The Built In Navigation Solution

[Tomgriff]

Was anyone on here an early Tesla owner? I wonder how their system was when they first started? I find it to be excellent now, better than apple maps or google maps on my phone. Most importantly is that it integrates your route with chargers, range, consumption and battery pre-conditioning. I have found the battery percentage arrival prediction to be very accurate, often spot on over several hundreds miles and a few percentage off at the worst. This allows a lot of confidence on trips to go lower in the pack, reducing charging time. Even though our Chevy Bolt has Apple Car Play and Android Auto and can show ABRP, there is no comparison to Tesla's nav system. If Rivian can get to the level of Tesla in a few years, it will be worth the wait.

Sponsored

 

[momo3605]

Was anyone on here an early Tesla owner? I wonder how their system was when they first started? I find it to be excellent now, better than apple maps or google maps on my phone. Most importantly is that it integrates your route with chargers, range, consumption and battery pre-conditioning. I have found the battery percentage arrival prediction to be very accurate, often spot on over several hundreds miles and a few percentage off at the worst. This allows a lot of confidence on trips to go lower in the pack, reducing charging time. Even though our Chevy Bolt has Apple Car Play and Android Auto and can show ABRP, there is no comparison to Tesla's nav system. If Rivian can get to the level of Tesla in a few years, it will be worth the wait.

Well does anyone have any experience with Rivian's range estimator/integration with EA chargers? i.e. is it totally inacurrate and likely to leave you stranded if you don't do a double check with ABRP for instance?

I think integrating maps with chargers, range, pre-conditioning is probably the main reason why companies like Tesla and Rivian don't integrate with Carplay. I'm not sure i've seen an implementation that matches Tesla's through a Carplay app. I think. it would lead to more confusion jumping between different maps and setting destination in two different places.

 

[rodhx]

The latest versions of CarPlay & Apple Maps reads the charge level of my Mach E and plans charging stops accordingly. Since Ford doesn’t do preconditioning anyway this means CarPlay/Maps works at least as well as the built-in system.

 

[mindstormsguy]

I really like Carplay/Android Auto, and the features that Google or Apple maps can provide. I wouldn't buy an ICE vehicle without Carplay support. BUT, I think Rivian might really be doing the right thing here.

I have an Audi e-tron right now. The route/charging planning on the built in nav is entirely useless. It is 100% willfully ignorant of charger speed. It doesn't precondition your battery. There's literally nothing usable that it brings to that table that you wouldn't get with a non-EV aware mapping/route planning application. It's a 2019 model, but they have never released an update to make this any better. It's the same today as when I got it new.

Apple released a feature where it can share turn/direction prompts with the vehicle, so it can show in the HUD, on the dash, whatever. Did Audi implement this? No. A while ago Apple added EV routing support in Apple Maps. But it relies on the vehicle to share SOC information with Carplay. Did Audi add this support? No. So I can't EV route with Apple maps.

I went on a long road trip with the e-tron a while ago, and so I decided to try out the paid ABRP subscription. It gives Carplay support. It's very crippled compared to the normal ABRP interface (because Apple locks down what can be presented on Carplay), and the turn-by-turn directions on ABRP are kind of crap. BUT, it gives you good charging planning. That was worth it. (Though the fact I had to manually adjust my current SOC was a huge pain). But it gave me charge planning, which neither Carplay or the e-tron's built in nav could. Would I use ABRP on Carplay on a regular basis? No. The UX is awful. But it was good to try as an enthusiast.

So given the choice between the Audi (which does include Carplay) and the Rivian nav (which may not have Google-level of turn-by-turn directions, but has better charging integration, and has already been shown to be constantly evolving), I'll take the Rivian. I like that the Rivian seems to be very good at predicting range based on current factors. I like that they're adding preconditioning. I like that they'll probably be rapidly iterating and improving more quickly than other OEMs, and probably faster than Apple and Google (specifically re: EV features). I bet Rivian adds many more vehicle-specific hooks than they otherwise could if they relied on Apple or Google for EV route planning.

Why no Carplay and Google maps then? Well. Why is Google maps so great? It's because they have millions of users on the road, constantly navigating, and constantly sending data back to Google to report on what directions worked, and what didn't. If Rivian forces everyone to use their nav, then they get information from most Rivian owners. This makes them improve their user experience for everyone. If they allow users to easily use Apple or Google, Rivian gives up a ton of data, and they will never get better. This would mean that no matter how many vehicle integration features they add, they'll never have a great navigation experience. But if they force more people to use it, then they'll get better, and eventually you'll all want to use it.

I just really really hope they quickly add the ability to easily "share" a location on your phone to the Rivian nav. I really like getting in my car and having Google suggest "hey, that place you were just looking up. yeah. do you want to navigate there?"

 

[Scoiatael]

Was anyone on here an early Tesla owner? I wonder how their system was when they first started? I find it to be excellent now, better than apple maps or google maps on my phone. Most importantly is that it integrates your route with chargers, range, consumption and battery pre-conditioning. I have found the battery percentage arrival prediction to be very accurate, often spot on over several hundreds miles and a few percentage off at the worst. This allows a lot of confidence on trips to go lower in the pack, reducing charging time. Even though our Chevy Bolt has Apple Car Play and Android Auto and can show ABRP, there is no comparison to Tesla's nav system. If Rivian can get to the level of Tesla in a few years, it will be worth the wait.

Tesla's latest nav update screwed up the street names in my area. I've always found Google Maps to be more accurate than Tesla.

 

[SeaGeo]

Well does anyone have any experience with Rivian's range estimator/integration with EA chargers? i.e. is it totally inacurrate and likely to leave you stranded if you don't do a double check with ABRP for instance?

I think integrating maps with chargers, range, pre-conditioning is probably the main reason why companies like Tesla and Rivian don't integrate with Carplay. I'm not sure i've seen an implementation that matches Tesla's through a Carplay app. I think. it would lead to more confusion jumping between different maps and setting destination in two different places.

As far as I have seen and heard the range estimator is generally surprisingly accurate. If anything, I am pretty suspicious of what I get out of ABRP after calibrating it to something similar to the range Kyle got in his range test.

 

[FrankieJ]

Hey everyone,

If you're looking for a not so positive post from me about the R1T you've come to the right place.

I've had more driving time in the R1T and I can honestly say the built in navigation is less than ideal. In fact, it sucks. I think that's my biggest gripe with the vehicle so far.

I've found that it always tries to route you on carpool only exits and recognizes partial lane tolls on 405 as a "toll road" thereby completely disabling Driver+. It can't find a location name or addresses as well as Google Maps. The travel eta is also amazingly inaccurate. On surface streets, it has been too late in telling me when to make the next turn after I miss a turning it has to recalculate.

I understand software is difficult and Google maps wasn't built in 2 years. I tried to give Rivian the benefit of the doubt when I first saw the truck and spoke to their engineers at Fully Charged Live in February 2020. Where they believed they could do better than Google, hence why no Android Auto or Apple Carplay, and where one of the software engineers from ABRP spoke with them to work on integrating ABRP into the Rivian ecosystem.

Frankly I'm surprised by the lack of progress on this front. We currently don't have a "better than Google Maps" solution nor do we have the ability to send ABRP routes to the R1T. I think having a robust navigation solution is a key strategy to make this product successful. Entertaining alternative navigation solutions while they developed their own Rivian solution would also have been a wise solution.

As someone who's new to the Seattle area, driving around with an essentially dumb navigation system is not ideal. I also haven't found a good place to mount my phone to use Android Auto. I'm sure as more of us take our Rivian's to places we aren't familiar with by following their "Keep The World Adventurous Forever" slogan/motto, we will feel that the Rivian navigation solution is woefully inadequate. And we will wish that they implemented Android Auto and Apple Carplay.

The navigation bar they have to meet is awfully high and I hope they will be able to succeed. And when they do, how much time will have passed and at what cost?

You might want to try this phone mount from Weathertech. It fits perfectly in the front cup holders and you can adjust the height so it is easily visible for the driver. You lose one of the cup holders but it works well. https://www.weathertech.com/weathertech-cupfone/cupfonexl/

 

[DaveA]

Well does anyone have any experience with Rivian's range estimator/integration with EA chargers? i.e. is it totally inacurrate and likely to leave you stranded if you don't do a double check with ABRP for instance?

I think integrating maps with chargers, range, pre-conditioning is probably the main reason why companies like Tesla and Rivian don't integrate with Carplay. I'm not sure i've seen an implementation that matches Tesla's through a Carplay app. I think. it would lead to more confusion jumping between different maps and setting destination in two different places.

It is super conservative...240 mile trip between EA chargers....range was 293....said I needed to stop and charge at a slow charger for an hour to make it....did not....arrived at destination with plenty of range.

 

[rodhx]

It is super conservative...240 mile trip between EA chargers....range was 293....said I needed to stop and charge at a slow charger for an hour to make it....did not....arrived at destination with plenty of range.

Both Ford and Apple Maps do something similar. At least when using Apple Maps it will eventually realize you can make it to your destination and pop up a banner that says it is removing the charging stop.

 

[WalnutFarmer]

No real-time traffic information in navigation is a huge problem Rivian needs to fix ASAP. This lack of information cost me an extra hour on my latest trip, when my friends in their Tesla got there by going around the traffic they were aware of via their navigation an hour earlier than me.

 

[SeaGeo]

No real-time traffic information in navigation is a huge problem Rivian needs to fix ASAP. This lack of information cost me an extra hour on my latest trip, when my friends in their Tesla got there by going around the traffic they were aware of via their navigation an hour earlier than me.

It has real time traffic info in it...

 

[ja_kub_sz]

@r1vlife I've found it to do a good job, nothing grossly better or worse then anything I've experienced in my other vehicles @Tomgriff .

I'm not a Apple Carplay or Android Auto person though.

I was actually making a 2 hour drive and the Rivian routed me in what I would've considered a non ideal route to my destination and low and behold there I rolled on in right on time. Even making roughly a third of the journey through residential towns with traffic. I honestly was impressed. I've now logged 1,000 miles and the Rivian navigation system is what I would consider better than my Jaguar Land Rover products. But that doesn't include the new Pivi Pro system (haven't used extensively).

 

[SoCal Rob]

I really like Carplay/Android Auto, and the features that Google or Apple maps can provide. I wouldn't buy an ICE vehicle without Carplay support. BUT, I think Rivian might really be doing the right thing here.

I have an Audi e-tron right now. The route/charging planning on the built in nav is entirely useless. It is 100% willfully ignorant of charger speed. It doesn't precondition your battery. There's literally nothing usable that it brings to that table that you wouldn't get with a non-EV aware mapping/route planning application. It's a 2019 model, but they have never released an update to make this any better. It's the same today as when I got it new.

Apple released a feature where it can share turn/direction prompts with the vehicle, so it can show in the HUD, on the dash, whatever. Did Audi implement this? No. A while ago Apple added EV routing support in Apple Maps. But it relies on the vehicle to share SOC information with Carplay. Did Audi add this support? No. So I can't EV route with Apple maps.

I went on a long road trip with the e-tron a while ago, and so I decided to try out the paid ABRP subscription. It gives Carplay support. It's very crippled compared to the normal ABRP interface (because Apple locks down what can be presented on Carplay), and the turn-by-turn directions on ABRP are kind of crap. BUT, it gives you good charging planning. That was worth it. (Though the fact I had to manually adjust my current SOC was a huge pain). But it gave me charge planning, which neither Carplay or the e-tron's built in nav could. Would I use ABRP on Carplay on a regular basis? No. The UX is awful. But it was good to try as an enthusiast.

So given the choice between the Audi (which does include Carplay) and the Rivian nav (which may not have Google-level of turn-by-turn directions, but has better charging integration, and has already been shown to be constantly evolving), I'll take the Rivian. I like that the Rivian seems to be very good at predicting range based on current factors. I like that they're adding preconditioning. I like that they'll probably be rapidly iterating and improving more quickly than other OEMs, and probably faster than Apple and Google (specifically re: EV features). I bet Rivian adds many more vehicle-specific hooks than they otherwise could if they relied on Apple or Google for EV route planning.

Why no Carplay and Google maps then? Well. Why is Google maps so great? It's because they have millions of users on the road, constantly navigating, and constantly sending data back to Google to report on what directions worked, and what didn't. If Rivian forces everyone to use their nav, then they get information from most Rivian owners. This makes them improve their user experience for everyone. If they allow users to easily use Apple or Google, Rivian gives up a ton of data, and they will never get better. This would mean that no matter how many vehicle integration features they add, they'll never have a great navigation experience. But if they force more people to use it, then they'll get better, and eventually you'll all want to use it.

I just really really hope they quickly add the ability to easily "share" a location on your phone to the Rivian nav. I really like getting in my car and having Google suggest "hey, that place you were just looking up. yeah. do you want to navigate there?"

It looks you have as much of an issue with Audi as screen projection. As the owner of an ID.4, another VAG product, I totally understand the frustrations with their choices, “features,“ and near-absent updates.

What I don’t understand is why anyone would argue against screen projection via Android Auto and Apple CarPlay for other people’s use.
1. Everyone gets more options. You are not forced to use it. It’s not a choice of screen projection OR built-in navigation where everyone is locked out of built-in navigation as soon as screen projection is offered on a vehicle.
2. Some people are concerned about much more than just on-road navigation when it comes to screen projection. It is still possible to use built-in navigation while using screen projection for other things, especially when screen projection is presented in a window as can be done on a display as large as the Rivian’s.
3. I think a lot of people rely on navigation for scenarios where range is irrelevant: local driving and established longer routes which aren’t close to range limitations but where they just want to see traffic info. There is no advantage to Rivian’s tightly-integrated navigation in those scenarios. I can see myself using Google or Apple Maps for those cases and Rivian’s navigation when taking long road trips which require charging.
4. If Rivian doesn’t provide navigation during a drive that doesn’t mean they lose access to all data about that drive. Rivian can collect information about each drive like start point, route, speed, and end point. Just as they can if you take a trip without using navigation today. This is the same whether people use screen projection or a phone with a mount. Unless you lock the vehicle in Park until a route is planned in Rivian navigation, you aren’t going to force some people to use Rivian navigation. I don’t know what limitations there are on the collection of data provided by AA and CP as turn directions are shown but, if allowed, Rivian could collect data from that, too.

 

[rodhx]

3. I think a lot of people rely on navigation for scenarios where range is irrelevant: local driving and established longer routes which aren’t close to range limitations but where they just want to see traffic info. There is no advantage to Rivian’s tightly-integrated navigation in those scenarios. I can see myself using Google or Apple Maps for those cases and Rivian’s navigation when taking long road trips which require charging.

Bingo! Google Maps is my favorite in day-to-day situations since it show real-time options at intersections including the time impact of that option (the gray paths that say things like "similar ETA" or "+2 minutes"). I find that fantastic on normal driving and no one else does it that way. It lets me make educated choices to take alternate routes as I approach intersections when all other nav systems just show you their "optimum" choice.

 

[AdamUCF]

I use Waze with Android Auto constantly. I used it just to route to/from work every day back when I went into an office for traffic and, perhaps more importantly, police alerts. It's nice to double up on the radar detection. The GM and Ford EVs can manage to have it, why can't Rivian? It seems like Rivian is trying too hard to be like Tesla.

Sponsored