the folks need to stick to smaller vehicles. Which is ok.

Agreed. For that reason I'd be interested in knowing if there is any significant difference in weight between the 20" wheels. I'm not aesthetically sold on a particular set and would consider choosing for a small efficiency gain. In the same line of thought, I'd probably shop around for a different tire at replacement time, but will first wear out what comes on it as I don't want to waste a set of tires. I think, living in a dry area, I can get away with a less aggressive tire but not so much a passenger tire that may not hold up to rocks.
I don't want to give up capability but I do want to maximize efficiency within the bounds of my needs.

 

[sevengroove]

I'm going to assume this is w/out the off-road upgrade package (tow hooks and additional reinforced underbody shielding)

Seems likely - does anyone have confirmation of this? I also wonder what their payload was for the test. I recall Ford using a 1000lb(?) payload for testing the range in their F-150 Lightning.

 

[flabyboy]

In about 10 years when EVs are common place and battery tech has improved. The Rivians, F150s, Hummers will be viewed as the polluters and environmentally unfriendly vehicles. Anything that requires an excessive amount of NRG to charge it will be viewed in that manner

 

[SeaGeo]

Agreed. For that reason I'd be interested in knowing if there is any significant difference in weight between the 20" wheels. I'm not aesthetically sold on a particular set and would consider choosing for a small efficiency gain. In the same line of thought, I'd probably shop around for a different tire at replacement time, but will first wear out what comes on it as I don't want to waste a set of tires. I think, living in a dry area, I can get away with a less aggressive tire but not so much a passenger tire that may not hold up to rocks.
I don't want to give up capability but I do want to maximize efficiency within the bounds of my needs.

Are you opposed to getting the 21s?

 

[DucRider]

Agreed, I expect the same. It's not clear to me that the EPA values (other than the different fudge factor) account for the different ride heights though. Any thoughts?

Rivian will have provided the parameters to set the dyno to for the the test. AFAIK, there is no way to change those during different speeds during the dyno test.
A chunk of these settings are derived from a "Coast Down" test. Tesla has a selectable mode for this test that shuts off all heating/cooling circuits and closes all the body vents to get the best aero. I don't know if the "Coast Down" mode optimizes ride height, but it wouldn't surprise me. Tesla also has a "Dyno Mode" for the test that disables all the traction control, stability control, etc

What Rivian selected for a ride height to simulate during testing, and to what extent they tweaked settings or designed certain features is unknown. Those manufacturers that don't do a lot of things to optimize for the EPA range test usually return a real world result that is closer to the test results.
Ride height will have the most impact at higher speeds. The standard hwy test has a top speed of 60 mph and averages 48 mph. The 5 cycle test (which Rivian uses) has a "High Speed" test that still averages 48 mph but tops out briefly at 80 mph but has bigger/stronger acceleration and braking during the speed variations.

Only when these get in the hands of people using them in a variety of conditions will we get a real picture of the range to expect. The EPA tests give us a few pencil lines on the canvas and we will paint the full color picture with our reports.

 

[Ventura]

Are you opposed to getting the 21s?

Yes, because of the lack of options. I could try running on passenger tires for the first 30K but I'd be even more concerned about durability off-road than traction (I'm unlikely to see mud).
I'd consider something like this slightly lighter, lower resistance LT tire as a replacement tire, but I'd have to determine that based on my likely use (more camping might mean more need for an AT).

 

[ajdelange]

In about 10 years when EVs are common place and battery tech has improved. The Rivians, F150s, Hummers will be viewed as the polluters and environmentally unfriendly vehicles. Anything that requires an excessive amount of NRG to charge it will be viewed in that manner

Not sure what NRGs are but in 10 years the grid will be much cleaner (we hope). I now charge from solar in the States and hydro in Canada so 0 carbon footprint is quite possible even today.

Sponsored