Rivian 1/2 ton high temp, grade test. Good read/video

valhalla360 wrote:

Reisender wrote:

Also not a engineer. How would regeneration fit into this. A model 3 see’s regen rates north of 70 KW and that’s a two motor system. I can see regen rates north of 200 KW for 4 motor trucks. I have read some speculative numbers on the Tesla semi of 800 KW regen rates. This would also play into brake life. One pedal driving is an interesting experience. I go days at a time without ever touching the brake pedal. I can see this being the same in bigger applications.

Cheers.

While there are limits with the motors & charging systems, regenerative braking is not limited so much by motor size but how hard you want to brake and the weight of the car.

Mod 3's have way more than 70kw of electric motor but they likely cap it at 70kw as the maximum reasonable amount of deceleration and most of the time, it doesn't draw anything close to that.

If you applied 200kw in reverse at 60mph, anything lose in the car would go flying due to the extreme deceleration...or more likely the wheels would start spinning in reverse and the vehicle would lose control.

An 80,000lb semi needs far more power to slow down as it's around 25 times the weight of a passenger car, so they can extract greater power thru the regenerative braking without causing other issues.

Yah that makes sense. The regen in the model 3 is selectable but your right in the sense that on the highest setting you wouldn’t really want any more regen as it would get jerky.

Reisender wrote:

Also not a engineer. How would regeneration fit into this. A model 3 see’s regen rates north of 70 KW and that’s a two motor system. I can see regen rates north of 200 KW for 4 motor trucks. I have read some speculative numbers on the Tesla semi of 800 KW regen rates. This would also play into brake life. One pedal driving is an interesting experience. I go days at a time without ever touching the brake pedal. I can see this being the same in bigger applications.

Cheers.

While there are limits with the motors & charging systems, regenerative braking is not limited so much by motor size but how hard you want to brake and the weight of the car.

Mod 3's have way more than 70kw of electric motor but they likely cap it at 70kw as the maximum reasonable amount of deceleration and most of the time, it doesn't draw anything close to that.

If you applied 200kw in reverse at 60mph, anything lose in the car would go flying due to the extreme deceleration...or more likely the wheels would start spinning in reverse and the vehicle would lose control.

An 80,000lb semi needs far more power to slow down as it's around 25 times the weight of a passenger car, so they can extract greater power thru the regenerative braking without causing other issues.

Reisender wrote:

Both Ford and GM have been doing some development in the hybrid truck market although it’s not clear if they’ll actually enter into serious production.

For cars, in developed countries it doesn’t make a lot of sense to go hybrid. Hybrids still have high maintenance and operating costs and none of the performance advantages. Hybrid cars tend to be doggy things in comparison to electrics. Hybrid sales have been falling for a few years although Toyota is still committed to making a comeback.

The next few years will be telling.

Old style hybrids don't make a lot of sense.

Plug-In-Hybrids make a ton of sense. None of the range issues of pure EVs and for most buyers who do mostly commuting, you can get 80-99% of miles of electric.

Honestly, it makes no sense why the EV proponents aren't pushing them hard as they answer 99% of the complaints for passenger car buyers.

PS: The maintenance cost thing is way overstated. Modern ICE are incredibly reliable and typically require little more than an annual oil change for $25. Vast majority of repair costs are for things like tires, suspension, brakes...which are present in all cars. You might save a little on brakes but PIH often do regenerative braking and if you aren't abusive, it's not hard to get 30-50k miles out of a set of brakes, so that's not a big issue.

rjstractor wrote:

Reisender wrote:

rjstractor wrote:

lbrjet wrote:
I just read that article earlier this morning and was shocked they did not say how much battery power the climbs used. Without that information it is all fluff. Guess they didn't want to say.

Watching the video I was able to glean some data that gave me an idea of how much power that thing was using- at one point in the video the engineers were mentioning that they might be pulling 1200 amps for a minute or two at at time. At another point it was mentioned that they were charging to a max voltage of 440. That works out to 528 kw. Assuming they were running 60 mph, that's 8.8 kwh per mile. The maximum range Rivian truck has a 180 kwh battery. So at the flat out maximum towing power draw you are depleting your battery in just 20 miles. By comparison, take a Ford Ecoboost powered F150. Say running flat out in a hard loaded climb it gets 3 mpg. So, it's fuel lasts about 100 miles at the fuel consumption rate. Disclaimer- I'm not an engineer, so if anyone sees an obvious flaw in my math, call it out and my feelings won't be hurt.

Also not a engineer. How would regeneration fit into this. A model 3 see’s regen rates north of 70 KW and that’s a two motor system. I can see regen rates north of 200 KW for 4 motor trucks. I have read some speculative numbers on the Tesla semi of 800 KW regen rates. This would also play into brake life. One pedal driving is an interesting experience. I go days at a time without ever touching the brake pedal. I can see this being the same in bigger applications.

Cheers.

In normal driving, especially stop and go, regenerative braking would be a huge factor. Going up hill or even on the flat while towing a high profile trailer at highway speeds, there's no regenerative braking at all. Towing tests with EVs on Eisenhower Pass show some battery capacity regained on the way down, but not nearly as much energy as was consumed on the way up.

Yes of course. You never get it all back. But I would think it would make a difference. It certainly does in our Tesla sedan. Coming down from our local ski hill we can literally watch the range tick back up. It’s why EV drivers tend to only charge to 90 percent so there is a place to put the regen power.

But yah. We’ll all have to wait and see.

Reisender wrote:

rjstractor wrote:

lbrjet wrote:
I just read that article earlier this morning and was shocked they did not say how much battery power the climbs used. Without that information it is all fluff. Guess they didn't want to say.

Watching the video I was able to glean some data that gave me an idea of how much power that thing was using- at one point in the video the engineers were mentioning that they might be pulling 1200 amps for a minute or two at at time. At another point it was mentioned that they were charging to a max voltage of 440. That works out to 528 kw. Assuming they were running 60 mph, that's 8.8 kwh per mile. The maximum range Rivian truck has a 180 kwh battery. So at the flat out maximum towing power draw you are depleting your battery in just 20 miles. By comparison, take a Ford Ecoboost powered F150. Say running flat out in a hard loaded climb it gets 3 mpg. So, it's fuel lasts about 100 miles at the fuel consumption rate. Disclaimer- I'm not an engineer, so if anyone sees an obvious flaw in my math, call it out and my feelings won't be hurt.

Also not a engineer. How would regeneration fit into this. A model 3 see’s regen rates north of 70 KW and that’s a two motor system. I can see regen rates north of 200 KW for 4 motor trucks. I have read some speculative numbers on the Tesla semi of 800 KW regen rates. This would also play into brake life. One pedal driving is an interesting experience. I go days at a time without ever touching the brake pedal. I can see this being the same in bigger applications.

Cheers.

In normal driving, especially stop and go, regenerative braking would be a huge factor. Going up hill or even on the flat while towing a high profile trailer at highway speeds, there's no regenerative braking at all. Towing tests with EVs on Eisenhower Pass show some battery capacity regained on the way down, but not nearly as much energy as was consumed on the way up.

rjstractor wrote:

lbrjet wrote:
I just read that article earlier this morning and was shocked they did not say how much battery power the climbs used. Without that information it is all fluff. Guess they didn't want to say.

Watching the video I was able to glean some data that gave me an idea of how much power that thing was using- at one point in the video the engineers were mentioning that they might be pulling 1200 amps for a minute or two at at time. At another point it was mentioned that they were charging to a max voltage of 440. That works out to 528 kw. Assuming they were running 60 mph, that's 8.8 kwh per mile. The maximum range Rivian truck has a 180 kwh battery. So at the flat out maximum towing power draw you are depleting your battery in just 20 miles. By comparison, take a Ford Ecoboost powered F150. Say running flat out in a hard loaded climb it gets 3 mpg. So, it's fuel lasts about 100 miles at the fuel consumption rate. Disclaimer- I'm not an engineer, so if anyone sees an obvious flaw in my math, call it out and my feelings won't be hurt.

Also not a engineer. How would regeneration fit into this. A model 3 see’s regen rates north of 70 KW and that’s a two motor system. I can see regen rates north of 200 KW for 4 motor trucks. I have read some speculative numbers on the Tesla semi of 800 KW regen rates. This would also play into brake life. One pedal driving is an interesting experience. I go days at a time without ever touching the brake pedal. I can see this being the same in bigger applications.

Cheers.

lbrjet wrote:
I just read that article earlier this morning and was shocked they did not say how much battery power the climbs used. Without that information it is all fluff. Guess they didn't want to say.

Watching the video I was able to glean some data that gave me an idea of how much power that thing was using- at one point in the video the engineers were mentioning that they might be pulling 1200 amps for a minute or two at at time. At another point it was mentioned that they were charging to a max voltage of 440. That works out to 528 kw. Assuming they were running 60 mph, that's 8.8 kwh per mile. The maximum range Rivian truck has a 180 kwh battery. So at the flat out maximum towing power draw you are depleting your battery in just 20 miles. By comparison, take a Ford Ecoboost powered F150. Say running flat out in a hard loaded climb it gets 3 mpg. So, it's fuel lasts about 100 miles at the fuel consumption rate. Disclaimer- I'm not an engineer, so if anyone sees an obvious flaw in my math, call it out and my feelings won't be hurt.

FishOnOne wrote:
I still think hybrid technology is the way to go for long distance travel vs all electric vehicles.

Both Ford and GM have been doing some development in the hybrid truck market although it’s not clear if they’ll actually enter into serious production.

For cars, in developed countries it doesn’t make a lot of sense to go hybrid. Hybrids still have high maintenance and operating costs and none of the performance advantages. Hybrid cars tend to be doggy things in comparison to electrics. Hybrid sales have been falling for a few years although Toyota is still committed to making a comeback.

The next few years will be telling.

I still think hybrid technology is the way to go for long distance travel vs all electric vehicles.

valhalla360 wrote:

Reisender wrote:

Yah. Comparative testing would be nice. Side by side tables are easy to follow and make decisions accordingly.

However I would think that towing range is not that big a deal for most F150 owners. Or at least around here. Most F150 owners here never tow anything, or if they do it is a 6000 pound travel trailer or 4000 boat they use on the weekend.

Comparative testing will get more important when one of the manufactures gets interested in the 3/4 ton or 1 ton market someday. And when that happens I wouldn’t be surprised if ford is first to the plate.

Yes, most 1/2 tons don't do a lot of towing but a significant percentage do some (I'm betting in raw numbers more 1/2 tons tow RVs than 3/4 and 1 ton combined)...and since 1/2 tons is where they are going electric first, it is absolutely a critical criteria to establish the capability.

Even if it's a 3000lb trailer, it's wind resistance that really eats up range. I have a small enclosed utility trailer and even empty, there is a noticeable drop in MPG.

A 6000lb trailer is right in the ideal range for a typical 1/2 ton truck.

10,000lb trailers, really most are moving up to 3/4 ton anyway.

But a typical travel trailer in each of those weight ranges wouldn't be hard to run the test and would give a very good idea of the impacts of towing on range since that's what it's all about if they are talking battery powered tow vehicles.

Ifs probably safer to test at the max expected tow capacity in terms of cooling and heating performance on grades etc. Gives them some wiggle room as far as the engineering goes. I think ford tests the same way with their gassers. Looking at the Ford F-150 truck forums the general consensus seems to be a 1/2 ton gasser ford loses have its range when towing. Which is kind of what the Rivian guts are finding on their tests. Our dually with the 7.3 Powerstroke lost about a third of its range when towing but that was 18 years ago.

Contractors and contractor fleet owners will love the reduced operating costs of electric. That and no more idling to stay warm in the winter or cool in the summer. Even just as ordinary EV drivers that has been a huge plus for us over the last 5 years of EV driving.