Rumor: Rivian buying ABRP

[Rivian_Hugh_III]

On the last Ask Rivian RJ said navigation was about to get a whole lot better. He was very excited and almost hyperbolic about the amount the Nav would be improved.

Sponsored

 

[RivAW]

Yeah...or they could just do what Ford did and gain us all access to the Tesla Supercharger network....there problem solved, probably cheaper....

 

[defcon888]

I think everyone would like this until they pull up to a completely empty location only to find all of the stations reserved….

very true...but if someone reserved a spot and does not show up, it automatically opens up. I would much prefer real-time information as to whether the station is working.

 

[Autolycus]

PHEVs have every right to use chargers. I'd rather see a PHEV charging on an L2 plug than charging super slowly on a DCFC plug.

I agree that they have a right to use the chargers. That doesn't mean it should be incentivized. A BEV has a much greater need for any charger than a PHEV. It can literally make the difference of a BEV getting to a location or not. With DCFC there is at least usually some cost associated with using the charger. With most L2 sites, there isn't. I also agree that PHEV's should be discouraged from using any DCFC plugs, but especially high output ones.

One solution to the DCFC situation is to have effective power distribution and management for a charging site. EA's current setup is far from ideal. Solutions like Rivian's load sharing across 3 pedestals--and better still Tesla's latest total site management scheme--should be the norm. In those site designs, a vehicle charging at 50kW really doesn't have as much of an impact a vehicle that is capable of much higher speeds.

 

[zefram47]

With DCFC there is at least usually some cost associated with using the charger. With most L2 sites, there isn't.

This is the inherent problem. Free charging shouldn't exist. At all. Full stop. Especially not agreements between manufacturers and charging companies. Free charging only leads to folks charging when they don't need to just because it's free. It's why so many ID.4 owners clog up stations charging to 100% along with others. But PHEVs? They typically have small batteries that charge relatively quickly in comparison to our large batteries. Fight the real fight and don't call fellow (partial)EV drivers the boogeyman because you see them as an inconvenience.

 

[Autolycus]

This is the inherent problem. Free charging shouldn't exist. At all. Full stop. Especially not agreements between manufacturers and charging companies. Free charging only leads to folks charging when they don't need to just because it's free. It's why so many ID.4 owners clog up stations charging to 100% along with others. But PHEVs? They typically have small batteries that charge relatively quickly in comparison to our large batteries. Fight the real fight and don't call fellow (partial)EV drivers the boogeyman because you see them as an inconvenience.

Agree with you about free charging, but I'm going to disagree with your characterization of PHEVs using remote L2 chargers as simply "an inconvenience." They're an outright impediment to EV adoption because their use of L2 stations, whether there's a fee or not, has the potential to make some destinations unreachable by any vehicle that doesn't have an ICE (be it as the primary method of propulsion or as a range extender).

 

[Trandall]

How many Hybrids with DC ports are on the roads? My understanding is the number was so small that it's more of a one-off conversation.

 

[defcon888]

But PHEVs? They typically have small batteries that charge relatively quickly in comparison to our large batteries.

Actually, that isn't true. We have a Toyota RAV4 Prime (PHEV) and on an L2 charger to get fully charged (to approx. 45 miles) it will take anywhere from 2-1/2 hours if you have the 6.6kW charger onboard or 4-1/2 hours if you have the 3.3kW charger. We charge at home 99% of the time and the other 1% is when I am at work and we get to charge for free.

 

[Dark-Fx]

How many Hybrids with DC ports are on the roads? My understanding is the number was so small that it's more of a one-off conversation.

I believe the Mitsubishi Outlander is the only comparable PHEV that has DC charging. I think Merc also has a few models. I'm not sure of others.

 

[CommodoreAmiga]

Actually, that isn't true. We have a Toyota RAV4 Prime (PHEV) and on an L2 charger to get fully charged (to approx. 45 miles) it will take anywhere from 2-1/2 hours if you have the 6.6kW charger onboard or 4-1/2 hours if you have the 3.3kW charger. We charge at home 99% of the time and the other 1% is when I am at work and we get to charge for free.

Yup. I have a XC90 Recharge. Love the vehicle, but it is SLOW to charge. Charging my R1T for daily use doesn't take much longer than charging the much smaller battery in the Volvo.

 

[Indy avocado]

Agree with you about free charging, but I'm going to disagree with your characterization of PHEVs using remote L2 chargers as simply "an inconvenience." They're an outright impediment to EV adoption because their use of L2 stations, whether there's a fee or not, has the potential to make some destinations unreachable by any vehicle that doesn't have an ICE (be it as the primary method of propulsion or as a range extender).

As much as I hate to gatekeep, you buy a PHEV so that you can charge at home but use gas for road trips. That's the WHOLE use case! If you are willing to wait 20-30 minutes to charge, just buy a BEV!
There is NO reason for PHEV to charge at a DCFC with current tech.

Even if the battery is somehow good for a 3C charge rate for the entire pack, they're going to spend 20 minutes to gain ~30mi of range. Realistically they're going to need 30 minutes to pick up ~20-30 miles. It's just not worth the time when you can add a gallon of gas for the same price and range in about 5-10 seconds.

 

[s4wrxttcs]

I'm choosing to believe that Rivian reached an agreement with ABRP to use their data, but not to buy the actual site.

I'm also choosing to believe (since I want to) that Rivian has reached an agreement with some off-road navigation provider and has purchased the right to use their data as well.

I choose to believe these two things not because of evidence that says they did, but because they absolutely have to. That it is the way.

 

[defcon888]

Yup. I have a XC90 Recharge. Love the vehicle, but it is SLOW to charge. Charging my R1T for daily use doesn't take much longer than charging the much smaller battery in the Volvo.

We had the XC40 Recharge for 9 months before we sold it back. We had a love/hate relationship with it. WIthin 2 months of receiving it, it was back at the dealer to get the tCAM replaced. The SOS light came on and took it in and they fixed it. Then 2 months to the day I was at work (140 miles away) and the car died......FOB didn't work,.....the car was dead. I had to watch a video on YouTube as to how and open the door with the key that is in the FOB....the sales guy never showed us. I also had to charge it to 90% in order to comfortably make it the 140 miles to work...never got near the 220 miles advertised.

My wife never felt comfortable driving it and when we got word that we could configure the R1T, we sold it. Kinda' sucks that in less than a year it dropped $20k in value.

 

[CommodoreAmiga]

My wife never felt comfortable driving it and when we got word that we could configure the R1T, we sold it. Kinda' sucks that in less than a year it dropped $20k in value.

Rivian is worse than that, at this point. $30k+ loss in value in a year. That's just MSRP vs what they're actually selling for used now. That isn't considering the "inflated" flips that happened soon after deliveries began.

 

[Craigins]

I'm choosing to believe that Rivian reached an agreement with ABRP to use their data, but not to buy the actual site.

I'm also choosing to believe (since I want to) that Rivian has reached an agreement with some off-road navigation provider and has purchased the right to use their data as well.

I choose to believe these two things not because of evidence that says they did, but because they absolutely have to. That it is the way.

My guess would be along this line of thinking. Pay to integrate the ABRP api into the rivian nav system.

Calculating routes isn't super cheap, then paying for data sources as they are constantly updating.

Makes sense at this scale to pay an existing service for access.

At some point Rivian will grow where they can jump back into their own closed ecosystem. Then Probably charge a service fee for advanced routing capabilities.

Sponsored