R2 Range Data from Socal > Utah and general impressions

[Cruncher2504]

So I just did a 400 miles trip from Disneyland to Zion and I wanted to share some of the range data that I have gathered in the trip as well as how I feel about the R2 in general.

Background: Owned LE 2023 R1S, and currently have a Dune Tri Motor R1S and R2 LE picked up last week. So most of my experiences will be comparing between the Dune and the R2.

1/ Driving experiences: the R2 feels much more planted than the R1S. This is probably because of the standard coil suspensions vs. Air springs. This creates a more pleasant driving experience than the gen 2 R1 imo.

2/ Comfort experience: I can't say how much I enjoy driving the R2. The cabin is super quiet and there are virtually no squeaks, rattles, or wind noise. Despite how many times I have brought my R1S to service, there are still squeaks and rattles popping up randomly.

3/ Build quality: when you already have the R1 as a point of reference, you can see where Rivian cut corners. The glove boxes do feel really cheap and flimsy. There are more hard touch plastics. Less metal trim pieces. But they did well in hiding those. And the design ends up feeling premium still.

4/ Charging: this thing charges fast!!! I only had to spend around 15 minutes at 2 charging stops to make it to Utah. The recommended charging time was around 12 mins each but I like to have some safety buffers. Due to the smaller battery, and longer sustained charging curve, this makes road trip more convenient.

5/ UHF: I used it 95% on this drive to keep constant speed. And I also read on reddit about some of the issues and I have to agree with them. The system seems to be a regression from the one I used on the R1 up until last month. The algorithm seems to be really reluctant on making lane changes especially right lane. I would say more than half of the time it would not make the change despite having complete opening to do so. And it made weird decisions such as slowing down abruptly when the turn signal was made. The road ahead had no car. There were cars behind us and to the right. But it just suddenly slow down instead of keeping constant speed to move ahead and find an opening. I think I pissed a few people off when it did that. I didn't observe that behavior on left lane change. And then on the first leg of the trip, I got camera error message and UHF just shut down. Had to pull over and did a reset for it to go back on.

Now to the range issue. I experienced widely different range estimates based on driving conditions. On the first leg of the trip, around 150 miles or so from SoCal to Baker, the elevation gain was around 4.2k feet. And in that stretch, I observed efficiency of 2.5 ish mi/kWh. When thing started to flatten out the remainder of that leg to Baker, the average efficiency was around 3 mi/kWh. I also did some napkin maths using the distance travel (135mi) and the used battery percentage when I reached Baker (around 48%) so that is equivalent of around 282 mi from 100 to 0%. My data from Rivian Roamer seems to agree with that analysis at around 3 mi/kWh. Then things started to go down hill when we hit the 200 or so mile trip on the 15 from NV to UT. That leg of the freeway has a speed limit of 75. And the temp was 117. So AC was working hard. I maintained much of the trip hovering around that speed limit and my efficiency got pummeled to around 2.0 ish.

But other things to note that my car was having a full load with 1 driver, 3 passengers, several luggages, 1 probable fridge plugged and running the whole time. AC was at medium, 68 most of the trip.

Overall, I enjoyed the trip. The R2 is an awesome vehicle. It's fast, comfortable and charges fast. Comparing with my Tri motor, I think it is more beneficial to road trip with the R2 because efficiency wise, I believe I would have to make the same stops between the R1 and R2 to go the same distance. But R2 just charges faster and battery capacity is less which translates to cheaper cost.

Sponsored

 

[ksurfier]

How do you feel about the turn signal and drive stalk? They worked fine, but my impression is that they felt a little flimsier than I expected. Curious if that’s just me or if others noticed it too?

 

[Cruncher2504]

I think they are fine. Comparing to my R1, they seem to be easier to make smaller adjustments. On my R1, I often find myself triggering the whole stalk when I just want to do a small shift to turn the signal off.

 

[Mos Eisley]

Now this is the kind of real world data that real matters! Big thanks to you and all who are taking time to share it here.

 

[DuoRivian]

Now this is the kind of real world data that real matters! Big thanks to you and all who are taking time to share it here.

The OoS data was real world too.

 

[goarmy]

So I just did a 400 miles trip from Disneyland to Zion and I wanted to share some of the range data that I have gathered in the trip as well as how I feel about the R2 in general.

Background: Owned LE 2023 R1S, and currently have a Dune Tri Motor R1S and R2 LE picked up last week. So most of my experiences will be comparing between the Dune and the R2.

1/ Driving experiences: the R2 feels much more planted than the R1S. This is probably because of the standard coil suspensions vs. Air springs. This creates a more pleasant driving experience than the gen 2 R1 imo.

2/ Comfort experience: I can't say how much I enjoy driving the R2. The cabin is super quiet and there are virtually no squeaks, rattles, or wind noise. Despite how many times I have brought my R1S to service, there are still squeaks and rattles popping up randomly.

3/ Build quality: when you already have the R1 as a point of reference, you can see where Rivian cut corners. The glove boxes do feel really cheap and flimsy. There are more hard touch plastics. Less metal trim pieces. But they did well in hiding those. And the design ends up feeling premium still.

4/ Charging: this thing charges fast!!! I only had to spend around 15 minutes at 2 charging stops to make it to Utah. The recommended charging time was around 12 mins each but I like to have some safety buffers. Due to the smaller battery, and longer sustained charging curve, this makes road trip more convenient.

5/ UHF: I used it 95% on this drive to keep constant speed. And I also read on reddit about some of the issues and I have to agree with them. The system seems to be a regression from the one I used on the R1 up until last month. The algorithm seems to be really reluctant on making lane changes especially right lane. I would say more than half of the time it would not make the change despite having complete opening to do so. And it made weird decisions such as slowing down abruptly when the turn signal was made. The road ahead had no car. There were cars behind us and to the right. But it just suddenly slow down instead of keeping constant speed to move ahead and find an opening. I think I pissed a few people off when it did that. I didn't observe that behavior on left lane change. And then on the first leg of the trip, I got camera error message and UHF just shut down. Had to pull over and did a reset for it to go back on.

Now to the range issue. I experienced widely different range estimates based on driving conditions. On the first leg of the trip, around 150 miles or so from SoCal to Baker, the elevation gain was around 4.2k feet. And in that stretch, I observed efficiency of 2.5 ish mi/kWh. When thing started to flatten out the remainder of that leg to Baker, the average efficiency was around 3 mi/kWh. I also did some napkin maths using the distance travel (135mi) and the used battery percentage when I reached Baker (around 48%) so that is equivalent of around 282 mi from 100 to 0%. My data from Rivian Roamer seems to agree with that analysis at around 3 mi/kWh. Then things started to go down hill when we hit the 200 or so mile trip on the 15 from NV to UT. That leg of the freeway has a speed limit of 75. And the temp was 117. So AC was working hard. I maintained much of the trip hovering around that speed limit and my efficiency got pummeled to around 2.0 ish.

But other things to note that my car was having a full load with 1 driver, 3 passengers, several luggages, 1 probable fridge plugged and running the whole time. AC was at medium, 68 most of the trip.

Overall, I enjoyed the trip. The R2 is an awesome vehicle. It's fast, comfortable and charges fast. Comparing with my Tri motor, I think it is more beneficial to road trip with the R2 because efficiency wise, I believe I would have to make the same stops between the R1 and R2 to go the same distance. But R2 just charges faster and battery capacity is less which translates to cheaper cost.

Great post! Thanks for another range experience. What size wheels do you have?

 

[Mos Eisley]

The OoS data was real world too.

Sure- but I was making no reference to OOS.

 

[tivoboy]

The OoS data was real world too.

While real it is still a bit of a stress test. As many others here have said even though they drive long stretches at 70-75, the average for a personal trip doesn’t mathematically end up there. It’s more like 65-67 at best. The stress test just goes non stop for as long as possible at 70 or 75 with minimal or incredibly limited slowing or stopping. They purposely pick routes and times (when practicable) to be able to maintain uninterrupted 70 or 75 speed.
It’s good data for sure. And most likely accurate. But it’s not really aligned with the reality of a typical driver covering the same route and distance but driving as the majority do.

 

[Cruncher2504]

Great post! Thanks for another range experience. What size wheels do you have?

No prob! We have the 21 btw.

 

[mkg3]

Since most drivers on I-15, especially between SoCal to Vegas, drive at 80~85 mph, if not faster, just keeping up with the traffic and not hold up the traffic would be a challenge at the lower speed indicated by the average speed.

I am hoping that someone reports the consumption/range at the actual driving pace that most of the drivers drive at (75~85 mph) on road trips. I usually drive the R1S gen1 quad at roughly 80mph on any road trips and usually get 2.1~2.3 miles/kWh through mixed topology on AP/Moderate/Low, and bit more on Conserve/Moderate/Lowest on 22".

 

[DuoRivian]

While real it is still a bit of a stress test. As many others here have said even though they drive long stretches at 70-75, the average for a personal trip doesn’t mathematically end up there. It’s more like 65-67 at best. The stress test just goes non stop for as long as possible at 70 or 75 with minimal or incredibly limited slowing or stopping. They purposely pick routes and times (when practicable) to be able to maintain uninterrupted 70 or 75 speed.
It’s good data for sure. And most likely accurate. But it’s not really aligned with the reality of a typical driver covering the same route and distance but driving as the majority do.

And many others have stated there are plenty of areas where you can drive at this speed for a prolonged distance (you even mentioned 65-67 mph which would yield similar results). So the data was very useful and from reports R2 underperformed at all speeds including urban driving. Awaiting the videos.

 

[Cruncher2504]

Since most drivers on I-15, especially between SoCal to Vegas, drive at 80~85 mph, if not faster, just keeping up with the traffic and not hold up the traffic would be a challenge at the lower speed indicated by the average speed.

I am hoping that someone reports the consumption/range at the actual driving pace that most of the drivers drive at (75~85 mph) on road trips. I usually drive the R1S gen1 quad at roughly 80mph on any road trips and usually get 2.1~2.3 miles/kWh through mixed topology on AP/Moderate/Low, and bit more on Conserve/Moderate/Lowest on 22".

Agreed. But the est speed accounts for super small detours like pulling into a super charger (2 in total) and 1 pit stop at Barstow outlet. And those 3 or 4 mph did pull the average down significantly. Otherwise the 75mph stretch was maintained at close to the speed limit (or slightly over). That was keeping with traffic as well. Another thing to note, Rivian Roamer data seems to be a bit lower than what is actually reported on Rivian itself. For instance, the on screen efficiency from the R2 is higher than Rivian Roamer. I'm not sure if the speed factor is also affected. But I know for a fact that my max speed at some points did go over the max reported on Rivian Roamer.

 

[tivoboy]

Agreed. But the est speed accounts for super small detours like pulling into a super charger (2 in total) and 1 pit stop at Barstow outlet. And those 3 or 4 mph did pull the average down significantly. Otherwise the 75mph stretch was maintained at close to the speed limit (or slightly over). That was keeping with traffic as well. Another thing to note, Rivian Roamer data seems to be a bit lower than what is actually reported on Rivian itself. For instance, the on screen efficiency from the R2 is higher than Rivian Roamer. I'm not sure if the speed factor is also affected. But I know for a fact that my max speed at some points did go over the max reported on Rivian Roamer.

View attachment 161859

how
Much off is the RR data. Because even just taking the miles distance and dividing it by the Rivian kw used reported the onscreen CALCULATED amount is if by ~.02.-.05 mile per kw. Not a lot but it’s not the same as reported even with rounding.

 

[Cruncher2504]

how
Much off is the RR data. Because even just taking the miles distance and dividing it by the Rivian kw used reported the onscreen CALCULATED amount is if by ~.02.-.05 mile per kw. Not a lot but it’s not the same as reported even with rounding.

Since I only have screenshot for the leg ending in baker (forgot to take one in barstow). But rivian roamer broke it down to 2 trips. Here's Gemini analysis:

Sponsored