So glad that you lose valuable screen space so you can see a piece of plastic that says T U N G S T E N at all times.TFL has some interior shots and this is what the tripmeter says for their trailer trip. 23 mi/kWh? lol.
I can only imagine the bad dealers (95% of them) are already scheming in dark rooms. In my head it looks like this:
Nah, that's a fair take. If you're actually using a truck to tow a trailer or camper and that is your main purpose for it then I get it and I agree the Ram is probably your best choice. I don't use my R1 for that, my towing is extremely limited moving my stuff from one area locally to another like taking my tractor for service or running to get stuff for the house. If I did have a travel trailer the Rivian wouldn't be good for my needs and I'd be still using a diesel truck.
They are targeting 350 on the 168 and 500 on the 229. That is around 2.1 to 2.2 miles per kW. It is probably optimistic but in a perfect setting possibly doable. I’ve had over 2.6 on my R1S on one stretch over 220 miles during a trip.
Not unpopular with me. You should get whichever truck fits your use case the best. If Ram can deliver the first BEV pickup that can tow like an ICE truck, they have hit a true home run. It will challenge all other automakers to be better.
Ah that makes sense then, the original linked article HERE stated "Base models feature an LG-sourced 168kWh battery with a targeted range of 300 miles (483 km)". 350 miles brings it back in line, though the 229kWh still projects as slightly more "efficient" ?
I'm betting at least 120k or more, especially if the bigger battery is only available on the high level trim.
Just FYI for those who haven’t watched the video. Nowhere did they say the 500 mile variant was only in the Tungsten trim. My plan is to get the Laramie edition (which is already nice enough) if they offer it with the 500 mile range option. I don’t need 23 speakers. And all the other crap in the Tungsten trim. Ideally don’t need or would like to spec one without the passenger screen and HUD. Don’t need that crap either.
This should be stressed. I'm still running with a 30A circuit (24A charging) that was put in when my house was built. I do intend to upgrade it at some point, but with an average daily use around 30-50 miles I just don't need a beefier circuit for the R1T most of the time. My MINI charged daily in around 1.5-2 hours and the R1T is about double that time for the same range because the MINI was twice as efficient.
NGL, the range numbers they've quoted are impressive, if true. Battery size of a Hummer with the efficiency of a Rivian...great news. I prefer the size of the R1T to a full-size, but if I towed more than I do now I'd probably consider one.
Cybertruck likely will have a battery between 150 kWh and 200kWh depending on how large they want the range to be.
If I didn’t use my Airstream ALL THE TIME (literally 10 weekly trips per year), I’d be sticking with Rivian. Personally, I am worried about Rivian selling a $90k+ lifestyle vehicle in this market. For me, paying $10k more but actually being able to replace my Tundra (instead of it being a supplemental vehicle) is a no brainer. I think lots of truck owners are in my position.
Hard disagree if you look at what it’s replacing. My Tundra gets 14mpg on the highway and 9-11mpg when towing. Vehicles like this will be a gateway to getting V8 truck owners onto the EV train, and the tech / efficiency will continue to get better (much moreso than ICE is capable of at this point). This is responsible engineering IMO, or at least a very good strategic / tactical stepping stone.
