R2 Range Limitations and Rivian's Response

[NY_Rob]

11 pages and going quickly. I think all these threads and responses will get some attention.

I'm calling it now... I got the over 20 on this one

Sponsored

 

[NY_Rob]

Okay, show of hands... who thought the large boxy vehicle with a large frontal area was going to be more efficient at highway speeds then the vehicle that looks like an egg laying on it's side? With only a small difference in battery pack size between them, why is it so hard to believe the MY has better range at highway speeds where aero drag is the predominant factor in energy consumption? Yes, 2+2 still equals 4.

 

[Bullwinkle]

Okay, show of hands... who thought the large boxy vehicle with a large frontal area was going to be more efficient at highway speeds then the vehicle that looks like an egg laying on it's side? With only a small difference in battery pack size between them, why is it so hard to believe the MY has better range at highway speeds where aero drag is the predominant factor in energy consumption? Yes, 2+2 still equals 4.

I agree, but on the other hand, I think most were at least marginally surprised and/or disappointed that it was 77 miles off of Rivian’s published range. RJ publicly said it would be competitive with MY.

 

[windshieldfarmer]

I agree, but on the other hand, I think most were at least marginally surprised and/or disappointed that it was 77 miles off of Rivian’s published range. RJ publicly said it would be competitive with MY.

Rivian screwed up big time by over promising and under delivering on range. Stupid. They had the option of dialing back posted range estimates but chose to paint the most optimistic picture possible. The fact the EPA allows such is beyond my comprehension. For Rivian, my opinion of their integrity took a big hit. I’m sure other buyers and potential buyers feel the same.

 

[rbdavis808]

More important than esthetic, fit/finish, handling, features, utility, and ride quality? I disagree.

Everyone gets to say what's most important to them and buy accordingly. I'm not entirely certain, but this may be why they have made more than one model of car since the dawn of time. Watch the historical records unearthed at Bedrock carefully and note that whereas Fred's horn made the sound Yabba-dabba-doo!, Barney's went Gotta-potta-stew?. Did this destroy their friendship, no sir it did not -- a more civil era to be sure.

 

[usulio]

Rivian screwed up big time by over promising and under delivering on range. Stupid. They had the option of dialing back posted range estimates but chose to paint the most optimistic picture possible. The fact the EPA allows such is beyond my comprehension. For Rivian, my opinion of their integrity took a big hit. I’m sure other buyers and potential buyers feel the same.

And this was already the case with Gen 2 R1 (advertise 410, get ~350 at 70mph). R2 is even worse but Rivian was already marketing based on unrealistic EPA numbers.

 

[Bullwinkle]

Everyone gets to say what's most important to them and buy accordingly. I'm not entirely certain, but this may be why they have made more than one model of car since the dawn of time. Watch the historical records unearthed at Bedrock carefully and note that whereas Fred's horn made the sound Yabba-dabba-doo!, Barney's went Gotta-potta-stew?. Did this destroy their friendship, no sir it did not -- a more civil era to be sure.

 

[R2 Fan]

...put in a 100kWh battery?

Where?

 

[R2 Fan]

For the same $$$? yes! that would help get it closer to a good number for 70mph

You're kidding right, batteries aren't cheap.

 

[r2fb]

It now appears that Model Y offers significantly more range in spite of nearly identical EPA range ratings. Did Rivian anticipate that the range delta would be this large?

it only offers 10 mile more range than the R2 if you don't drive below 0% and no one will do that

 

[WoodChips]

Okay, show of hands... who thought the large boxy vehicle with a large frontal area was going to be more efficient at highway speeds then the vehicle that looks like an egg laying on it's side? With only a small difference in battery pack size between them, why is it so hard to believe the MY has better range at highway speeds where aero drag is the predominant factor in energy consumption? Yes, 2+2 still equals 4.

Over the years ICE engines have gotten more efficient. Range and efficiency of vehicles isn't all about shape.

True shape plays a big part but the statements about brick vs egg assumes shape is the only factor.

Rivian over estimated the R1.... Well many potential R2 shoppers never had R1 on their radar because the price tag so they wouldn't know that.

 

[daeHelkcunK]

Well no one is complaining which one is more capable or not. The discussion is about efficiency, when company is saying that the efficiency of both the vehicle is same then why 25% difference. I am not saying tesla is better or rivian is better. Both have there pros and cons but what they don't have common is efficiency.

They both exhibit excellent efficiencies. It's simply in different driving conditions. Which goes back to my original post. Apples to oranges.

 

[dcdttu]

You're kidding right, batteries aren't cheap.

They're actually not that expensive these days compared to 10 and even 5 years ago. Adding 10kW would have been around $2000, something people would easily consider on the R2 in a "Max Pack" version. I think the real problem was space to put them in the R2.

 

[gecko10x]

11 pages and going quickly. I think all these threads and responses will get some attention.

Rivian was upfront and center with their range and efficiency saying it would compete with Tesla.

As a non EV owner I would have thought the comparison tests would have reflected a similar range, even if not hitting 330.

For those of us that haven't owned an EV range is a concern just as it was for most of you when you first entered the EV world.

In town I'm not worried with the range or efficiency. Would I like it to go father per change? Hell yes but that's only because electric isn't free.

But road trips are what many of us are trying to figure out. Does the diminished range still work for us? What's our most common road trip destinations and how many stops does it take?

The tests have shown me that I will have to make one more stop to reach both of my most common destinations. Maybe for many it's not a deal breaker but for us that live where the charging stops are still lacking it's a concern.

I travel on roads where gas stations can have gaps of 100+ miles. I don't really want to be limited to 60 mph to extend my range on roads that have 80mph posted limits, we all know what that means for the average driver.

If I'm not on my states only interstate the speed limits are usually 65 which would extend the range but the chargers along those roads are often lvl 2 speeds, no quick 20 minute happening there.

If feels like if I can't get 280+ highway miles than I might as well have a 150 range vehicle and not leave town but that defeats the purpose of spending the money on an R2.

It's a good thing I still have plenty of time before my order window opens.

Have you put your trips into ABRP to see what it says?

 

[WoodChips]

Have you put your trips into ABRP to see what it says?

Yes, many times with different settings for wind, temp, road conditions and SOC.

I'm a little worried about range. On the interstate I think there are enough places to charge but when headed into the mountains the locations are fewer and a lot lower charge rating, which tell me they might also be less maintained and more likely to not be use.

Sponsored