Am I the only one who thinks anything less than 400mi of range is legacy at this point?

[2kwik4u]

......because range anxiety is way overblown IMO......

While I agree, I think it has to be "lived through" and can't just be "told" to most drivers. The difference between knowing the path and walking the path is quite different. Until you experience living with an EV, it's hard to get someone to believe you enough to spend their own money on it.

I was forced into a road trip for family reasons 12 days into owning my Rivian. 600mi, one way, trip. Luckily I had the NACS adapter in hand. I spent HOURS the night before researching the route, planning the stops, signing up for the apps, and general worrying over a whole slew of issues. After the first leg down, it was ALL gone. After the 3rd trip I made like that, I don't even plan anymore. Set it to 100% the night before and leave in the morning. Put in destination and follow directions. There is no amount of convincing that could have been done before purchase, and living through the experience that could have convinced me it's 95% as easy as what my ICE road tripping was.

Some things you just have to experience to understand fully.

Sponsored

 

[SANZC02]

There is more to it than the posted range. Based on the battery technology some recommend to not charge above 70% unless you are going on an immediate trip. So is it immediate enough if I charge to 100% by 6 am but don’t leave until 10? Then if it’s a long trip am I willing to accept the exceptionally slowed charge rate between 80 and 100% or do I move on so as not to waste time which means now I am at 80% of the 400 miles? Other battery technology wants you to charge to 100% but which one has worse performance in extremely cold climates. You will only get the 400 miles under ideal conditions which differs depending on the battery technology you selected. Bottom line is I have not seen a manufacturer sort all of this out for the consumer so we can make informed decisions. Finally while not arrange discussion some vehicles have much lower efficiencies so while it is loaded with huge heavy battery packs to get the 400 mile range it costs more $$$ to charge that huge pack vs perhaps a vehicle with a 300 mile range with 1/2 the battery density so it costs way less to charge to get that 300 miles. I am a retired engineer but also a realist

Don’t get too hung up on charging. I rarely find going to 100% is worth the time to do so but to charge overnight and leave at 100% may be a use case. I’ve done that on occasion, when they say don’t leave it at 100% or under 10% more referring to days not hours.

I have a 10 year old Tesla and a 3 year old Rivian. The batteries are way more resilient than people first thought now that there is way more data available. The Tesla has free supercharging which has been used for probably 95% of the 116,000 miles, usually charge to 80% And run it down to 20-30%. It still has over 90% of original range.

Rivian is similar except only DCFC charge on trips and L2 charge rest of the time. Plug in and charge to 80% once it gets under 40% unless traveling then usually keep it between 20 and 70% to stay in the sweet spot for charge speed. Has 44,000 on it and still around 98% of original range. Around 30,000 of the miles on the R1S is trips with DCFC charging.

 

[kryptokat]

Would like to add my personal experience as I find a lot of the comments here valid and misunderstood at the same time. My personal EV journey started with 2 year leases, with a Nissan leaf with 80 miles of EV range, then two more Nissan leaves then, a BMW i3 bev 80 miles also, then to a Tesla model s, then Jaguar ipace, Audi e-tron, Ford F-150 lightning and lastly an Ioniq5. I was One of the early adopters of the Toyota hybrids and was ecstatic when my Camry got 32 miles per gallon. Purely from a cost to own perspective EVs are not cheap. In my opinion EVs play really well in the luxury and performance market. I'm currently down to a hybrid and a plug-in hybrid with no EV. And it will take minimum of 300 miles for me to even consider one and with 400 offerings becoming hard to ignore. Efficiency matters to me so giving me 400 miles with a 200 kwh battery is not going to work for me. BMW and Toyota are doing really well with their efficiencies. Rivian seems to compete well but alienating people who will not buy a car without Android auto / Car play is a poor choice. I still prefer coasting to one pedal driving because my driving is 90% highway and the regen gives me motion sickness if I'm not the one driving. The popsicle stick handles make me feel like I'm pulling someone's finger, very counterintuitive to the dynamics of opening a door away from you, and are as inconvenient as they are unnecessary. As much as I want the R2 the BMW IX3 and Highlander EV are just hard to ignore. To add to OP's point I find 300 mile EVs give me more range anxiety than my 80 mi EVs because I venture out further with them. The NACS standard and 400 miles reliable highway range will get me to give up my ICE, so maybe 400 miles is the new minimum standard. Rivian has dropped the R1 standard so maybe they agree too?

 

[runwithscissors]

Tesla charging solved my range anxiety. When I first bought mine in 2023 and had to deal with EA charging, it was super frustrating and made me question my purchase. I quickly got my home charger installed and that helped but didn't enjoy longer trips until we were compatible with Tesla. I'd have to be desperate to charge at anything other than Tesla with DCFC. Rivian has an awful charging curve which to me is more important than 100% range.

 

[Billyk24]

Would like to add my personal experience as I find a lot of the comments here valid and misunderstood at the same time. My personal EV journey started with 2 year leases, with a Nissan leaf with 80 miles of EV range, then two more Nissan leaves then, a BMW i3 bev 80 miles also, then to a Tesla model s, then Jaguar ipace, Audi e-tron, Ford F-150 lightning and lastly an Ioniq5. I was One of the early adopters of the Toyota hybrids and was ecstatic when my Camry got 32 miles per gallon. Purely from a cost to own perspective EVs are not cheap. In my opinion EVs play really well in the luxury and performance market. I'm currently down to a hybrid and a plug-in hybrid with no EV. And it will take minimum of 300 miles for me to even consider one and with 400 offerings becoming hard to ignore. Efficiency matters to me so giving me 400 miles with a 200 kwh battery is not going to work for me. BMW and Toyota are doing really well with their efficiencies. Rivian seems to compete well but alienating people who will not buy a car without Android auto / Car play is a poor choice. I still prefer coasting to one pedal driving because my driving is 90% highway and the regen gives me motion sickness if I'm not the one driving. The popsicle stick handles make me feel like I'm pulling someone's finger, very counterintuitive to the dynamics of opening a door away from you, and are as inconvenient as they are unnecessary. As much as I want the R2 the BMW IX3 and Highlander EV are just hard to ignore. To add to OP's point I find 300 mile EVs give me more range anxiety than my 80 mi EVs because I venture out further with them. The NACS standard and 400 miles reliable highway range will get me to give up my ICE, so maybe 400 miles is the new minimum standard. Rivian has dropped the R1 standard so maybe they agree too?

This is a Rivian forum. I have a R2 reservation andviwn a Ford Mach E which has varying ( you get to set) regenerative braking settings). The Mach E rolls considerably more than any hybrid I have own including a current 10 year old Rav4 hybrid.

 

[windblowlc]

To add to OP's point I find 300 mile EVs give me more range anxiety than my 80 mi EVs because I venture out further with them.

I find this statement is really odd. It's inconceivable that a 300 mile EV gets more range anxiety than a 80 mile one. May be the reason you don't venture out further with the 80 mile EV is precisely because of range anxiety?

 

[mswlogo]

Yes, I think anything with less than 100 MPGe is also legacy.

There are very few cars that hit 400 miles and above 100 MPGe

An Air and an S. I think Gravity might be close.

I ended up going with an X and had to compromise on the range. It came in #2 time wise (2 gravity’s in front) and #1 efficiency.

Rivian came in 4th and 2nd to last on efficiency.

You want both.

 

[River Ghost]

https://insideevs.com/features/790876/300-mile-range-evs-400-2026/

What the broad market feels they want in range is different than what an individual may feel they need. That does not mean that the individual is wrong; it is just two different things. As RJ Scaringe has repeatedly noted there just is not that much choice in EVs like there is in ICE vehicles. EVs currently have to address the broad market and not niches in order to be successful. That will change as we get more choices in EVs.

 

[Praxis]

Yes, you're the only one.

I've been driving EV's for almost 11 years now. When EV's were in the 100 mile range you (or people like you) were saying you need 200 miles of range. When EV's were in the 150 miles range you (or people like you) were saying you need 300 miles of range. When EV's were in the 200 mile range you (or people like you) were saying you need 400 miles of range.

There is no satisfying you (or people like you) so keep on driving ICE.

Eh. Many ICE vehicles have been capable of 400-500+ miles on one tank for a long time so it's natural to want that kind of range from battery EV, too - especially considering the ~tenfold increase in 'refueling' time.

Yes, though - most of most folks' driving needs are maybe 10-50 miles a day, which is well covered by a 200-300+ mile battery range, especially if charging at home.

For me, my main hangup with EVs is the fact that the charging situation in my home town (for my occasional visits) is.. slightly dire, to say the least. Only two charging points available, and they're only 11-62kW, likely with questionable dependability. The two closest DC fast charging stations are almost a hundred miles away. Definitely not ideal with lower limited range.

 

[mkhuffman]

I 100% agree with the OP. 400 mile range is the minimum I will consider.

I have bad public charging experiences almost every time I do it. The one exception is the RAN.

I can't wait for the R1 with a 200 kWh pack. It will allow me to drive almost everywhere using home and destination charging. That will be amazing, and that is what is needed for the skeptics to give it a shot.

Just imagine if you could fit a 200 kWh pack in the R2. One day battery density will be high enough for it to be possible. Imagine only charging when you want to instead of being forced to. Just imagine.

 

[DJFrerichs]

Yes, you will want to get the largest battery possible to compensate for loss, but this is no different than lower MPG an an Ice vehicle in the Winter. More charging options on the road should help alleviate this concern. Preconditioning and not driving like a nascar driver is key.

 

[BannedByTMC]

but this is no different than lower MPG an an Ice vehicle in the Winter

Yes it is, it's not even close.

 

[DJFrerichs]

Yes it is, it's not even close.

I disagree, you will easily see similar % impact on ice in winter vs summer.

 

[BannedByTMC]

I disagree, you will easily see similar % impact on ice in winter vs summer.

That is simply incorrect as anyone who's experienced both knows, as well as data to back it up.

[Fuel economy tests show that, in city driving, a conventional gasoline car's gas mileage is roughly 15% lower at 20°F than it would be at 77°F. /QUOTE]

For electric vehicles (EVs), fuel economy can drop roughly 39% in mixed city and highway driving, and range can drop by 41%.

https://www.energy.gov/energysaver/fuel-economy-cold-weather

Sponsored