That was about the best winter conditions you could expect. It would be nice to see it in colder conditions to see how the cold affects the efficiency. I think you have to take all the factors into account as you can’t really compare this test with others that are done in colder conditions or with higher winds.
I'm not understanding the problem, the vehicle went 90 percent of the claimed mileage. It's rated for 329 miles and went 298, shouldn't that result be around what to expect.
Yes, I feel like it’s reasonable to not be pleased by the 329 number, but not the result. 90% of EPA at 70mph in conditions that aren’t the ideal is actually impressive.
Thing about the quad is it’s epa range settings are based on all purpose mode right. Perhaps eco mode with 2 bosch motors is more efficient than 1 enduro
When it comes to EV trucks, there's really no replacement for energy capacity. Yes, you can make a more efficient EV truck that loses all that efficiency advantage when being used as a truck (e.g., towing), but you're only talking about maybe a 25-30% efficiency boost in the perfect conditions. On the other hand, adding 40-70% energy capacity means that you get both better base range and better range when actually using it as a truck.
No, that's not really a thing. Running a battery to empty and/or regularly fast charging it (on super fast chargers) isn't great for the battery but its the same redlining and/or riding the clutch on a manual, which is to say it not something you should be doing on the regular basis but it not going to 'ruin' the car for you or the next person who buys it if you do it once in a while. You shouldn't ever really run your car (petrol or electric to zero) and like petrol cars all EVs have about 5-10% fuel left when they say they are on 0 so your very rarely ever going to actually run the battery to true zero.
Was the sound system in this Rivian the same one that Kyle reviewed recently? He said the 2nd Gen Rivian sound system is so bad that he was going to reach out to the engineers to find out what's up. The 1st Gen with the Meridian he said was the best. If so, I'd be curious on Ryan's perspective vs Kyle's. Savagegeese channel also noted the poor sound system in their recent review.
I believe Kyle's and Savagegeese listened to it before the recent OTA that addressed the sound. I have the OG Meridian in my R1T and it is the best IMO. Slaps.
I just got a 2025 R1T and the sound system sounds incredible. An OTA fixed whatever problem they had. Watching Google Cast or RUclips - the sound is amazing. Playing music through Spotify or Bluetooth sounds great also,
@ That's great news Ryan. Looks like Rivian pushed an OTA (as James and JF said here) that seems to fixed the earlier issues, which is very cool how it can be fixed that way without hardware changes.
That is strange it is not showing the accel/regen on the wheels in the drive mode screen of the center display. I wonder if it wasn't disconnecting the rear motors? That would explain the lower efficiency.
If you doing a “Test”, start with a SOC 80% or above. Drive your test pattern and go to 20% or less. Then note the miles driven on the test. Then charge back to starting SOC at the beginning. How many miles did you go and how many Kw was added back? That is your true miles to Kw.
@@Bballpros better if it’s real environment with wind, slight elevation changes and different speeds from 80% to 20% then charge back to 80. That will show people the miles per Kw which cost different in my area than in California or Florida
Rivian really needs to improve the efficiency of their vehicles, crazy to think that Cybertruck gets more range with 20kWh less. Really hope that they can improve aero and high-speed efficiency.
Cybertruck was tested in slightly warmer temperatures and non windy conditions. Plus the R1T’s all terrain tires are more aggressive than Cybertruck’s all-terrain tires. Yes, Cybertruck is more efficient but not as much as you are making it seem.
@@carlomorischi3435 A few things: EPA lab tests vehicles at between 30 and 60mph on a dynamometer, so 70+ is definitely ‘out of spec’. If you check the ratings on Rivian’s site, they do a range estimate for the Tri-motor on the 22” rims in Conserve mode, but only give a general range of 329 miles for the 20” off-road tires. I believe their site says that these measurements are estimates, based on their experience, not EPA. The other point is that the R1T is a towing beast, but you will lose a lot of range, given the wind resistance. So while the Cybertruck may be more efficient when it’s not towing, it won’t be under load. Depends what you use a truck for. I’ve seen both around town, and efficiency regardless, far prefer the Rivian, even with its ‘panda eyes’ - cute rather than menacing.
@@davidcottrell570 I also prefer Rivian, but they should focus on the real-world usage where range matters the most, which is 70-80mph cruising, not EPA.
You can absolutely go 400. Just not at 70 or 80 and that is not surprising. These tests are in no way scientific. It’s just for fun. You really shouldn’t extrapolate anything
51,579 people called nobody bought them last year. And nobody is worried that you didn’t, but then Rivian owners have such a high ownership loyalty rating that they wouldn’t understand your reluctance. What will be interesting is how many more people buy the R2 and R3. I have a feeling that somebody will, and that there will be a lot of them. Maybe one of those somebody’s will be you. You looked and commented, just like me, and I can’t afford one either, much as I would like to. Yes, it sounds like a lot of money for a compact truck, but there’s plenty of good reason why they are so expensive. Maybe a used R1T will be in my future (my wife likes them too), and I’m happy if that makes me a nobody. Just kidding ;)
cant overcome physics. great to see more rivian/non-tesla content!
I would like to see a cold weather test with the LFP battery standard range battery.
That was about the best winter conditions you could expect. It would be nice to see it in colder conditions to see how the cold affects the efficiency. I think you have to take all the factors into account as you can’t really compare this test with others that are done in colder conditions or with higher winds.
Nice commentary. Well balanced and thoughtful consideration of the variables. Kudos!
@@steveboker2124 thanks!
I'm not understanding the problem, the vehicle went 90 percent of the claimed mileage. It's rated for 329 miles and went 298, shouldn't that result be around what to expect.
300 winter highway miles was better than I would have expected. Sounds good to me!
Yes, I feel like it’s reasonable to not be pleased by the 329 number, but not the result. 90% of EPA at 70mph in conditions that aren’t the ideal is actually impressive.
Agreed-how many times did he have to use the accelerator to get back up to 70mph? If not for that, it would have made it to 329 miles.
It’s a solid result but I expected better efficiency. It did a bit worse than an old R1T quad motor without a heat pump in similar conditions.
@@ryankassel5691it’s winter
Good improvements, cheers fella 👍
The 2025 "refresh" is a great reason to go buy used R1T
Would be interesting to do a range loss test in 20F too.
54F in this video is more like spring weather and isn't a hard test 🙂
Thing about the quad is it’s epa range settings are based on all purpose mode right. Perhaps eco mode with 2 bosch motors is more efficient than 1 enduro
When it comes to EV trucks, there's really no replacement for energy capacity. Yes, you can make a more efficient EV truck that loses all that efficiency advantage when being used as a truck (e.g., towing), but you're only talking about maybe a 25-30% efficiency boost in the perfect conditions. On the other hand, adding 40-70% energy capacity means that you get both better base range and better range when actually using it as a truck.
Got to ask, doesn’t running the battery to dead screw it and will never be as it was? If So, pity the used buyer that get these.
No, that's not really a thing. Running a battery to empty and/or regularly fast charging it (on super fast chargers) isn't great for the battery but its the same redlining and/or riding the clutch on a manual, which is to say it not something you should be doing on the regular basis but it not going to 'ruin' the car for you or the next person who buys it if you do it once in a while. You shouldn't ever really run your car (petrol or electric to zero) and like petrol cars all EVs have about 5-10% fuel left when they say they are on 0 so your very rarely ever going to actually run the battery to true zero.
With heat pumps ideally for 1kW of electricity should get you 3kW of heat energy. Vs a PTC resistance heater which is 1:1.
Was the sound system in this Rivian the same one that Kyle reviewed recently? He said the 2nd Gen Rivian sound system is so bad that he was going to reach out to the engineers to find out what's up. The 1st Gen with the Meridian he said was the best.
If so, I'd be curious on Ryan's perspective vs Kyle's. Savagegeese channel also noted the poor sound system in their recent review.
I believe Kyle's and Savagegeese listened to it before the recent OTA that addressed the sound. I have the OG Meridian in my R1T and it is the best IMO. Slaps.
I just got a 2025 R1T and the sound system sounds incredible. An OTA fixed whatever problem they had. Watching Google Cast or RUclips - the sound is amazing. Playing music through Spotify or Bluetooth sounds great also,
Sound system was good, my understanding is the premium option is the same as the old one, but please correct me if that’s incorrect.
@ That's great news Ryan. Looks like Rivian pushed an OTA (as James and JF said here) that seems to fixed the earlier issues, which is very cool how it can be fixed that way without hardware changes.
That is strange it is not showing the accel/regen on the wheels in the drive mode screen of the center display. I wonder if it wasn't disconnecting the rear motors? That would explain the lower efficiency.
He's in Conserve and you can see the 2 rear motors are cooler than the front so they are definately off.
There was a glitch in the current software that causes certain elements of the display to not update.
If you doing a “Test”, start with a SOC 80% or above. Drive your test pattern and go to 20% or less.
Then note the miles driven on the test.
Then charge back to starting SOC at the beginning.
How many miles did you go and how many Kw was added back?
That is your true miles to Kw.
Route should be a loop to eliminate elevation change. Right?
Thats what their 10% challenge basically is
@@Bballpros better if it’s real environment with wind, slight elevation changes and different speeds from 80% to 20% then charge back to 80.
That will show people the miles per Kw which cost different in my area than in California or Florida
My Tesla X shows it should be getting 3.2 miles per Kw but actually it’s 2.7 miles consistently 80 - 20 - 80 percent
Are you gonna test a dual motor max pack R1T with the 22" wheels?
Rivian really needs to improve the efficiency of their vehicles, crazy to think that Cybertruck gets more range with 20kWh less. Really hope that they can improve aero and high-speed efficiency.
@@carlomorischi3435 the Cybertruck gets 1.9 miles per Kw that’s 550 wh/mile and pretty bad
Cybertruck was tested in slightly warmer temperatures and non windy conditions. Plus the R1T’s all terrain tires are more aggressive than Cybertruck’s all-terrain tires.
Yes, Cybertruck is more efficient but not as much as you are making it seem.
@@carlomorischi3435 A few things: EPA lab tests vehicles at between 30 and 60mph on a dynamometer, so 70+ is definitely ‘out of spec’. If you check the ratings on Rivian’s site, they do a range estimate for the Tri-motor on the 22” rims in Conserve mode, but only give a general range of 329 miles for the 20” off-road tires. I believe their site says that these measurements are estimates, based on their experience, not EPA. The other point is that the R1T is a towing beast, but you will lose a lot of range, given the wind resistance. So while the Cybertruck may be more efficient when it’s not towing, it won’t be under load. Depends what you use a truck for. I’ve seen both around town, and efficiency regardless, far prefer the Rivian, even with its ‘panda eyes’ - cute rather than menacing.
@@davidcottrell570 I also prefer Rivian, but they should focus on the real-world usage where range matters the most, which is 70-80mph cruising, not EPA.
@ Depends where you live. That would be a $500 ticket plus a week in the impound for me.
The test video gets started at 9:10 for those that want to cut to the meat of the subject.
😎👍🇺🇸🇮🇱
2024.51 increased efficiency in low and mild temps so probably already out of date 😬
Great range test! It's crazy how terrible Rivians do in the real world. Nobody has ever got one to go close to 400 miles.
This model is rated for 329 miles
You can absolutely go 400. Just not at 70 or 80 and that is not surprising. These tests are in no way scientific. It’s just for fun. You really shouldn’t extrapolate anything
News flash. Nobody wants to spend $100k on a truck that requires a long time to charge up and offers limited range
5 people out of 100 Do! It’s their money let them waste it I say! 😂🎉😎🇺🇸🇮🇱👍
@ explain the 5 out of 100 people
Lots of people do. Feel free to go anywhere else though. Keep your ram or whatever too. We don’t care.
@@hlothr the numbers don’t lie…
51,579 people called nobody bought them last year. And nobody is worried that you didn’t, but then Rivian owners have such a high ownership loyalty rating that they wouldn’t understand your reluctance. What will be interesting is how many more people buy the R2 and R3. I have a feeling that somebody will, and that there will be a lot of them. Maybe one of those somebody’s will be you. You looked and commented, just like me, and I can’t afford one either, much as I would like to. Yes, it sounds like a lot of money for a compact truck, but there’s plenty of good reason why they are so expensive. Maybe a used R1T will be in my future (my wife likes them too), and I’m happy if that makes me a nobody. Just kidding ;)