Rivian, give me a SoC gauge option

[LeeY]

Have you looked in the “RiDE” menu (secret service mode)? You may get some indication there.

I’ll surely take a look. But really, especially when leaving it for extended periods or cold weather is a factor, something up top would be useful.

Sponsored

 

[BCondrey]

Every 10% of battery remaining is 30 miles in my truck, at my normal eff. The % is the SOC. If they gave it to you on a graph, they would have to use the inflated EPA estimate, which is worthless.

 

[DayTripping]

While on this topic, I'd love to have a real instaneous gauge that shows my energy consumption rather than the almost useless 15 minute graph. Something that refreshes more quickly would be helpful with better granularity. I still want my SoC at my destination or waypoints.

 

[CANCERDOC]

The problem with that is the miles to empty are almost never accurate in a Rivian. My Tesla if I go to the energy screen is pretty much dead nuts on. Rivian is nowhere near as accurate. My Teslas will typically get with about 1/2% of what I end up at when I stop. I charge my battery based on charge level, not MTE. I do that to minimize degradation.

I don't want to calculate that X number of miles in Conserve is a certain % and Y number of miles in Sport is another %. Percent is percent regardless of drive mode. My approach has resulted in minimal degradation of my EV's batteries. The MTE is even less accurate since I changed my tires.

That's why it is nice to have both % and miles to empty. That way you can do the math in your head if the vehicle doesn't recalculate on the fly due to inclement conditions. A less granular battery guage isn't useful at all. And taking away miles to empty won't work for most people that can't do the math in their head about how much range they probably have left. Having both is the most reasonable compromise.

 

[CANCERDOC]

While on this topic, I'd love to have a real instaneous gauge that shows my energy consumption rather than the almost useless 15 minute graph. Something that refreshes more quickly would be helpful with better granularity. I still want my SoC at my destination or waypoints.

I agree with this, I think it is nice to have a Wh/mi like the Tesla efficiency guage, along with readouts on where the energy is going. I'd even be ok with the number being an instantaneous mi/Kwh. This wouldn't be difficult to implement since I'm sure every single electron is being accounted for in an EV. Whether it can be presented in an easy to use form, is another matter.

 

[NY_Rob]

Ugh to have less precision? I like having both miles and percentage and we already have that option. Giving people an option with less precision will lead to more dumb posts like “but I had one bar left!”

I haven’t come across a problem in my 40 years of life that was solved by knowing less about it.

Strongly agree with both opinions above... ?

Everyone's always complaining about the "dumbing down" of all aspects of life to the point where users are now completely clueless when it comes to technical aspects of mechanical devices.

The huge problem with rounding by 10% points is that you could get in the vehicle and it would show you 20% SOC but the battery is actually at the low side of 15%. Then you drive one mile which drops the actual pack SOC to 14% and the indicator now displays 10% SOC due to huge rounding. At this point the driver has seen the range suddenly drop from 20% to 10% after driving only one mile.

IMO, that would give drivers even more range anxiety not less.

 

[MarkNorman]

That's why it is nice to have both % and miles to empty. That way you can do the math in your head if the vehicle doesn't recalculate on the fly due to inclement conditions. A less granular battery guage isn't useful at all. And taking away miles to empty won't work for most people that can't do the math in their head about how much range they probably have left. Having both is the most reasonable compromise.

A less granular gauge may not be useful to you, but in any situation where I’m not using the route planner, all I ever need/want is a general sense of SoC.

Case in point, my kids are EV natives. The Nissan Leaf they drove through high school had a stacked bar gauge for SoC and that is all they ever needed/used. The Leaf also showed MTE, but it was useless because it was unrealistic (like the Rivian MTE display) and they quickly learned to trust their gut based on the gauge rather than the number on the screen.

 

[MarkNorman]

Ugh to have less precision? I like having both miles and percentage and we already have that option. Giving people an option with less precision will lead to more dumb posts like “but I had one bar left!”

This obviously isn’t for everyone and that’s fine. I think I addressed the “but I had 1 bar left“ concerns with the switch to single percentage below 10%.

 

[MarkNorman]

I haven’t come across a problem in my 40 years of life that was solved by knowing less about it.

Well in nearly 50 years, I’ve learned that discovering the problem you‘ve been fretting over isn’t actually a problem is the best solution. My premise is having precise-looking, pseudo data is actually more of a problem than just having less information. Even the percentage SoC is not all that accurate at all times. The BMS is never calibrated perfectly and it’s always a guess. So I’m asking for a gauge option that just says “hey driver you’re somewhere around 7/10 right now” and that’s all I’ll ever need/want - except on longer trips when I use the route planner, which is actually really good. Again, not for everyone.

 

[MarkNorman]

The huge problem with rounding by 10% points is that you could get in the vehicle and it would show you 20% SOC but the battery is actually at the low side of 15%. Then you drive one mile which drops the actual pack SOC to 14% and the indicator now displays 10% SOC due to huge rounding. At this point the driver has seen the range suddenly drop from 20% to 10% after driving only one mile.

I was picturing more of a continuous gauge with tick marks every 10% so you could discern approximately where you stood on SoC. More of an analog clock rather than a digital stopwatch with seconds.

 

[LMI - R1T]

The problem with that is the miles to empty are almost never accurate in a Rivian. My Tesla if I go to the energy screen is pretty much dead nuts on. Rivian is nowhere near as accurate. My Teslas will typically get with about 1/2% of what I end up at when I stop. I charge my battery based on charge level, not MTE. I do that to minimize degradation.

I don't want to calculate that X number of miles in Conserve is a certain % and Y number of miles in Sport is another %. Percent is percent regardless of drive mode. My approach has resulted in minimal degradation of my EV's batteries. The MTE is even less accurate since I changed my tires.

It's an industry term. ?

 

[Gen(R3)Xer]

Been thinking about range anxiety recently. Detractors use it as a cudgel and it’s become engrained in many people as a reason not to try an EV. I don’t deny it’s a real thing for folks getting into EVs, but why? My hypothesis is: range anxiety results mainly from the way EVs show fuel level (the range display). Rather than putting our minds at ease, the level of precision in an ever-changing, miles-remaining range estimate makes us hyper-fixate in a way we never did with ICE.

In an ICE vehicle you might monitor it down to the 1/4 or 1/8th tank on the fuel gauge, but having an order of magnitude more precision in an EV range display triggers a fear response in many. I’ve personally witnessed new EV owners (that I’ve convinced to get an EV) on the verge of returning their vehicle after driving part way home from the dealer (over the mountains), watching their plummeting range estimate with dismay and terror. My response to their frantic phone calls has been, “Does the route planner say you’ll make it? Yes? OK, drive the speed limit and you’ll make it.” My record is 100% so far.

Changing the driver display to show battery percentage is a step in the right direction and I use that, but I’d prefer a simple gauge with 10% increments with no numbers until you get below 10%. Keep all that precision in the route planner, but not in the driver display.

**EDIT: I’m not saying make a gauge the only option, just make it AN option.

EV creds: 9 EVs (including 2 R1s), 7 years, and about 150K miles all across North America. I certainly don’t know everything but I’m no newb.

EDIT 2: After reading through 3 pages of replies (thank you they are great!), I want to revise this a little: Rivian’s miles to empty (MTE) display should be updated to reflect variables like driving history and pack/motor temps so it provides more realistic/useful information. While I would still prefer a less granular gauge for my own use, it sounds like I’m in the minority.

I personally prefer battery percentage to miles per charge. It’s similar to a traditional gas gauge in that it’s either full, 3/4, 1/2, 1/4, or empty. Seeing my battery at 20% makes me think I need to charge this up to 80% soon.

There are too many variables to get an accurate miles per charge reading (although they are getting better and AI will help), not only because of temperature, wind, elevation, traffic, etc. but because of the volatile nature of driving styles. One day you might be chill and not stomping on the accelerator, the next day you might be running late and driving faster than you normally would.

I still think a percentage only gauge would make you less anxious.

 

[Gen(R3)Xer]

Been thinking about range anxiety recently. Detractors use it as a cudgel and it’s become engrained in many people as a reason not to try an EV. I don’t deny it’s a real thing for folks getting into EVs, but why? My hypothesis is: range anxiety results mainly from the way EVs show fuel level (the range display). Rather than putting our minds at ease, the level of precision in an ever-changing, miles-remaining range estimate makes us hyper-fixate in a way we never did with ICE.

In an ICE vehicle you might monitor it down to the 1/4 or 1/8th tank on the fuel gauge, but having an order of magnitude more precision in an EV range display triggers a fear response in many. I’ve personally witnessed new EV owners (that I’ve convinced to get an EV) on the verge of returning their vehicle after driving part way home from the dealer (over the mountains), watching their plummeting range estimate with dismay and terror. My response to their frantic phone calls has been, “Does the route planner say you’ll make it? Yes? OK, drive the speed limit and you’ll make it.” My record is 100% so far.

Changing the driver display to show battery percentage is a step in the right direction and I use that, but I’d prefer a simple gauge with 10% increments with no numbers until you get below 10%. Keep all that precision in the route planner, but not in the driver display.

**EDIT: I’m not saying make a gauge the only option, just make it AN option.

EV creds: 9 EVs (including 2 R1s), 7 years, and about 150K miles all across North America. I certainly don’t know everything but I’m no newb.

EDIT 2: After reading through 3 pages of replies (thank you they are great!), I want to revise this a little: Rivian’s miles to empty (MTE) display should be updated to reflect variables like driving history and pack/motor temps so it provides more realistic/useful information. While I would still prefer a less granular gauge for my own use, it sounds like I’m in the minority.

I personally prefer battery percentage to miles per charge. It’s similar to a traditional gas gauge in that it’s either full, 3/4, 1/2, 1/4, or empty. Seeing my battery at 20% makes me think I need to charge this up to 80% soon.

There are too many variables to get an accurate miles per charge reading (although they are getting better and AI will help), not only because of temperature, wind, elevation, traffic, etc. but because of the virile nature of driving styles. One day you might be chill and not stomping on the accelerator, the next day you might be running late and driving faster than you normally would.

I still think a percentage-only gauge will make you less anxious.

 

[bike123.com]

Strongly agree with both opinions above... ?

Everyone's always complaining about the "dumbing down" of all aspects of life to the point where users are now completely clueless when it comes to technical aspects of mechanical devices.

The huge problem with rounding by 10% points is that you could get in the vehicle and it would show you 20% SOC but the battery is actually at the low side of 15%. Then you drive one mile which drops the actual pack SOC to 14% and the indicator now displays 10% SOC due to huge rounding. At this point the driver has seen the range suddenly drop from 20% to 10% after driving only one mile.

IMO, that would give drivers even more range anxiety not less.

For 7 BEV’s including our ‘22 ‘model T’ we use ( for road trips) the ‘gaining or losing on your man’ gps miles-to-go v. ‘miles of range’ and monitor the trending comparison.

It’s been very real and allows us to know whether we need to slip into conserve or ease up on the speed.
We also try to allow for non-functioning or occupied stations.

 

[Brian A]

I like the precision and range anxiety comes in because recharging takes much longer than refueling an ICE vehicle. Therefore much more inconvenient.

Also. There aren't as many charging stations as there are gas stations so the anxiety kicks in. For myself, my wife and I went to Breckenridge, CO a couple of weeks ago for 2 days (2hr 10min from our home) and we took our ICE vehicle because I didn't want to try to find a fast charger that works. Breck only has one and it has a very low rating. When we go back in April for our week long stay we will drive the R1T because we are staying at a place that has level 2 chargers in the parking garage so I know I will be able to charge during the week I am there.

Sponsored