R2 Range Limitations and Rivian's Response

[Bullwinkle]

I know most of the people on this site are current Rivian owners. Where you should all be concerned is for those that don't currently drive a Rivian, why pay more for an R2 with significantly less range than a Tesla Model Y. I get the offroad argument, which is valid. How many people will really primarily use the R2 as an offroad vehicle? According to the Rivian rep when I test drove, it's like 10% are asking for 20 inch wheels (not a scientific benchmark, but it's something).

Why current Rivian owners should care is that if this car doesn't sell, who's going to service your car in 5 years? A couple of diehards is not going to keep a company afloat. I ordered an R2 on July 31 with a fair amount of excitement, but I am questioning if I walk away from the $500 deposit to get 50 more miles per charge. That's real.

If the Model Y performance goes 260 miles from 80% to 10% SoC, and the R2 goes 200 miles from 80% to 10% SoC, how much more range would R2 need to go for you to see it as a better value?

Sponsored

 

[dcdttu]

Just for fun I used ABRP to plot a trip from Los Angeles, CA to Lubbock, TX in a R2 Premium, Model Y Long Range, and Lucid Air (Dream).

As you can see, the difference between the Y and R2 is a measly fifteen minutes. Why? The R2's charging curve mostly makes up for the Model Y's efficiency, and neither has enough actual range to start skipping chargers in a meaningful way, like the Lucid can do.

(Also note the total travel time difference between the R2/Y and Lucid is about an hour, out of a 20 hour drive. Not bad at all.)

Yes, extremely remote off-roading and adventuring is going to be a bit curtailed I suppose, but long distance travel won't.

 

[savethemanual]

I know most of the people on this site are current Rivian owners. Where you should all be concerned is for those that don't currently drive a Rivian, why pay more for an R2 with significantly less range than a Tesla Model Y. I get the offroad argument, which is valid. How many people will really primarily use the R2 as an offroad vehicle? According to the Rivian rep when I test drove, it's like 10% are asking for 20 inch wheels (not a scientific benchmark, but it's something).

Why current Rivian owners should care is that if this car doesn't sell, who's going to service your car in 5 years? A couple of diehards is not going to keep a company afloat. I ordered an R2 on July 31 with a fair amount of excitement, but I am questioning if I walk away from the $500 deposit to get 50 more miles per charge. That's real.

I'm holding out for the non performance premium AWD R2, which has a base of $54k later this year. An equivalent MY is $52k (add 20" wheels). Would I like more range for the handful of long road trips I make a year? Sure, but the Exterior/Interior design, interior space, roll down rear glass and overall capability of the R2 win me over. They are both fantastic vehicles and can't go wrong with either one, happy trails!

 

[Tracaus]

If the Model Y performance goes 260 miles from 80% to 10% SoC, and the R2 goes 200 miles from 80% to 10% SoC, how much more range would R2 need to go for you to see it as a better value?

I'm reacting to this and your previous quote on range not being a top quality. I would say reliability is my top factor, which is definitely an anxiety I have right now. But I have to own that, or I shouldn't have ordered the car.

It's only my opinion, but at about 5% I wouldn't care as it's in the margins. If we are being real, ~50 miles per charge range differential is something. Some of this is usage. For me, I will mostly commute, take out a camper, and road trip to visit my kid in college. Range matters on a 430 mile road trip. I'm bought into the EV driving experience, but it's nice to have flexibility on charging. The 330 EPA stated number range attracted me to the R2. If software updates can't improve what users are reporting, that's a legitimate issue in my mind. To be clear, my intent isn't to bash R2. I'm on this site because I take seriously the real world experiences posted by others. It is helping me figure out if the R2 is right for me.

 

[sparked]

Just for fun I used ABRP to plot a trip from Los Angeles, CA to Lubbock, TX in a R2 Premium, Model Y Long Range, and Lucid Air (Dream).

I would be a little cautious using ABRP for R2 at this stage. Not that I think it changes much for my use case when I started editing the consumption to compare, but the default consumption is basically a placeholder.

We're having a discussion here about ABRP and R2 here in case you have some thoughts or questions: https://www.rivianforums.com/forum/...nsumption-for-r2-at-279-wh-mi-accurate.62233/

 

[tivoboy]

I'm reacting to this and your previous quote on range not being a top quality. I would say reliability is my top factor, which is definitely an anxiety I have right now. But I have to own that, or I shouldn't have ordered the car.

It's only my opinion, but at about 5% I wouldn't care as it's in the margins. If we are being real, ~50 miles per charge range differential is something. Some of this is usage. For me, I will mostly commute, take out a camper, and road trip to visit my kid in college. Range matters on a 430 mile road trip. I'm bought into the EV driving experience, but it's nice to have flexibility on charging. The 330 EPA stated number range attracted me to the R2. If software updates can't improve what users are reporting, that's a legitimate issue in my mind. To be clear, my intent isn't to bash R2. I'm on this site because I take seriously the real world experiences posted by others. It is helping me figure out if the R2 is right for me.

I doubt software updates are going to help with the actual efficiency capabilities much at all.. maybe 2%, but almost certainly not anything like 5%

 

[tivoboy]

I would be a little cautious using ABRP for R2 at this stage. Not that I think it changes much for my use case when I started editing the consumption to compare, but the default consumption is basically a placeholder.

We're having a discussion here about ABRP and R2 here in case you have some thoughts or questions: https://www.rivianforums.com/forum/...nsumption-for-r2-at-279-wh-mi-accurate.62233/

The default is just the current EPA standard, but its very easy to adjust it to 2.6-2.9 which is where overall mileage could very well land.

 

[Gen(R3)Xer]

There are numerous tests now that show the R2 has somewhere between less and a lot less range than Rivian's marketing department and EPA testing suggested. I wonder if something changed between the EPA test mules and production? I wonder if this has actually caught Rivian management by surprise--were they anticipating more range off the production line? I further wonder what Rivian's response will be if the tested 250-mile range provides real sales headwinds and RIVN is also affected.

In the short term, is there a software update or a manufacturing tweak that can bring the range closer to 300 miles? Longer term, is there space for extra cells, or could more energy-dense cells be used? If so, could this be done before the Lidar/CPU update? If battery/range improvements add cost, could the Lidar/CPU update provide cover for a small price increase? If better cells were used in the near future, perhaps the old cells could be used up in the $45k R2?

Sorry. Quite a few questions. Not many answers.

Everyone’s probably already covered this topic to death by now, but very few of the EVs out there actually come close to their estimated range. Some automakers have underpromised and overdelivered, like Porsche, and others have overpromised and underdelivered, like Tesla (in my opinion).

In my experience my 2025 Tesla Model 3 RWD Long-Range has never gotten close to its EPA-rated range of 363 miles and it’s a very aero, low-to-the ground, sedan. I drive about 18 minutes on city streets (15MPH-45MPH) and 12 minutes on the interstate (70+MPH), Monday through Friday (40 miles roundtrip). I typically charge up to 80% (290.4 miles) since it’s an NMC battery and I end up getting around 240 miles or 50 miles less than expected. I’ve gotten used to this though and I can get through 5 days without having to charge, unless it’s cold outside in the Winter and then I have to charge up every 4 days. I do not have a garage or home charging, so I have to park outside and use public charging. Other things drain your battery faster, like Sentry Mode (Gear Guard on Rivian) and cabin heat protection. I turn Sentry Mode off at home, because I have a camera that looks out at the parking lot.

If you have home charging you will be absolutely fine and never have to think of this 98% of the time. When you go on longer trips you will have access to amazing charging networks, like Rivian’s Adventure Network, Tesla’s Supercharger Network, IONNA, etc. The GPS tells you where to stop and charge and many times it’s only for 10-20 minutes, rather than the 30-45 minutes that people think it will be.

You just have to adopt a different mindset when driving an EV. If you have at-home charging you’re mostly going to be charging at home. If you have to use public charging all the time, like me, then you’ll have see what it’s like as far as your commute goes.

Anyway, long story short, Rivian isn’t going to alter anything about the R2 at this time. The R2 Standard RWD Long-Range has the longest range (345 miles) of any R2. That’s the one I’ll be getting, but I know the actually range for my commute will probably be closer to 225 miles. The interstate is a range killer, especially when the vehicle is so boxy.

 

[ksurfier]

Everyone’s probably already covered this topic to death by now, but very few of the EVs out there actually come close to their estimated range. Some automakers have underpromised and overdelivered, like Porsche, and others have overpromised and underdelivered, like Tesla (in my opinion).

In my experience my 2025 Tesla Model 3 RWD Long-Range has never gotten close to its EPA-rated range of 363 miles and it’s a very aero, low-to-the ground, sedan. I drive about 18 minutes on city streets (15MPH-45MPH) and 12 minutes on the interstate (70+MPH), Monday through Friday (40 miles roundtrip). I typically charge up to 80% (290.4 miles) since it’s an NMC battery and I end up getting around 240 miles or 50 miles less than expected. I’ve gotten used to this though and I can get through 5 days without having to charge, unless it cold outside in the Winter and then I have to charge up every 4 days. I do not have a garage or home charging, so I have to park outside and use public charging. Other things drain your battery faster, like Sentry Mode (Gear Guard on Rivian) and cabin heat protection. I turn Sentry Mode off at home, because I have a camera that looks out at the parking lot.

If you have home charging you will be absolutely fine and never have to think of this 98% of the time. When you go on longer trips you will have access to amazing charging networks, like Rivian’s Adventure Network, Tesla’s Supercharger Network, IONNA, etc. The GPS tells you where to stop and charge and many times it’s only for 10-20 minutes, rather than the 30-45 minutes that people think it will be.

You just have to adopt a different mindset when driving an EV. If you have at-home charging you’re mostly going to be charging at home. If you have to use public charging all the time, like me, then you’ll have see what it’s like as far as your commute goes.

Anyway, long story short, Rivian isn’t going to alter anything about the R2 at this time. The R2 Standard RWD Long-Range has the longest range (345 miles) of any R2. That’s the one I’ll be getting, but I know the actually range for my commute will probably be closer to 225 miles. The interstate is a range killer, especially when the vehicle is so boxy.

All that may be true, but imagine your dismay when you spend >$60k on a vehicle with advertised range of 330 miles, yet somehow the best you can possibly get on the highway is only 250 miles (driving like a turtle no less)…I’d be extremely pissed at Rivian for this especially when you consider the Gen 1 R1 lineup was able to get within about 10% of EPA range…

 

[brad.bryant74]

I agree with most people's responses that the EPA range is more a guide not a law. I currently lease a 2023 VW Tiguan SEL R-Line 4Motion (yup, it's a mouthful) and have made several trips from Northern VA to Southeastern MA during my lease. Interestingly enough, I get better gas mileage when I use Adaptive Cruise Control vs. all human input. For context, with all human input I'm usually topping off my tank from ¼ to full in NJ; conversely, with ACC if top off from ¼ to full in MA.

 

[savethemanual]

All that may be true, but imagine your dismay when you spend >$60k on a vehicle with advertised range of 330 miles, yet somehow the best you can possibly get on the highway is only 250 miles (driving like a turtle no less)…I’d be extremely pissed at Rivian for this especially when you consider the Gen 1 R1 lineup was able to get within about 10% of EPA range…

If I'm spending 60k on anything, I'm doing my research. Clearly the real highway range will come up during that research and I'll also find out how flawed the EPA rating system is.

 

[windshieldfarmer]

All that may be true, but imagine your dismay when you spend >$60k on a vehicle with advertised range of 330 miles, yet somehow the best you can possibly get on the highway is only 250 miles (driving like a turtle no less)…I’d be extremely pissed at Rivian for this especially when you consider the Gen 1 R1 lineup was able to get within about 10% of EPA range…

Not to discount your statement, but the EPA highway range on 21s is 303 miles, not 330 miles. While 250 miles is still significantly short, it’s not 80 miles off of EPA. I’m also interested in city loop performance. My BMW IX50 has been a bit disappointing in urban driving, averaging about 3.3 kWh per mile under good conditions. On my 30 minute test drive with the Rivian I was seeing 3.7 kWh per mile…which surprised me, especially with four or five miles at 70 mph. Certainly that is an anecdotal observation but something that will be interesting to watch as my possession of the R2 and IX50 will overlap for six weeks.

 

[ksurfier]

Not to discount your statement, but the EPA highway range on 21s is 303 miles, not 330 miles. While 250 miles is still significantly short, it’s not 80 miles off of EPA. I’m also interested in city loop performance. My BMW IX50 has been a bit disappointing in urban driving, averaging about 3.3 kWh per mile under good conditions. On my 30 minute test drive with the Rivian I was seeing 3.7 kWh per mile…which surprised me, especially with four or five miles at 70 mph. Certainly that is an anecdotal observation but something that will be interesting to watch as my possession of the R2 and IX50 will overlap for six weeks.

I think you may be completely missing the point, the R2 is not capable of a 330 mile range under any realistic scenario, except for maybe a 30 MPH flat downwinder...the 330 mile range really serves no purpose at all, in fact, even at 44 MPH it still only makes it 315 miles (3.5 MPK) if fully charged to 100% and discharged to 0%.

In order to get the EPA range of 330 miles (check Rivian and EPA websites - it's 330 - see disclaimer), the R2 would need to drive that distance over 10 hours, with an average speed of ~33 MPH...Disclaimer: "Range estimates are preliminary estimates based on the EPA test cycle and are not official EPA values. The EPA estimates range through a series of standardized lab tests that mimic real world conditions. Factors including tires, drive modes, HVAC settings and accessories can all have an impact on range."

If Tesla were using the same B.S. method to estimate range, then they would claim the 2026 Model Y AWD has a range of 409 miles (yet they report only 294 miles). To achieve the 294 miles, they can do it at 55 MPH (not 33 MPH)...

Now the fun part, reality:
On the HWY at 73 MPH:
-Tesla gets approximately 225 miles range (77 kwh battery), this is 76.5% of EPA estimate.
-R2 gets ~210 miles range (88 kwh battery), this is 63.6% of EPA estimate.

An apples-to-apples comparison of EPA range for MY vs R2 is therefore:
MY - 294 miles
R2 - 273 miles

or if using Rivian EPA method then we could infer:
MY-409 miles
R2-330 miles


FROM EPA:

MPK	City	Mix	Hwy
MY	3.9	3.8	3.6
R2	3.4	3.1	2.8
Range (mi)	City	Mix	Hwy
MY	304	290	274
R2	260	240	219
Difference	43	50	55

Quote: " All R2 Performance models have the same specs regardless of whether you get a Launch Package model or a later, standard version. You’ll get 656 horsepower, 609 lb-ft of torque, and 330 miles of EPA range. With a 0-60 time of 3.6 seconds, you can comfortably blow the doors off of anything else you’ll see on a dirt trail. You’ll gap 4Runners and Outbacks so hard you’ll end up in different time zones." - https://insideevs.com/reviews/798129/rivian-r2-first-drive-review/

 

[windshieldfarmer]

So I’m guessing you’ve cancelled your order. It is what it is…. I don’t want to drive a jellybean and the R2 serves my use case, even with range that is short of EPA. My last two EVs have also fallen short of EPA.

 

[Bullwinkle]

I think you may be completely missing the point, the R2 is not capable of a 330 mile range under any realistic scenario, except for maybe a 30 MPH flat downwinder...the 330 mile range really serves no purpose at all, in fact, even at 44 MPH it still only makes it 315 miles (3.5 MPK) if fully charged to 100% and discharged to 0%.

In order to get the EPA range of 330 miles (check Rivian and EPA websites - it's 330 - see disclaimer), the R2 would need to drive that distance over 10 hours, with an average speed of ~33 MPH...Disclaimer: "Range estimates are preliminary estimates based on the EPA test cycle and are not official EPA values. The EPA estimates range through a series of standardized lab tests that mimic real world conditions. Factors including tires, drive modes, HVAC settings and accessories can all have an impact on range."

If Tesla were using the same B.S. method to estimate range, then they would claim the 2026 Model Y AWD has a range of 409 miles (yet they report only 294 miles). To achieve the 294 miles, they can do it at 55 MPH (not 33 MPH)...

Now the fun part, reality:
On the HWY at 73 MPH:
-Tesla gets approximately 225 miles range (77 kwh battery), this is 76.5% of EPA estimate.
-R2 gets ~210 miles range (88 kwh battery), this is 63.6% of EPA estimate.

An apples-to-apples comparison of EPA range for MY vs R2 is therefore:
MY - 294 miles
R2 - 273 miles

or if using Rivian EPA method then we could infer:
MY-409 miles
R2-330 miles


FROM EPA:
MPKCityMixHwyMY3.93.83.6R23.43.12.8Range (mi)CityMixHwyMY304290274R2260240219Difference435055

Quote: " All R2 Performance models have the same specs regardless of whether you get a Launch Package model or a later, standard version. You’ll get 656 horsepower, 609 lb-ft of torque, and 330 miles of EPA range. With a 0-60 time of 3.6 seconds, you can comfortably blow the doors off of anything else you’ll see on a dirt trail. You’ll gap 4Runners and Outbacks so hard you’ll end up in different time zones." - https://insideevs.com/reviews/798129/rivian-r2-first-drive-review/

Is the difference between media/customer expectations and actual range large enough to significantly diminish customer orders? If it is, what are Rivian's options? Wall Street will ask this question in 2 months. Rivian management knows this. They will be ready with either a rhetorical or course-correcting answer. Gen(R3)Xer has opined that the management answer will be rhetorical, stay-the-course, and that there will not be structural changes forthcoming.

Wall Street (and a typical customer) accepts "right now" solutions and maybe 12-month solutions. They may also accept a convincing rhetorical answer--especially if orders substantiate. If Rivian wants more range, are there short-term and medium-term solutions?

Sponsored