Yes.
Yes, I always drive in Conserve unless there is a reason to operate in AWD.
If you want to exceed 2.1 mi/kwh just drive slower. On a recent mostly highway trip to and from Indianapolis I wanted to get an idea of the difference in efficiency at different speeds. I drove in Conserve mode for this test. Weather conditions were nearly the same both ways.
Yes, I always drive in Conserve unless there is a reason to operate in AWD.
There is no reason to run Standard Height on highways. There is ample ground clearance for speed bumps at Lowest.
My tires at Lowest wear evenly across their profile (see pic, all 4 wear that way). Not true for our Model X, which wears the inside corners of the rears when set to lowest.
What is notable is the elevation changes when going over the Cajon Pass outside of Las Vegas. This forces the Tesla Model X Long Range Plus (351mi EPA) to recharge before leaving Las Vegas, or they can't make it to Barstow. The Rivian has no such limitation.
Final word on tires and settings - When it is over 100°F in the desert, and long stretches between services, how much your tires cost is less important than range. If you die, you can't buy new tires. ;-)
Look at the depth of the wear bars across the pattern. Notice how the "inside" which normally wears quicker on many ICE trucks is actually normal. Cars with variable ride height often wear out the inside corners in the rear when set to the lowest setting due to camber increase. That did not happen to the R1T.
I'm aware. But it's "literally" impossible for me to drive that slowIf you want to exceed 2.1 mi/kwh just drive slower. On a recent mostly highway trip to and from Indianapolis I wanted to get an idea of the difference in efficiency at different speeds. I drove in Conserve mode for this test. Weather conditions were nearly the same both ways.
On the way to Indianapolis I set the cruise control at 65 mph, and if I came up on a slower driver I passed as soon as traffic allowed. My efficiency was 2.44 mi/kwh.
On the way back I set the cruise control at 55 mph, and again I did not stay behind a slower driver if I could pass. My efficiency was 2.79 mi/kwh. The trip milage is higher bcuz I drove to a RAN charger to charge.
The cruise control maintained an extremely steady speed. The fact that efficiency improved at the slower speed would be true for anyone else. As you said, you had higher efficiency when you drive "around town or in heavy traffic" which is slower speeds. I seriously doubt your "truck has a problem".
Btw, that efficiency increase of 2.79 - 2.44 = 0.35 mi/kwh would increase my range, based on often quoted 125 kwh usable battery (true??), by 125 x 0.35 = 43.75 miles. I think it would be a similar scenario at higher speeds. My result illustrates what @electrictaco said above.
. 65 feels like torture.
