Rivian Electric Truck takes on the Ike Gauntlet

[FishOnOne]

What a poor showing for the Rivian electric truck on the Ike Gauntlet test. The truck towing 8,100 lbs consumed 81% of battery capacity traveling 70 miles.

From this test it's clear that electric trucks are along ways from being used for tow vehicles including the charging stations that are not layed out to support charging a truck with a trailer in tow and this truck is not compatible with the Tesla charging stations is another big flaw.

Not sure how to quantify this test but I would consider calling it an epic fail.

Link

[Reisender]

Adam R wrote:
I keep hearing that EV's cost so much less to operate in energy costs. In this test, the cost to drive 140 miles in the Rockies is essentially a wash. Empty, I'd get closer to 17 mpg in that same trip. Yes, it can get to 60mph about 5 seconds faster than my F-350. That would effectively account for 0.00001% of my average driving experience and with 450hp on tap in my stock truck it is no slouch. Even using an F-150 Ecoboost, it would still be a wash and the R1 is smaller than an F-150. So what are the benefits of this truck? Cost more to fuel, smaller, less capable, gives you anxiety, costs you time while on the road to refuel, but hey, it saves you 5 seconds from 0 to 60. Oh, and it has no soul either. Now if I was just a commuter living in the city, it might be worth considering, but out west, with lost of distance between A and B, it's not practical at this time.

EV’s are a small fraction of the cost to fuel. But there is a little context missing here. Your truck is more likely to be used more for long road trips and hauling and it’s probably really good at that. Trucks like the Rivian and other half tons in general are more likely to be daily drivers and will probably only see occasional heavy towing duty like we saw in the video. As a daily driver the vast amount of charging will be done at home where it is super cheap. (Or at least here). Superchargers and DC fast chargers are not meant to be cheap or used as a regular charging location. They are primarily used by those on road trips.

We are probably typical EV drivers. We have done maybe 6 or 7 long road trips in the last year. We have used Superchargers or DC fast chargers maybe a dozen times in the last year. So much cheaper and more convenient to charge at home.

Cheers.

[bikendan]

BCSnob wrote:
70mpg equivalent hwy/city not towing.
Of course if you only use your truck for towing there will be no benefit.

Based upon population which is the larger market, rural vs urban/suburban?
Which market purchases the greater total number of small & midsize PUs?
Which market has the greater density of charging stations (and fuel stations)?

I agree, it is an ugly truck.

The thing is, this discussion is in a RV forum. So this means that having a 1/2 ton for towing IS IMPORTANT. Isn't this thread in the TOW VEHICLES section, not the Grocery Getter section?
Bringing up that most don't use their 1/2 ton for towing is pretty much irrelevant here.

[BCSnob]

70mpg equivalent hwy/city not towing.
Of course if you only use your truck for towing there will be no benefit.

Based upon population which is the larger market, rural vs urban/suburban?
Which market purchases the greater total number of small & midsize PUs?
Which market has the greater density of charging stations (and fuel stations)?

I agree, it is an ugly truck.

[Adam_R]

I keep hearing that EV's cost so much less to operate in energy costs. In this test, the cost to drive 140 miles in the Rockies is essentially a wash. Empty, I'd get closer to 17 mpg in that same trip. Yes, it can get to 60mph about 5 seconds faster than my F-350. That would effectively account for 0.00001% of my average driving experience and with 450hp on tap in my stock truck it is no slouch. Even using an F-150 Ecoboost, it would still be a wash and the R1 is smaller than an F-150. So what are the benefits of this truck? Cost more to fuel, smaller, less capable, gives you anxiety, costs you time while on the road to refuel, but hey, it saves you 5 seconds from 0 to 60. Oh, and it has no soul either. Now if I was just a commuter living in the city, it might be worth considering, but out west, with lost of distance between A and B, it's not practical at this time.

[Reisender]

Adam R wrote:
So, the truck goes from 100% to 15% of charge and then up to 52% of charge at a cost of $17.36 in Dillon. It then goes back down to 16% on the return trip to Denver. Let's assume it can get back up to 100% of charge for $34 on the second charge so the cost from Denver to Dillon and back is $51 in round numbers. The round trip mileage is 140 miles. So the cost of electricity is roughly $0.36 per mile. My 2019 Ford diesel could pull that same route and easily average 10mpg round trip so I would burn 14 gallons of diesel for that same trip. At $3.50 per gallon, my fuel cost would be $49 or $0.35 per mile. While not against an electric vehicle, the justification is far from being a slam dunk at this time. Plus, I could pull twice that weight, have 5 times the range when empty and fill ups take 5 minutes. I'll keep my Ford for now. Adam

Fair enough. But it’s a half ton. And it doesn’t have the optional bigger battery. I’m not sure they meant this to compete with heavy duty diesel pickups. Heavy duty diesel pickups do what they do very well. But in turn, for a sport truck buyer those diesel pickups wouldn’t hold a candle to something like a Rivian in terms of sport truck performance. Right tool for the right job etc.

Jmho.

[Adam_R]

So, the truck goes from 100% to 15% of charge and then up to 52% of charge at a cost of $17.36 in Dillon. It then goes back down to 16% on the return trip to Denver. Let's assume it can get back up to 100% of charge for $34 on the second charge so the cost from Denver to Dillon and back is $51 in round numbers. The round trip mileage is 140 miles. So the cost of electricity is roughly $0.36 per mile. My 2019 Ford diesel could pull that same route and easily average 10mpg round trip so I would burn 14 gallons of diesel for that same trip. At $3.50 per gallon, my fuel cost would be $49 or $0.35 per mile. While not against an electric vehicle, the justification is far from being a slam dunk at this time. Plus, I could pull twice that weight, have 5 times the range when empty and fill ups take 5 minutes. I'll keep my Ford for now. Adam

[Reisender]

The only thing that kinda surprises me is the 160 kw charge rate at a DCFC. I’m not sure why they did that. I’m not an expert but even on this truck with the smaller 135 kWh battery they should be able to handle 250 kw or more. Even a little 82 kWh battery in our Tesla peaks out at 250 kw.


Maybe their 180 kWh battery will charge faster. That’s probably 6 months away. I wouldn’t be surprised if they redo this test with the big battery though.

[BCSnob]

I’d like to see head to head f150 ecoboost vs Rivian tow 7-8k from golden to vail and back and then compare total time and fuel costs. My guess is Rivian will cost less while f150 will take less time due to much shorter refuel times. I don’t know if the f150 will keep pace towing uphill.

I doubt the folks at Rivian design their product to compete in the full time TV market; it seems more designed to compete in the daily drive occasional TV market (a much larger market than full time TV). The comparison above is more in line with what the Rivian will compete against.

[1320Fastback]

and I guess I'll keep my 30 year old Dodge a while longer. There something about having a 300+ mile range that's makes getting somewhere before sunset possible.


It looks like their truck overheated the battery/motor/? systems and did not recharge on the way down the hill much at all. Also why would they not put the trailer brakes on 1 or 0 so the truck does most if not all the slowing? Sure it wouldn't be safe but it would bump up the regen numbers not having the trailer brake it's self and you know dang well people will be doing that when they figure out the range problem and actually start towing with electric trucks.

[BCSnob]

World's fastest EV charging station promises a full battery in under 15 minutes
Link
ABB will open the first station in Europe by the end of this year. Next year, it will expand to the US and around the world.

Btw, there are no stations (fuel or charging) at the top, you have to get through the tunnel and down the other side to silverthorne to fill up or turn around and go back down to Georgetown.

Never mind, company is building 360kw stations, there’s already a 350kw station in Frisco which takes 40min to charge a Rivian. Charge times are the current issue for cross country trips in EVs. Range towing may already be comparable to a f150 ecoboost.

There is this work from Purdue U engineers
Cooled charging cable

[ksss]

BCSnob wrote:
All I’m suggesting is there are ICE tow vehicles being used around the country now that would also fail that test and yet no one is suggesting we should give up on all ICE tow vehicles or not even try to improve their capabilities.

Btw how did the f150 ecoboost do with this test? What would the range be for 3.5mpg with a 26gal tank?

The difference is when you get to the top with the F150 you fill up and 10 min later you move on with your life.

[BCSnob]

All I’m suggesting is there are ICE tow vehicles being used around the country now that would also fail that test and yet no one is suggesting we should give up on all ICE tow vehicles or not even try to improve their capabilities.

Btw how did the f150 ecoboost do with this test? What would the range be for 3.5mpg with a 26gal tank?

[Bionic_Man]

I70 is in my back yard. I think it’s kind of comical the apologists for the Rivian here. I see no way to have a position that this truck is ready for prime time towing duties. It simply isn’t.

Hard pass from me on this technology for the foreseeable future.

[Reisender]

BCSnob wrote:
My TV has a 26gal tank; we get ~7mpg towing a 7k trailer on hilly terrain below 3000’. I wonder just how bad the Rivian would look compared to my rig running that route? The Rivian could run it faster than I since it has no worries about overheating.

We chose to stay at hotels instead of pulling the trailer up and over going out to Carbondale CO a couple years ago.

Yep. With our 3/4 ton GMC we would have been in the right hand lane, foot TO THE FLOOR and watching the temperature gauge and every body passing us while we got 5 mpg. Then on the other side of the hill we would have been modulating the brakes and modulating gearing as we went down the other side.

That Ram half ton following empty with no trailer couldn’t even keep up to the Rivian hauling 8800 pounds up the hill. And remember, that was the medium range Rivian. They are not producing long range Rivians until next year.

[BCSnob]

My TV has a 26gal tank; we get ~7mpg towing a 7k trailer on hilly terrain below 3000’. I wonder just how bad the Rivian would look compared to my rig running that route? The Rivian could run it faster than I since it has no worries about overheating.

We chose to stay at hotels instead of pulling the trailer up and over going out to Carbondale CO a couple years ago.