First article I've seen from the Rivian tow test:
Rivian R1T's first real-world towing test shows 62% range loss
Not exactly what I was hoping to see, but there could be other factors at play like high speed and cold temps. I don't have Instagram and haven't been following the posts to know the conditions.
I'm definitely feeling good about opting for the tri-motor Cybertruck with the longest range available.
I saw that post on the Rivian Forums yesterday. I think that single data point isn't telling the whole story here.
Using the remaining range and the percent battery remaining from that picture, everyone is estimating around 1,200Wh/mi of energy usage.
I did some quick checks on his other legs, and making a few assumptions, got to around 870Wh/mi of energy usage. I took the number of stops he made. The distance traveled (because Instagram tags your location, and google can help you find the chargers, then determine the route), and combined that with his comments of most often charging from 30% to 80%, and figured a miles per charge, then assumed 50% of the battery was used for each leg, and came to that 870Wh/mi figure. That was also across Illinois which is pancake flat. He's out west now, towing a bit faster, and has elevation changes to deal with.......If I assume he didn't post 1 charge, that jumps to 1,000Wh/mi, and didn't post 2 charges then to 1,330Wh/mi. The timing, distance, and locations all correlate to having every charge posted, so I'm fairly confident in that distance/charge. Likewise, we can vary the percentage used from 40% to 60% (+/- 10%) and get a similar range of power consumption.
I figure he's probably around that 1kWh/mi usage on average. Sure would be nice if he would post those numbers and let us all come to our own conclusions on the math.
He posted the weights from a Travel America stop at one point. He's a shade over 14.2k lbs loaded, with the trailer at 5.2k lbs (probably closer to 6k lbs when you consider the combined weight of the truck, and compare it to Edmunds review weight. He's a little tongue heavy IMO). I would wager his trailer is slightly less aero than a boat with a cover on, however it's probably better than a travel trailer based on frontal area alone.
I think these numbers track pretty well with what we have seen from people towing with the eTron and the ModelX. That family that is towing the travel trailer across Kansas with a ModelX has shown usage up into the 1,400Wh/mi range, but more often is a bit lower without a headwind and using lower speeds. They're really hamstrung by the smaller batter pack in the ModelX as well. Towing range for them is often in the double digits accounting for reserve. Same with the eTron towing that trailer as a publicity event. They were just under 1,000Whr/mi over the course of several days of towing.
OutOfSpec Reviews did a towing test with an eTron, and I think his usage was around 1.1mi/kWh (910Wh/mi), and he was towing a smart car, parked backwards on an open trailer.
I don't think there is any earth shattering breakthrough in range knowledge here. It's probably a little higher than we expected, but honestly not significantly so. Anyone that wants to tow long distance, or on a regular basis should really hold out for the 180kWh pack if going with a Rivian. No idea what the Hummer will do (it's shaped like a brick so I have my suspicions). Cybertruck is vaporware as best I can tell at this point. I think the Lightning has a strong chance of doing well in the towing area based on shape and pack size alone.
Another thought on towing efficiency. Isn't it an interesting idea that we are now making suggestions to essentially "get a bigger fuel tank" if you want to tow, rather than get a more efficient engine. By comparison the amount of energy needed to support a 13mpg gas engine while towing is just under 2,600Wh/mi. OVER double the energy usage of an EV. Say what you want about the carbon footprint of creating/recycling/destroying batteries, and the concerns of power grid handling the extra demand. The simple fact of using less than HALF of the energy to get the same job done is a step in the right direction. Whether that energy is dug up, refined, transported and dispensed, or generated from the tides in the ocean, transmitted and dispensed, it's pretty clear that the simple fact we are fundamentally using LESS energy is a big deal IMO.
There are a couple things we've learned about the truck that I'm not super keen on though. I asked him yesterday how the driver aides did while towing. Apparently it's back to regular old cruise control when towing. No lane keep assist, and no adaptive cruise. Seems like a miss for Rivian there honestly. I've also watched DeMuro's review and the backup camera doesn't point at the trailer hitch. My wifes traverse couldn't see the hitch in the rear view camera, and it was "back to the olden days" when we hooked up with it. In/Out of the drivers seat about 6 times to get it just right. Monster sized oversight if that is really the case IMO. I'm really curious how those cupholders and console are holding up to road trip abuse. I'm also interested to see how the dash looks at night with the displays dimmed. Does the tonneau cover leak at all, or can that be considered dry space? I have so many questions on how it works as a daily driver.........Guess I just have to be patient.
).
