Rivian Debuts R1S Electric SUV: Seats 7, Packs 180-kWh Battery [UPDATE]


Big SUV with battery fitting of its size.

***UPDATE: Large gallery of live images of the Rivian R1S added below.

Finally, there’s an electric offering in the pipeline that slots into the real 7-seat SUV category and it comes to us in the form of the Rivian R1S.

After debuting its electric pickup truck, the R1T, Rivian, just a day later, unleashed this equally impressive battery-powered SUV on the world.

Offered in 5- or 7-passenger configurations, the R1S, like it truck sibling, comes with three battery pack choices:

  • 105 kWh
  • 135 kWh
  • 180 kWh

Electric range is even more impressive than the R1T truck though. The biggest pack offers 410-plus miles of range, while even the smallest pack is supposedly capable of delivering over 240 miles of electric driving bliss.

Top speed for all versions is listed at 125 MPH and 0 to 60 MPH varies depending and pack size and motor output. The quickest R1S hits 60 MPH in just 3.2 seconds, while the slowest is still no slouch at 4.9 seconds.

As you’ll see in the specs below, the R1S can haul a rather hefty load and can tow too.


The truck comes to market first, sometime in 2020, followed by the R1S in 2021. The timeframe is a bit open-ended right now for Rivian offerings, but we can assure you the products are the real deal and production sites are secured.

Following the R1S SUV, Rivian says several other offerings are already in the development stage.

Keep an eye on this Rivian space. It’s the one to watch now.

Rivan R1S Live

21 photos

Rivian R1S Live

8 photos

Rivian R1S

3 photos

Press blast below:


Los Angeles CA, November 27, 2018. Rivian, an electric vehicle manufacturer, unveiled the first of the world’s first two Electric Adventure Vehicles™ — the all-electric pickup R1TTM which is to be followed by an all-electric SUV – R1STM— during the week of the 2018 LA Auto Show.

The R1T™, a 5-passenger pickup truck, debuted at an event at the Griffith Observatory in Los Angeles on Nov. 26. With class-leading specifications, sophisticated exterior and interior design, and a wide range of features developed to invite all of life’s adventures, Rivian vehicles have been designed to help customers get out and explore the world.

We’re launching Rivian with two vehicles that reimagine the pickup and SUV segments,” said Rivian Founder and CEO RJ Scaringe. “I started Rivian to deliver products that the world didn’t already have – to redefine expectations through the application of technology and innovation. Starting with a clean sheet, we have spent years developing the technology to deliver the ideal vehicle for active customers. This means having great driving dynamics on any surface on- or off-road, providing cargo solutions to easily storing any type of gear whether it’s a surf board or a fishing rod and, very importantly, being capable of driving long distances on a single charge. From the inside out, Rivian has developed its vehicles with adventurers at the core of every design and engineering decision. The R1T and R1S are the result of all this work and we are excited to finally introduce these products to the world.”

Skateboard Platform

The foundation of the R1T and R1S is Rivian’s skateboard platform, which efficiently packages the battery pack, drive units, suspension, braking and thermal system all below the height of the wheel, providing the packaging space above for occupants and their gear.

Beyond the packaging benefits, this architecture delivers a low center of gravity that supports the vehicle’s agility and stability. Adding to these inertial advantages is a sophisticated suspension architecture with unequal length double wishbone suspension in the front and a multi-link suspension in the rear. The suspension features dynamic roll control and adaptive dampers along with ride-height adjustable air-suspension – allowing the suspension to be adjusted for any condition whether its highway comfort, on-road performance or off-road capability.

Rivian’s quad-motor system delivers 147kW and precise torque control to each wheel, enabling active torque vectoring and maximum performance in every situation, from high-speed cornering to low-speed rock crawling. With 3,500 Nm of grounded torque per wheel (14,000 Nm of torque for the full vehicle), the R1T and R1S can both reach 60 mph in 3 seconds and 100 mph in less than 7 seconds. This powertrain and chassis also enables the R1T’s tow rating of 11,000 pounds.

The beauty and elegance of our quad-motor setup isn’t just about brute power, this architecture provides instantaneous torque with extremely precise control at each wheel, which is completely game-changing from a dynamics perspective both on- and off-road,” said Executive Director of Engineering and Programs Mark Vinnels.



The R1Tand R1S have been designed to communicate strength and refinement while still inviting customers to get them dirty. Strong proportions and clean, continuous bodylines help the vehicles achieve a modern, inviting stance, while acknowledging the performance and level of technology integrated into the vehicle.

The main bodyline of the R1T, which wraps up and around the cab, not only gives the car a distinctive silhouette, but also highlights the Gear Tunnel™ cutline and accentuates the rear fender flares. The R1T features short overhangs, high ground clearance and aggressive approach and departure angles for a confident and rugged stance, all enabled by Rivian’s unique skateboard platform. A Rivian will be quickly recognized, with its iconic, signature “stadium” headlights and a daytime running light that extends the entire width of the vehicle.


Much like the exterior, Rivian’s interior welcomes occupants into a premium environment that conveys craftsmanship yet invites rugged, daily use. Color and materials play an important role in differentiating Rivian vehicles. Sustainably sourced wood is used throughout the interior and its natural finish contributes to a warm and inviting feel. The most striking use of wood is as a structural element that integrates the main center display and driver cluster, integrating form and function beautifully. In the high-wear areas of the interior, the materials take inspiration from sportswear and active gear, combining durable and innovative materials that can easily be cleaned.

Although the exterior of the vehicle is what first attracts you, the interior is where you spend the most of your time, so we really focused on creating a transformational space inside our vehicles,” said VP of Vehicle Design Jeff Hammoud. “The biggest challenge was creating an interior design that delivered a premium experience, while still being comfortable as a space that is heavily used. To do this, we looked outside the automotive industry and took inspiration from contemporary furniture, as well as hiking and outdoor gear, to drive the design.”


The R1T leverages the vehicle architecture to deliver more lockable storage than any other vehicle in its class. The 330-liter front trunk is easily accessed for daily use with the hood being fully powered for opening and closing.

The R1T’s lockable Gear Tunnel aft of the cab, which extends from one side of the vehicle to the other, provides more than 350 liters of space for hauling gear of any size, whether it be snowboards, golf bags or strollers. The gear tunnel doors also act as steps for loading items into the bed or on the roof, as well as seats perfect for lacing up hiking boots. The R1T has a watertight, integrated tonneau cover for the bed and in the rear beneath the bed floor is a 200-liter sealed bin that can also be used to store a full-size spare tire. The bed features three 110-volt outlets with more 400 watts available at each.

As part of a Gear GuardTM feature, the bed also has two integrated locking cables to safely secure bicycle frames and other gear to the bed. As part of this feature, any gear stored in the bed is also monitored by a bed camera and alerts owners should the bed be entered or items removed.

Rivian has developed a racking system that utilizes telescoping racks with easy-to-use mounts that quickly attach to the roof as well as the bed rails and bed floor of the R1T. The racks have been developed to be integrated with a range of accessories including tents, travel containers and bike/ski racks. When not in use, racks can easily be stored in the front trunk of both vehicles.


Rivian’s energy-dense battery module and pack were developed with the most demanding journeys in mind — incorporating tough underbody protection and an advanced cooling system to give occupants the confidence to go further, regardless of terrain or temperature. Adaptive control algorithms learn driver behavior, optimizing user-specific battery management for maximizing battery life, reliability and second-life reusability. Three battery sizes are planned with the 180 kWh and 135 kWh available at launch and a 105 kWh being made available within six months of launch.

The battery is designed for fast charging with charging rates of up to 160kW. This enables approximately 200 miles of range to be added in 30 minutes of charging. In addition to DC fast-charging, an 11kW onboard charger facilitates rapid charging at a Level 2 charger.

Connectivity and Digital Experience

Rivian has developed its connected car platform from a clean sheet to allow full control and flexibility over the vehicle hardware, software and user experience. The system operates on a high-speed Ethernet backbone that enables robust security. This platform supports granular over-the-air updates of vehicle software to add features and functions and improve performance. All Rivian vehicles connect to a cloud-ecosystem for data exchange and processing, enabling machine learning and data science services. The digital experience extends beyond the vehicle into the cloud ecosystem and mobile/web applications and provides a consistent and seamless interface for vehicle status and control. Maps, music, navigation and several on-brand features complete the digital experience. The digital user interface strongly reflects adventure, outdoors and exploration – the experience is immersive and natural whether it’s being used in a connected urban setting or well off the beaten path.


The R1T will launch with a robust hardware suite with multiple modalities including camera, lidar, radar, ultrasonic and a high precision GPS coupled with high definition maps. This hardware enables “Level 3” (hands-off wheel and eyes off road) autonomy for highway operation. Beyond the highway Level 3, the vehicle will have a range of self-driving features focused on enabling active lifestyles.


Rivian’s safety systems and body-structure design are targeted to deliver IIHS Top Safety Pick Plus and NHTSA 5-Star ratings. Safety features include 8 airbags for occupant protection and reinforcements of the skateboard platform to protect the battery. Both models will be offered with a full complement of active safety systems as well, enabled by Rivian’s suite of self-driving sensors.

About Rivian

Rivian is developing vehicles, technology and services that inspire people to get out and explore the world. Whether it’s a family camping trip or a weekend away, Rivian is focused on providing the ultimate platform for experiencing life’s adventures. Rivian has development centers in Plymouth, MI, San Jose, CA, Irvine, CA, and London, UK. In addition to our development locations, the company has a modern, 2.6 million square foot manufacturing plant in Normal, IL. Core to delivering Rivian’s vision is a team of 600 passionate people working in close collaboration to deliver a set of products that electrify adventure.

Deliveries of the R1T begin in late 2020 and the R1S begin at the start of 2021. Pre-orders and more information are available at www.rivian.com.

Categories: Rivian

Tags: , , , ,

Leave a Reply

247 Comments on "Rivian Debuts R1S Electric SUV: Seats 7, Packs 180-kWh Battery [UPDATE]"

newest oldest most voted

Nice, I could see them selling more of these initially than their truck.

Should cater well to the Range Rover crowd.

This would cater to the entire 3-row SUV crowd, which is HUGE in the US! It looks to be a slightly blocky version of the Ford Explorer… kind of like the offspring of an Explorer and a Flex… it’s very tempting, for sure!

Black will be nice

Great to see Rivian is ahead of most others in quoting mostly metric measurements.
Shows they are thinking worldwide sales or do they know that President Trump is about to take the USA metric.

The 180 kWh version is indicated as 5 passenger, not 7. They must have had to use that space for additional battery module(s). The specs are at least partly made up (and not too carefully) as all versions show the same empty weight.

It was same for the truck — same curb weight & payload for all 3 battery variants, which has to be a mistake, but I haven’t seen it corrected anywhere. And since the top 2 variants show a difference in 0-60 & 0-100 estimated performance numbers, despite same drivetrain specs, torque & power, pretty clearly the larger battery version has to be a lot heavier.

Thought the weight quoted was for the midspec

I agree that this could be a very popular family vehicle. Also that green color just looks fantastic!

I was just going to say how much I don’t like the green! To each one’s own, I guess. 🙂

They went with that color intentionally.

Range Rover called and wants it’s color back.

😆 Yeah, that color, not far from a military olive drab, doesn’t appeal to me; but obviously it does to others.

Screams Range Rover.

Should probably have borrowed some of the Range Rover Evoque front design..

Totally agree that the lines resemble a Range Rover, though the front is so distinctive it removes any doubt about the brand. Some don’t like the front but to me it’s great. The strong horizontal with the splitting verticals at each end reminds me of a steel I-beam, projecting strength and ruggedness.

Rivian is on a roll! Very, very, nice and I am impressed that they are positioning themselves very well with a truck and SUV.

WOW! These guys are on a roll right now! Can’t help but notice how lame are the traditional manufacturers when a startup can come up with this and they still struggle to convert ICE rejects. Please tell me this will undercut the X price.

The projected price just barely undercuts the current X pricing, with many more base kWh though.

I think Tesla is making huge progress with the price of their 2170 cells. After a couple more profitable quarters, I project they’ll slash the prices of all their models to make up for the loss of Federal tax credit. This also makes me think the Model X was a misstep… Tesla should have gone this route.. more traditional and rugged SUV.

A bloated up Model S is a bloated up MS even with automatic front doors and gullwings. Sorry, terrible generalization, I just wish they had priced it better.

The Model X is unique, in offering the space of a large SUV or minivan, while being only slightly less efficient than a sedan — that’s a good thing. People who want a “traditional SUV” at the expense of efficiency can get the Rivian. Choice!

i feel all of tesla’s vehicles are around $7500 too high

$3,800 would be more accurate.

Everyone can come up with impressive specs — the challenge is bringing it to production 🙂 While I’m fairly optimistic about Rivian, let’s reserve judgement until they actually begin volume deliveries…

RIP to Range Rover.

This is no Range Rover, although they took plenty of styling cues.

Maybe not, but it could still be the death knoll to Range Rover’s sales.

Land Rover Discoveries and Jeep maybe, but Range Rover?

Range Rover is about luxury and basically nothing else. It’s one of the worlds best off roaders, yet the average Range Rover is first taken off road by it’s third owner!

This is Way cooler than all those Gas Guzzlers put Together. 🙂

You are correct, this is no Range Rover. It’s much, much better than a Range Rover.

In California, this this will destroy Land Rover. Just like Tesla destroyed Mercedes and BMW.

This… may be THE best 4×4 by farrr (read in Jeremy Clarkson voice)

Looks great. Do they have a prototype or just CGI images?

Looking at the live Rivian feed off of their website at the moment, looks like they have one on the stage with a seated driver, so I assume it moves 😉 Though I wasn’t watching when they put it on the stage.

Thanks, definitely looks like a real car and a very attractive one at that. Let’s hope they manage to get it into production.

It’s a prototype. It’s on stage in LA and yes, it is fully functional.

It’s not a prototype, it’s a PRODUCTION model. That’s impressive. How were these folks under wraps so well???

And what production line did it come off? Or you meaning to say prototype final version looking like a future production model.

Yeah, it’s a production prototype or pre-production prototype, but it’s not an actual production car, since it’s not planned for production until 2021.

But I won’t be surprised to see some changes between now and then. We’ve seen several pre-production EVs with 4 motors, one for each wheel; but so far at least, the production versions have all had only 1 or 2 inboard motors. (Exception: I think the Karma does have 2 motors on the rear axle, but only because space constraints prohibited a single larger motor. The two motors don’t power the rear wheels independently.)

EVs with a motor in the front and the back, can have very quick torque vectoring (quicker then a 4×4 ICE for example).
Cars with two motors on the rear axl can have even more advantages, when it comes to power control and torque vectoring.
Torque vectoring is even more effective if it is actuated through two motor drives, located on the same axle, as this configuration can be used for shaping the vehicle understeer characteristic and improving the transient response of the vehicle

With 4 motors – this could have some impressive handling with the right software.
Normally only one motor is needed in the front and two in the rear – but I’m sure they can find an advantage for it, by clever software or in special off road situations.
To develop software like this is expensive, and require a lot of time. Testing under all kinds of situations, and collecting a ton of data – that has to be analyzed together with a lot of sensor output values. This can be done by it’s own – while the rest of the vehicle goes through production planning.

The same characteristics can be controlled in principle with just one motor per axle, using an open differential and brakes to control wheels individually… Though of course separate motors are more precise and efficient 🙂

A separate motor for each wheel looks like a good idea in theory. But nobody has yet done it in a production car, due to various practical problems.

Time will tell if Rivian will be the first, or if they’ll decide that just two motors works better.

“In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. But, in practice, there is.” — Jan L. A. van de Snepscheut

Various practical problems… Such as?

I guess it might be a bit more expensive and less reliable due to more individual parts — but otherwise, I have a hard time thinking of any meaningful downside.

Rimac uses four independent motors in their “production” cars.

I doubt it’s even a production prototype. AIUI these are used to test production tooling? I’d say it’s a validation prototype at best at this point.

Did I use the wrong term? Isn’t “validation prototype” just one type of pre-production prototype? (All collies are dogs, but not all dogs are collies!)

They just didn’t promote until everything was all set. No false promises riddled with early failures. They did their homework and went about it in the most respectable way.

You summed it up nicely, that’s why I have the utmost respect for them.

If you have all the funding and talent that you need, then there’s no point in divulging. Tesla needed money and to get people’s attention, and they did, and it worked. Now that people know what an EV can do, and now that Rivian has models to produce, then Rivian can step out of the shadows and push the EV envelope further.

Very true. I’m excited. I hope it plays out well.

They certainly seem to be following in Tesla’s footsteps very well, with a lot of their own innovation to offer. It would be really cool to see them emerge as the second EV-only (relatively) big manufacturer in the US.

Why do you think Rivian reveals two years before production, I’m sure they have the same problem Tesla had with Model 3: it needs to take loads of pre-orders to show suppliers the demand is there and worth tooling up for.

I suppose Rivian now needs lots of money to build a mass production line. They’ve got the factory, but they need the production equipment. If they didn’t now have a need for lots of investment capital, then they wouldn’t have emerged from stealth.

Showing off a well-designed, attractive pre-production prototype (or two, in this case!) is a tried and true method of attracting money from investors.

They had most of their equipment needed already with the Normal plant. They are in the process of getting the factory ready.

Kind of surprised you cant get the 180kWh battery with 7 passengers. To me that seems like an odd drawback. Does the battery compartment intrude into the passenger compartment on the very largest battery pack?

It’s skateboard. The battery is all underneath in the chassis

I don’t think “skateboard design” is generally used to imply the battery is entirely flat. The moniker is often applied to designs with some hump(s), especially in the rear part. I’m pretty sure that’s the case here as well with the 180 kWh battery.

Might have to do with weight. Who knows.

That is really odd! 7 people and luggage is a lot of weight – you’d want the top pack, you’d think?

It’s also a bit curious that the R1S is 20kg lighter than the R1T, and that there’s no distinction between the 5 and 7 seat versions… maybe they don’t know exactly how much the 5-seater will weight, yet? I assume that, without seats, it would have to be 30 or 40 lbs lighter, all else being equal.

I do see that the GVW is the same for both, and that the R1S has 20kg more payload than the R1T. It adds up to the same thing. Cool.

The 5-seater is apparently identical except for the battery — seat weight matters very little in such a vehicle. It’s pretty clearly a typo that all variants have same payload & curb weight, just as it is for the truck. Puzzled not to see a correction from them.

The layout of the table suggest that the given weight numbers apply *only* to the 135 kWh variants… I suspect that’s the only size they have fully developed yet.

Well, true, if this is a 7-seater, then it must be the 135kWh pack since the 105s come later.

The 105 kWh one will also be a 7-seater. The 180 kW one will be a 5-seater.

(So the prototype could in theory be the 105 kWh variant, too — but since that is supposed to come later, and it’s not the one they gave a weight figure for, that seems unlikely. Also, the prototype seems to have 9 battery modules, which would fit nice with 135 kWh vs. 105 kWh for a variant with 7 modules… Though admittedly that’s somewhat wild speculation 🙂 )

They probably have to stack some batteries in the rear to get up to 180 kwh, and I would assume that it eats into the interior space such that a 3rd row becomes impossible.

I assume that’s the case, but it seems like a pretty extreme design consideration…why wouldn’t they put those batteris somewhere else? …unless they were worried about front/rear axle loads – these things have amazing offroad specs, and both have 52%/48% weight ratios.

It seems strange that they would develop a skateboard that couldn’t support everything they want it to carry.

The 180kWh version has 80% more battery than the Model X’s max battery option, but same length of vehicle and almost the same wheelbase… So probably not possible for the skateboard to accommodate this (and making it thicker might make the vehicle floor too tall — they still need god ground clearance).

Says 2nd and 3rd row fold into the floor. 180kWh pack may prevent the 3rd row from folding. So they just take it out, instead of having to design different seats that can be removed?

Well that certainly explains it! I’m amazed they can fold the seats into the floor. I didn’t expect to see that in any skatebord-style BEV, at least not until batteries shrink (i.e., gain energy density) somewhat more than they already have.

If so, then that seems odd. If Rivian can put 180 kWh of batteries under the floor and cargo bed of the R1T, then why not 180 kWh of batteries under the front and back floor of the SUV version, the R1S?

Maybe the cargo bed is higher than the floor? I seem to remember reading about minimal wheel well intrusion into the bed, so perhaps that does indicate a higher than normal cargo bed for the R1T.

For the pick-up variant, the one with the biggest battery foregoes the under-seat storage room — i.e. that one has a hump, too.

No “pass-through” storage tunnel on the R1T with the largest battery pack? Yeah, that would indicate they’re using that area for more batteries, which I suppose means they couldn’t use the same area to stow collapsing seats in the R1S.

But they ought to still be able to put 3 rows of seats in if one row is removable rather than collapsible. Not as convenient, but Rivian could make it an option for those who want it.

It still has the pass-through storage tunnel. What they called the gear tunnel. It just doesn’t have the tiny space beneath the rear seats. So the extra battery cells must go where the third row would go in the SUV and where the second row sits in the pickup truck.

IMO that was a poor trade-off. Road trip with the family is what this style of vehicle is for. This one requires either sacrificing the road trip, or the family.

If you want to spend even longer cramped up with five kids + 1 SO then you need to, more power to you.

Sounds like a good excuse to get out and stretch the legs for some peace and quiet IMO.

180 kWh and 5 passengerscomment image

Most likely the skateboard can’t be large enough; Recall the 180kWh pack is almost 2x the capacity of the max Model X pack, and the R1S is the exact same length and very similar wheelbase. I’d expect adding an additional layer of batteries to the entire skateboard and making the entire vehicle have a much higher floor isn’t an option (and they still to maintain decent ground clearance for offroad).
If so, they have to have an additional module somewhere, and in the rear cargo area or instead of the frunk would likely be a weight distribution problem — instead of the rear seats sounds a reasonable compromise.

Looks badass, but it’s a long time until 2021.

True, but 2017 seemed far away for the Model 3, and here we are, a year later and producing about 6k per week! Time is relentless… as my great-grandmother used to say, “It’ll be here before you know it!”

My mom always used to say, “This, too, shall pass.” Not completely relevant, used to drive me batsh-t.

Still not for sale in Europe until 2019 some time.. no time to rest for the Tesla employees in Europe when they start to sell that model.

It’s a long time is exactly why they always give these sorts of timeframes – it’s far enough away nobody really complains when they don’t make it – but near enough that they hope there will be enough fanboys to drink the Kool Aid

Another glass of Rivian Kool-Aid, please. Extra strength this time!
😀 😀 😀

Yeah, but it is hard to do all the job quicker. There is a ton of work left – before the cars can hit production. They have to manually make a test vehicle, and get design/technical/quality feedback – and do some design changes. Then they have to do a LOT of CAD work, to design the production line. They have to order production equipment, set up deals with suppliers, make a test run of the production to perform real crash tests, winter, summer and general torture testing. They have to see if they must make some design (technical/quality) changes, finish up the software related to ESP, torque vectoring and then they can start production. (I know there are a ton of extra stuff to check out, like shipping agreements, legal aspects of the car.. all over the world and stuff like that). .. but to make a car is a LOT of work, and it takes time. If they try to cut steps, it will normally haunt them later somehow. 2020 and 2021 is no problem, as long as the vehicles are properly made, have a good quality and a competitive price – or serve a niche market that nobody… Read more »

How do you know most of that isn’t already done?

It would have been seen doing winter testing, summer testing and so on. News from suppliers would trickle through the supplier channels too. Manufacturers of robotics, chassis transportation systems and so on would also give notice about their sales. Don’t know what is included in the old manufacturing plant they bought – but there would have to be new tooling too. In addition there would be information about homologation, which leaves a paper trail.
So I’m pretty safe when I say there are a ton of work left. . even though they can have worked on the manufacturing aspect of the cars for year – and have a 99% working assembly line on their computers.
Will be good to see them in production though.

Because if most of it was already done, then they wouldn’t be talking about another year or two before production starts.

(Bloomberg) — Demand for electric cars will continue to surge irrespective of oil prices as consumers buy into a technology aimed at making driving fun while being environmentally friendly, according to Royal Dutch Shell Plc.
It should be a cool vehicle. btw Trump wants to kick GM when they are down, since they teed him off by cutting subsidies for their evs, (which will not happen), but he loves to throw tantrums when he doesn’t get his way. Wah!

Bloomberg seems to have it right, and yeah, 45 is having another lashing-out tantrum twitstorm…

Yelp watch cnn and they were taking about the Cruze ev not selling and Americans not buying these things so that why Gm is closing those plants and Trump taking away the ev tax credit

Heh, the related https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-11-27/trump-promised-jobs-for-ohio-voters-they-want-him-to-deliver cites a “David Green, president of UAW Local 1112 in Lordstown”… That name sounds strangely familiar — coincidence? 🙂

My guess is that it’s a coincidence. Someone who created an online identity for the purpose of posting pravduh and FÜD would probably not use his real name. Heck, even professional Tesla basher Mark B. Spiegel used the screen name “Logical Thought”… and I think still does.

Excellent recall. Yes, he was an infamous Troll.

The non-thinking media will write things like “an electric SUV to take on Tesla” etc.

It’s Range Rover, Porsche (Cayenne) and every other fancy SUV manufacturer that needs to worry. Consider what’s going on at the Alfa Romeo and Maserati offices when they read about this

Agreed. The market is big enough for the X and R1S, for sure! Plus, they have different niches, as well – the X was designed for suburban families, while the R1S is going for adventurous families (which sometimes can be the same people).

If someone wants an EV he is likely looking into Tesla more than the ones you mentioned. So this might very well take away some of teslas cake.

Maybe, but really it’s about price point now: The OP above has it right, they will disrupt luxe SUV segment whether ICE or not. Production constraints (batteries?) will be the biggest issue but they seem very on their game having secured supply chains, etc.

Agreed, this will absolutely eat into both Model X, I-Pace, and ICE lux SUV shares, at the right price point.

A major win for us consumers for sure, more choices.

More choices is exactly what the EV revolution needs.

Every new model of EVs will cut into Tesla’s sales to a greater or lesser extent, but mostly lesser. PEVs (Plug-in EVs) mostly compete with the 98% of the new car market which is gasmobiles and mild hybrids, not the 2% of the market which is other PEVs.

No one single auto maker can possibly make enough EVs to replace all the gasmobiles and mild hybrids on the roads. The EV revolution needs more new BEV makers. We EV advocates should welcome upcoming new BEV makers like Rivian, not worry about them taking some of Tesla’s market share!

Go Rivian!

Mitsubishi, Land Rover, PHEVs are looking even less attractive.

Except, a PHEV could be offered at a lower price point.

Sure. The Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV, a compact SUV, seats 7 with a MSRP of $35,795.

But as I understand it, sales of that are are declining. The market is showing a preference for well-designed BEVs over PHEVs made by converting gasmobiles.

PHEVs do have their place, but that will pretty much fade away as the market fully transitions from gasmobiles to BEVs.

No it doesn’t. You can’t get the third row in the Outlander PHEV.

There are only three plugins that seat 7 in the US right now:
Chrysler Pacifica
Tesla Model X
Volvo XC90

Ack! 😯 Thank you for the correction.

Actually, the Outlander is still doing extremely well, despite the 2019 upgrade being rather measly (just 10% larger battery). If Mitsu could fit a larger pack in there, enough to get a 35-40mi or so EPA range (maybe aero can be slight improved or weight cut down a bit to help with that) it would make for a highly attractive vehicle worldwide, even at a higher price (and if they managed 45mi WLTP AER, it would get the full UK incentive)

But… the laggard, legacy LICE makers not really making them (PHEV SUVs), but instead Detroit doubles down on gas-guzzling trucks/SUVs.

Look at those specs. Definitely several echelon higher than the Mitsubishi. It might even be at a price that only the top of the line Land Rover buyers can afford.

It’s really nice to see them come along this far as we’ve been reading about them for a while now.

The 180-kWh battery should be quite the impressive toy hauler. These Rivian R1S SUVs will quite easily eat into the existing Range Rover sales dominance, that is this premium SUV segment.

2022 looks to be a real shakeout year in the legacy ICE OEM Premium SUV trenches.

Finally! This thing will sell like hotcakes!

Let us celebrate this great environmental achievement of designing a two and a half ton “adventure vehicle”. It’s electric, so it’s ok.

two and a half ton “adventure vehicle”….to replace a similar ice one….so yes. let’s celebrate that! In our parts of the woods it’s illegal to lock family members in the trunk….so this will work fairly well for bigger families.

It may be an improvement over an ICE vehicle of the same class, but that doesn’t make the class itself any less of a waste of resources.

If you read the press release, it’s mostly talking about adventure, very little about meeting the basic transportation needs of bigger families.

While we’re on the topic, bigger families are also a “great” contribution to the environment.

I disagree. We’re either going to low-carbon lifestyles or we’re not. If we are, more people enjoying a low-carbon lifestyle won’t emit very much CO2, so population growth isn’t a problem. If we aren’t, we have big problems either way.

It’s not just carbon that’s the problem though. The biggest impact most people will have on the environment is having kids. Think of it this way – if you have a child there is one more mouth to feed, body to cloth and move. You’ve basically doubled your environmental impact, making that yearly long haul flight a minor blip in comparison.

CO2 and climate change is just one of many environmental symptoms of humanities damage to the environment.

So are you saying that while buying an electric car will make you feel like you are saving the world, the reality is that the birth rates in the developing world are cancelling out your purchase exponentially?

Kind of, actually!

65 % of animal species have disappeared from our planet since 1970.
This is not even 50 years out on the hundred million since life began here.
War is raging hard in many places on earth right now.

I know not on this side of the world but that might change quite fast.

In the next 50 years, we will have a very challenging world to live in alone, not even considering driving a gargantuan piece of metal.

So, yeah, a family have environmental burden.

So it’s pretty telling, how people are clueless, believing an electric SUV will save the world.

Now before you slash me as a pessimist whine, I all in with EV, but saving the world is a couple of steps further.

We need to have Rivian and million of other that embrace sustainability and that (also) mean stop trowing everything we make in trash.
We’re far from doing it.

I believe it’s wild animal populations that have reportedly declined by >50%, not species.

My bad, you’re right!

52% less populations, but still when the population gets too low there in jeopardy.

One specie each 20 minutes disappear forever from the surface of earth.

Big machine won’t do any good with the resources they deprived them.

I think we have to take ownership here.

Sure, birth rates in the developing world are also a problem, but children in the developed world will have far more impact on the environment than those in the developing world, just down to the fact we use significantly more resources than them.

OK, that helps clear it up. Since birth rates in most of developed world are creeping into the negatives, that seems to work. Less people over time = less impact. The final piece of the puzzle would be to eliminate immigration into the developed world. Each person needs to lessen their environmental impact. Remaining in the developing world would be an effective way to help.

Human overpopulation is certainly the root cause underlying a growing number of existential problems facing humanity, from climate change to deforestation and resource depletion to air and water pollution to the refugee crisis to the growing number of regional wars and conflict zones worldwide. But even if everyone traded in their honkin’ big car for a microcar tomorrow, that wouldn’t do anything to solve the overpopulation problem.

Let’s take our victories where we can find them. We may not be able to stop the increase in global GHGs and the global pollution of air and water, but we certainly can slow it by switching from gasmobiles to BEVs. And that includes larger BEVs, not just smaller ones.

Nope. Going low-carbon would require getting rid of 50% of all cars in the US (limit of one vehicle per household), and no personal-use SUVs or trucks whatsoever. People needing one will rent it for the occasion, like they do a U-haul.
In terms of overall environmental impact, A BEV is only 10% better than an ICE. It has worse embodied materials & energy cost to produce, and takes the same space on the road and when parked (and autonomous vehicles will make this worse, not better) and congestion has a deep environmental & societal cost.

“A BEV is only 10% better than an ICE.”

Fortunately, it’s a lot better than you’re claiming. The Union of Concerned Scientists says that in the U.S. it’s an average ~50% reduction, and that’s based on a lifetime cycle, including manufacturing; not just a per-mile basis.


So you want to outlaw or regulate not only large SUVs but children as well. Got it, thanks for clarifying.

I don’t know how you came to this understanding, I made no mention of outlawing or regulating anything.

SUVs and trucks are a symbol of unnecessary consumption because very often they are used in situations where a more efficient vehicle would have worked just as well. If SUVs were used to actually drive large families through difficult terrain, this wouldn’t be an issue. Instead, they are used by single commuters, stuck in rush hour traffic on the highway. How does this happen? Well, it usually starts with a marketing department putting out a press release that uses “adventure” at least seven times.

So excuse me if I’m not thrilled about the products being discussed here. I don’t like them and wanted to voice that opinion. How reading that opinion has led you to believe I want to outlaw children is beyond me.

“It may be an improvement over an ICE vehicle of the same class, but that doesn’t make the class itself any less of a waste of resources.”

Well of course it does. In fact, on the basis of individual drivers or individual vehicles, switching from a gasmobile SUV to a BEV SUV cuts down on emissions and fossil fuel use far more than switching from a gasmobile subcompact economy car to a similarly small BEV.

If EV makers refuse to make larger cars and light trucks, will that persuade those who drive pickups and SUVs to switch to small economy cars? Of course not! It will just persuade them to keep buying gasmobiles.

Hopefully that’s not really what you want.

It seems highly unlikely that EV makers would downright refuse to make larger cars and light trucks, but lets roll with that premise.

Sure, in this situation, people wanting a truck or an SUV would initially continue to buy gasmobiles. However, gas would eventually cease to be a social necessity. Economic competitiveness would no longer depend on cheap gas. Poor people’s mobility would no longer depend on cheap gas. Most of the reasons we have for not taxing gas as much as we should will eventually be gone. Once gas prices soar, few will be able to afford continuing to drive gas vehicles.

When this happens in the real world, there’ll be plenty of electric trucks and SUVs on the market. But in our fictitious world, where all SUVs are gasmobiles, most people will simply no longer be able to afford them.

So yes, if EV makers refuse to make larger cars and light trucks, that will (eventually) persuade those who drive pickups and SUVs (and aren’t too rich) to switch to small economy cars. 🙂

More Zoes, less Teslas? Sounds good.

Hopefully you have got yourself neutered.

It’s among the solutions.

Many do after their second or third child.

It’s not a big thing and an option among others if the birth pill don’t fit.

Truck are made to work and that’s pretty good, I’m still trying to figure out what SUV are for when there’s only one person aboard.
I just can’t see the point.

To be fair he has a point…lots of people should be neutered. We should start with sex offenders and go from there.

Let the wind blow, and the sun shine!

Good looking, but abysmal efficiency. What a waste of time and especially, energy.

Their efficiency looks to be on par with Tesla. A bigger, blocky-er SUV getting 240 miles+ on 105kWh? That’s not too far off… certainly no worse than the Jaguar that people can’t praise enough…

It’s super efficient. They are saying possibly 20-30 percent more efficient than most of today’s EVs.

Sure, if you include Mercedes, BMW etc. alibi-PHEVs in “most of today’s EVs”…

How the heck is 410 miles on a huge 3 row SUV inefficient? And how is the first long-range all-electric full-size 3-row SUV and pickup truck a waste of time. Do you support EVs and adoption? Sad to see so many people trying to poke holes in everything a new company is doing to promote the segment that they’re supposedly fond of. It’s as if many people want all of these companies to fail miserably. This is something I don’t understand.

There are those who are against full-size pickups and SUVs (or at least 3-row SUVs), and so they are disappointed when an EV is developed for that segment – regardless of energy source, it is a waste, and such vehicles should not be encouraged.

I understand where they are coming from, but as you pointed out, it’s not a realistic perspective. Particularly here in the US, people are going to buy what they want to buy, so you can’t go wrong with improving efficiency.

Understood and agreed.

“There are those who are against full-size pickups and SUVs… so they are disappointed when an EV is developed for that segment…”

Sadly, just another case of “The perfect driving out the good.”

Yet for EVs to flourish and take over eventually, this is the segment most needed for rEVolutionizing.

Bring ’em on – the more the better. Especially since Rivian seems to have development and manufacturing well on it’s way.

Promising. Ver-ry promising, indeed!

(Original James)

Unfortunately a lot of those people are more sedan snobs than anything else. Those that most complain about Pickups and SUV’s invariably drive large sedans, rather than small hatchbacks.

In the ICE world they’re most likely to be a BMW/Audi sedan 3/5 series and A4/A6 driver, in the EV world they’re likely to be a Tesla Model 3/S driver.

If they were truly that environmentally conscious they would be driving something like the i3, Zoe, or similar. But usually aren’t, and they value speed and performance of their own vehicle as much/more than their so called environmental “credibility”.

The Model 3 has better efficiency than the i3 and ZOE.

It could be twice as capable at half the price and people will still find things to whine about. Just human nature I guess. The more successful something or someone is the more they are attacked. Elon Musk being a perfect example.

Yep. Quite true.

Elon Musk partly brings it on himself though, not least for his outspoken twitter usage. A lot of people only know him for publicly calling a diver that rescued a dozen kids a paedophile, with no evidence, for example…

I bet very few people know him only for that. Nobody would even care about it if they didn’t already know him for other things…

Possibly, but they may not have an opinion either way. Having a Trump like tendency on twitter is a major negative however.

Looking at this from outside the US these two vehicles seem ideally suited to your love of large SUV’s. Often the comments I see are about large US vehicles not being suitable for Europe or small European vehicles not being suitable for the US, so this appears to hit the US market squarely where it matters.
Tesla certainly has the market on battery efficiency at the expense of traditional design. This counters that by just super sizing (something it seems the US love) the battery to compensate. Actually, I’ve always maintained we will need 200kWh+size batteries to cater for heavy haulage, so this is actually a really good development.
My main question will be that they can deliver all this great product for the seemingly small price of US$69,000? Looks like a serious luxury offering, hope they haven’t over specified everything.

I’m the “original” James. I disagree with this James. I find it very interesting. Not sure how the design will go over. With Escalade and Chevy trucks looking like a box on wheels – they sure have been successful.

Some styling cues look overdone to me – too busy seat upholstery and dash design…

Intrigued by the eifficiency and range claims. Think the frunk and stowage area in front of bed need be rubberized, not carpeted. Should have drains too.

The 4 motor vectoring system? Needs to be proven reliable and efficient.

We obviously need these vehicles out there. Personally not for me – I’d rather have a more Colorado-sized truck, AWD 2 motor, and a bit more rounded and aero sans the 1980s Samsonite hard suitcase look up front.

An interesting and very production-ready looking rig!

I’m sold enough to put down a deposit. It looks like the perfect replacement for my Model X which will be about 5 years old when this is ready. I love the practical design decisions that I don’t think Elon would ever allow on a Tesla. Plus, their headquarters is in my hometown so I feel like I’m supporting a local company with a better mission statement than the major auto companies.

Awesome! You should get to know them!

Impressive they have 600 employees, offices in San Jose, Irvine, Detroit, UK and 2.9M sf factory in Illinois. Next questions: Battery source…very important to understand ramp. Who are major investors? Expected charging infrastructure? (*RV parks for adventure vehicles are a no-brainer).

I wonder if the pickup can take a fifth wheel trailer mount?

Just my opinion, but I’d think you would want a vehicle with much more robust towing capacity to justify mounting a fifth wheel trailer hitch. I don’t think the R1T’s towing capacity is strong enough to take a trailer big and heavy enough to need a fifth wheel mount.

There are many 5th wheel trailers that weigh half the towing capacity of the Rivian truck.
It’s not so much about high weight as it is about stability in towing.
So yes, it makes complete sense to want to put a 5th wheel hitch on it.

There is a lightweight hatch right under where you would mount a fifth wheel.

Yes, I would be most nervous about battery source, but it sounds like they have their ducks in a row. The growing pains will happen at some point, but hopefully they’ve learned a lot from watching Tesla. They are already copying their technique of “fully-loaded, most expensive” versions for sale first, which I don’t say as a put-down: it’s smart business.

This is why I said people wouldn’t want a Tesla pick up that looks like its from blade runner. The type of people that get pickup trucks get them because they look big and aggressive not because they look like they are from scifi movie

Just like Tesla, Rivian doesn’t need to capture 100% of the market. They just need to sell as many as they can make.

Yes, unfortunately, some potential buyers will find the odd-looking headlights offputting. And others won’t.

Gives off a strange vibe of a Russian Lada Niva with the odd looking front lights to it. I hope they don’t share the same designer.

Carrying 2000 pounds of batteries around does not sound good.

That’s the current level of battery tech. Tesla’s packs aren’t featherweights, either.

The 2012 Tesla Model S85 had a ~1300 lb battery pack. 2000 lbs. is certainly heavier, but not terribly so.

But this is one of the reasons why we haven’t yet seen a mass produced BEV pickup.

Hot damn this company can make awesome EVs. I’m hoping they can keep it up and offer a compact and subcompact SUV.

Yes, you could easily see 60kWh batteries and 80kW quad motors in a smaller vehicle. I guess they will use the Tesla model and target the high end market, then work downwards with more suitable models. Or maybe they are the next Porsche or Jaguar brand and service the top end market with smaller market share.

Hopefully once they get going and can make some $$, they can shift into volume production for a $40k-$50k vehicle, then lower, then lower. I hope they won’t stay a niche luxury maker like Tesla.

Except that’s precisely what Tesla is doing.

“Rivian’s quad-motor system delivers 147kW and precise torque control to each wheel, enabling active torque vectoring and maximum performance in every situation, from high-speed cornering to low-speed rock crawling.”

Quad motors are definitely very interesting – groundbreaking, even. Land Rover is going to be punished severely for their lack of vision and innovation in not bringing forth an electric Range Rover – something that was painfully obvious even before the current generation RR was released.

It’s worth pointing out that Land Rover and Jaguar are the same company (JLR). It’s unlikely that all that EV research Jaguar have done for the I-Pace is not available to Land Rover. They’ve already talked about electric Land Rovers in the past, although I’d guess Land Rover will be one of the last companies to transition to fully BEV due to the nature of the vehicles they produce and where/what they sell them for.

There is definitely a plan in the works. They told us that in Portugal when we drove the I-Pace. The I-Pace could have almost been a Land Rover, as they were specifically touting its off-road prowess and targeting that market. But made more sense as a Jag at this point.

More recent comments suggest the opposite: Jaguar could become all-electric in order so Land Rover can keep selling gas guzzlers…

I love that they are innovating PAST Tesla in this way. Things are getting interesting!

Much better than Porsche who appears to be bench marking a 3 year old P85D rather than a Model 3 P/Track

FWIW, Rimac has used the four motors approach for years… I wonder whether it will become more mainstream with time, or always remain a somewhat niche solution?

Skimming the Wiki entry for Rimac Automobili, it looks like the company is known for high-end EV prototypes and for making “battery packs, drivetrain systems and full vehicles for other companies”.

So far as I can see, the closest they have to a “production” car is the Concept One, with an intended production run of 88 units.

This is very far from what I consider mass production. Am I wrong?

That article must be wildly outdated/incorrect. The Concept_one, along with the related Concept_S, had only ten units made — not quite prototype, but not exactly series production either… The Concept_two on the other hand will have 150 units, which is a fairly normal run for a seven-digits supercar.

How many units of the Rivian R1S SUV will they produce in 2021?

Probably few enough that battery cell supply won’t be that big a concern. If and when Rivian starts significantly ramping up production then they’ll need to secure control of their own battery cell supply, as Tesla has, but that’s almost certainly several years off.

What about securing control of their won steel supply?

Is that a joke? I’m not aware that automobile grade steel is in short supply.

Yes, that’s sarcasm. I’m pointing out that “securing control of their own supply” of commodities is not something car makers usually engage in.

(⌐■_■) Trollnonymous

Who the he11 designed the BUTT FUGLY front of their cars?

I think they got the Gen1 Nissan LEAF designer /s

Looks odd on the truck, but looks at home on the SUV. Like a Jeep.

Some of us think “Doesn’t slavishly follow the design of gasmobiles” gives Rivian’s design a unique type of elegance, and perhaps even beauty in a way. 🙂

While most others think, “another weird-mobile demonstrating that EVs will never be mainstream”…

To elaborate: when your product is just like any other, it makes sense to go for a niche aesthetic, in order to stand out from the rest — since that will capture the segment of the market that happens to like this particular aesthetic, while the rest wouldn’t have been interested in your product anyway. When on the other hand you have a product that stands out on technical merits, giving it a niche aesthetic is a *dumb* idea — it just alienates the majority of people who would have been interested otherwise…

New technologies allow for new, and often better, design choices.

When designing the Model T, the Ford Motor Co. didn’t slavishly follow the design of older horseless carriages. They didn’t mount an exposed engine directly above the rear axle; they put it in a metal box at the front of the car. They didn’t use iron rims on the wheels; they used pneumatic rubber tires. They used a steering wheel rather than a tiller.

I submit that likewise, BEV makers shouldn’t slavishly follow the design of gasmobiles. BEV makers should look forward, not back, when designing their vehicles!

Putting weird headlights is *not* something enabled by new power train technology. New power train technology would allow for a shorter, differently shaped, more aerodynamic front — but they choose not to do that. They chose to stick with combustion truck design, *except* for going weird on something that’s completely unrelated to the different power train.

The irony is that it actually entirely follows the design of combustion cars, *except* in some cosmetics that are completely unrelated to any consequences of power train choices…

Yup. In my opinion, the problem with Rivian’s R1T isn’t that it doesn’t look enough like a gasmobile pickup, it’s that it looks far too much like one. Even moreso with the R1S, which looks like Land Rover might have build it, other than the odd headlights.

But I understand why Rivian wanted to play it safe with its first vehicles. Hopefully, if they are a success, Rivian will feel more free to strike out boldly in a new direction with future designs.

It does look a bit like a Landrover Discovery 3 mated with one of the US full size SUV’s…

These polarising (by their own admission) headlights are definitely not “playing it safe”.

That’s bringing some serious whoop-ass.

Prices? May be vehicles that only the 1% can afford.

That’s the way it is man, all the new cool tech is expensive and the 1% are the target.

Rivian takes GM’s “skateboard EV” design away from them and beats them with it.

Hopefully it also puts the fear of god into the laggard, legacy LICE Detroit Big 2 1/2 truck makers.

This is gorgeous. I’ll take a moment to pause and admire a well-executed design.

I note that they mentioned LOCKABLE storage when they described the frunk. Great feature. (And a serious error by Tesla, but not bad enough that I wouldn’t buy one…)

Everyone has slight changes they’d like… Out of respect and admiration, I won’t mention my version of those now.

The only thing I’d DEFINITELY change about the overall SUV design would be to add some depth to the bumpers, both front and rear. A relatively minor parking error would destroy the entire back liftgate, glass, and taillight assembly. That would get very expensive very quickly. (Collision avoidance systems won’t stop the other guy from bumping you while you’re parked.)

The lack of depth for the bumper is likely to be so they can get the approach and departure angles they have. That’s why a lot of serious off roaders remove the standard bumpers and replace them.

Even if that’s so, I think Michael is right. I expect the production version to have more substantial looking bumpers, both front and aft.

It’s great to see Rivian touting another BEV, and it’s a real SUV… unlike those smaller 5-seat cars that are merely labeled “SUV” because the auto maker thinks they’ll sell better that way. (I’m looking at you, Jaguar and Chevy!)

By 2021, Rivian may have some competition in the BEV SUV market. Not that there is anything wrong with that; competition is good and will help the EV revolution progress faster!

Is Rivian giving any estimate about the price?

Go Rivian!

Remember Duisenberg? Remember Packard? Remember Oldsmobile?

It’s a long way from having exciting concepts to having a successful automotive manufacturing company. The legacy manufacturers like GM and Ford have weathered through over a century where many, many auto manufacturers failed. Rivian has some pretty exciting concepts but we really know very little about the company yet.

Tesla has been manufacturering cars since 2010 and they are still struggling. Personally, I favor Rivian over Tesla but I’m very reluctant to be an early adopter again. I hope the best for Rivian but I have a wait and see attitude right now.

Remember the 1936 Cord? LOL – I was just thinking of odd, out-of-the box ( Well, it kind of looks like a box ) front end designs….. Cord came to mind. Or the 1958 Ford Edsel.

“Remember Duisenberg? Remember Packard? Remember Oldsmobile?”

Some pretty poor analogies there. Two of the three brands were once among the market leaders.

If your intent is to issue a caution about initial enthusiasm for a startup auto maker being followed by a rapid decline and failure, then you might want to say “Remember CODA? Remember Th!nk? Remember Better Place?”

But as Steven Loveday has stated several times, Rivian looks like the real deal. They have already purchased an abandoned auto assembly plant, and otherwise have been quietly building up to actually mass producing truly competitive passenger vehicles.

GM or Ford could do this if they just gave a damn.

With that aero shape, the hwy ranges will be 80 miles, 100 miles and 140 miles for those battery setting.

Which is why the Tesla truck will be much more aerodynamic for exactly that reason.

A lot of new EV models will be on sale by 2021.

More competition among car manufacturers is good for consumers.

For now, it looks very likely that 2019 will be the year of the Tesla Model 3.

It looks like Sir Axelrod.

Sure would like to see the interior controls, indicators and display panels. Sure would like to see the quality of the interior and it’s appointments. Sure would like to see how much dough they want for it.

The R1T truck was fully exposed and is production-level. The R1S SUV comes out later and not as much was shared about it. We only received a few pictures and they didn’t really talk about it at the events. We get the impression that it’s a bit more in prototype form, whereas the truck is ready to go. With that being said, they are built on the same platform and interior appointments, screen, controls, upholstery, etc. are supposed to be very much the same. So, if you look at the gallery for the truck, it will give you a pretty good idea. As far as price, they didn’t say much more than the fact that the base truck will start in upper $60s before rebate. So the top-of-the-line model will obviously be much more than that. While I can’t say for sure, I’d guess the SUV will be priced similarly to the truck, but one would assume it will probably be a bit of a premium. We have a few years to go here.

Are there any EPA range information?

Great! This is what the world needs, another huge SUV (even an electric one). It’s not massive enough for me, though. I will wait for the electric road grader and then make my move.
But seriously, I don’t blame Rivian (or any other manufacturer) one bit. They produce what sells in our monkey-see monkey-do age.

I really like it – great design details everywhere, I also like the minimal interior. When I saw the truck yesterday there was some familiar and now the R1Sreminds me a little of an International Scout. With a white roof it could pass for a very modern day Scout

The article text is misleading/confusing for 5-7 seater and 3 battery sizes. It appears from the table that the largest battery needs to be the 5 seater (presumably more room for more battery cells).
comment image

It looks like a Edsel.

Yup and you know the jokes they made about what THAT car looked like. hehe.

Regardless of looks, I wish they’d offer soon a cost reduced model. I’m concerned about stopping, not accelerating so a 2wd system would be plenty for me. I’d also like to forgo some frills to keep the price down.


Excellent design, robust looks. SUV version is shorter in length than truck version.
Probably they should launch 1 more mode: R1U for Utility.
Take the SUV, just remove the 2nd & 3rd row seat, replace glass windows with metal in 2 side rear doors and 1 hatch door.
It will be used by business to carry things securely.
Provision should be given to mount a trailer in the cargo area.

On their website, they make it clear that the “rear bin volume” listed in the table is the space under the floor where the spare tire is stored, at least for the R1T. Also, they state that the base R1S will cost $65,000 after the federal tax credit.

They stayed pretty silent. That is a very long period without any noise to be able to convince investors to be patient.
True story from my youth that I think fits this scenario.

Backdrop. Farm with a few cows, some corn and bean acres, typical old school farm. Cattle kept a few miles down the road for winter (better shelter in that other old farmsite). The farmsite with the cattle on it had a guy we knew that rented the old house that was on the property. Free rent. Anyway my brother and I pull up in the yard and are going to go out and check on the cattle. I see a kennel/fence full of what looked like huskies. Probably a dozen. They were just staring silently/intently at us.

Me: When did he get those?
Brother: awhile back. He’s breeding them.
Me: Why aren’t they barking at us?
Brother: Because you don’t try to scare what you intend to eat.

No noise is most of the time more powerful than noise.

I like that.

I like this car, a lot.

But, can a small company from out of the blue really start producing top notch cars at sensible prices? If this becomes true, it means great news.

buy Rivian, Tesla, Bollinger and make Detroit sweat for being a belligerent auto industry only concerned with profits from the almighty ICE industry. The heck with Detroit.

Ford just can’t afford themselves to do pretty much nothing any longer anymore.

Ford board members must be in panic mode.

Until Rivian has a sub $50k model, I don’t think they’ll panic.
I’m hoping that Ford takes up Rivian’s platform sharing offer.

Yeah, just like Mercedes, BMW, and Audi didn’t panic until Tesla had a sub $50,000 model… At which point they suddenly went scrambling, as if that came totally unexpected.

3.5 tonnes though…

Thre are some old roads near where I live in Dublin that has a 3.5tn weight restriction.

Me thinks this is what Tesla should have aimed for when they designed the Model X. If they can price the base 105Kwh version under $90K, this thing will do very well. Also get rid of those oval headlights.

Need to start hearing about their sales / distribution / service story.
Even great products break or get damaged when you leave the tarmac.
Would an owner have to ship their truck to a remote service center to get fixed?

The front end does seem a bit divisive. The 3 when we first saw it was the same. Now most people admire the 3’s front look. On the Rivian, the whole vehicle has squared off lines. I wonder how it would look with the 2 oval headlight clusters being square. You could keep the way the headlight LED clusters overlap the horizontal band but the square or even round shape of the headlights might feel more resolved and traditional.