Switched from Launch Edition Quad to Dual Motor Max Pack Performance -- my impressions / review

[SeaGeo]

Not true. I was not able to get the range out of my QM to be comfortable trying the San Carlos to the states run with no chargers through the desert: even running pure conserve. I now do it regularly in the Enduro running in AP/Auto.

Unless we can get Rivian to weigh in on how much more efficient the motors are in the Enduro vs Bosch, we are all mostly using anecdotal info and individual perceptions to make recommendations.

Conveniently Rivian did this with the EPA efficiency submittals and the dual motor tested out to about 5% more efficient than quad in conserve mode.

Sponsored

 

[Tr4ckD4ys]

Not true. I was not able to get the range out of my QM to be comfortable trying the San Carlos to the states run with no chargers through the desert: even running pure conserve. I now do it regularly in the Enduro running in AP/Auto.

21's on both.

A lot of "opinion" on here from people that have not owned both lol... Reader beware.

You said it before I got to it. The guy is spewing a bunch of things seemingly to justify his own bias but not really factual comparison of how DM vs QM works and/or saves energy.

 

[Tr4ckD4ys]

I did not recalibrate. No real need to.

I also had a R1T large pack on 21’s. 5800 miles and had 2.31 lifetime mi/kwh. My R1S with running boards and mud flaps Lifetime over 5800 miles is 2.49.
not sure why Rivian didn’t offer a 20inch to maximize range. Smaller wheels are more efficient.

Not really true for the Rivian though, given a good tire/wheel combo that would improve efficiency isn’t available yet. It’s all about rolling resistance and from the dozens of tire threads, it seems that even 20” wheel folks sizing down both in width and diameter with an AS wheel (Michelin Defenders) aren’t getting closer to the range of the Rivian 21” setup, sometimes get even less than the stock Pirelli ATs. So this simple rule that largely Tesla seems to have perpetuated somehow doesn’t apply to Rivian - and that’s because rolling resistance & aerodynamics are more important than size.

 

[anthonysfl]

Not really true for the Rivian though, given a good tire/wheel combo that would improve efficiency isn’t available yet. It’s all about rolling resistance and from the dozens of tire threads, it seems that even 20” wheel folks sizing down both in width and diameter with an AS wheel (Michelin Defenders) aren’t getting closer to the range of the Rivian 21” setup, sometimes get even less than the stock Pirelli ATs. So this simple rule that largely Tesla seems to have perpetuated somehow doesn’t apply to Rivian - and that’s because rolling resistance & aerodynamics are more important than size.

Lol you’re nuts man.

 

[Tr4ckD4ys]

Lol you’re nuts man.

Man I don't deal in YouTube influencer videos (although I do like that particular channel and series quite a bit). Just read the dozens of tire threads in this forum. I understand the science behind smaller wheels but there are several owners with real life experience confirming that this has not held true for them on their R1's. Reducing this, as you had, to just wheel size is close-minded as several other variables (aerodynamics, rolling resistance, materials used, et cetera) influence this too. If you prefer buying tires based on a YouTube influencer only to have wasted your money with minimal/unproven range gains, go ahead. It hasn't worked for others on the 20" wheels (the smallest OEM wheel you can get). That's a fact - tested on a Rivian - not on a Tesla.

 

[anthonysfl]

Man I don't deal in YouTube influencer videos (although I do like that particular channel and series quite a bit). Just read the dozens of tire threads in this forum. I understand the science behind smaller wheels but there are several owners with real life experience confirming that this has not held true for them on their R1's. Reducing this, as you had, to just wheel size is close-minded as several other variables (aerodynamics, rolling resistance, materials used, et cetera) influence this too. If you prefer buying tires based on a YouTube influencer only to have wasted your money with minimal/unproven range gains, go ahead. It hasn't worked for others on the 20" wheels (the smallest OEM wheel you can get). That's a fact - tested on a Rivian - not on a Tesla.

I already spent my money on the oem 20’s and sold my oem 22’s. Not sure how you’re confused on my previous comment. I compared both the R1T and R1S. I HAD both. R1T large pack on 21’s with no mods. My R1S with 20’s on AS tires, mud flaps and running boards is more efficient. My lifetime on S over the same mileage in my T is 2.49 which is greater efficiency than 2.31. Here are a couple short trips on the highway. Two pics from T are 8-15% worse efficiency.

 

[Tr4ckD4ys]

I already spent my money on the oem 20’s and sold my oem 22’s. Not sure how you’re confused on my previous comment. I compared both the R1T and R1S. I HAD both. R1T large pack on 21’s with no mods. My R1S with 20’s on AS tires, mud flaps and running boards is more efficient. My lifetime on S over the same mileage in my T is 2.49 which is greater efficiency than 2.31. Here are a couple short trips on the highway. Two pics from T are 8-15% worse efficiency.

Going from 22" to 20" I agree. But changing OEM size tires on a 20" OEM wheel is where it's unclear. Even going from 21" to 20" is unclear, as 21" OEM setup still gets better mileage than any 20" OEM wheel/Non-OEM-tire combo.

 

[NineElectrics]

I already spent my money on the oem 20’s and sold my oem 22’s. Not sure how you’re confused on my previous comment. I compared both the R1T and R1S. I HAD both. R1T large pack on 21’s with no mods. My R1S with 20’s on AS tires, mud flaps and running boards is more efficient. My lifetime on S over the same mileage in my T is 2.49 which is greater efficiency than 2.31. Here are a couple short trips on the highway. Two pics from T are 8-15% worse efficiency.

I’m amazed that you can achieve this result with OEM 20s on a quad! Your R1S is still configured to the 22s; maybe that confuses the trip computer. Even miscalibrated, the difference shouldn’t be that extreme, though.

Can you share the extract tire you’re using?

 

[Epicloop]

Reducing this, as you had, to just wheel size is close-minded as several other variables (aerodynamics, rolling resistance, materials used, et cetera) influence this too.

There is lots of talk about rolling resistance, are people referring to tire tread/compound or weight or both?
It seems to me that the combined weight would be the greatest factor in rolling resistance.
We must be reading different tire efficiency reports because I have seen plenty reporting greatly improved efficiency with A/S on 20" with even more if going to 60 profile as opposed to 65.

 

[LL75]

Going from 22" to 20" I agree. But changing OEM size tires on a 20" OEM wheel is where it's unclear. Even going from 21" to 20" is unclear, as 21" OEM setup still gets better mileage than any 20" OEM wheel/Non-OEM-tire combo.

Not sure where the confusing part is. You need to go to this site and enter the tire spec and see how big the different the diameter from 20", 21" and 22".

https://tiresize.com/calculator/

 

[Tr4ckD4ys]

Not sure where the confusing part is. You need to go to this site and enter the tire spec and see how big the different the diameter from 20", 21" and 22".

https://tiresize.com/calculator/

Let me be super specific: There does not yet seem to be a better performing tire (in terms of range) than the OEM Pirelli ATs for the R1T in OEM size 275/65/20. You can buy Michelin AS tires, but they will not improve your range conclusively. Some people put non-OEM size on the 20" wheel, i.e. 275/60/20 which yes is slimmer and smaller but does not conclusively improve range given calibration concerns. The OEM 21" setup still gets a better range than both the OEM 20" and the OE 20" with 275/60/20 mounted to them (to my original point, they are still the range king for the R1T). The OEM 22" gets a worse range than any of the previously mentioned options. So yes, going from OEM 22 to 21 or 20 will improve range. But going from OEM 21 to OEM 20 or non-OEM 20 as of today will not improve range conclusively. Therefore, your rule of "smaller wheel, better range" does not hold true in the comparison case of OEM 21" to OEM 20" (with either of the above stated options - maybe the rule should be "smaller tire, more range" but that's to be proven yet in the R1T case).

 

[Tr4ckD4ys]

There is lots of talk about rolling resistance, are people referring to tire tread/compound or weight or both?
It seems to me that the combined weight would be the greatest factor in rolling resistance.
We must be reading different tire efficiency reports because I have seen plenty reporting greatly improved efficiency with A/S on 20" with even more if going to 60 profile as opposed to 65.

I saw somewhere on here someone posting that the weight is actually not that much of an impact in the R1T case, but it's only anecdotal evidence. I think all of these factors influence each other.

 

[LL75]

Let me be super specific: There does not yet seem to be a better performing tire (in terms of range) than the OEM Pirelli ATs for the R1T in OEM size 275/65/20. You can buy Michelin AS tires, but they will not improve your range conclusively. Some people put non-OEM size on the 20" wheel, i.e. 275/60/20 which yes is slimmer and smaller but does not conclusively improve range given calibration concerns. The OEM 21" setup still gets a better range than both the OEM 20" and the OE 20" with 275/60/20 mounted to them (to my original point, they are still the range king for the R1T). The OEM 22" gets a worse range than any of the previously mentioned options. So yes, going from OEM 22 to 21 or 20 will improve range. But going from OEM 21 to OEM 20 or non-OEM 20 as of today will not improve range conclusively. Therefore, your rule of "smaller wheel, better range" does not hold true in the comparison case of OEM 21" to OEM 20" (with either of the above stated options).

Dude. Anthonysfl above already showed you his picture of the r1t with 21" and his r1s with 20" AS tires size of 275/60/20 Pirelli scorion AS plus 3. His R1S with the 20" beated the efficiency. of his r1T with the 21". FYI, the r1t is also more efficient than the r1s aerodynamic wise.

 

[Tr4ckD4ys]

Dude. Anthonysfl above already showed you his picture of the r1t with 21" and his r1s with 20" AS tires size of 275/60/20 Pirelli scorion AS plus 3. His R1S with the 20" beated the efficiency. of his r1T with the 21". FYI, the r1t is also more efficient than the r1s aerodynamic wise.

Gotcha. I am in agreement with this but it is the first data point I see on here of a tire/wheel combo beating the estimates of the 21" OEM setup. However, I think this setup isn't exactly kosher for the R1T - and to other posters - calibration et cetera is also a concern. I'd like to see an OEM size tire get better efficiency than going the trade-off route on weight ratings.

 

[NineElectrics]

Dude. Anthonysfl above already showed you his picture of the r1t with 21" and his r1s with 20" AS tires size of 275/60/20 Pirelli scorion AS plus 3. His R1S with the 20" beated the efficiency. of his r1T with the 21". FYI, the r1t is also more efficient than the r1s aerodynamic wise.

The results are surprising. I wonder if @anthonysfl 's superior results can be explained by the fact that his R1S still thinks he is on 22" wheels. Rivian might vary the suspension height depending on the wheel size. It could be that with 22" the Rivian is at a lower height on the highway, which is more aerodynamically efficient. Definitely it would be compared to 20" wheels; not sure about 21".

I believe out of all the Rivian tire options, the 22" wheels have the smallest overall diameter (though just barely) over the 21"s, and are thus the shortest in height. Therefore, Rivian can make the ride height the lowest when it thinks it is running with this wheel.

Sponsored