Status of Current Charging Curves

[SeaGeo]

Thanks to a few folks who've posted charging curves with their R1T, I thought I'd go through and plot them up against some other 400v class vehicles for a frame of reference. So far from what I've seen, the R1T charging performance up to about 50% seems pretty good and is limited by architecture. However, between 50% and 80% state of charge, the R1T seems to currently have the most conservative charging curve I can recall.

I've plotted up the curves from three R1Ts. I'm still a little suspicious of the curve that @timesinks had initially, so I'm not retaining it beyond the first plot showing power vs state of charge. I added @fastwheels data on the first plot as well, but with a guesstimate at the power at 80%.

I've also included a simulated curve showing what I'd consider to be pretty reasonable for the large pack given the battery size. That's the "Rivian Target" curve. As a total coincidence, this curve seems to provide a pretty good match to a couple of the better curves I have heard of from employees. However, I haven't actually seen proof of that.

Because the vast majority of people seem to be getting the 20" ATs, I'm doing mileage calculations based on 293 miles, which seems to generally be what the GOM calculates in conserve mode for folks at a full SOC.

It's worth noting that I believe both of the curves from SID and Bowhunter are on 350kw chargers that seem to be limited to about 375 amps. It looks like it'd probably save about 5 minutes from 10 to 55%+ to charge on a 150kw charger that can provide 175kw than a 350kw charger that's limited to 375 amps. The very start of the timesinks 150 curve is a good example of this. Regardless of what appears to be a very conservative curve, it is really being limited by the 400v architecture.

One other piece of context that I personally find a little interesting is that with the upcoming update to the ID.4 charging curve, the even the "target" curve I've created for the R1T would not be any faster at road tripping than the ID.4.

Currently looks like around 50 minutes around 50 minute to an hour for a 10 to 80% charge if the curves we are seeing continue to be good reference curves.

I'm coming around to the theory that the curves are being limited by a conservative thermal limit that Rivian has set given the shape of the curves, the very sharp drop in charging speeds, and that they are not following a similar consistent backbone curve despite all of them except maybe Timesink's first curve hitting the limits of the charger to start.

We should also be getting a pretty good set of curves from @OutofSpecKyle shortly. And as a reminder, he was able to get clarification that the launch edition vehicles do not have hardware capability for the 800v switch.

Oh, and towing for any distance more than about 75 miles will really suck with the curves we're seeing. Without changes to the curve, the max pack isn't going to help that much either.

Sponsored

 

[Attesan997]

Thanks for putting all the data together. For those going in expecting a charging beast from 0-80% SOC I think it’s fair to say they will be disappointed. I guess software could help, always the chance they’re being conservative until they have more real world data.

I can’t say I’m surprised though from the first media drives no one really raved about the charging curve. Unlike something like the ionic 5 or to be more fair the Taycan.

 

[SeaGeo]

Thanks for putting all the data together. For those going in expecting a charging beast from 0-80% SOC I think it’s fair to say they will be disappointed. I guess software could help, always the chance they’re being conservative until they have more real world data.

I can’t say I’m surprised though from the first media drives no one really raved about the charging curve. Unlike something like the ionic 5 or to be more fair the Taycan.

No problem. What we've seen so far is definitely disappointing for a flagship EV that's been under development for quite awhile now. I would really have hoped that it would perform at least as well as the ID.4 given where each vehicle sits in the market.

 

[sub]

I thought I'd go through and plot them up against some other 400v class vehicles for a frame of reference.

Why didn't you include Tesla 3/y? They are 400V and data is readily available for them.

 

[McMoo]

And here’s a model 3 which is a much smaller pack with 2170 cells like Rivian. Tesla’s V3 supercharger can reach higher amps than CCS. I hope they can figure out something flat and consistent like the e-tron. This is a huge pack.

 

[SeaGeo]

Why didn't you include Tesla 3/y? They are 400V and data is readily available for them.

Mostly because tesla pushes more than 500 amps, i'd reference the plaid curve anyway. Te plaid curve is quite similar to the EQS curve above about 50%. so I don't see much value there.
https://insideevs.com/news/573179/mercedes-eqs-450-charging-analysis/

 

[Attesan997]

No problem. What we've seen so far is definitely disappointing for a flagship EV that's been under development for quite awhile now. I would really have hoped that it would perform at least as well as the ID.4 given where each vehicle sits in the market.

Ramble incoming.

I agree with you but thinking about it a bit more I think part of this also comes down to the "new-ness" of the space and lack of competition. If Rivian had stuck with their original vision and made a sports car I'd bet you a $1 it would've charged similarly to the Taycan/Etron GT. It also would've been way more expensive and sold in a much more limited capacity. No way a brand new startup with no history was going to charge Porsche prices for was likely going to be just an adequate electric sports car.

They pivoted to the truck and SUV space and targeted the adventure lifestyle and boom. Their closest competitors, although I would personally say they're not direct competitors, are the Lightning, Hummer and Silveradolanche. The Lightning didn't have the best curve from what I recall and the GM products have massive batteries so any improvements to speed are likely a wash. I think it was one of the Ford execs who said even the upcoming dedicated electric platform that would underpin the next Lightning still probably wouldn't be 800v because of most people's access to that infrastructure. Ultimately while I would've preferred otherwise, I think Rivian knew they were safe with almost any curve they came up with, at least for the next few years. And with all the challenges they've faced while I would've preferred something better will it matter? Most of Rivian's targeted customer base likely doesn't know what a charge curve is and those that do and care did enough sleuthing at this point to determine if Rivian's current products are right for them.

Anyway ramble over, thanks for putting the data together. While I'm a bit disappointed it's not a deal breaker, at least not to me. Hope I'm completely wrong and improvements are a software unlock away like the Mach E.

 

[COdogman]

Thanks for putting that together! I am confident after a few updates the curve will be better. I have no idea why they are being so conservative with it early on, but they must have their reasons.

Any thoughts on the brand/ franchise of charger being part of the problem?

 

[slawwach]

Thanks for putting this together.
I am waiting for Kyle's charging test nervously because it doesn't look promising. For many people that mostly commuting this probably doesn't matter that much, but for me Rivian is going to be a road trip vehicle and I'll keep commuting in smaller, more efficient car.
The promise of 140 miles in 20 minutes and "fast charging at over 200 kW for sustained periods" was not great, but OK for me. It looks that they missed it quite a bit unfortunately.

It looks that even Hummer might be a better road trip vehicle, which sounds funny (assuming you'll have 350kW chargers on your way).

 

[Scott]

As I mentioned in another thread, I expect them to improve this over time. No matter how much testing you do internally you can’t replicate the volume of real world data your consumers provide after delivery. Much like Ford was conservative with the Mach E initially, I expect Rivian to loosen things up over time. My bold prediction is we will see 150kw up to 65-70% state of charge within 1 year.

That said I will base purchasing decisions based on current performance not my long term hope.

 

[SeaGeo]

The promise of 140 miles in 20 minutes and "fast charging at over 200 kW for sustained periods" was not great, but OK for me. It looks that they missed it quite a bit unfortunately.

I think it'll hit the 140/20, the trick will be finding a 350 kW charger that puts out 500 amps.

Much like Ford was conservative with the Mach E initially, I expect Rivian to loosen things up over time. My bold prediction is we will see 150kw up to 65-70% state of charge within 1 year.

I don't remember you replying earlier, hasn't the MME only been improved upon above 80%? Or did they adjust the rest of the curve?

Either way, I really hope they work on the curve here.

They have a lot of data. The truck has been in production for what... 6 months now? They have been developing their battery pack for years. I'm still reserving judgment for Kyle's testing, but it appears to that their initial curve is well behind every other high end EV released in the last two years. That shouldn't be a lack of data. Usually manufacturers push the curve out acknowledging it needs some refinement around the edges. This looks like it someone typed in a thermal limit of 65 degrees instead of 95 degrees or something.

 

[Taycanfrank]

I tend to agree with the speculation that it's a mistake or problem rather than intentionally being "conservative".

The Rivian battery isn't anything new, this technology has been used for years and there is plenty of information on how these types of batteries react to certain charging curves. This is why most EVs release with a high, flat curve until at least 80%.. it's fine for the battery.

My Taycan 4S, one of the first ones Porsche built and with zero software updates applied, has a very high, very flat curve through 80% and I've experienced less than 2% battery degradation with over 20k miles & dozens of 350kw charging stops. Obviously it's a different system and not apples to apples, but the point is you can release a brand new EV with a flat curve and have no issues. It's well studied and safe for the battery.

There's no reason for Rivian to intentionally have the curve we're seeing and hopefully they can address the issue. If they want to be conservative above 80%, as the Mach E originally was, that's fine as most of the time you won't want to supercharge past 80% anyway. But give me 0-80% at full blast, please.

 

[Polecat]

I have a more general question about charging systems in general based off of some of this data. I’m fairly new to EVs with my P*2 being the first but in the few times I have DC fast charged I have seen it reach 420-435 volts allowing for more kW per amp etc.

Seeing this I had incorrectly assumed that most manufacturers were doing something similar within the 400v class of architectures. But it seems the Rivian is unable to push that voltage with current BMS software.

I guess my question after rambling about this is the polestar unique in how it pushes the voltage higher and that I shouldn’t expect that in other vehicles?
Also do we even know voltage/amperage as part of the Rivian curve right now? I have no idea if that information is surfaced during charging.

 

[OverZealous]

I'm getting a little concerned about the charging curve since we eventually want to replace our 2015 Model S with an R1S as our daily/trip vehicle.

Right now, we can get around 260 miles of max range on the Model S in good weather. (This is down from the original 270 miles 6.5 years ago.) On our most frequent trip, we currently have to stop to charge 2-3 times (it's about a 450 mile trip we often take around the holidays). We usually try to get one long leg & long stop to eat and charge fully, which takes about an hour, then 1 or 2 smaller stops which take 15-20 minutes. This older Model S is capped with a pretty low charge rate, too, thanks to Tesla shenanigans.

Now that the R1S is probably not getting a max pack any time soon, I'm concerned we'll actually be stopping for longer on average than we would with the Model S—even with the technically faster charging speeds and 20-25% longer range—simply because it drops off so quickly while filling a 60% larger battery.

I'm still going to get the R1T no matter what, since I want/need a truck, and I wasn't planning on using it as our daily vehicle. But I'm starting to question the R1S as our primary driver unless they can improve those charging curves.

It's going to be interesting to see what happens over the next few months.

 

[SANZC02]

I'm getting a little concerned about the charging curve since we eventually want to replace our 2015 Model S with an R1S as our daily/trip vehicle.

Right now, we can get around 260 miles of max range on the Model S in good weather. (This is down from the original 270 miles 6.5 years ago.) On our most frequent trip, we currently have to stop to charge 2-3 times (it's about a 450 mile trip we often take around the holidays). We usually try to get one long leg & long stop to eat and charge fully, which takes about an hour, then 1 or 2 smaller stops which take 15-20 minutes. This older Model S is capped with a pretty low charge rate, too, thanks to Tesla shenanigans.

Now that the R1S is probably not getting a max pack any time soon, I'm concerned we'll actually be stopping for longer on average than we would with the Model S—even with the technically faster charging speeds and 20-25% longer range—simply because it drops off so quickly while filling a 60% larger battery.

I'm still going to get the R1T no matter what, since I want/need a truck, and I wasn't planning on using it as our daily vehicle. But I'm starting to question the R1S as our primary driver unless they can improve those charging curves.

It's going to be interesting to see what happens over the next few months.

Just my 2 cents being a fellow MS owner.

The R1T is less efficient than the MS but still charges faster for both kWh and miles than my 2016 MS. I’ve looked at it compared to my charging and seems like it will be the same at worse and mostly better to what I currently experience as it charges today with no improvements to the R1T charge curve.

Sponsored