Rivian has improved R1 range through software before, and that track record is the best reason I have to think the R2’s highway efficiency can get better with an over-the-air update.
On the drive home to Florida after testing with Kyle Conner at Out of Spec, my R2 Performance managed 171 miles going from 85% to 2% at mostly 70 to 75 mph. Kyle’s numbers showed the R2 using 18.4% more energy than a Model Y Performance at 50 mph and 26.5% more at 80 mph, even though the EPA rates them almost the same.
Out of Spec’s newest video, posted yesterday, shows another R2 on all-terrain tires getting 213 miles from 100% to 0% in cooler North Carolina weather. That lines up with my drive, since 171 miles over 83% of the pack works out to roughly 206 miles on a full charge.
Back in late 2022, Rivian confirmed to Electrek that updates since the start of production had improved R1 efficiency, which moved the quad-motor Large pack R1T from 314 to 328 miles and the R1S from 316 to 321. Rivian credited battery management, regen and ride height adjustments for the gains.
A few months later, 2023.02.03 added an updated EPA estimate and a larger depth of discharge, giving owners more usable energy and around 16 extra miles at the top of a charge. That one came from opening up more of the pack, which still counts as range for owners even if energy per mile stayed the same.
The R2’s gap to the Model Y looks mostly like aero to me, and no update reshapes the body.
I fully expect Rivian to find a few percent through things like how the R2 splits torque between its two motors at cruise and how the inverter is tuned for highway speeds, like it did with regen on R1, but I wouldn’t count on software closing a 26% gap.
Gap to what? The Model Y is a totally different vehicle. Calling it a gap is silly. I’m totally happy with the R2’s performance and wouldn’t want it to weigh hundreds of pounds more just to have the same range as a completely different vehicle by an entirely different company using totally different technology.
I mean the gap between what EPA testing says versus what the R2 can actually get.
There are multiple examples that the R2 can get incredibly close to EPA rating when driven in similar conditions that the rating was conducted. Saying it’s not getting rated mileage when it’s being driven in the most demanding form of driving is a disservice to the vehicle. Do the other vehicles get closer to their rating in the same conditions? Sure, but they’re *all* underperforming their EPA ratings then.
I don’t think anyone would say no to more range, but harping on range disparity when operating in completely different conditions of that rating is just tiring.
But that’s not what you wrote.
The only other place the word “gap” appears is when you mention “the R2’s gap to the Model Y.”
And you didn’t even bother to give us the EPA numbers for R2 or Model Y. 🙄
Here you go: https://riviantrackr.com/news/the-r2-performance-returned-253-miles-against-a-330-mile-epa-rating/
I mean, we aren’t turning down a chance for more range via an update because you are happy with the performance, are we?
but how did Tom with state of charge get 259 miles in his R2 range test, and that R2 had the 20″ all terrains, in Colorado with a fair amount of elevation change(2,193 feet).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xyCaTZEKGck
David Vaught got 320miles on one charge in his Rivian R2 and he also has the 20″ all terrains.
https://youtu.be/d-eHYzwy30A?si=pbchV7TwVbPMIXk2
When are we going to get video comparisons of R2 vs the Model Y for things that the R2 was designed for? Off roading, towing, dog comfort, road trip luggage capacity, etc. Id even love to see them tracked.
Yeah I’m kind of sick of “EV influencers” skewing the public into thinking EVs are solely valued as efficiency machines and that efficiency and range is the sole determination for “ranking EVs” and how good they are.
Ironically the EV community has been working to dispel unwarranted range anxiety yet we’re now captivated by EV influencers convincing the public that EVs are duds because of efficiency and range. I think if this sentiment catch on, consumers will lose as it will push manufacturers to all make Efficiency Machines (low ground clearance eggs) to meet customer expectations as driven by EV influencers. That’s the reality of videos that solely compare on efficiency and range and declare a loser based off of that with no other consideration for actual real world usage.
And in reality if road tripping matters that much why arent we measuring road trip times for a set distance rather than solely efficiency/range? What is the actual trip time difference for R2 vs Model Y going from Denver to Las Vegas? Certainly, if you care about efficiency and more specifically “road trip speed runs”, that is the ultimate use case that should be measured and compared.
And yes it seems no one is willing to compare EVs against the R2 for
I find real world experiences by other Ev owners a useful metric, as the epa ratings are not very good at predicting the real world, especially at highway driving speeds. I find out of spec a great resource for EV related information, I think of them more as Ev enthusiast than influencers, I found their videos with Joses’s R2 very helpful. interstate highway driving range is still the achilles heal of EV ownership.
Yes, exactly!
Yes, exactly!!
If you charge it home most of the time does range really matter? For the few road trips that most people do per year fast chargers are becoming ubiquitous and really isn’t an issue unless you happen to live in Wyoming or Montana and then you should buy an appropriate EV for that area. By and large mid 200 mi range is more than adequate.
Agreed. I’m not likely to take a road trip in the winter (skiers likely would) so 200 miles is more than enough to get 2.5 hours and take a break. There are places where it makes a difference even in the summer like western North Dakota.
We don’t drain and don’t charge 100% of the battery on trips, we usually go to 10% before
Ack! So sick of highway range fretting and “testing” by amateurs. Anything for views and clicks. Most EV drivers have a wide mix of state and interstate, local streets, elevations, traffic congestion, wind, speeds, driver attitude, etc. Give it a rest. Please.
The recent Out of Spec review was comparing an R2 with ALL-TERRAIN tires to the other cars with ALL-SEASON tires. So right away I have to make the assumption Out of Spec doesn’t know what they are doing. For example, well established car reviewers like Car & Driver got 260 miles range on R2 at 75 mph. MotorTrend got 263 miles. That’s a lot more than Out of Spec got. The R2 also has more highway range than the first generation of Tesla Model Y (I know, my MY gets much less than 260 miles hwy range).
Regarding EPA range, the BMW is rated at 399 miles. Independent reviews show real-world hwy range between 320-340 miles (avg 330) which about 18% less than EPA. The Rivian EPA range is rated at 330 miles with independent reviews showing real-world hwy range around 260 miles which is about 21% less than EPA. So there is not a big difference in EPA vs real-world comparing R2 with iX3.
One more thing, in the Out of Spec reviews they say the Rivian R2 cost is same as BMW iX3. That is completely wrong. The BMW iX3 with similar equipment is at least $7,000 to $9,000 more than an R2 Performance, and even more expensive than an R2 Premium.
Don’t get me wrong, the iX3 is a great EV. But let’s stick to facts.
So as much as Out of Spec reviews are entertaining, they really are Out of their Lane when it comes to doing trustworthy reviews
At the risk of opening myself up to forum attacks, when Rivian posted EPA numbers for the R2 that were similar to a Tesla Model Y, I assumed the R2 would get a similar range. For the highway. Because who cares about range in town?
I get that the R2 is shaped like a brick. I get that EPA rating isn’t just highway driving. But my expectations were set based on those EPA numbers, and now I’m disappointed that I can’t make drives in the R2 that I can in my Tesla.
Just by posting this, I fear backlash from Rivian fans who will berate me for having unreasonable expectations or caring about range. I want an R2. I want Rivian to make it as a company. I’d love to get rid of my Tesla. But the Out-of-Spec range tests show a range gap of 60 miles between R2 and Model Y at 70 mph. That’s enough to give me serious pause. I like to drive 80 mph or above, because that’s the speed limit and flow of traffic where I drive, so the problem’s probably even worse than the OoS figures. Add in battery degradation over a few years and cold weather, and it starts to look like the R2 no longer meets my needs.
I hope that Rivian can squeeze out a few more miles via software, but I’m starting to think it won’t be enough for me. They probably would need a much bigger battery, which I doubt will happen, and that makes me sad. I’ve been a huge Rivian fanboy. I own an Gen 1 R1. Reserved an R2 on Day 1. Test drove the day it was available. I was virtually certain I was going to buy an R2 as soon as the RAP1 + Lidar becomes available. But now I’m starting to think I’m out. What’s the point of an adventure vehicle if I don’t have enough range to get to the adventure?
If you are willing to wait, I would also recommend considering the standard R2 trim, which will have less horsepower and performance for greater range and efficiencies. Enjoy the journey!
Adding to my earlier post regarding how you can’t trust the Out of Spec range numbers comparing R2 to iX3. This time comparing R2 to Tesla Model Y LR AWD. Car & Driver tested 2026 Model Y highway range at 75mph and got 270 miles range. C&D also tested R2 highway range at 75mph and got 260 miles range. There are other range tests on Model Y LR (Premium) that have a range of about 250 to 290 miles range.
I’m also imagining that an adjustment in battery temperature control would make a big difference. I’ve seen a couple R2s not keep the battery at optimal temperature for efficiency, in videos by Dominic Wilkerson (“I Drove My Rivian R2 359 Miles Around Washington’s Olympic Peninsula”) and David Vaught (“Rivian R2 “Cold” Weather Testing (Range + Charge Tests)”).
In both of their videos, the battery stayed fairly cool and didn’t seem to warm up to ideal temp. A software adjustment to fix this would probably make a measurable difference in cold weather range
I’m wondering if this is the reason why most reviewers find highway range to be consistently around ~260 miles, but a few outliers get way less for some reason
Guess it’s time for a new battery chemistry or time to find space for more cells. 200mi highway driving is pretty weak…
Curious is anyone using conserve on road trips in the R2? It lowers HP and Torque values but hard to feel the difference between conserve and all purpose under normal driving.
I got 253 miles going from 100% to 10% using conserve on my road trip test. All but 15 miles was on the highway, was a very hot day in triple digits, most of the highway was 70 mph except for congestion and average for the trip was 54 mph at 3.2 mph.
I have zero complaints with the highway range I am seeing. We are on the 21s.
I bought a Model 3 at launch (which is the car I recently traded for an R2). Shortly after I got my car, Tesla released a software update that added something on the order of 3-5% more range, and also improved the 0-60 time. They did it by improving the motor control algorithm.
There may be a bit of efficiency on the table for Rivian to unlock. Odds are that it won’t be enough to move the needle much for anyone, but anything they can eke out will be welcome.