- Joined
- Nov 19, 2021
- Messages
- 16,022
- Reaction score
- 21,995
- Location
- Cupertino, CA
- Cars
- Air DE-P, Gravity DE
- Air DE Number
- 241
- Gravity DE Number
- 013
- Referral Code
- Q1BTN5Y3
My point was not to re-litigate the issue. There are many factors involved.Maybe, but I think there are some tractable differences in how @Ron_Burgundy drove his R1S and how I drive mine that can explain most of the differences:
> I drive at/slight above the speed limit, in "Conserve" mode (i.e., FWD, using 2 out of the 4 motors). I got ~2.5mi/kWh., about 10% better than Rivian's claimed efficiency. I don't want to speak for Ron, but I think he drove faster and in 4WD. Ron got significantly less. He can elaborate.
> as for ADAS, I quoted my recent (last 2 months) experience with my Rivian. I think Ron's data was 1+ year ago.
I believe in Physics. I don't think our cars were that different. But the drivers/time frames were different.
As for my experience with my Lucid AGT, I never got better than 3.5-3.6mi/kWh, which is significantly lower than Lucid's claims. You and I had this debate multiple times. Your recent posting says Lucid's, using the 5-cycle test, is "slightly optimistic". But if you look at most Lucid AGT owners' experience, actual realizable efficiencies reported are in the low 3 mi/kWh range, hence, the credibility gap.
In a recent positing, I posted my AGT (~3.5 mi/kWh) and R1S's (~2.5 mi/kWh) efficiencies on the same (780 miles) road trips. @Adnillien says (and I agree) a more interesting comparison would be between the R1S and the Gravity. Since I don't have a Gravity, I can't made this comparison. Gravity should be more efficient than the R1S, perhaps not by as much as you think!
Ron can speak for himself.
My point was that different people with ostensibly the same vehicle can have vastly different experiences, in part because of different expectations, but also because they are different drivers, with different habits, live in different climates, drive on different roads, or simply got a car that did or didn’t have various issues.
Simplifying that to one thing is very difficult, and sometimes impossible, unless you’re running both cars on a dyno or side by side on a highway simultaneously for a limited run.
And even then the cars may have different issues, because neither car is the same as the other. Airfoil hanging loose? There’s some efficiency lost.
Anyway, I think we agree that different people can have different experiences with the same year and model of vehicle, which was actually my only point.
As for the “credibility gap,” that would apply to every vehicle that uses the 5-cycle test. That includes Rivian, in case you’re wondering. I’m glad you’ve seen good efficiency with yours; but let’s not pretend everyone does. At highway speeds (70-75mph) both vehicles see the same 15-30% loss, though under the same precise conditions, the Rivian will generally be somewhat less efficient, due to the fact that it is a pickup and/or boxy SUV, and not a sedan.
That’s not controversial.