Rivian, give me a SoC gauge option

[DayTripping]

I want the precision and I have a few motorcycles with not very granular fuel gauges and it is really hard to predict sometimes how much fuel I am using. I have mine to show %'age now. I also want my estimated charge % at arrival, not the stupid miles which depends on what mode I am in.

If I could remove the miles to empty totally I would. Its how I run it in my Tesla and never have looked back or seen a need to change it. If I must have MTE (miles to empty) at my arrival, then give me the % left as well. That is why they are starting with and doing the math to give me the highly inaccurate MTE.

Sponsored

 

[lefkonj]

What's really funny is I have two sons who learned how to drive over the last 3 years. Both of them never look at the gas gauge, they base it on how many miles the dash says they have left. Never say 'I have a quarter of tank left' instead 'I have 120 miles left'. The gauge would be ok for an older generation but the younger generation doesn't care about the percentage just the miles they can go.

After owning 2 EVs for the last 2 years I don't care anymore either, its the miles I have left.

 

[sub]

There is no reason not to add more options. Rivian probably has more important things on their to-do list but I hope that eventually we will have 10+ options for the behavior and appearance of every UI element.

My preference is for an option that completely removes the battery gauge. If you plug in every night the battery gauge is entirely unnecessary at least 350 days a year for the vast majority of people. I run out of washer fluid more often than I run out of battery. Perhaps replace the battery gauge with a 1-100% washer fluid gauge.

And for the 5-10 days each year that I need to monitor my range, I can turn it back on (ideally with even more detail).

 

[DayTripping]

What's really funny is I have two sons who learned how to drive over the last 3 years. Both of them never look at the gas gauge, they base it on how many miles the dash says they have left. Never say 'I have a quarter of tank left' instead 'I have 120 miles left'. The gauge would be ok for an older generation but the younger generation doesn't care about the percentage just the miles they can go.

After owning 2 EVs for the last 2 years I don't care anymore either, its the miles I have left.

The problem with that is the miles to empty are almost never accurate in a Rivian. My Tesla if I go to the energy screen is pretty much dead nuts on. Rivian is nowhere near as accurate. My Teslas will typically get with about 1/2% of what I end up at when I stop. I charge my battery based on charge level, not MTE. I do that to minimize degradation.

I don't want to calculate that X number of miles in Conserve is a certain % and Y number of miles in Sport is another %. Percent is percent regardless of drive mode. My approach has resulted in minimal degradation of my EV's batteries. The MTE is even less accurate since I changed my tires.

 

[Jonger1150]

The critical tipping point is how many DC quick chargers are available "just in case" for range anxiety to go away. Most gas stations don't offer chargers. If just 25% did, that's 50,000 more chargers nationwide. That basically doubles the quick charging network.

#1: If you don't own a home where you can have a lvl 2 charger -- don't buy an EV yet.

 

[DayTripping]

The critical tipping point is how many DC quick chargers are available "just in case" for range anxiety to go away. Most gas stations don't offer chargers. If just 25% did, that's 50,000 more chargers nationwide. That basically doubles the quick charging network.

#1: If you don't own a home where you can have a lvl 2 charger -- don't buy an EV yet.

If you buy a Tesla with free supercharging (and you have one nearby) like some of the current pricing that includes it for a new one, it might be worthwhile. Otherwise, I'd totally agree.

 

[CANCERDOC]

Ugh to have less precision? I like having both miles and percentage and we already have that option. Giving people an option with less precision will lead to more dumb posts like “but I had one bar left!”

 

[lefkonj]

The problem with that is the miles to empty are almost never accurate in a Rivian. My Tesla if I go to the energy screen is pretty much dead nuts on. Rivian is nowhere near as accurate. My Teslas will typically get with about 1/2% of what I end up at when I stop. I charge my battery based on charge level, not MTE. I do that to minimize degradation.

I don't want to calculate that X number of miles in Conserve is a certain % and Y number of miles in Sport is another %. Percent is percent regardless of drive mode. My approach has resulted in minimal degradation of my EV's batteries. The MTE is even less accurate since I changed my tires.

I hear you but neither is a ICE gauge. There are plenty of variables that will cause an increase or decrease in consumption. I had an Audi that got 300ish miles of range locally but on a highway got in the high 400s. Just looking at the percentage of battery/tank left is not great either.

 

[Donald Stanfield]

I haven’t come across a problem in my 40 years of life that was solved by knowing less about it. The way to fix range anxiety and GOM issues is to teach people the simple math of using battery percentage to calculate how many kWh you have remaining and multiply that by the usage rate to get miles.

Once you understand how to do that and more importantly why to do that the mystery of a battery going dead ceases to exist. EVs are new, and how the range and batteries work are unknown to many people but the best thing about them is their ease of consumption calculations on the fly.

If you’re smart enough to worry about the possibility of running out of battery then you’re smart enough to figure out how to make a snap calculation of your usage rate.

 

[Gee Bee]

Iam on the fence for a quad max

I cancelled my order as no price or range was given.

For road trips I rather drive my Turbo S cabriolet.

4600 miles in ten
Days

 

[LeeY]

Just give me a gauge showing where the vampire drain is coming from and an option to engage or disengage the items without having to go panel surfing.

 

[slillie]

Been thinking about range anxiety recently. Detractors use it as a cudgel and it’s become engrained in many people as a reason not to try an EV. I don’t deny it’s a real thing for folks getting into EVs, but why? My hypothesis is: range anxiety results mainly from the way EVs show fuel level (the range display). Rather than putting our minds at ease, the level of precision in an ever-changing, miles-remaining range estimate makes us hyper-fixate in a way we never did with ICE.

In an ICE vehicle you might monitor it down to the 1/4 or 1/8th tank on the fuel gauge, but having an order of magnitude more precision in an EV range display triggers a fear response in many. I’ve personally witnessed new EV owners (that I’ve convinced to get an EV) on the verge of returning their vehicle after driving part way home from the dealer (over the mountains), watching their plummeting range estimate with dismay and terror. My response to their frantic phone calls has been, “Does the route planner say you’ll make it? Yes? OK, drive the speed limit and you’ll make it.” My record is 100% so far.

Changing the driver display to show battery percentage is a step in the right direction and I use that, but I’d prefer a simple gauge with 10% increments with no numbers until you get below 10%. Keep all that precision in the route planner, but not in the driver display.

**EDIT: I’m not saying make a gauge the only option, just make it AN option.

EV creds: 9 EVs (including 2 R1s), 7 years, and about 150K miles all across North America. I certainly don’t know everything but I’m no newb.

Currently on a 2-week ski road trip from Seattle to Utah. This may be obvious or already discussed, but: The range displayed on the driver’s display is based on ideal conditions. That’s why when I top off the truck to 100% it always displays “420 miles,” regardless of temperature, altitude, wind conditions, road incline, etc. However, the soc that is displayed (center screen) when you are navigating to a destination is dynamic, and takes into account environmental conditions like wind speed and direction, speed limit along the route, altitude, highway grade, outside temperature, etc.

Although there is usually a disparity between the range remaining on the driver’s screen and the predicted SOC at destination on the center display, I find that when I reach the destination, the center display turns out to be the most accurate. If the soc at destination starts going into the yellow or red range, I either slow down (speed is the biggest killer of range) or stop for more electrons.

Montana and Idaho highways are killers of range because they have 80 mph roads. In that case, I either suck it up and move to the right lane and slow to less that 70 or plan on more refueling stops.

Oh, love my truck!

 

[MarkNorman]

The problem with that is the miles to empty are almost never accurate in a Rivian. My Tesla if I go to the energy screen is pretty much dead nuts on. Rivian is nowhere near as accurate. My Teslas will typically get with about 1/2% of what I end up at when I stop. I charge my battery based on charge level, not MTE. I do that to minimize degradation.

I don't want to calculate that X number of miles in Conserve is a certain % and Y number of miles in Sport is another %. Percent is percent regardless of drive mode. My approach has resulted in minimal degradation of my EV's batteries. The MTE is even less accurate since I changed my tires.

My understanding is Rivian uses their mode-dependent range estimate divided by battery capacity multiplied by current SoC to estimate MTE. There is no factoring in for pack temp or past driving behavior etc. I think Tesla used to do that too, but have since improved their model to account for some of the variables. I also prefer that approach.

I am very impressed with the route planning estimates, they seem pretty spot on for me. Although I do wish they would pull in more of the fine tuning you get from ABRP, i.e. speed offset, SoC at charge stop and SoC at destination,

 

[MarkNorman]

Just give me a gauge showing where the vampire drain is coming from and an option to engage or disengage the items without having to go panel surfing.

Have you looked in the “RiDE” menu (secret service mode)? You may get some indication there.

 

[MarkNorman]

Currently on a 2-week ski road trip from Seattle to Utah. This may be obvious or already discussed, but: The range displayed on the driver’s display is based on ideal conditions. That’s why when I top off the truck to 100% it always displays “420 miles,” regardless of temperature, altitude, wind conditions, road incline, etc. However, the soc that is displayed (center screen) when you are navigating to a destination is dynamic, and takes into account environmental conditions like wind speed and direction, speed limit along the route, altitude, highway grade, outside temperature, etc.

Although there is usually a disparity between the range remaining on the driver’s screen and the predicted SOC at destination on the center display, I find that when I reach the destination, the center display turns out to be the most accurate. If the soc at destination starts going into the yellow or red range, I either slow down (speed is the biggest killer of range) or stop for more electrons.

Oh, love my truck!

Good points. You may have driven past me on your way to UT, I’m jealous!

Agree, the route planner (center display) is a far better estimate and I wish some of the variables were factored into the MTE Number in the drivers display. Mainly, just incorporate efficiency from recent past drives, i..e if I haven’t been coming close to the 3 mi/kWh used for AP mode range calc in any of my recent past drives, don’t assume I will in the near future either.

Sponsored