Rivian R1T Electric Pickup Truck Shocks World In LA Debut [UPDATE]


The all-new Rivian R1T electric pickup truck will be in a class of its own.

***UPDATE: Live images of the Rivian R1t electric truck added below.

Several years ago, Rivian Founder and CEO RJ Scaringe initiated a plan to bring a vehicle lineup to market that has never been executed before. After years of research, planning, and development, the R1T electric pickup truck will be unveiled as the first entrant in the realization of Scaringe’s dream. Many have long-awaited Rivian’s launch and assumed the vehicle would be easily comparable to today’s trucks — aside from the fact that it’s 100-percent electric — but that’s not really the case. In fact, Rivian has gone so far as to create its own unofficial vehicle class in which its R1T fits perfectly: Electric Adventure Vehicles.

Click here to check out Rivian’s 3-row 7-seat all-electric SUV

Scaringe begins:

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.

Not only does the R1T offer a sizable, integrated, watertight, covered bed for versatility, it also seats five adult passengers comfortably, has a large front trunk (frunk), and comes with an innovative gear tunnel. In addition, there’s storage beneath the rear-seat floor, as well as beneath the bed floor. The lockable gear tunnel offers a significant amount of cargo capacity for longer items like skis, a snowboard, a tent, a stroller, or even golf clubs. Its door also doubles as a step for accessing the bed or loading items in the bed or on the roof, and it can also be used as a convenient seat for lacing up your boots. The R1T is clearly much more than your average pickup truck when it comes to high-level functionality and innovation.

Head on over to our Forum to discuss the Rivian R1T

While the R1T’s massive amount of versatile storage space impressed us thoroughly, the truck’s performance, capability, and range should work to make it a true winner. It can sprint from zero to 60 mph in 3 seconds or to 100 in 7 seconds. The R1T can also tow a whopping 11,000 pounds. With its largest battery pack, it provides over 400 miles of range (200 of which can be added in 30 minutes via DC fast charging). To top it off, four independent 147kW motors control 3,500 Nm of grounded torque to each wheel and provide a combined output of 14,000 Nm of torque and some 800 horsepower. Mark Vinnels, Executive Director of Engineering and Programs shares:

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.

The R1T features a rugged, premium interior that covers all bases. It’s durable, comfortable, and highly functional, with surfaces that are nice to look at and easy to clean. VP of Vehicle Design Jeff Hammoud explains:

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. 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.

In terms of the R1T’s exterior design, the images speak for themselves. As you can see, Rivian designed a signature front end that will become immediately recognizable and will make its way into all the automaker’s upcoming vehicles. It features unique, “stadium” style headlights and a daytime running light that wraps around the entire front end of the truck. Similarly, the tail light extends all the way across the rear of the vehicle and also doubles as a charging status indicator.

Other notable R1T features include a highly sophisticated suspension system consisting of a double wishbone front suspension and a multi-link rear suspension. The truck will also have a ride-height adjustable air-suspension and be able to ford water up to one meter deep. Finally, the R1T will offer over-the-air software updates and come equipped with a full hardware suite that’s capable of Level 3 autonomy.

Rivian just provided us with this pricing update:

Pricing starts at $61,500 after Federal Tax credit.  Deliveries of the R1T begin in late 2020. Fully-equipped vehicles with the highest performance level and largest battery pack will enter production first. Our 180 kWh pack (400+ miles range) and 135 kWh pack will be available at launch, with the base variant (230+ miles range) to follow within 12 months of the start of production.

Rivian is now accepting preorders for a refundable deposit of $1,000. More information is available at www.rivian.com

Below is a more detailed look at specifications as provided by Rivian:

*For those eager to learn more about the details, we’ve included Rivian’s press release in its entirety below the following image gallery.

Rivian R1T Live:

16 photos

Rivian R1T

24 photos


Los Angeles CA, November 26, 2018. 8am PST 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, Trucks

Tags: , , , , ,

Leave a Reply

433 Comments on "Rivian R1T Electric Pickup Truck Shocks World In LA Debut [UPDATE]"

newest oldest most voted

Why why why did they have to put weird looking headlights on this otherwise really nice looking truck? Seriously, everything about this truck looks great, except for those headlights.

They look really nice in person. I was impressed. I didn’t expect it to look as attractive as it did.

How it looks in person is quite irrelevant for a company that has no dealerships. Maybe eventually they’ll have dealerships or stores but at least for the first few years, most sales will be heavily dependent on online viewing of it.

Steven- I think this truck is striking what an opportunity you had to be in front of it

I think the looks will grow on me, great specs and unique styling.

If they’d just push them to the sides a bit, then it might help. They just look off in the position they are in.

What were they thinking with that awful headlight design? I’d have also come up with a better taillight design that left the middle of the tailgate bare except for a badge. No need to get too far beyond a conventional design. The rest of the truck looks nice, though. Tesla designed its sedans smartly. but screwed up on the Model X design with those stupid falcon wing doors. I’d have dismissed that door design right away.

The Falcon Wing doors give you the benefits of sliding minivan doors while allowing you to call the vehicle an SUV.

Should have just done sliding doors.

I don’t know why people keep suggesting this.

A sliding door only gives an opening as wide as the track length. Where is there room to put a track that long on the X? It would either have much smaller doors or be a much longer car.

The primary goal of the falcon doors is to make a huge opening, allowing easy access to the third row. You can make the case that such a goal wasn’t worth the drawbacks, but a similar sized sliding door couldn’t happen, and a regular door would need the hinge moved forward and be smaller too.

“A sliding door only gives an opening as wide as the track length… a similar sized sliding door couldn’t happen…”

Fortunately, some engineers can think outside that box.


I would love to see Tesla make a different version of the Model X, with sliding doors.

Ron Swanson's Mustache

Nice dorkmobile you’ve got pictured there.

Five years ago I was to buy one of these Ford B, but I actually tried it during one afternoon and going into the rear seats, and more specially to going out, was really plainly, not practical at all, and I’m a young person, now imagine with old people…

This one looks like Model Y.

And provide weather protection.

A vehicle that cannot accommodate a proper roof rack cannot be called and SUV.

I’m still torn on those Falcon wing doors. The kid in me says they are damn cool! But the pragmatic adult in me says…ugh…look cool but are impractical, hard to build, will break down eventually, etc.

They still make sense in a way to make the Model X an exotic vehicle that turns heads. But they had better not be on the Model Y.

Talk to adult parents that have kids and MX. They will not go back to regular cars. The doors provide protection from the weather, and easy to work car seats, etc.

Impractical and cool often go together. Few exotic vehicles are practical and owning them is rarely pragmatic.

You only live once.

For a minivan type of car, like model X – they could have used sliding doors. They are cheap, proven, can open close to other vehicles and does not need sensors to prevent them from hitting the ceiling of a garage, they give superior access to the cabin, they are easy to automate. It would also be possible to fit a ski box on the car (I know this has been a drawback for many (potential) customers in Norway. Just as the tow bar was a HUGE advantage compared to other EVs.
Sliding doors would of course put it in a “soccer mom” electro racer category – that would probably hurt sales.
They have clearly tried to disguise the apperence, and there is some kind of cool factor with the falcon wing doors.
They clearly learned a lot developing them, that they can use in other cars. The skills and technology learned does not only apply to falcon wing doors.
Model Y will for sure come with cheaper doors. Easy to manufacture, well proven and cheap – so they can make hundreds of thousands.

To be as successful as the Model 3, the Y needs to have regular doors. Now, as, some 5 to 6 five years from now the Y should became my next car, if, by any miracle, in the meantime Tesla decides to do another version of the Y with Falcon Wing Doors, I would buy it in a blink of an eye!

I think Elon himself call the falcon door “ubris” that would have been nice to avoid, at least in the initial rollout.

Two months ago, there was a black Model X parked in a very peaceful street perpendicular to the commercial main street of my small home town in central Portugal. Then, a woman was coming up from the main street with her young child (a boy with some 10 to 12 years, it seemed), when the boy came to around the Model X trying to see the interior and didn’t want to go away. Then his mum said ” What? Again? Can’t you let this car alone?!” So, from this sentence, I understood that it wasn’t the first time they passed through this street in this afternoon and that the boy went around the Model X. Then, the answer of the young boy was priceless to hear: “But mum, with its doors and the interior, it’s the coolest car in the world. A truly electric spaceship”.
Made me remember that when I was 12, my poster car in my room was a Lamborghini Countach! Times have changed, for most of the younger, their dream cars are not any more Porsche or BMW cars, but Tesla cars…

That’s cool – thanks for sharing!

Aftermarket product will probably handle that problem – if they sell enough.
Given the specs, they should have a hit here.. unless it’s crazy expensive.

95k for a midsize is pretty crazy expensive. It’s double the cost of the top of the range Tacoma TRD Pro for example. That said they presumably know that and are going with the luxury market.

True, but for that money, you get a sweet vehicle that gets over 400 miles of range despite the terrible aerodynamics. You’re paying for the 180kWh pack, and getting unprecedented range for such a large, blocky vehicle.

95K IS crazy expensive for sure. It will automatically be a low volume vehicle. But it may be a smart choise, at a small scale operation is a lot less expensive – then to go into high volume production from day one.
Should have made the headlights look like the Rivian logo – if they wanted to stand out in the crowd. . or incorporate the Rivian logo inside a more normal looking outer headlight.

If they succeed, and they have another model coming soon AND they both sell OK, AND they have a 40-50K model coming after that.. they may have a chanse.
A lot of huge companies will have several EVs ready by the release day of this truck. Non of them will have a truck I think – so they can use that to offer a product with no electrical competition. Specs looks solid, for it’s main customer group. I don’t see a customer buying this 95K truck to do that much work with it.

How is $95 K expensive? Their prices are very low, not high, you get advanced auto pilot capabilities unavailable with Tesla.

They’re expensive compared to an ICE equivalent vehicle. It’s not expensive for an EV per se, or for the kind of vehicle it actually is (as mentioned by others it’s more likely to cater towards the luxury SUV crowd – at the higher end of the price tag anyway).

I agree with you John D. I wish them all the best and hope something like this is released, with a longer bed, for a lower price in the near future.

$95K for the midsize and $120K for the LR? Pretty inexpensive compare to the X,I’m sure they’sd sell quite a few at those prices,and very advanced AP,perhaps they mean to charge more?Very exciting vehicles, the headlight will grow on people.

Probably to distinguish themself from others, when you see a BMW, you know it’s a BMW, whenyou see a GM … you know it’s not a BMW 🙂

Which others?

Yeah, I had the same reaction. The Specs are GREAT. The price is reasonable (especially for those specs).

But that design? Ugh. I’m sorry but for the Truck market they should probably make it look as bland & “normal truck”-ish as possible.

They are not going after the traditional truck crowd, but the high end luxury tech-bro 6figure salary crowd that likes to portray a rugged outdoorsy persona.

I think it’s great to see an EV startup not afraid to eschew tradition and put different-looking headlights on its SUT. Hopefully that distinctive look for the LED headlights — a design which I think is practical rather than ornamental — will help it stand out in the market, rather than being offputting to potential buyers.

Tesla headlights are the ONE thing the IIHS doesn’t like so naturally, Rivian came up with these cool Tron-like headlights that IIHS might actually approve of.

Yes, they are very unique and bright. I was impressed.

Given the less-than-good ratings that the IIHS gives to nearly all cars’ headlights (96 out of 100 tested!), perhaps Rivian is ahead of the curve in putting headlights on its vehicle which actually provide adequate illumination for driving at highway speed at night.

Of course this is pure speculation on my part, but perhaps in a few years, people will be praising Rivian for starting a new and safer trend in headlights, instead of complaining that they look different.


NHTSA/DOT regs haven’t been updated much since the days of sealed beam headlights, and certainly don’t help car makers prepare for the IIHS test.

The horizontal lights are all good – but the weird looking vertical once.. they should probably have been replace by a more normal looking one. . or incorporate the Rivian logo in the headlight. Should be easy enough with modern LED headlights.

Agreed. The headlights make it look like a toy.

Ron Swanson's Mustache

Those headlights are super rad!


There’s one in every crowd…

I agree. That is the #1 thing that bothered me as well. Looked at that and thought, “humm….not sure if I want to drive something that has these weird headlights”.

The more I look at them, the more I agree. Those headlights are very odd, actually ugly, and could potentially hurt sales.

Replying to myself, the headlights are kind of growing on me now. Maybe not elegant but certainly futuristic. And fashion and taste always seem to change course over time, so what the heck. Go Rivian!

Prolly to Shock FORD out of it’s do-nothing attitude?

I thought this as well when I first saw it. Its starting to grow on me though, as it seems it has for other people too. I think EVs are going to start pushing new styles, which may seem strange now, but at some point wont seem out of place.

You mean like the original LEAF pushed a new style?… 😛

Reminds me of Studabaker.

Ron Swanson's Mustache

Those headlights are fantastic! I love the texture that you can see in the closeup photos.

I love the headlights! They set the vehicle apart from you palloi of other vehicles and remind me of the bumper overriders that we used to have.

Very impressive, but why did they make it ugly?

I also don’t like the external look. It reminds me of the designs of 5 / 10 years old EV concept cars.

It looks really nice in person. Images don’t due it justice due to all the lines.

I believe you. But I think it’s more a matter of taste. I don’t say it’s ugly, far from that. It just doesn’t suit me on a styling point of view (I can’t explain why well in English). Either way it seems to be a really impressive machine.

I saw it in person and sat in it. I know it’s a matter of opinion, but I thought it looked outstanding. I would have never called it ugly and that was surely not the consensus at the events. Perhaps if you see it in person you’ll feel differently. However, we all have different taste.

Is this a concept or more a production model Steven?

Of course for a company that has zero dealerships, how it looks in person doesn’t really matter much.

Sure Daddy

Breitbart troll.

They had a board meeting about this topic. The “make it ugly” motion won by a very slim margin.

Jokes aside, we all know perfectly well that looks are subjective. Rivian doesn’t need everyone to like the design. They just need (let’s say) every 5th person to love it. If you read the comments here, you see that a significant percentage of people like it. Distinct look also helps to distinguish them from the crowd.

If only every fifth person can stand the looks, that means they have cut their potential market by five…

Color me skeptical they will get 230 miles of range on the highway at least out of 105 kWh. But, I would love to be proven wrong and wish them well.

You are doing something wrong if highway range is the most important thing on a pickup truck.

Well, if it’s an off-road and camping vehicle, range becomes extremely important.

Yep. And range seems to surely not be an issue with this truck or the SUV. Highly efficient. Huge battery packs. Fast charging. Extremely high-tech temperature management. Let’s hope they can pull it all off.

Roughly 2.2 mi/kwh –not sure when that became highly efficient?

…and a replacement pack for the 180 kwh model would likely run north of $60,000. Selling the base model vehicle for nearly the same money ? — give me a break.

160kw charging rate — do they have some new battery tech, .. are they way out in front of Tesla? Lately we’ve seen Tesla , Nissan and probably others get slowed down on charging to prolong battery life.

/if they can get it built, I’m sure there will be some California buyers for this “electric raptor” — for the performance, the novelty, and the green smug points. But it ain’t going to be practical, and it ain’t going to be 60k.

I think he compares it with conventional pickup truck.

Base model is 105 kwh not 180 😉 and why you think that their price will be 333$ per kwh?

160kw charging rate for 135kwh pack is roughly the same as Teslas 120kw/100kwh. No magic tech needed. 😉

But honestly i’m also skeptical about announced pricing. We will see. 🙂

There’s somewhere in the neighborhood of a shltload of articles here and elsewhere about Tesla throttling supercharger rates to preserve the battery. Also about too many supercharging sessions shortening the battery life. Have you not seen?

I think you’re exaggerating the issue. Tesla only slightly reduces the highest/fastest charging speed on its cars which have had a large number of Supercharging sessions. After the first few minutes of charging of a near-empty pack, when the charge rate would be reduced anyway because the battery pack is heating up, it’s not throttled anymore. Charging a Tesla battery pack which isn’t nearly exhausted won’t be throttled, either.

Yeah, cause 1.18C charging sure is speedy. Must be some kinda new battery tech to pull that off. /S

$333 per kWh is not that bad. Tesla’s range upgrades cost $360-$450 per kWh.

Why would they need some new battery tech? Charging a 180KWh battery at 160KW is not even the 1C rate that any old lithium cell can handle.

Actually, old lithium cells (back in the nineties / early naughts) never charged at 1 C…

If base version is around 100KWh, I don’t think it will be enough.

I keep waiting for the next Workhorse effort, that will actually lead to an extended range PHEV truck. I can see 60-100KWh with an engine, but not without. Maybe 180KWh without, but $$? As others say, camping and recreation place high, off the path, demands on battery size.

WKHS sits at 88 cents, per share, since they didn’t deliver. A well done PHEV truck, that takes car of daily miles, would be a hot, practical, ticket. My opinion.

Yep, .. I don’t see a BEV pickup working out (Schwarzenegger might drive one,…. but Joe-upper-middle-class-sixpackof-IPA won’t). Highway/towing range is too great an obstacle for current battery tech.

The rumor mill says Ford has a PHEV f150 on the way.

Yes, they are doing that to their entire future lineup because they are giving up on cars except for the Focus. They need major electrification efforts in order to keep their fleet average mpg up.

Giving up on cars — GM is doing the same. All the plant closures/layoffs were basically on the car side. Whatever was on the pickup/SUV side will likely get moved to Mexico.

MPG requirements for trucks are far weaker than for cars. Some studies suggested CAFE will encourage more big cars, not small ones.

Ron Swanson's Mustache

I want to believe.

I would hope they will follow a Tesla example, but for the outdoors adventurers, and build charging stations near where people want to go to play. Ski/bike resorts, beaches, mountain trail heads, National and State Parks, etc.

They are already working on branded charging infrastructure in select areas like national parks, ski resorts, Joshua Tree, Lake Tahoe, etc. By the time these vehicles arrive, hopefully manufacturers’ won’t have to worry about providing their own widespread charging infrastructure, just like automaker didn’t have to build out a network of gas stations. However, at least initially, branded charging stations in select areas only makes sense.

Lot’s of campgrounds with 240 volt 50 amp outlets. That’s generally fast enough for me.

The sort of people this truck is “aimed” at don’t generally stay in big RV parks. They’ll be on a beach somewhere, or in the middle of Grand Staircase Escalante, with the local toilet being either a long drop or a bag…

Or they’ll be taking the kids too soccer practice.

It’s extremely important, especially when looking at that sort of range. For any off road capable vehicle you still need to get to the location you’re off roading for starters. Then if you’re overlanding off road a significant distance you need to consider range requirements there as well (and something like half the highway efficiency is a safe sort of bet for an ICE, not sure if it’s the same penalty with electric as transmission gearing doesn’t come in to play as much.)

With the 180kWh pack available range will be in the same ballpark as the ICE versions, so not much of an issue there, if you can afford the extra $20k,

230 miles seems about right for the kind of vehicle it is though. It’s around two thirds of the range of the X, which for an inherently less efficient machine (i.e. because of the shape) is pretty good.

You must not have a working ranch.

The datasheet has the usual problem: No mention about the testing cycle for the range. They probably picked the one that gives the highest number, not the one that is closest to realistic driving. Everybody does that and publications do not care to ask them to disclose their metrics.

It was all real-world testing. They used the 400+, 230+ etc because they expect it to be better. A 180-kWh battery with 400 miles makes sense.

Call me skeptical until I see a source

I’d still expect a small clarification on their part, like “estimated EPA test cycle combined range” .
A single number is still meaningless, esp. for a pickup truck which has a wide range of possible uses… How is it when towing, for example?

It will come. We often don’t get those numbers until near delivery time. This is still a few years out.

As an S owner, I think this is feasible if the air suspension lowers and the tires don’t add too much rolling resistance. A 100 kWh S gets 330 miles or so and an X around 290 miles. This truck with a 105 kWh pack should be able to get more than 200 miles and 230 sounds achievable.

Meh…it is possible. Model 3 gets more than that with far less. Yes, the aerodynamics of this are terrible, the testing regimes are actually done at relatively low speeds. So it could get that rating with the EPA rating but real live may be much lower when driving at 70 mph.

Well, on long Ontario to Florida Road Trips, I frequently get passed 2-3 times along the way, by specific Pickup & Boat Combo’s, since I am set on Cruise Cintrol, at 65 or whatever the posted speed is, and the Pickup/Boat Combos are Hauling at 80! They pass, need gas, pull off and fill (wherin I keep going on by), and jump back on the road Hauling along at 80 again, and pass me again! Like I said, this often happens 2 or 3 times, over a days driving, including if I take a Meal Stop!

In the text it says 11 000 pounds and in the spec. sheet 5 000 kg.

11,000 lbs. is 5,000 kg

Stating the obvious…

Not obvious enough for “Do Not Read Between The Lines”

Lol this makes Model X look pretty pathetic 😀

Wait till you see the SUV.

I guess we should all wait until it actually exists on the road and is actually for sale for the stated price. Color me sceptical. I certainly have given up over the years comparing non-production EVs with existing ones.

Agreed for sure. But they certainly have all their ducks in a row after all these years, including a massive and working production facility and lots of capital. I feel they did this right, unlike companies like Faraday and Lucid. No early announcements, took their time, etc. We shall see!

Faraday and lucid were never about manufacturing cars in America. They were purely about getting the technology coming out of silicon valley and taking it back to China.

The W-15 was promised at near the same price (~60k) and many doubting Workhorse were proven correct. That had fewer batteries, but you’d have to add the cost of an engine.

I’m sure there is the use case for a 100KWh BEV truck, or maybe they carve a niche in the upper end for the bigger batteries. My cycnicism comes from trailering at 7mpg, and what that would do to 300KWh, let alone 100. The “daily use” versus “weekender” needs differ starkly from that trip to Grandma’s.

Workhorse is set up for low-volume production, and its W-15 was aimed primarily at the commercial market. That inevitably leads to higher prices.

Rivian is aiming for a true mass production vehicle, and should benefit from economy of scale on its costs and prices. At least, I hope so!

I hope we can give Rivian a chance to prove itself, rather than prematurely concluding they can’t deliver on the specs and figures provided here. And if the specs do prove to be a bit too optimistic, well let’s remember that Tesla originally touted the Model S85 as a “300 mile” EV, even persisting in that claim for a few years after the EPA gave it a range rating of 265 miles.

Rivian doesn’t have to be perfect; it just has to be competitive.

Go Rivian!

The other thing is they also knew well enough they needed to change gears from where they started in Florida, that says something.

I think these people are right where they need to be on this. Wishing them the best !

Actually, I was wondering about the “lots of capital” part.

Crunchbase says they’ve had a total of ~$201M investment so far. Don’t know how much of that they’ve spent yet, but at 600 people, their monthly salary costs (even if most of it is in lower CoL states, not California) would still need to be pretty high — average annual employer salary cost in the Midwest is $75K/year (and presumably most of their current workers are R&D, not the eventual assembly line workers, so average is probably rather higher), so we’re talking about $45M/year, or $3.75M/month, at least.
They’re not going to see appreciable income (I’m discounting refundable $1K deposits) until 12-18 months from now, so they’re clearly going to need more cash, probably a lot more.

Components alone, esp. the batteries are going to be expensive, and I can’t see any supplier fronting large battery packs on credit.

It’s not going to be easy. That’s for sure. But, of all the startups out there, I feel they have the best chance of succeeding. I also believe the company has gone about the process in a respectable manner.

Best, I agree; but is that good enough?… Let’s hope so — but I’m not counting on it.

A startup auto maker that is aiming for mass production needs a minimum of maybe $1.5-2 billion, not mere hundreds of millions, in funding. If Rivian has gotten as far as it has, including buying an abandoned auto assembly plant as well as producing a pretty compelling production-quality prototype and pay salaries for executives and engineers for some years, all for no more than ~$201 million, then I’d say they are being pretty frugal with their expenditures… which is another sign of a well-managed company.

Where’s there SUV

Why egg on an anti Tesla troll? Don’t you have enough of those?

Haven’t you noticed a very sharp drop in anti-Tesla trolling, after Tesla proved it could deliver a solid profit in a quarter, thus emphatically disproving the #1 claim of Tesla bashers; the claim that Tesla would never be profitable?

With much less motive to short-sell TSLA, there is much less motive to post anti-Tesla FÜD.

Very few serial Tesla bashers are ordinary trolls. The overwhelming majority are motivated by greed, and ignoring them will not cause them to disappear.

The Model X for all intents and purposes is a decent looking mini-van and this truck is … well … a truck. Apples and oranges.

I see some comments which make a certain Tesla basher here look pretty pathetic. 🙄

You have to remember that the X was never intended as an offroad vehicle. It was shamelessly promoted as the soccer mom vehicle. It was all through Musk’s interviews and Tesla’s early promotional literature. Musk set out to build a roomier, more accessable Q7 with acceleration to beat a 911. And, that’s exactly what they did.

Having followed Tesla closely since 2008, I never had the impression that the X would have any sort of truck-like abilities, whether in offroading or long-range hauling. It’s a suburban family vehicle, plain and simple.

Well said! The Rivian RT1 is aimed a very different market than the Tesla Model X.

One of the ways Rivian is showing it’s a smartly run company is by not competing for the same market segments as Tesla is currently serving.


My thought on the 2018 Leaf is that Nissan did the same thing: get outta the way of the 3 freight train by making it cheaper at all costs. I doubt the 60kWh will do well at $36k when the 3 hits $40k in <6 months.

The Y is going to ravage cars like the IPace, EQC, iX3, etc. I guess it doesn't matter to those automakers, but Rivian chose its target audience well.

You mean as pathetic as your drooling crap comments you keep posting here?

Yeah, the same way a main battle tank makes any car look “pathetic”… Let’s all drive MBTs!

What are normal prices for pickup trucks in the US? Would love it if someone familiar with the matter would give some examples.

They can range anywhere from $28-60k, depending on what you get. Most seem to average around $48k though.

A premium pickup truck in the U.S., upper trim would price out similarly. $70K. Chevy Silverado 1500, Sierra 1500, and Ram 1500 top-tier is closer to $60k. You can spend well over $45k on a compact Honda Ridgeline. So, for an all-electric truck, it’s not ridiculously priced.


Ridge line is the crappier truck

Tacoma TRD Pro tops out at $45k as well, which isn’t a crappy truck.

factor in the fuel savings, which could easily be more than $200/month, and it’s already competitive.

….the juice isn’t free….certainly not 180kw worth… one thing that wold be nice, that is a lot of juice sitting in a driveway doing nothing… power that could run a home for weeks… thinking powerwall here.

Correct, but “the juice” is very roughly 1/3 the price of gas.

That “1/3 the price of gas”, depends a lot on when and where said juice is purchased. The variability can easily bring those 1/3 numbers a little closer to, 1/2 the price of gas, in certain “on the road” DC fastcharging scenarios.

And in other areas it may be 1/5 the price of gas, especially where there’s a night-time price differential and the plug-in EV is charged at night.

Why cherry-pick the highest electricity prices? What does that prove, other than the fact that there are outlier figures?

Hopefully they have a vehicle-to-home capability so the truck can act as a power supply in case of outages.

We have really cheap and green juice in Washington state. Sure makes driving electric economical.

I like the looks of the Rivian better than Tesla’s concept. I especially like the fact that it has a frunk. $68,000 before tax credit for base model. They plan on selling the bigger battery with all bells and whistles first. So I’m guessing we’re looking at over $100,000 for the early adopters.

We didn’t get a price on the top-of-the-line model. However, we were told that they will be offering a bare-bones truck with the largest battery pack. Bare bones for this truck is like super-luxury for most of today’s trucks. But, essentially, this means that people will be able to get the longest range, largest battery pack, with the most basic interior and options offered, in order to get the price down for those that don’t need the extras. We found this very compelling and intelligent. Obviously, it will still have all the watertight storage options, sophisticated suspension, etc.

This will no doubt be cost competitive with the highest end luxury trucks since they are overpriced.
The challenge will be the middle of the full size segment (which is by far the highest volume). Here you can get a very capable and pleasantly equipped truck for less than $50k (transaction price, not MSRP). $25k buys alot of gas and oil changes, in a well understood, low risk product with tons of aftermarket accessories. That will be a tougher sell.

Not any different than an EV sedan compared to an ICE. You can get a Honda Civic or Mazda 3 dirt cheap. And, some rivals are even cheaper. You won’t find a decent competing ICE sedan with a price that’s even close. So, $60k for an EV pickup truck is pretty respectable for sure.

Except it’s 69k. Tax credit for rich people trucks in 2022 is hardly a slam dunk.

More than the price, it makes gas trucks look Obsolete.
Literally Obsolete.
This will be a shock to the industry.

Rex, not yet. Too expensive, with too little workability ( too small cargo and tow ). But, like MS, good start.

I don’t understand the downvotes here. This truck is fantastic for suburbanites hauling bags of mulch from the store, but it’s too expensive for country folk and not functional for people who do work. I believe that it’s a great start and want it to succeed, because it’s the only way that we’re going to get the big guys to put some effort in.

Me either. This is a great start with decent penetration potential.
In a couple years, they can add a 7′ box version and push much further into the market.


Average pickup MSRP is $45k.

I know a few coworkers that spent $65k on trucks. This is within the ballpark for the specs it’s offering.

Another insight into the US truck market is the used truck market for older trucks with similar towing capacities, and a fraction of the power.

A 10-15 year old Duramax diesel with 120K-150K miles in good shape can easily go for $20K+ these days. Used truck prices are pushing up new truck prices, and vice-versa.

Presumably that’s why all the used Canadian trucks are going south. Up here something like that would be lucky to get $10-15k (Canadian).

You can get an F-150 Platinum with all the bells and whistles, Fx4 package, max towing package, 4-door, 6.5′ bed, etc., for just under $69k, but that’s pretty much as far as trucks go in the US.


Or an F150 Raptor. They go even higher in price.

Forgot about checking the Raptor variants… duh…

For some strange reason, I couldn’t price out a Raptor on Ford’s website when I just tried?? Not sure why.

The 2019’s top out at around $80k and they generally sell for MSRP, at least in the US.

I don’t get that datasheet. The curb weight is 2670 kg for all three options, no matter if the battery is 105 kWh or 180 kWh.

That seems not accurate, as the difference of 75 kWh is probably 400 kg or more, so which one is 2670 kg?

Leaving only 800 kg load capacity is not much for a pickup truck.

I read that chart as the middle battery option is 2670 kg. No mentioning about weight of the smaller or larger battery vehicles.

At a guess the larger battery will be around the 3000kg mark, leaving it with around 580kg of payload (or around 1300lb). The latter is a little on the light side for a full size, but it’s not far off (a fully loaded full size will have around 1500lb of payload, whereas a mid level will have around 1700-1900lb.

It’s got the payload of a full size, in a midsize package due to the increased GVWR, which is a bit more than the older Full size half ton trucks had (newer ones have a GVWR of around 300kg less, unless you get the HD Payload packages).

— edit

Ouch. I would have thought better. I commented earlier before reading the specs. I really did expect more out of this.

What would you want to see better?

Better towing and cargo. This price is a low end of diesel f350, and this obviously outperforms diesel in terms of torque. But Ford built the 350 to actually be useful. Those boys are from McLaren, so are pushing speed and image, but really lost the ability on payload. Right now, this vehicle is best suited to a rich Texan goat roper than to actually being used in the field.

BTW, glad to hear that you are there. Personally, I think the truck looks interesting, just disappointed in performance. BTW, did the go with CCS plug? I’m guessing so, but wish they would cut deal with Tesla.

I assume 11,000 lb towing is not enough for you?

6 tonnes is what a starter f150 does. And f350 super duty that costs about 60-70k, towes 10+ tonnes. With a 5th wheel , f350 will take just under 14 tonnes.

Yet, rivian blows the door off f350 diesel in terms of torque.

My heavy duty towing days are over. But, yes, I grew in rural area and we hauled racing sailboats, and small motorboats, along with 6-8 horse trailers as well as loads of fence posts, and building material ( we built a 7500 SQ foot house back in the 70-80s ).

So, I understand how many truck owners who fork out 60K, will want it to work. Otoh, this is ideal for Rich Texan goat ropers.

I think it is obvious this is is targeted towards different users than 5th wheel users (a very small percentage of pickup drivers).

Actually, many F150’s have much lower than 6 ton (12,000 lb) towing capacity. It is only select configurations of F150’s that tow that much. Some are less than half that, at less than 3 ton towing capacity. Unfortunately, most of the major truck makers advertise their max configuration, and then let people assume it applies to many more trucks than they actually apply to. In reality, you have to know your EXACT configuration to know your towing capacity.

Even then, you have to look at the notes at the bottom and understand that an equalizing hitch is needed for max numbers:


The notion that they are going to have a GCWR approaching 17,000 pounds is laughable. And even more laughable would be the outcome of the ‘truck’ towing 11,000 pounds up a grade in the summer.

If the truck is ever built, SAE numbers are going to be in Honda Ridgeline territory, not F150 in max-tow configuration territory.

Not with a 180-kWh battery pack. It will have immense power and torque. It should be able to tow ten times that up a grade, but it won’t be rated for that, just like the Tesla Model X. It should be “able” to easily tow much more than an F-150 with 4 147kW motors, 14,000 Nm torque, and the massive battery.

Power (ie launch and acceleration) is 1 of 5 main areas that determine towing capability. Cooling/temperature is another, and this truck is going to fail miserably.

Not true if they live up to their claims. The have multiple patents on very high-level battery cooling technology, and temperature management in general, so much so that they went as far as to say that ambient temp will have very marginal impact on range. It’s a proprietary system that they spent a great deal of their time on before launch. The goal was to make a system that is unaffected by temps, at least to a degree that has never been accomplished before. It was one of the top priorities. I don’t know how you could have any clue that it will fail miserably since you know nothing about the system. While some EVs struggle with temps, others have proven that it’s not an issue. Hopefully, this truck will prove naysayers wrong.

truckguy is thinking of an ICE vehicle. BEVs don’t care about elevation because they don’t require oxygen from the environment to function.

BEVs output their max torque from 1rpm through the first few thousand rpms (or more, depending on specific design variants). A BEV like those of Tesla and Rivian can tow everything short of a mountain, absent licensing regulations and frame integrity.

Guess what the production vehicle current record holder is for towing something? It’s the Porsche Cayenne ICE which pulled a far bigger aircraft than the Model X.


Yes, EV torque is impressive, but it’s not unprecedented or really that much different to ICE vehicles in the real world.

Will this tow 11,000 lb better than a 900ft lb Diesel F350? Or even a 450 ft lb Ecoboost? In the real world I doubt there would be much difference for the majority of people in the vast majority of situations. It’s not going to overheat but at the same time all three trucks pulling the same load would probably get to the same end point at the same time (traffic allowing). The difference would be that the cost of energy would be cheaper for the EV, then the F350 and then the Ecoboost.

The whole torque debate is largely a game of Top Trumps (in the ICE truck world as well as the EV world). It’s the “mines bigger than yours” of the car world.

You don’t have a clue what you are talking about. The truck is going to weigh around 7,000 pounds at SAE testing and then add the 11,000 pound trailer, 18,000 gross combined weight. That is more than any max-towing 1/2 ton and clearly into 3/4 ton territory. Now try and pass the SAE climbing test (11 miles uphill at 7% grade in 100 degree heat with the AC on full) and it’s going to fail miserably. The Tesla Model X P90D towing tests that Edmunds did made a laughing stock of Tesla’s 5,000 pound towing claim – even towing 1,300 pounds uphill at 50mph with the battery off bleeds the battery so fast it’s laughable.


This one? That’s true, but is actually said the towing was effortless – no overheating, which was your claim.

Sure, there are issues with towing with an EV, the range loss and charge time being one, but that’s not to do with heat issues.

I don’t necessarily disagree with your overall claim however – EV’s have a long way to go before they become as useful for long distance towing as ICE vehicles, no matter their tow capacity. That will in part be solved by larger batteries (which is one of the reasons the 180kWh batter option is probably the only realistic option for many people who buy a truck).

truckguy — There is a long history of people underestimating the abilities of EV’s, dating back to the “glorified golfcart” era.

If you successfully predicted before 2010 that Tesla would build a performance version of the Model S that would be a 5-door 5+2 seat full size sedan that does 0-60 in less than 3 seconds, then I might value your opinion.

Most likely, you are just the next guy in the long line of folks who simply underestimate EV drivetrains.

Hint: Electric motors provide propulsion to some of the largest vehicles in the world, including this BelAZ 75710 that can transport more than 500 metric tons of material using four electric motors.


Well, that’s not battery-powered, though… While there are some pretty large battery-powered haulers too, not quite in the ~400 t class just yet IIRC?

In terms of non-battery electric propulsion, there are electric or railroad locomotives with ~10,000 kW, capable of towing thousands of tonnes; and diesel-electric or turbo-electric cruise ships / ocean liners with >80,000 kW…

In other words, this targets the 80% of pickups that will never hit the 11,000 lb tow capacity. Where I live it’s exceedingly rare to see a pickup towing *anything* and that tow rating is plenty.

“…this vehicle is best suited to a rich Texan goat roper than to actually being used in the field.”

Or rather, it’s best suited to a “suburban cowboy” who will never use it to haul or tow anything heavy, and will never drive it offroad.

That is precisely where EV makers should enter the “passenger truck” market. Just like Tesla targeting the “premium large sedan” market with the Model S, Rivian is being smart in aiming at the upper segment of the market, where a more expensive vehicle can compete.

If Rivian had tried to deliver a truck with a full-sized pickup bed and hauling/ towing capacity equivalent to an F150 pickup, it would have had to price it so high that almost nobody would buy it.

Sorry you don’t like it, but this is a smart business strategy on the part of Rivian. More practical pickups can come later, as EV tech continues to improve.

Go Rivian!

I did not say I did not like it. I’m just disappointed that they did not go after the work side. The torque on that is what I expected. But had they put in a stronger frame they could have taken this to 7.5-10 tonnes.

Regardless, as I said earlier, this will lead to EVs being the main new sales in about 2-3 years.

Seriously, windbourne? What on earth led you to believe that Rivian was coming out with something to compete with an F350??? You have some very unrealistic expectations of not only the company, but also the technology.

Holy crap, this is an amazing vehicle.

Sure is. And with the tailgate open, a 4×8 sheet of plywood fits. Also, due to the frunk and gear tunnel, there’s no need for a lockbox in the bed, and all your extra stuff and tools can go in the cargo areas, so that leaves the bed open for hauling. Additionally, every cargo compartment is covered, lockable, and watertight.

What is gear tunnel. BTW, does the weight of tools in the frunk, gear tunnel, etc count against cargo? They only have .8t for cargo. If tools are considered like humans, then cargo just got better.

. . ? Does the passengers not count?
In Norway, it is the over all weight that is meassured. So, if the driver and the 4 passengers weigh 100kg each – there would be 300kg left for cargo.

That is the main problem for campers, close to the 3500kg limit.
With passengers, family luggage and full fuel/water tank, they will be over the limit.

Yes, passengers and usually the driver (although the driver is a tricky subject as it varies) count in the payload, so with a driver and three passengers you will need to remove up to 300kg off of the 800kg payload, then any luggage they have. That’s the same with any ICE pickup too though.

For a North American midsize/full size truck the payload is reasonable. For an international truck (Hilux etc) it’s a bit low, but then they’re a different market.

There should be ratings for both curb weight and GVW (Gross Vehicle Weight). Looks like GVW is the figure you’re looking for.

Absolutely none of these figures are EU ratings. These are all SAE ratings, and they are based upon trucks operating at up to 75 MPH fully loaded, and 65 MPH towing. EU ratings are based on 100 MPH (62 MPH) and are based on completely different test procedures.

Nix…. Ooops! “EU ratings are based on 100 MPH (62 MPH)”, should likely have been posted as ‘EU ratings are based on 100 KPH (62 MPH)’, Right?

Woops! Yes, my bad!! Thanks for the correction!

Ron Swanson's Mustache

The article at electrek has pictures of the gear tunnel. Basically it’s a discrete lockable compartment accessible from the exterior of the vehicle that runs the width of the truck. It sits behind the passenger compartment and in front of the bed.

We have pics here in the gallery as well. Rivian keeps adding images to an FTP site and a Dropbox and sending more pics. Some are duplicates, etc. Hard to keep up. We were the first out with the embargoed article and we have been trying to add as they come in.


Kinda like the side boxes on a 18 wheeler, mine goes all the way across like that on my Volvo. Also accessible from the top from the inside of the sleeper.

That is awesome for fishing rods – too fragile to just through in the back with other sh1t that slides around

That looks useful.

I really liked the seat and the step. But, I can totally see using that space for a plethora of things.

I can see the aftermarket offering rollout-drawers to fit in that space.

For sure. They definitely did their homework. One would hope so since they’ve been at this since 2009. I appreciate how methodical it has been and the fact that we haven’t been riddled with ridiculous announcements and false promises for 9 years.

What is a gear tunnel?

A picture is worth a thousand words. Here’s a publicity photo of the gear tunnel on Rivian’s SUT:


Hold on. With a bed length of only 1.4m, the only way a sheet fits is if over the top of the gate, or if gate down. Not as big of a deal for sheets (plywood, particle board, sheet rock, etc ), but studs are different. Hard to lock those in place, unless maybe they have strong fabric type Gate, or their gate slids out .

Yeah, it’s a bit of an odd comment. In reality the bed is around the same length as a midsize shortbed (4ft 6″), but around a foot shorter than most crew cab shortbeds (5ft 6″), and two foot shorter than an extended cab short bed (6 ft 6″). On all of the above vehicles they also gain an extra two foot with the tailgate down.

Steven said “with the tailgate down”. That means open.

But this isn’t the truck you want for hauling building materials on a daily or even weekly basis. It’s not aimed at that market.

Yea, but I can’t see people buying a work truck that is appointed for the luxury segment either. That’s not what this truck is marketed for. It’s very high-end. Most people don’t buy the $70,000+ top-of-the-line F-150 with leather and all the extras to use for hauling dirt and debris or to add as part of a construction fleet.

Actually, you would be surprised how many ppl DO buy trucks that haul around things and still go symphony at night. The fact that it has outlets in the bed shows it is for doing work.

True. I totally see and believe that. I just meant that this seems to be more geared to the crowd that buys a Land Rover or G-Class or people with the absolute top-of-the-line F-150 or Ram with no option unchecked. Fortunately, it still allows for the function, but after being inside it and getting a feel for it and the company’s marketing, surveys, model, and vision, it is supposed to appeal to what they call the “Patagonia, Land’s End, REI, LL Bean, North Face type crowd.” It’s really hard to explain here in text, but they did a whole presentation about where cars fit in a four-way continuum. They talked a lot about hikers, bikers, skiers, fisherman, hunters, campers. People that do a lot of road trips to national parks and are all about destinations like Joshua Tree and Lake Tahoe, etc. Interesting stuff for sure and at least worth sharing, even if it doesn’t work out quite like that.

I like their marketing approach,I’m certain various branches of the military as well as police units would like this vehicle.

The chest-beating over Long bed vs. Short bed has been going on since the 1950’s, with all the same arguments about sheets of plywood and 2X4’s.

And yet the 4 door shortbed has grown to be one of the most popular combinations in all sizes of trucks. Everything from Toyota Tacoma’s, to Chevy Colorado’s, to F250’s, tons of people still by shortbeds.

The plywood/2X4 conundrum is easily solved with a bed extender box in the ICE truck world. Sure, it isn’t a complete replacement for a longbed, but it works for a ton of truck owners. I’m not sure why it would be a problem with this truck when the entire truck world has already solved that problem for ICE vehicles.

Insisting they solve an age-old ICE truck debate between longbed vs. shortbed with their first truck seems silly. They can always put out more cab/bed combinations later.

The 4.5×4.5 foot bed is ridiculous small. I have an F-250 with a 8 foot bed and its really handy at times. I can physically fit 2.5 yard of mulch (its light) if its stacked high (driving it short distance at very low speed so the overstacked load doesn’t blow out – could tarp it) and all the preasure treated 4x4s that fit in the bed (with 10 footers sticking out) which I have also done and still needed multiple trips. A contractor (which I am not, just handy homeowner) would have to buy a trailer and bring the trailer to the lumber yard or if landscaping, tow a trailer. A Rivan plus trailer would work though a bit long for a quick run to the lumber yard and the turning around problem. A dump trailer would be great when taking yard waste to be recyled. I also own a Leaf (named Lil Sparky). OK – so the point is some people really do want and/or need a large truck bed.

So you would need two trips traveling a short distance at low speed to carry 2.5 yards of mulch. *shrug*

You can carry 8 footers sticking out the 7 foot bed+tailgate the same as you carry 10 footers sticking out. There is always a size (12 footer, 16 footer, 20 foot engineered beam, etc) where you should use a trailer instead no matter your truck size. *shrug*

I’m not saying that larger truck beds are useless. They serve their purpose. But people have been debating long vs. short for a long long time, and whatever the argument for buying a long bed for some people, lots of other folks go ahead and buy short bed trucks and survive just fine with them.

There is plenty of market for short beds, even if it isn’t what every single truck buyer wants. Trying to resolve the ancient long v. short debate so it makes everyone happy as a pre-condition to building their first truck isn’t going to happen. They have to start somewhere.

What I’d be interested in knowing is “why such a short bed”, or more precisely, why such a long hood? With a more conventional (let alone EV style front) they would have been able to move the entire cab forward and provide a bigger bed. At a guess it’s a mix of aerodynamics and the fact a longer hood means more frunk space?

I think it’s an intentional marketing strategy, discouraging sales to people who want to use a truck for hauling heavy loads on a regular basis. Hauling a load will cut down on this BEV’s range quite a bit, so Rivian is aiming sales at those who want a truck more for its looks than its hauling ability.

Just my guess, of course.

At 400 Watts per each of 3 outlets, that won’t run a hand held Circular Saw, Iron, or a Toaster, let alone a Hair Dryer when Camping! What kind of Power Tools are you thinking of?

A 2 kW (120V x 20A) outlet, might serve up power for a Work Tool, but 400 Watts? Don’t Think So! Even a 15 Amp x 120 Volt Plug can deal with most light tools, 1 by 1, but 20 Amps give some margin when running a 100 Foot Long Extension Cord!

I missed that. So it has the same wattage as a normal ICE truck for running 110v tools (but obviously for longer). I guess the inverter used is the limiting factor?


That’s what I said, too, in other comments… altho perhaps not as well as you said it. 🙂

I missed that, hence my comment.

Those are DAMN GOOD POINTS about the additional storage capacity from the frunk & gear tunnel.

it is 5,000 kg tow rating (11,000 lb).

Go Rivian! Wishing them much success.

For sure. Looks great. Rivian, do you want a soon-to-be-shuttered factory in Oshawa? It currently builds trucks and the workers there would love to help. 🙂

I doubt that gm, Ford, or chrsyler will sell any plants to Tesla or rivian, but will likely sell 1 to a Chinese company with 3-5 years.

Well, I agree with you, not because they wouldn’t sell to Tesla or Rivian, because Tesla and Rivian have no interest. They will sell to whoever offers money.

You think that Tesla has no interest in another GF in America? U are dead wrong.

Eventually, sure, Tesla will likely buy or build another, probably either in the Detroit area or in the deep South.

But it’s not part of Tesla’s current plans.

Oshawa, Ontario may come up for Sale in just over a year, after they Close that one! “No More Camaro’s For You!”

They already have a factory.

Sounds impressive. I’ll need to see the truck in the metal before passing judgement on the front end styling and interior. I like the profile and rear 3 quarters view though.

Yes it has a bit weird facia. But the specs points to a solid start from a young company, i wish them well!
The electric pickup disruption is surely coming, hopefully Rivian will be able to mass produce the weichle in a few years
Wonder what specs we can expect from Tesla and others?

Well, one thing is for sure, Elon or His Pickup Truck Team of Designers, will definitely be noticing this, and seeing what they can do to make sure they didn’t miss some of the things Rivian sees as winners, for the Tesla Design!

We also don’t know how much feedback they got, in all the various channels, including snail mail, as to Elons request for input for Their PICKUP!

No doubt, the Earliest we will likely see a Tesla Pickup Reveal, is tagged onto the Model Y Reveal, but, I hope they make it a Separate Event, hold it at a suitable place to Demo the Capabilities, and do it in Daylight!

We can expect Tesla to do better with aerodynamics.

But Rivian certainly has made some innovative design choices for this SUT; for example, the pass-thru storage tunnel and the headlights. One area where Tesla is as bad as other auto makers is with its IIHS ratings for headlights. Perhaps Tesla would do well in looking closely at Rivian’s headlight design… contrary to all the negative comments here. Safety is more important than style!

Sorry but it’s not close to the first pickup by over 120yrs. Even more recent E 10s, E Rangers and many other brands. I’m working with a 1990 Solectria E-10 pickup now converting it from lead to lithium.
The first things EVs were used for is delivery pickups. In fact they lasted into and passed WW2.
I do like what Rivian is doing but they are not the first.

First production-level pure-electric truck to be produced in the U.S. for the masses.

How about the first THIS century?

It’s 11,000 lbs./5000 kg. And remember, it’s a premium truck. Doesn’t really compete with base model ICE pickup trucks, but rather the loaded, off-road, top-tier trims. I honestly thought after seeing it that it would be over $100,000 due to everything it offers. Tesla’s most inexpensive vehicles sit at $50-60k or more. Dial that up to a pickup truck and 3-row SUV and I was surprised to see the pricing actually. Not that I could afford it, but still surprised.

Yeah this is affordable for upscale truck market

Do Not Read Between The Lines

Sorry, my mistake. That’s great to see.

But still, I think that excitement should be tempered: it’s _minimum_ $68k in _2021_. At this point we know that high-end premium electric will work. The challenge is getting low-end premium, near-premium and mainstream.

What’s the size of the global premium pick-up and large SUV market?

I believe they’re only planning on producing 50,000 a year by 2025 so demand isn’t going to be a problem for their production schedule!

A fully specced out full size will max out at around $75k, but they are not really positioning this as one of these.

The sort of ICE vehicle most people interested in an “Electric Adventure Vehicles” would be the Tacoma TRD Pro, which maxes out at $45k.

The towing capacity does confuse things a little, and does mean it’s dabbling in the full size category, but if you’re towing >7,000lb then you’re probably going to go straight for the 180kWh version, which is $90k. The 180kWh version will probably never be able to tow 11,000lb in real life however, as it would probably require an extremely light driver with nothing else in the truck to not be over GVWR with even the bare minimum tongue weight you’d want to have with a trailer of that size.

It looks like a great vehicle, don’t get me wrong, but it’s on the expensive side compared to it’s competition. It’s nice to see it’s not exorbitantly expensive though as you say and bodes well for the future!

I, too, am pleasantly surprised at the lower-than-expected MSRP of $61,500. I figured it would be in the $75k-100k range. Of course that’s with only a 105 kWh battery pack, but it’s great that they’ve created such a wide range in ranges 😉 with the three battery sizes. That will also help Rivian capture the largest market with this SUT.

Go Rivian!

Yep, well-priced considering, and very impressive on all fronts.

Ugly as sin. Here is my issue with so many EVs, why do they look like they’re trying to hard to scream “Look at me, Im an EV”? Why is it so hard to make something that looks like a normal vehicle inside and out? Lastly I know what the big question is, says 400mi range, whats the range when towing?

Have you seen the recent crop of Ford and GM/Chevy pickups with their “Hey! Look at me, over here, please!??” front ends?
Talk about over compensating😄

Back end of a RAM as well. Why would anyone want RAM on the part of their vehicle they’re probably most likely to get hit?

LOL! That’s why they used to put the “Dodge” name on the tailgate, and the “Ram” name on the dashboard. That way if someone was coming at you from behind, they knew to dodge you, and if you were driving, you knew to ram other cars….. *Evil Grin*

The Dodge places a Readable Instruction on the Tailgate, for Semi Drivers, as a Hint, for what to do, when the PU Driver Break Checks the Semi!

Yeah it’s the headlights but besides that it’s solid

That greatly depends on your elevation change. Maybe 650mi+ if all down hill, maybe 360-380 on level ground, and probably less than 200 if going all uphill. If you want something that looks like a boring old gasmobile then be a Luddite and stick with boring old gasmobiles.

With a 400 mile range towing something relatively small (i.e. not the 11,000 lb, but closer to 3,000-5,000) you’re probably looking at max 200 miles if the Model X is anything to go by, a lot less if going up hill a lot.

In a vehicle that is less efficient to begin with, the relative range loss from towing will be smaller.

“Look at me, I’m an ICE!”…why is that better?

Like ice, range will depend on shape of trailer and load. When we hauled a racing sailboat (c-scows), we saw little loss on range ( maybe a 1/10).
But when trailering a tri-hull, we would lose about 1/3. And with an.empty horse trailer, which weighed far less than either boat, we would lose 1/2.

So asking for range means that you do not trailer, as it is a meaningless question.

The things that make it look like a “normal vehicle” – like a grill – are unnecessary on an EV. They’re not trying to scream “I’m an EV”, they’re just designing for what the vehicle IS, rather than trying to throwback to a different technology.

Range when towing, like all liquid-fueled vehicles, will be less, and completely dependent on what you’re towing.

Except that by far the most “screaming” part of this design are the goofy headlights, which have absolutely nothing to do with the power train…

“Why is it so hard to make something that looks like a normal vehicle inside and out?”

My only complaint about the styling here is that it’s too “normal”; too much like a gasmobile. What is considered “normal” is going to change as the EV revolution progresses.

Gosh, Lemuel, why did Ford have to put the engine for the Model T inside a metal box at the front? And who wants rubber tires instead of proper iron buggy tires? Plus, where is the steering tiller? Why don’t they make a normal-looking horseless carriage?

Yeah, Abram, these newfangled motorcars are just a passing fad.

Yeah, they made it look like just like a combustion truck — except for the bits totally unaffected by the power train choice…

When I first saw those headlights I thought I was looking at the rear.

Is “distinctive look” now a euphemism for ugly?

Biggest disappointment is the ~2021 release date.
Workhorse, Bollinger, Tesla, et al won’t be far behind.

What about the charging standard? Is going to use CCS? I sure hope they don’t try to build thier own network like Tesla.

Bollinger expressed interest in the Tesla network. Personally I’d like to see CCS and a Tesla supercharging port on both Rivian and Bollinger.

No sense putting on both. A simple adapter does the trick.

I would love to see them use Tesla, bit will likely be CCS.

“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.”

How agile can a 7600-pound truck be and what inertial advantages can all that weight possibly offer? Seriously, I do like the idea of an electric pickup that has more storage space than a conventional one. We’ll probably be seeing electric pickups from several major manufacturers in the coming years. If I were in the market for a pickup, I’d wait for one of the big boys to come up with a pickup that makes more sense at a better price. Of course, a solid-state battery would be a major game changer. It wouldn’t take long to recharge your electric pickup and the electric boat you’d be hauling with it.

The one thing that “worries” me regarding this is they (and it’s not just Rivien) have replaced a less reliable drivetrain with less reliable suspension systems.

There’s a reason most pickups and proper off road oriented vehicles have simple suspension (like leafsprings and solid axles). They’re reliable and cheap to maintain/repair. You need to start getting complex with multilink and air to get the same sort of capacity, and all that does is decrease reliability.

The M1A battle tank is quite agile even though it weighs 68 tons.

I have read that it has a tank mode. The high torque with the 4 motors allow the it to turn in place like a tank!

That’s not going to do the tyres much good!

Up front pricing, specs to which Tesla has to play catch-up with their truck offering… We have a winning entry here! Stay afloat, license the Tesla supercharger network, learn how to manufacture in volume, get redundancy in your supply network, and beware the auto dealer lobbying power!
This, undoubtedly, is the biggest nail in the coffin of the Ford F150. Realizing that Workhorse and Bollinger are already in the field, can’t say it’s the first nail.

It does look like a very solid offering, but the F150 has been the top selling vehicle in the US for longer than I’ve been alive. That’s a lot of brand loyalty to overcome!

Agreed. There’s a lot of nails for that coffin, but I do not mind counting each one. Tell all your truck-lovin’ friends about this!

This is more a nail in the coffin of a Tesla PU.

Plenty of room for a Tesla truck; don’t forget their ace: Supercharger network. They also have a lot more money, production capacity, and parts suppliers in place.
What’s new about Ford and GM trucks? I see an auburn pasture filled with abandoned GM and Ford models, including the Ford Bronco.

Love the design besides the headlight plus the bed must be longer but it could be this trim is the shortest

You did read the article where there is a through tunnel, right? Plus just how often do you need the full 8′ ??

Every time I buy a sheet of plywood or sheetrock. Plus 6′ fence boards and 8′ 2×4’s. Pretty much what I have a truck for.

The key question: what’s their timeline to market? We’ve seen promises like this before evaporate before hitting mass-market numbers, or any numbers at all.

All startups have a timeline, almost nobody ever actually comes up with a product let alone on time. It’s not easy to start a car company….

At least they HAVE a Factory already acquired! Better than just moving dirt around in North Las Vegas!

I’ve seen other articles mention they aim to be producing around 50,000 a year by 2025. That would suggest it’s a pretty low volume vehicle at the moment, but they may also be assuming that their production capacity will be increased by a more in demand SUV?

So, will be manufactured in Normal, IL, and distributed how? Tesla style? So, only in states currently allowing non dealership sales?
How about service?

11k please read

…at least the lines if not between them;)

All they nay sayers who said this could not be done, well it can be done.
I really enjoy this company proving so many gas hogs wrong. 😁

All that’s done so far is a prototype. There is still the small matter of actual mass production to take car of.

But the factory and equipment are already there. They are even subletting stamping capacity til they need all of it for themselves. I think these guys are on a good path to being successful.

I think they have a real solid plan in place to make all this work. It’s refreshing to see a startup without all the drama.

A startup without drama would be refreshing but Tesla started with a bargain basement factory too and it yet had an extremely dramatic walk through a decade long valley of death before making some serious profit.

I think starting up a car company is really hard and drama is hard to avoid.

No, Tesla started by contracting with Lotus to build gliders into which they installed an EV powertrain, for Tesla’s first vehicle, the 2008 Roadster.

Rivian appears to already be further along toward being a “real” auto maker than Tesla was in 2008.

As Bunny already pointed, out Rivian already has a full-sized auto assembly plant. That puts them much, much closer to being a real EV maker than all-hat-and-no-cattle wannabes like Lucid or Faraday Future.

According to Loveday, this is essentially the production model. Am I remembering correctly?

Yes, this is.

Rivian has just sent a huge shockwave through the complacent pickup truck field. Now just wait about six months for Chevy to announce their latest plans for a competing truck about a year beyond Rivian.
Got my popcorn!

If they only now start making plans, it won’t arrive before 2023.

NIce, very nice, I wish they made this in 2004 when we bought or Titan Crew Cab. Unfortunately we retire next year and our new car buying daze are behind us. We are stuck with a Titan and 3 family LEAFs.

In 2004, it would have used NiMH batteries giving less than half the range…

I would love to volunteer road testing this beast from campground to campground towing our camper next year.

Is this unit available in the market, how can we book?

There is a link in the post for taking $1,000 deposits.

Fuel for a full-size ICE pickup is around $1700 – $2000 per year. Of all the types of vehicles, full-size pickups benefit the most from EV efficiency. Factoring the gasoline savings alone, the Rivian makes sense.

QUOTE=Deliveries of the R1T begin in late 2020. They need a few on the road now so people can see the real thing and maybe get a test ride. It sounds too good to be true but just what millions are looking for.

Good start. I have had trucks my whole life and right now have a diesel Colorado. I paid $37k for it (basically loaded). Fuel and maintenance (fuel filter, oil change, DEF) definitely adds up, but I am hoping someone hits the $45k price point in EV trucks so I can finally get into an EV. Maybe if someone does a midsize it will get down to that price range.

Looks like a great truck but I don’t see what competitive advantage Rivian brings to the table. It’s my theory that unless a startup has some specific competitive advantage going for it or a very unique product it has little chance to make it in the cut throat car market. Its best chance is if the incumbents keep ignoring the potential of BEV trucks I suppose. GM has already announced it will (but might announce the opposite next week) but I doubt Ford would venture to put all its eggs in the ICE basket for its all important F150 moneymaker, especially after seeing Rivian’s truck. At the very least it will be up against some Tesla truck product if Rivian manages to bring it to market in 2021 and Tesla should have EV production down to an art by then.

The advantage is the Rivian is the first legit all electric full size pickup truck. If the company can attach their name to “EV Truck” like Tesla has to the “EV Car” then I think they have something.

If it were available today it would be the first to market with a product like this giving it a few years to settle in before competitors start to make things more difficult. That’s what helped Tesla so much, it was ignored for over a decade before competitors started to realize this wasn’t a fad.

But it’s not available today and it remains to be seen if it’s available by 2021, these projects do tend to run into substantial delays so I don’t think there is going to be much of a head start. Maybe Tesla’s truck will be too different to be a direct competitor but I can see Ford come up with something very similar pretty quick if it feels the time is right.

What matters is competition. Maybe Rivian never hits the market, but the pressure on other companies is there. Someone else mentioned that Ford was rumored to be doing a BHEV F150.

I don’t see why there would be any doubt that these vehicles will come to market. We’re talking about some 10 or more years of research, development, fundraising, and the acquisition of a working factory. They have their boxes all checked. They didn’t pull a Faraday here.

Fully working paint shop and final assembly line?

Photos of their factory always seem to show acres of empty space.

Not sure, but they have a few years. The fact that they took the time and spent the money to acquire a working factory ahead of launch speaks volumes. Most other startups aren’t even close to that step.

Sounds like it does. They bought the plant for almost nothing and bought the equipment in a separate transaction. Scaringe said stamping, paint shop and robotics were in great shape. Mitsubishi stopped production recently (2016).

If Fords PHEV F150 offering is available in mid 2020 (start of 2021 F150 model year) and it’s around the price of the Diesel F150, with a decentish range (say 50+ miles) then they will have a winner on their hands for most truck owners.

Why are you so negative about Rivian? Is it just EV startups you despise, or EVs in general?

Your entirely negative comments would be better suited to a “rollling coal” forum than to comments on this article.

Full size? In my opinion a full size truck has a bed bigger that 55″. Beds this small are for people who want a truck but don’t need a truck.

It has a ton of other storage, which ICE trucks don’t offer. That makes a major difference. And, all this extra storage is protected from the elements. It’s the best of both worlds.

A ton of other storage isn’t really the issue. You can’t fit bikes in the other storage, or quads, or a body (i.e. sleeping in the bed). Those cases are what many people with trucks actually do, and why they want longer beds. The other point of longer beds is for building materials (which as you said may not be as relevant for a $90k truck). There are also plenty of farmers with range topping trucks that will still be putting things like hay bales in the back of their trucks. They again won’t fit into the other storage compartments. Not many people will be able to fill up a truck bed with “stuff” that could equally fit into the other storage locations (not that they are worthless, the frunk and pass through storage is a great option for smaller belongings). Bed size is one of the biggest differences between a midsize and a full size truck and why, even though it’s GVWR and towing ability rival the half ton vehicle, it’s arguably closer to a Mid size. It’ll all depend on what you want from a vehicle. Bed size is just as much a personal choice as all the… Read more »

A new company like this won’t be able to initially offer 100 to a million different configurations. That’s not even a possibility and would be economically ridiculous. However, if it sells well and interest is there, there is no reason whatsoever that they can’t offer different bed and cab configurations down the road. For what they aim to do, this mid-range truck makes sense. If they offered 4 million configurations from the get go, they might as well pack their bags and plan to fail miserably. The F-150 has been around for a few years, so that’s different. You can’t really compare at this point.

I’m not suggesting they should, rather using it as an example of how very personal a truck spec is. For some people a 4 ft bed with a big frunk will be great, but for most current truck owners it probably won’t be.

Here’s hoping though that they do start to offer different cab styles and bed lengths in the future. Although I do think for the Tacoma crowd (if they can get over the price) this current configuration will be a great electric alternative. For a full size owner, not so much.

Actually, plenty of goat ropers will buy these. But spec on bed, cargo, and towing bother me, esp since they have so much torque.

Hopefully, they did homework and are targeting the largest niche that will pay. I would have expected F350 diesel targeting, but ..

Now, people that want a truck, and may even need a truck, but can’t deal with few other storage situations aside from an open bed, could become truck buyers without spewing emissions. This is way more versatile and sensible than a typical truck by a long shot. Today, so many people buy trucks for status but rarely even use the bed and don’t haul much of anything often. Now, they can have the truck bed if needed, but also have all the extra internal storage and passenger space for use at all times.

I’d agree there. This vehicle may well tempt a lot of non Pickup owners to pickup ownership. I’ve mentioned before that one of the big markets may be people that would in the past have bought a Nissan Xterra or similar vehicle.

It has the same competitive advantage of any BEV: Very high torque from a standing start; instant response to pressing the “go pedal”; silky smooth, super-quiet ride; lack of noxious, smelly exhaust; and the ability to conveniently charge up with electricity at home, rather than having to drive to a special store which sells gasoline once a week.

The U.S. has a very large light truck market. There is certainly room for both a Tesla pickup and this Rivian SUT, and many other light truck BEV models besides.

Seems to be EV bashing to suggest there isn’t room for both; indeed, many more than just two!

Relax. We are not bashing rivian, or truck. We are questioning the niche they are targeting. That torque is better than F350 diesel, which is expensive ( 60k minimum, well used to be ) to buy and own. As Steven says, they are targeting goat roper types ( what u call suburban cowboy ).

I just thought rivian would make this far more useful from gitgo.

His premise is that there will be serious competition in this space pretty soon, thus making it very hard for a new start-up without something revolutionary that puts them ahead for a long time…

(I don’t quite agree though that they will face major competition soon. They should have a couple of years at least before the market becomes crowded — which might or might not be sufficient for them to establish a strong enough position to withstand future competition…)

(⌐■_■) Trollnonymous

I can get past the Fugly front.

I can charge for Free at work for 2 days and drive the rest of the week without charging.

Put clueless Detroit out of business

Well executed and far better than Tesla’s dorkMobile pickup. GM now on death watch.

Well, Ford trimming Car Sales, GM stopping Production in Oshawa, Ontario, next December! So, yeah… Lots of changes Happening!

This really is a winner! Don’t have to wait for Tesla’s pick-up. Be interesting to see if it takes the pick-up market by storm as I think it will. Watch out Ford! Nice to see GM shift to commit itself to fully electric, but it will take a couple of years for them to compete with this Rivian R1T. 4 independent motors, one for each wheel is a feature most won’t appreciate until they do serious off-roading with it.

Just had an idea about offroading – put cameras at each wheel and display on the center console so you don’t need to stick your head out the window or have a friend spotting your tire placement.

Absolutely stunning truck, well done Rivian!! Ok with the headlights, makes it unique for the brand and thank goodness they didn’t go with the typical giant truck grille.

I think on the pickup ought have disappearing foot rails on outside folds under truck when doors open CV lose

The aftermarket builds stuff like that for ICE trucks. That sounds like an aftermarket product.

It isn’t a truck. It is a cruck (car/truck). I have no use for a “truck” with a bed under six feet. I think have a bed that is mostly over the wheels greatly reduces the amount it can haul. Another disappointment in my opinion.

meh. Long bed vs. short bed debate has been going on for well over half a century. There simply is no single answer that will suit everyone’s needs. They have to start somewhere, and then they can build more cab/bed configurations later.

Can you get Weather Tech floor mats for this and some Rhino Liner for bed? I’m ready to buy this! Elon needs me to move a couch to his new vacation home at the factory in Nevada.

(⌐■_■) Trollnonymous

Yes, just tell them you have a Ford Raptor.

Delete you comment, sir. It is factually wrong.

WOW! Now that’s how an EV startup should present its first vehicle!

So many positive things to say about this vehicle, from the three battery sizes to the attractive styling.

I’d describe this vehicle as an SUT (Sport Utility Truck), like the Honda Ridgeline, rather than a pickup, because its 1400 mm (4.59 ft.) bed is shorter than even an “extra-short bed” or “super short bed” pickup, where the bed length is 5.5 ft.

But that’s in no way a criticism of the design choices here. In fact, it may be smart of Rivian to put a shorter-than-a-short-bed cargo bed on it. That will help limit the weight of things being hauled by the SUT, which should limit how much of its EV range will be lost by hauling heavy cargo.

I’m very gratified to see a vehicle which appears to have such a great market potential from Rivian. This may be counting my chickens before they’re hatched, because we haven’t seen any third-party reviews of the SUT, but from the first impression here, it looks like my optimism for this company appears to have been well-founded.

Does Tesla finally have a true rival? Only time will tell, but I hope so!

Go Rivian!

The open bed is 2100mm. So like 7 ft. It can accommodate a 4×8 sheet of plywood. It’s 4.5 feet wide, too.

That’s not unique to the Rivian though, nor is it as beneficial as a longer bed to start with. All truck tailgates are rated for the same sort of usage as the Rivian.

A Ridgeline has no issues carrying sheets of Ply for example.

I’m not buying the 14,000Nm torque spec….1 Nm (Newton-meter) is equal to 0.737 lb-ft. That equates to 10,326 lb-ft of torque. 10,000 lb-ft of torque??!! Really?

This is how torque is measured at the wheels for EVs. Take a look at Tesla Roadster vs. cars like the Dodge Demon. It’s hard to compare HP and torque in EVs at wheels to traditional specs. But, it’s definitely 10-percent factual.

“10-percent factual” statements are all too common in the EV world 🙂

This is why cars like the Tesla Model X can tow a Boeing plane and though they’re officially rated for lower towing capacity and payloads, they can tow and haul incredible amounts. All-electric torque at the wheels is massive.

Steve et al: Hi and thanks for the reply. I am quite familiar with torque measurements for both gas and electric vehicles, thus my question/comment. I think they are off by a factor of 10. For example, the Tesla Model 3 AWD Performance has a rated torque of 639 Nm or 471 lb-ft. The Model S P100D with ludicrous mode is rated at 931Nm/687lb-ft. So, I could easily accept 1,400Nm/1,000 lb-ft for the truck but not 14,000. Think about it.

It’s around 800ft lb of torque from the motors, the torque you’re talking about seems to be that of the torque at the wheel, after going through the gearboxes.

Hi Andy and thanks for more discussion. I can believe 800 lb-ft…but the spec is not 800 lb-ft or even 1,000 lb-ft but 10,000 lb-ft…an extra zero. If indeed there was gearing involved it would imply a 10:1 gear reduction. But, these are usually direct drive systems for one thing and there is no need to use gear reduction if you have 800lb-ft at the motor…no normal vehicle needs 10,000 lb-ft at the wheels. That’s something like you need with an open pit mine haul truck. I’m sticking with my comment that there is an error in the spec.

There are two torques listed, vehicle torque and vehicle grounded torque. My understanding is the vehicle torque, 1120 Nm, is the total measured at the motors, while the grounded torque, 14000 Nm, is the total measured at the wheels after being multiplied by gear boxes.

That latter number may well require taking with a pinch of salt. I wonder if there’s an actual standard for it’s measurement.

As was mentioned elsewhere it’s about the same amount of Torque as four Semis. There’s no way a vehicle like that truck has that much torque, and if it does it would never be able to use it without shredding its tyres immediately.

Wheel torque doesn’t require measurement standards — it’s a very simple and clear physical property. And 14,000 Nm doesn’t sound wrong, considering that Tesla claims 10,000 Nm for their next-gen Roadster, and even the Model X is not much behind that IIRC.

They aren’t direct drive systems. The vast majority of EVs have reduction gears, typically in the 8:1 range or thereabouts. Indeed EVs typically have higher reduction ratios than combustion cars in the highest gears, since the electric motors prefer operating at higher RPM ranges. (Which is why motor torque is not directly comparable…)

Read the Spec Sheet again: it lists Torque your way, and at the Wheels!

That’s not unique to an EV. It was just a publicity stunt manufacturers like to do to make their vehicle seem tough.

The Porsche Cayenne is currently the record breaker there. It pulled an A380


Toyota’s pickup has also pulled the Space shuttle in the past and the VW Toureg has towed a Boeing 747 anongst others.


Ron Swanson's Mustache

That gear tunnel looks like it’d be the perfect place to store rifles and shotguns for a trip to the range or field.

Yes. It would be good for that. Heck, you could probably put a small deer in there. It’s pretty accommodating. One of my kids could probably sleep in there, haha.

I’d Airbnb that space!


Creativity at its best!

What’s the range while towing 11,000lbs?

Also, is that correct? There is a conflict in the spec chart. Left column lists as lbs, but right column shows as kg?

Which is it?

5,000 kg/11,000 lbs

About 75 miles

Towing range usually depends more on trailer aerodynamics than weight. Figure 0.75 kWh/mile for smallish trailers (e.g. speedboat) and 1.1-1.3 kWh/mile for large camper trailers and such.

It is when you tow different types of loads that you figure which is more important: aerodynamics or friction. Turns out that a simple greased set of bearings are decent enough, and it is aerodynamics that matter.

Tesla really is an amazing company.

Friction happens between the wheel an the road — and it can be quite significant, when the load is heavy and the speed is not too high.

What is the price point and couldn’t they have made it more rugged looking so more men would be drawn to it’s looks…the range and everything seems good but it definitely needs to be more rugged looking to satisfy the outdoorsmen and blue-collar guys that buy most P/U…

It looks pretty rugged in person and the interior is incredible. Remember, it’s supposed to appeal to a luxury car crowd (more Land Rover-esque). They talked a lot about Patagonia and upper level brands that are not cheap and pride themselves on the outdoors. Starts around $60k with tax rebate.

What’s with the ugly headlights these days??? Other than that horendous mistake, everything looks good.

I’m guessing the final release will get rid of that Little Orphan Annie blank-eyed look. The headlights are unnecessarily weird, at least paired with the horizontal beam that crosses them.

Ron Swanson's Mustache

It feels super weird to be this excited about an EV that isn’t coming from Tesla.

Just when we start to move toward energy efficiency for moving ourselves around everybody gets excited about excessive speed, acceleration and monster trucks!
Every individual has the opportunity today of producing clean renewable electrical energy for their own personal transport but not if we keep chasing this previous mentality, It seems old habits die hard and the electric companies will be all too happy to charge for it just like oil companies have !

You have got to be there life of the party

Persuading just one gasmobile pickup driver to switch to a BEV SUT like this would save maybe 2-3x as much gasoline from being burned as someone replacing his subcompact economy car with a BEV.

In a perfect world we could convince everyone to live frugally, with a much smaller carbon footprint. But in the real world, we need to look for where switching from gasmobiles to BEVs will actually make the biggest impact on fossil fuel use. The biggest impact per driver is with the biggest and heaviest passenger cars and light trucks, not the smallest.

You said it…”The biggest impact per driver is with the biggest and heaviest passenger cars and light trucks, not the smallest.”
If we take the present attitude toward oversized inefficient vehicles and apply it to EVs what impact will it have on electric consumption? How will it be produced? will it be clean? will we be under the price control of big utilities instead of oil ? How will the extra demand be met ?
The bigger heavier trend makes for less efficiency so we will just be trading oil consumption for another source.
At present I drive an efficient EV and can charge it with a roof array but this monstrosity would require a half acre field array plus longer charge periods.
Tesla has been successful by designing a low aerodynamic lightweight car “like no other” with a large power pack that pounces traditional vehicles.
This efficiency does not scale up for larger heavier non aero trucks without affecting the energy supply needed to run them.

How far will it pull 5,000 pounds. Can we quit with the cutsy metric units. It’s sold in America for Americans. Make it easily comparable if you want to compete.

It’s 11,000 pounds/5,000 kgs. Many newer companies are going to metric. It’s not “cutsy.” It’s just something that is more standard and acceptable everywhere.

I wish that realisation would show in InsideEVs articles more often 😉

We try. But, as you can see we also deal with a lot of adversity about it. It’s another slippery slope. I’m all for it. Many Americans are surely not, and that’s where the lion share of our traffic comes from. We will work harder to include both.

We are the only 1st world country left that doesn’t use metric. Even so, metric is infiltrating. When was the last time you saw ICE displacement in cubic inches? It’s all liters now.

My problem was that I was born in 1978, so I have a good feel for how long an inch is, or a mile, or how much a pound is. I have to stop and do the conversions in my mind before I can attempt to picture how long a cm is, for example (2.54 cm/in).

It’s coming. The children of the Millennials will probably be the last to have both sets of units taught in school.

Actually, not just first-world: the US are literally the only country left in the world that hasn’t transitioned, or at least isn’t in the process of actively transitioning to metric.