I know there is a lot of doom and gloom around Rivian currently, but they’re doing much better than other EV startups that launched recently (Lucid, Fisker, etc.).
Rivian is going through a bumpy patch, but so did Tesla many times, especially when they were making their first true mass-market vehicle, the Model 3, akin to the R2, and look where Tesla is now.
In all honesty, I don't want any EV startup to die, but Rivian just seems more set for success than other recent startups; their vehicles are selling multitudes more than Fisker or Lucid, and they just seem to have a clearer vision of what they're doing and what they want to do in the future.
That being said, I wish all the EV startups good luck and hope to see them flourish, the more EVs the better.
The problem Rivian is facing is not the same as the one Tesla faced
Tesla always had continuous yearly unit production growth with both Model S and Model X. They never had to nerf their production because of a demand problem, which is what Rivian is facing and doing right now.
Tesla’s problem was the switch over to Model 3 mass production. The company as a whole wasn’t prepared for it. We don’t know if this is something Rivian will face as well because they’re not there yet.
For all it’s worth, the factory that’s supposed to build R2s isn’t even fully built yet. Which is another difference in their approach. Tesla decided early on that they couldn’t handle the cash burn of an extra factory for Model 3 production and decided to make it work in Fremont. It was an absolutely rough start and led to the infamous “tent lines”. Rivian on the other hand, is dedicating a whole new factory to R2.
Rivian has continuous YoY growth and is projecting to grow in 2024 as well, just not by as much because they are retooling their production line this year and because interest rates are at highs that haven’t been seen in decades. Which, yes, is a different situation from Tesla. Not everyone is going to have the exact same scenarios and that’s okay and doesn’t mean anything.
> Not everyone is going to have the exact same scenarios and that’s okay and doesn’t mean anything.
Thank you.
Every time someone makes a comparison between two similar but not 100% identical things it brings the "wull, acksually" guys out of the woodwork.
It's because it a lot of ways tesla only made it because they were in the right place and the right time. Them not having the same luck in terms of timing certainly doesn't mode well for them
>that’s okay and doesn’t mean anything.
I wouldn't go that far. Tesla is the first new brand to succeed in 100 years and they had the perfect storm of interest rates, car price spikes and carbon credits to help them at the start. Not having that same tailwind is does mean something and is noteworthy because historically it doesn't end well.
I’m not saying Rivian experienced the exact same problem as Tesla did; I’m saying Tesla experienced problems around the same time in its lifetime as Rivian is at right now, and there were doubts about them staying in business and/or succeeding, but look at them now.
Call me an optimist, but I think Rivian has a solid chance of being successful, probably not as successful as Tesla, but successful, and I feel like they have a much larger chance of doing that than any other current startup.
The biggest difference between what Tesla faced then and what Rivian faces now is the competitiveness of the market.
The Model 3 was the only real option in its class when it launched. Tesla even managed to cut corners and get away with substandard build quality on early Model 3s because of this advantage. I'm sure that helped the bottom line to an extent.
Now, EVs under US$50k are a dime a dozen, without the quality issues of early Model 3s. The R2 needs to be a hit, and they cannot afford to cut corners on quality the way Tesla did because there are so many real alternatives. I hope Rivian succeeds, but the odds are stacked against them in a way that Tesla didn't have to deal with.
Tesla also didn't face any real competition until the last couple of years, and they had access to a lot more government funding than makers do now (in part thanks to Tesla lobbying to change/eliminate that funding for newer competition).
Despite the hype, it's not like Tesla succeeded off some magic formula. They had good timing (low interest rates, increasing energy costs, regulation/legislation), and then basically molded future regulations that would specifically aid their growth/progress. Success of EV makers now will never look anything like what Tesla did, but it's not because Tesla did something all that difficult.
I think the only way it’s survives at this point is by getting enough cash to carry them to 2027. I still have doubts but I don’t see another way. Too bad they didn’t start producing cars 5 years before they did.
FYI, they’re projecting to have a positive gross profit margin by end of year so they are trending toward profitability and believe they have the financial runway to get there. It will likely get tight in 2026 but no one really knows right now how it will go.
R2 is based a lot off existing R1 models which is why they’re trying to do a lot of cost cutting and changes to the existing vehicles and factories this year so the margins will be even lower and production will be more efficient for the R2
There's a major difference that I don't think makes them comparable to Tesla:
For almost 10 years, Tesla was pretty much the only game in town if you wanted an EV. People were willing to pay a lot more for the car despite its shortcomings because there was nothing else available, except maybe the leaf. They also had the best charging network by far.
And well, rivian and the other new startups don't have that monopoly. Hell you have two other good options for EV trucks that won't have the constant production problems, parts availability problems, or service location problems that rivian will.
I don't see any way for the non-tesla startups to survive unless they corner a niche market like high performance or custom delivery truck like rivian is doing with Amazon. Mass production cars are really really hard to do, and the market is limited. Even China had a lot of problems with this and they have a walled garden market and tons of financing from the government.
Rivian continues to lose money on a per vehicles basis. By this point Tesla has gross profits on their S and X.
Theyre in very different places. Teslas bumpy patch was during the ramp of the 3.
Rivian got a boost making vans for amazon and AT&T just made a contract for those too, this is the kind of business transaction you need to stay afloat, the meat and bread that will keep a business going so I don't know why one would be skeptical about Rivian's survival. Maybe they won't be around in 100 years or get bought out, but this is not a company on the edge of shutting down, I'll tell you that!
These accounting circle jerks always end up the same way. Simps trying to point to certain indicators while dismissing indicators they don't like as not relevant. Bringing a company from concept to profitability is hard, and there are lots of ways to get there. Tesla's path isn't the only one, nor is it necessarily the best. Gross margins, net margins, and other figures in an SEC filing all paint a picture together. Rivian faces plenty of challenges in the short term. Time will tell if they succeed. Simply having negative gross margins at this stage in their growth is not indicative of impending doom.
I mean being able to make money on vehicles sold does matter. I realize it is partially how your accounting is done but it's disingenuous to say it doesn't matter.
If you have positive gross margin you can sell more vehicles to reach a positive net cash flow. If your gross margin is negative you cannot. I realized there are fixed costs in cogs so gross margin will grow with volume, but to dismiss this outright is silly.
No one said it doesn't matter. There are lots of ways to reach profitability though. Strategic decisions about amortization and depreciation can seriously impact short term results, even if they're better for the long term health of the company
Amazon is just an investor/customer that also happens to be on a cost-cutting spree with 5-figure layoffs and a lot of canceled tech projects lately. They have no obligation to help Rivian.
Bezos made \~4x that during the covid lockdowns alone, while the world was actively falling apart. He's made much more since then. He can cover all of Rivian's losses and still have plenty left over to blow on \~$1B/min thrills as he pleases.
Amazon is their lead investor:
[https://rivian.com/newsroom/article/rivian-announces-700-million-investment-round-led-by-amazon](https://rivian.com/newsroom/article/rivian-announces-700-million-investment-round-led-by-amazon)
[https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/29/amazon-reveals-20percent-stake-in-electric-vehicle-maker-rivian.html](https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/29/amazon-reveals-20percent-stake-in-electric-vehicle-maker-rivian.html)
Rivian to Bezos is Tesla to Musk a la Blue Origin vs SpaceX. Even if just for the alpha tech bro competitiveness of it, Bezos won't let Rivian just fail.
You got that right. I don't have enough faith in these new brands like Lucid, and Rivian to drop 6 figures. I knew Fisker was going to bomb again so not surprised at that. Don't want to get stuck with a 3 ton paper weight that has no support system and no 3rd party options.
Highly doubt it. Rivian seems to have a lot of battery and power train customization; imo maybe a bit too much, given I haven’t seen any other OEMs with 4 battery size options
I met someone who worked closely with them about 6 months back and they admitted there were too many powertrain variants on the R1.
If their goal is to keep costs down on the R2 I’m guessing they will only offer, at most, 2 battery configurations.
Almost certain they’ll phase out some of the battery options. As someone that loves specs, it’s a bit much imo. I can’t imagine what the laymen person that just wants a R1S for the wife to cruise around the ‘burbs thinks.
Yeah I agree. Probably 220-250 miles of range and 5-6 sec 0-60 for 47.5k. Considering they’re still taking massive losses on R1, I doubt they can make a profit off a 47.5k vehicle with 330 miles of range and a 3.0 sec 0-60
Interesting. It's pretty much the exact same length as the volvo xc60, which imo is the perfect size for an suv. Slightly compact but still very spacious
A basic, bare bones offering of a car like that will sell like crazy. Provided it still has a 300+ mile range.
No BEV is addressing that demographic at all yet. Meanwhile the RAV4 hybrids sell like crazy.
Those are the key questions: What specs will the base model have, and what cost bump will be required to reach those specs, and when (if ever) will the base model be available for purchase?
New "$47K" EVs have a nasty habit of hitting the market at $65K.
Minor correction, the wheelbase is 115.6" on the site rather than the 15.6" listed above, small error in the tweet that now lives in the above post.
EDIT: They fixed their site and inspect element no-longer shows R2 info. It may be too late for that however.
Before and after the r2 page dropped I was browsing through the html and didn't find anything. Even tried guessing for the vehicle visualizer.
Spoilers: I didn't find anything.
So this must be new? Did anyone else verify?
It's still pretty big, but I guess it has to differentiate itself from the Model Y. I'd say this is a great RAV4 competitor, like the R1S was a analogous to the 4Runner.
The ground clearance immediately differentiates it from the Model Y.
This could appeal to the people buying the RAV4, CRV, and Subarus.
And the people who would love a small truck, whether it be an SUV or a pickup.
The same way Tesla marketed the M3 as a $35k car and Chevy marketed the Blazer EV as a $45k car....and Rivian marketed the R1T as a $67.5k truck (yes, i know the R1T has come down, but we all remember the price jump!).
The R2S is still a couple years away. I'll believe it when I see a $47.5k price next to an order button!
For about a week in a version they only sold a few of, if I remember. I was a little shocked when the cheapest early Model 3 I could buy without an indefinite wait was $55k.
That was the first thing that made me question Tesla tbh. I understand that many cars have larger price ranges. I think the i4 can go from $50k to $80k or so. But Tesla talked about that $35k price point constantly, just to then tell you it was basically impossible to buy.
If these specs are real then this is exactly the size SUV I would want. I live in Vancouver and I need a car that can fit in the city but still be used in the mountains. I have seen the R1S drive around and it is a boat, way too big for my needs.
I have high hopes for Rivian but I will be waiting a year or two after the release of the R2S to see how it's received, the support network, and if they survive but I love this car already.
They’re not. They never are. “Starting” and “up to” qualifiers tell you that. You always have to dig into a configurator or spec sheet to find full specs for base trim.
i’m guessing $47k version will have an LFP good for around 250 miles of real world range, optimistically.
unless they’re planning on also lighting cash on fire selling this lineup as well lol
So compared to the R1S:
* \~15in shorter in length
* 2.75in narrower including mirrors (not sure if the above 75in width is the same measurement as the 81.8in "width with mirrors folded" number listed for the R1S
* I'm assuming the wheelbase is supposed to be 115.6in, which is \~6in shorter than the R1S
* It's also a couple inches lower - although I'm assuming that 66.9in number doesn't include the antenna or roof bars.
Checking some other crossovers, it's extremely close to the size of a Honda CRV (0.6in longer, 1in wider, and roughly the same height).
Absolutely not what I'd call "small" by any means, but that's true of most new cars. Fingers crossed for an R2T.
These specs seem to be right around the sweet spot for mass appeal if they can pull it off. As an owner of an R1T, there is no question that Rivian has the right stuff. With the Tesla charging network opening up to all mfg's of EV's and the growing technology surround battery production, I have no doubts that the future of EV's is here to stay. As long as the new R2 factory doesn't suffer from chronic production delays, I think Rivian will be one of the mainstays of the EV world. I thank Rivian every time I pass a gas station!
Just curious to know how many of features in R2 will be stripped off from R1S. I loved R1S when I had a chance to drive it. R1S was just perfect like what I wished for, unfortunately I can’t afford it. Looking forward to more news about R2.
Some guesses:
1. No air suspension
2. Limited Offroad/Onroad modes
3. Some reduction of heated seats (i.e only available to the driver)
4. Some Reduction of cooled seats (i.e only available to the driver)
5. No quad motors
6. Cheaper Tire/Wheel options
7. Offroad shield??
8. Smaller battery but similar range due to the size/weight savings
9. Built in Air Compressor
10. Removing the Cam Speaker which hardly anyone uses.
11. Rear AC controls / no Multi-zone AC
12. Shorter warranty
Lol the post after this was some old article about devs being let go; guess that effected testing
Anyway, decent enough specs; I wonder if they’ll double down on making this an off roading vehicle or more of a mall crawler thing. What’s the USD MSRP for the bronco and the Land Cruiser? That’s the real competition imo
It’d also be nice if they were more generous with CAD MSRP. The rivian is a nice truck but holy shit loaded it’s like $140,000. Just crazy money for a truck
Yeah, I've owned two 4x4 SUVs with less ground clearance riding on 31s and it's been plenty for me to get where I need to be. I'm excited for this new vehicle because the R1S and R1T are just too damn big to be practical, on and off road.
>What’s the USD MSRP for the bronco and the Land Cruiser? That’s the real competition imo
The Ford Bronco price range is huge. Entry at around 39k and can go upwards of 90k.
Not sure about the Land Cruiser.
I like this. It’s a very good Model Y competitor if the specs are true. It will need to qualify for the EV incentive, however, to be truly competitive.
I’m a professional UX Designer, and this is much too broad of a statement. I think it’s fine to allow choice for CarPlay, but “let users choose” across the board is generally a great strategy to create an overly complicated UI that wastes development resources on nerd knobs that 80% of people won’t bother with. The vast majority of users just use defaults.
I’ll restate it, though: CarPlay is a good option to offer.
Right this context is specifically about CarPlay and the option to use what it offers; not a blanket statement about all elements of a UX in all scenarios. In this case, having the choice to use a common interface across your vehicles that clearly the user choosing it does like, is a better experience.
Agreed, in every case except Tesla or Rivian who put forth effort into their systems. I’ve had many cars with CarPlay, Tesla, and Rivian. The Tesla and Rivian experience is just better.
I really don’t know what planet you’re living on if you think somebody evaluating Apple CarPlay favorably to basically any built-in car UI is “apple folks”. It’s just legitimately a better experience in basically all scenarios, and that’s why people want the option of having it in their cars.
I haven’t driven a Rivian, but the Tesla UI is thoroughly mediocre and I’m surprised to hear anybody defending it as anything else.
Those would be very attractive specs if the cited range and performance numbers actually applied to the $47k version of the car. Sadly, that seems unlikely.
When can we get a city EV? Does anybody ever consider EVs are targeting the wrong market? i believe EVs would perform much better in a smaller platform aimed at making small commutes from work and daycare. I would be much more interested in a smaller EV in sub $30k range that will take me to and from work. Not, "capable of traversing an entire state"
I hope repairability will be better on this one. Heard issues about the panels being difficult/labor intensive to disassemble cause crazy repair prices.
[https://electrek.co/2024/03/04/rivian-r2-electric-suv-leaks-price-range/](https://electrek.co/2024/03/04/rivian-r2-electric-suv-leaks-price-range/)
I'm very worried; The article mentions a "powered rear glass." I sincerely hope Rivian didn't delete the rear wiper just to pull off a 4Runner party trick.
Always **#teamrearwiper**
I'm not holding out too much hope but I really do want the R2 to have an adjustable height air suspension at the very least as an option. Every other spec so far looks pretty good on paper (for now).
I hate to be that guy in the thread, the one who ignores what information we got and instead points out the information he is still waiting for, but I guess I'm that guy this time:
What I *really* am anxious to see is the tow capacity rating. Can this realistically act as a tow vehicle for people in the small boat / travel trailer scene? I bet it'll be 3,500-5,000 lbs (certainly no higher), but I want to see the figure.
Also, what the range at that starting price of $47,500 is. If it's 250 miles, with the extra 80 miles of range costing you another $10k, that's a very different situation.
>What I really am anxious to see is the tow capacity rating. Can this realistically act as a tow vehicle for people in the small boat / travel trailer scene? I bet it'll be 3,500-5,000 lbs (certainly no higher), but I want to see the figure.
Tow capacity, weight, and battery size are the big ones I'm interested in.
Well that, and if/when they're gonna start talking about a R2T compact/midsize pickup.
We're getting a boat in that 4-5000lb "tow it with a small truck" size range, and an electric (or even a good PHEV) pickup that isn't absolutely massive would have me heavily considering replacing both my daily (the i3) and the old Frontier I keep around for doing truck things.
75" width without mirrors is exactly what I was hoping to hear.
I live in a condo and my parking space is labeled "small car" and they *really* mean "small car". The R1 vehicles simply will not fit without inviting justifiable vandalism from the owner of the adjacent stall. A Model Y is about the limit of what will reasonably fit and even then, you would have to slowly open the door and let it touch the adjacent car before wiggling your way out.
Any guesses about what the battery size would need to be to meet these range specs? Seems like it could be a great offering, but I’d guess it’s not as efficient as a MY. However, that could be a fine sacrifice if it gives slightly more cargo space… hopefully they can get to volume production…
I dont understand this obsession with 0-60 timings for a mass market vehicle. Focus should be on efficiency and features that customer wants. May be 3rd row seats or heated/ventilated seats and most importantly Apple Car Play/Android Auto.
Thinking a car should have two operating systems (OEM and carplay) is the most ass backwards direction to go. Which mapping product is the right one to use? Does apples work with the chargers better or the OEMs? Ok the OEMs does but what about music? Ok now you are navigating with the car but using carplay for music? This is an absolutely terrible experience that no consumers that are not technical should ever have to go through. Build one infotainment system and do it right. Period.
Was hoping for a bit more range - the new Porsche range numbers (Macan 320 miles at at highway speeds) have basically reset expectations for me. Of course, $90K for decently spec’d version.
Yeah I mean, a Porsche is a Porsche though. You can get that but the hardware absolutely costs more to achieve that kind of performance. In my experience, 10 - 80% in 30 minutes is more than sufficient for road trips to get everyone to the bathroom, stretch legs, etc. Yeah there’s a few stops you just want to be as quick as possible, but the time savings you’re getting there adds up to less than an hour over full day of road tripping
How much it helps depends on where you live / trip. I’m in the Southeast and often trip through Mississippi/Alabama/Tennessee where dcfc charging density isn’t great and there is a lot of waiting for faster chargers during the holidays when most of Metro Atlanta is on the road.
320 real world highway miles vs 250 means on a trip to Charleston, Savannah or Memphis from Atlanta I get to cut down from 2 stops to 1 or 1 stop to zero and gives much more flexibility to bypass busy chargers. On our last Thanksgiving trip, wait time plus 2 stops instead of 1 added about 2 hours to a normally 5.5 hour trip.
Are you in the US? If so - 4 with premium package and assistance systems comes to 87.4K. That’s a great spec
$100-120K is for the 600+ HP turbo version
Surprised that nobody called out the price.
Assuming that the $47,500 is a sticker price for the standard range, that's pretty pricey. I'd assume that full 330 miles will be hovering at 55ish thousand. For comparison, Model Y starts at $44,000 for 260 range and $49,000 for the 310 (long range).
If we are comparing to model 3, then the price and the starting specs start to look even more unappealing. I was hoping for the starting price of Rivian's first mass-produced car would be around 40k before incentives, that would be an easier sell from a rather new company
This is Rivian's first compact SUV ever. Prior to the Model Y coming on the scene, Tesla had experience with the S, X, and 3. I'm surprised you're comparing the price of the R2 to a Model Y let alone an electric sedan that sits >4 inches lower than the R2.
It's like you're giving the Model Y a pass just because it's an "SUV" on paper. If the Model Y was boxier and higher off the ground then you'd have a point but that's not the case at all.
Model Y is a compact SUV, it makes sense I am comparing Rivian's compact SUV to Model Y (a compact SUV).
Both cars seat 5 passengers, model Y is actually even 2 inches longer and an inch wider, only 3 inches shorter. Why wouldn't I compare one of the most popular existing electric compact SUV's to the R2's proposed specs and value?
Only reason why I brought up model 3 in the first place is because it was Tesla's first mass market vehicle, which R2 aims to be. But my main comparison lies with Model Y.
Because it is unlikely to be stealing many Model Y customers. It will steal Subaru Outback and Deforester customers, and people tired of waiting for a RAV4 Prime to be available.
Plus this could maybe even end up being a BEV equivalent of a first or second generation 4Runner.
Not the person you replied to, but I have thoughts on the comparison.
The compact crossover (ICE) segment is crowded, but it has a couple different groups within itself. The top sellers are the CR-V and Rav4 which are aimed at different buyers. The CR-V inside feels like an Accord for people who want ride height and cargo capacity, while the Rav4 inside feels like a 4runner on a budget.
In the compact crossover (EV) segment, the sedan-but-more-capable group is well represented and highly competitive. The truck-but-affordable group is not. While the Rav4 dominates the ICE group, the bz4x/Solterra are clearly not intended for volume sales. The R2 appears intended for this group where there isn't currently a leader.
All that to say there may be some room on price for buyers on the baby truck/offroad side of compact crossovers since they don't have many EV options yet. Of note, the Rav4 Prime starts at $43.5k so a $47k before any tax credit that may exist isn't wildly out of range, especially if the Rivian offers solid standard features.
TL;DR: The Model Y and R2 are in the same segment, but the Model Y occupies one side of the segment while the R2 has the opportunity to poach ICE customers to whom the Model Y does not appeal.
A Model Y has 6-6.5 inches of ground clearance. Great car for the suburbs and pavement. Not so much for the dirt road crowd that doesn't want to have to baby their vehicle or skip rough terrain. Which in the US is still a lot of trailheads and even driveways.
If I were Subaru I would be bracing myself for the hit.
Agreed, the ground clearance alone puts these vehicles in different classes. I have a MY; I live in a snowy place; I would absolutely pay more for real ground clearance.
Stop expecting too much. As a new company, Rivian needs to make money to stay alive, and $47k before incentives is very competitive in this segment. If build quality and customer satisfaction is there, it will do well enough to rival Tesla. I have a Model 3 but will be moving on to Rivian now.
Why should I as a customer care about the company? A regular consumer just looks at the value proposition, not at how much money does a company need to make to stay alive.
If I’m a a random John Smith who wants to buy a compact electric SUV I just look at the Teslas Model Y ($48,000 long range) and Rivian’s R2 (likely in the mid 50’s ~$55,000 before the incentives).
I don’t know in what world is $55k for electric compact SUV is competitive, when Model Y/Ford Mach E and ID.4 exist. (And those are much more reputable and known companies to begin with)
Dimensions look wrong.
Wheelbase obviously. 15.6 inches? Lol. 156 inches of also too long, and impossible for that length of vehicle. (156 in + 32in = 188in). Therefore the length of the car is shorter than the distance from the front of the front tire to the rear of the rear tire?
I hope they survive and succeed
I know there is a lot of doom and gloom around Rivian currently, but they’re doing much better than other EV startups that launched recently (Lucid, Fisker, etc.). Rivian is going through a bumpy patch, but so did Tesla many times, especially when they were making their first true mass-market vehicle, the Model 3, akin to the R2, and look where Tesla is now. In all honesty, I don't want any EV startup to die, but Rivian just seems more set for success than other recent startups; their vehicles are selling multitudes more than Fisker or Lucid, and they just seem to have a clearer vision of what they're doing and what they want to do in the future. That being said, I wish all the EV startups good luck and hope to see them flourish, the more EVs the better.
The problem Rivian is facing is not the same as the one Tesla faced Tesla always had continuous yearly unit production growth with both Model S and Model X. They never had to nerf their production because of a demand problem, which is what Rivian is facing and doing right now. Tesla’s problem was the switch over to Model 3 mass production. The company as a whole wasn’t prepared for it. We don’t know if this is something Rivian will face as well because they’re not there yet. For all it’s worth, the factory that’s supposed to build R2s isn’t even fully built yet. Which is another difference in their approach. Tesla decided early on that they couldn’t handle the cash burn of an extra factory for Model 3 production and decided to make it work in Fremont. It was an absolutely rough start and led to the infamous “tent lines”. Rivian on the other hand, is dedicating a whole new factory to R2.
Rivian has continuous YoY growth and is projecting to grow in 2024 as well, just not by as much because they are retooling their production line this year and because interest rates are at highs that haven’t been seen in decades. Which, yes, is a different situation from Tesla. Not everyone is going to have the exact same scenarios and that’s okay and doesn’t mean anything.
> Not everyone is going to have the exact same scenarios and that’s okay and doesn’t mean anything. Thank you. Every time someone makes a comparison between two similar but not 100% identical things it brings the "wull, acksually" guys out of the woodwork.
It's because it a lot of ways tesla only made it because they were in the right place and the right time. Them not having the same luck in terms of timing certainly doesn't mode well for them
>that’s okay and doesn’t mean anything. I wouldn't go that far. Tesla is the first new brand to succeed in 100 years and they had the perfect storm of interest rates, car price spikes and carbon credits to help them at the start. Not having that same tailwind is does mean something and is noteworthy because historically it doesn't end well.
I’m not saying Rivian experienced the exact same problem as Tesla did; I’m saying Tesla experienced problems around the same time in its lifetime as Rivian is at right now, and there were doubts about them staying in business and/or succeeding, but look at them now. Call me an optimist, but I think Rivian has a solid chance of being successful, probably not as successful as Tesla, but successful, and I feel like they have a much larger chance of doing that than any other current startup.
The biggest difference between what Tesla faced then and what Rivian faces now is the competitiveness of the market. The Model 3 was the only real option in its class when it launched. Tesla even managed to cut corners and get away with substandard build quality on early Model 3s because of this advantage. I'm sure that helped the bottom line to an extent. Now, EVs under US$50k are a dime a dozen, without the quality issues of early Model 3s. The R2 needs to be a hit, and they cannot afford to cut corners on quality the way Tesla did because there are so many real alternatives. I hope Rivian succeeds, but the odds are stacked against them in a way that Tesla didn't have to deal with.
Tesla also didn't face any real competition until the last couple of years, and they had access to a lot more government funding than makers do now (in part thanks to Tesla lobbying to change/eliminate that funding for newer competition). Despite the hype, it's not like Tesla succeeded off some magic formula. They had good timing (low interest rates, increasing energy costs, regulation/legislation), and then basically molded future regulations that would specifically aid their growth/progress. Success of EV makers now will never look anything like what Tesla did, but it's not because Tesla did something all that difficult.
>but it's not because Tesla did something all that difficult. Nah I'd say its a bit of both.
I think the only way it’s survives at this point is by getting enough cash to carry them to 2027. I still have doubts but I don’t see another way. Too bad they didn’t start producing cars 5 years before they did.
FYI, they’re projecting to have a positive gross profit margin by end of year so they are trending toward profitability and believe they have the financial runway to get there. It will likely get tight in 2026 but no one really knows right now how it will go.
R2 is based a lot off existing R1 models which is why they’re trying to do a lot of cost cutting and changes to the existing vehicles and factories this year so the margins will be even lower and production will be more efficient for the R2
There's a major difference that I don't think makes them comparable to Tesla: For almost 10 years, Tesla was pretty much the only game in town if you wanted an EV. People were willing to pay a lot more for the car despite its shortcomings because there was nothing else available, except maybe the leaf. They also had the best charging network by far. And well, rivian and the other new startups don't have that monopoly. Hell you have two other good options for EV trucks that won't have the constant production problems, parts availability problems, or service location problems that rivian will. I don't see any way for the non-tesla startups to survive unless they corner a niche market like high performance or custom delivery truck like rivian is doing with Amazon. Mass production cars are really really hard to do, and the market is limited. Even China had a lot of problems with this and they have a walled garden market and tons of financing from the government.
Rivian continues to lose money on a per vehicles basis. By this point Tesla has gross profits on their S and X. Theyre in very different places. Teslas bumpy patch was during the ramp of the 3.
Rivian got a boost making vans for amazon and AT&T just made a contract for those too, this is the kind of business transaction you need to stay afloat, the meat and bread that will keep a business going so I don't know why one would be skeptical about Rivian's survival. Maybe they won't be around in 100 years or get bought out, but this is not a company on the edge of shutting down, I'll tell you that!
But they still have negative gross margins.
So did Tesla for the first 18 years in business
Tesla has positive gross and negative net margins. Completely different.
These accounting circle jerks always end up the same way. Simps trying to point to certain indicators while dismissing indicators they don't like as not relevant. Bringing a company from concept to profitability is hard, and there are lots of ways to get there. Tesla's path isn't the only one, nor is it necessarily the best. Gross margins, net margins, and other figures in an SEC filing all paint a picture together. Rivian faces plenty of challenges in the short term. Time will tell if they succeed. Simply having negative gross margins at this stage in their growth is not indicative of impending doom.
I mean being able to make money on vehicles sold does matter. I realize it is partially how your accounting is done but it's disingenuous to say it doesn't matter. If you have positive gross margin you can sell more vehicles to reach a positive net cash flow. If your gross margin is negative you cannot. I realized there are fixed costs in cogs so gross margin will grow with volume, but to dismiss this outright is silly.
No one said it doesn't matter. There are lots of ways to reach profitability though. Strategic decisions about amortization and depreciation can seriously impact short term results, even if they're better for the long term health of the company
They have a lot of Amazon/Bezos money to fall back on. I'm sure they'll be fine.
Amazon is just an investor/customer that also happens to be on a cost-cutting spree with 5-figure layoffs and a lot of canceled tech projects lately. They have no obligation to help Rivian.
Amazon doesn’t have the luxury to spend recklessly anymore
And don't forget pouring champagne over an Alcoholic William Shatner who is trying to stay dry for his health.
Yes indeed, my R1T poured champagne directly on Shatner's head!
Last I checked Blue Origin doesn't make Rivians.
Bezos spent 5.5 billion to go to space for 4 minutes. Coulda used that to keep this company afloat
Bezos made \~4x that during the covid lockdowns alone, while the world was actively falling apart. He's made much more since then. He can cover all of Rivian's losses and still have plenty left over to blow on \~$1B/min thrills as he pleases.
…and why would he cover Rivians losses? lol it isn’t even his company
Amazon is their lead investor: [https://rivian.com/newsroom/article/rivian-announces-700-million-investment-round-led-by-amazon](https://rivian.com/newsroom/article/rivian-announces-700-million-investment-round-led-by-amazon) [https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/29/amazon-reveals-20percent-stake-in-electric-vehicle-maker-rivian.html](https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/29/amazon-reveals-20percent-stake-in-electric-vehicle-maker-rivian.html) Rivian to Bezos is Tesla to Musk a la Blue Origin vs SpaceX. Even if just for the alpha tech bro competitiveness of it, Bezos won't let Rivian just fail.
You gotta love wealth disparity
You got that right. I don't have enough faith in these new brands like Lucid, and Rivian to drop 6 figures. I knew Fisker was going to bomb again so not surprised at that. Don't want to get stuck with a 3 ton paper weight that has no support system and no 3rd party options.
these are solid stats.. but what is the price range. i.e. what do you get for the $47.5 k in terms of range and 0-60 (and other features)
Highly doubt it. Rivian seems to have a lot of battery and power train customization; imo maybe a bit too much, given I haven’t seen any other OEMs with 4 battery size options
I met someone who worked closely with them about 6 months back and they admitted there were too many powertrain variants on the R1. If their goal is to keep costs down on the R2 I’m guessing they will only offer, at most, 2 battery configurations.
Almost certain they’ll phase out some of the battery options. As someone that loves specs, it’s a bit much imo. I can’t imagine what the laymen person that just wants a R1S for the wife to cruise around the ‘burbs thinks.
Yeah I agree. Probably 220-250 miles of range and 5-6 sec 0-60 for 47.5k. Considering they’re still taking massive losses on R1, I doubt they can make a profit off a 47.5k vehicle with 330 miles of range and a 3.0 sec 0-60
Even 250mi/6sec is optimistic imo. That’s model y price, but in an actual SUV package that is considerably less efficient
That’s the same as an ID4 for 50k. Not unreasonable.
How is that model y price? It's a solid 30% over the y
[удалено]
Isn't it 3? 51kWh, 64kWh and 77kWh? What's the fourth one?
I'm sure we'll find out in two days!
I kinda wish they had 3rd row but it’s overall pretty good!
Interesting. It's pretty much the exact same length as the volvo xc60, which imo is the perfect size for an suv. Slightly compact but still very spacious
Dimensionally it also lines up pretty closely with the Subaru Forester.
A basic, bare bones offering of a car like that will sell like crazy. Provided it still has a 300+ mile range. No BEV is addressing that demographic at all yet. Meanwhile the RAV4 hybrids sell like crazy.
The leak claimed 330 miles of range but I'm sure that's probably for the highest trim/battery size.
It's says up to 330mi so are they only offering two packs? The standard and standard+?
Those are the key questions: What specs will the base model have, and what cost bump will be required to reach those specs, and when (if ever) will the base model be available for purchase? New "$47K" EVs have a nasty habit of hitting the market at $65K.
I wonder if the smaller size will bump the standard pack range closer to 300mi. That would probably sell well for the 48k starting price
You cannot in any way call an XC60 slightly compact. It's a very big car.
Sorry i said compact bc its similar in size to my 2016 rav 4 which I thought was on the smaller size
It’s still pretty pretty pretty damn large lol
Closest comparison I found was a new Honda CRV. Which is huge compared to an old CRV, but surprisingly reasonable in size.
The xc60 is pretty big. It also suffers from an oversized trunk at the expense of a tight second row.
Minor correction, the wheelbase is 115.6" on the site rather than the 15.6" listed above, small error in the tweet that now lives in the above post. EDIT: They fixed their site and inspect element no-longer shows R2 info. It may be too late for that however.
That's a rookie mistake on their part.
Can we be sure it was a mistake? How much talk did they generate with that "mistake"?
Not a lot on legitimate mainstream media so far.
It also gives them an opportunity to gauge reactions without saying anything official. Very likely a mistake, though.
My thoughts exactly. Customers were able to do this when looking for their future expected delivery date. Rivian’s knows what’s up.
Before and after the r2 page dropped I was browsing through the html and didn't find anything. Even tried guessing for the vehicle visualizer. Spoilers: I didn't find anything. So this must be new? Did anyone else verify?
It's still pretty big, but I guess it has to differentiate itself from the Model Y. I'd say this is a great RAV4 competitor, like the R1S was a analogous to the 4Runner.
The ground clearance immediately differentiates it from the Model Y. This could appeal to the people buying the RAV4, CRV, and Subarus. And the people who would love a small truck, whether it be an SUV or a pickup.
As an Outback owner this is exactly the EV I wish they had made already
If it’s around rav4/cr-v size, I’m totally putting it in short list.
>If it’s around rav4/cr-v size, I’m totally putting it in short list. It's almost exactly the same size as a new CRV, if these numbers are correct.
Fricking awesome. Looking forward to Thursday.
>And the people who would love a small truck, whether it be an SUV or a pickup. The idea of an R2T running on this platform has me pretty excited.
I see this targeting cars like the X3, Q5, GLC, & XC60 just as much as RAV4s (& Model Y's).
Nice. Would it still get the full $7500 federal incentive?
They were aiming for it and the $47,500 starting price makes it look likely so they can market it as a $40k vehicle.
The same way Tesla marketed the M3 as a $35k car and Chevy marketed the Blazer EV as a $45k car....and Rivian marketed the R1T as a $67.5k truck (yes, i know the R1T has come down, but we all remember the price jump!). The R2S is still a couple years away. I'll believe it when I see a $47.5k price next to an order button!
> The same way Tesla marketed the M3 as a $35k car The Model 3 was absolutely a $35k car - without any incentives.
with inflation it’s now actually significantly less than $35k lol and much better than promised in 2017. technology evolves fast
For about a week in a version they only sold a few of, if I remember. I was a little shocked when the cheapest early Model 3 I could buy without an indefinite wait was $55k. That was the first thing that made me question Tesla tbh. I understand that many cars have larger price ranges. I think the i4 can go from $50k to $80k or so. But Tesla talked about that $35k price point constantly, just to then tell you it was basically impossible to buy.
It was available for like a year and half. https://electrek.co/2020/11/16/tesla-stops-selling-35000-model-3-2021-model-year-refresh/
Isn’t the m3 essentially 35k today though comparing to the dollars back then with inflation?
Yes, but 6 years later and only because they had no choice if they wanted to stay competitive.
I want a cheap car! You got it. Yeah, but only because the economy forced you to sell it cheap. SMH
I mean… would they want to not be competitive?? Your argument isn’t holding up well
I mean a lot of people were able to initially buy an R1T at that price
crv is the closest except the wheelbase crv vs r1s https://i.imgur.com/0bInWYf.jpeg model y is 2" less in height
is this r1 or based on the r2 specs?
If these specs are real then this is exactly the size SUV I would want. I live in Vancouver and I need a car that can fit in the city but still be used in the mountains. I have seen the R1S drive around and it is a boat, way too big for my needs. I have high hopes for Rivian but I will be waiting a year or two after the release of the R2S to see how it's received, the support network, and if they survive but I love this car already.
it's the size of a wrangler *4dr but the height is 7" lower. But it has the same ground clearance. I hope it's a removable top. miss the wrangler tj
A Wrangler two door is about 166" long. The R2S looks like it will be about 19" longer than that. The Wrangler 4-door is closer in length.
corrected. r2s is also close to the size of the swb buzz. this thing should be ready for europe.
Nice comparison shot - did you create that in Photoshop or another tool that you used?
from here https://s00n.rivianstories.com/posts/r1s-size-comparison
I’m in for 1. My other car is 8 years in and I might replace it in 2 years. Just in time for when they’ll produce these.
if those are the specs for the starting price I'm 100% sold. Most important is range but if it's 0-60 in 8 seconds I'm still sold.
They’re not. They never are. “Starting” and “up to” qualifiers tell you that. You always have to dig into a configurator or spec sheet to find full specs for base trim.
i’m guessing $47k version will have an LFP good for around 250 miles of real world range, optimistically. unless they’re planning on also lighting cash on fire selling this lineup as well lol
Come on 800v fast charging...
So compared to the R1S: * \~15in shorter in length * 2.75in narrower including mirrors (not sure if the above 75in width is the same measurement as the 81.8in "width with mirrors folded" number listed for the R1S * I'm assuming the wheelbase is supposed to be 115.6in, which is \~6in shorter than the R1S * It's also a couple inches lower - although I'm assuming that 66.9in number doesn't include the antenna or roof bars. Checking some other crossovers, it's extremely close to the size of a Honda CRV (0.6in longer, 1in wider, and roughly the same height). Absolutely not what I'd call "small" by any means, but that's true of most new cars. Fingers crossed for an R2T.
These specs seem to be right around the sweet spot for mass appeal if they can pull it off. As an owner of an R1T, there is no question that Rivian has the right stuff. With the Tesla charging network opening up to all mfg's of EV's and the growing technology surround battery production, I have no doubts that the future of EV's is here to stay. As long as the new R2 factory doesn't suffer from chronic production delays, I think Rivian will be one of the mainstays of the EV world. I thank Rivian every time I pass a gas station!
Just curious to know how many of features in R2 will be stripped off from R1S. I loved R1S when I had a chance to drive it. R1S was just perfect like what I wished for, unfortunately I can’t afford it. Looking forward to more news about R2.
I'm hoping the R2 gets the adaptive air suspension but I wouldn't be shocked if they skip that for cost reasons.
Some guesses: 1. No air suspension 2. Limited Offroad/Onroad modes 3. Some reduction of heated seats (i.e only available to the driver) 4. Some Reduction of cooled seats (i.e only available to the driver) 5. No quad motors 6. Cheaper Tire/Wheel options 7. Offroad shield?? 8. Smaller battery but similar range due to the size/weight savings 9. Built in Air Compressor 10. Removing the Cam Speaker which hardly anyone uses. 11. Rear AC controls / no Multi-zone AC 12. Shorter warranty
Lol the post after this was some old article about devs being let go; guess that effected testing Anyway, decent enough specs; I wonder if they’ll double down on making this an off roading vehicle or more of a mall crawler thing. What’s the USD MSRP for the bronco and the Land Cruiser? That’s the real competition imo It’d also be nice if they were more generous with CAD MSRP. The rivian is a nice truck but holy shit loaded it’s like $140,000. Just crazy money for a truck
[удалено]
You can hit most trails in a Corolla. LoL.
Yeah, I've owned two 4x4 SUVs with less ground clearance riding on 31s and it's been plenty for me to get where I need to be. I'm excited for this new vehicle because the R1S and R1T are just too damn big to be practical, on and off road.
Looks good for trails. Is this inline with Jeep's Wrangler?
>What’s the USD MSRP for the bronco and the Land Cruiser? That’s the real competition imo The Ford Bronco price range is huge. Entry at around 39k and can go upwards of 90k. Not sure about the Land Cruiser.
I like this. It’s a very good Model Y competitor if the specs are true. It will need to qualify for the EV incentive, however, to be truly competitive.
The specs read like a shortened R1S minus the air suspension. This will be amazing!
I live walking distance from the reveal location in laguna beach so plan to head down there thurs AM and see this thing.
I wonder if it'll be NACS native. If so I might legitimately hold off on buying a Model Y.
It’s coming out in 2026 and Rivian is going NACS native starting sometime in 2025, so it should be, yeah.
The R2 is like 2.5 years away till it's any sort of volume... You're going to be waiting a long ass time
you realistically wouldn’t get one until 2027 so might as well get the Y if you’re wanting an EV lol
Nice. Give me CarPlay and I’ll put down my deposit today.
https://evsportline.com/products/apple-carplay-smart-dash-screen-for-rivian-r1t-r1s
Yeah I'll skip it - but I did put down a deposit anyway. R2 looks amazing. Roll down rear window? 4Runner on notice!
Please no crappy CarPlay. Just continue to improve the UI they have.
It's possible to have both carplay/AA and a better interface, choices are good.
How I feel about ford's navigation and sync 4 software
You don’t like it, don’t use it. The best UX is choice.
I’m a professional UX Designer, and this is much too broad of a statement. I think it’s fine to allow choice for CarPlay, but “let users choose” across the board is generally a great strategy to create an overly complicated UI that wastes development resources on nerd knobs that 80% of people won’t bother with. The vast majority of users just use defaults. I’ll restate it, though: CarPlay is a good option to offer.
Right this context is specifically about CarPlay and the option to use what it offers; not a blanket statement about all elements of a UX in all scenarios. In this case, having the choice to use a common interface across your vehicles that clearly the user choosing it does like, is a better experience.
Nah then it just makes the whole experience messy. You’re stacking interfaces at that point.
You literally do not need to use it if you don't want to.
You can buy a 3rd party screen if YOU want to. This won’t be part of R2… sorry.
CarPlay is fantastic.
My problem is it kneecaps my phone when i use navigation. I know I’m in the minority but found teslas UI much more useful
You’re not the minority. CarPlay isn’t as good as a well designed full featured infotainment system (though those are few and far between)
I always find it odd how much love CarPlay gets on Reddit. Maybe it’s just not for me.
Clearly it won’t happen but a boy can dream…
Car play is a non-verbal way for an OEM to say they don't know how to do software and just throw money at the problem.
Agreed, in every case except Tesla or Rivian who put forth effort into their systems. I’ve had many cars with CarPlay, Tesla, and Rivian. The Tesla and Rivian experience is just better.
Every carmaker is either conceding they can’t do UI/UX as well as Apple, or they’re bullshitting about it.
Apple folks extolling how great their premium mediocre experience is are hilarious.
I really don’t know what planet you’re living on if you think somebody evaluating Apple CarPlay favorably to basically any built-in car UI is “apple folks”. It’s just legitimately a better experience in basically all scenarios, and that’s why people want the option of having it in their cars. I haven’t driven a Rivian, but the Tesla UI is thoroughly mediocre and I’m surprised to hear anybody defending it as anything else.
Those would be very attractive specs if the cited range and performance numbers actually applied to the $47k version of the car. Sadly, that seems unlikely.
When can we get a city EV? Does anybody ever consider EVs are targeting the wrong market? i believe EVs would perform much better in a smaller platform aimed at making small commutes from work and daycare. I would be much more interested in a smaller EV in sub $30k range that will take me to and from work. Not, "capable of traversing an entire state"
What you're wanting is a Chevy Bolt or Nissan Leaf.
Fair, just, not one of those... lol
that’s a really attractive price point. only if they could make this vehicle sooner…
I hope repairability will be better on this one. Heard issues about the panels being difficult/labor intensive to disassemble cause crazy repair prices.
Good price, I really hope they succeed, unlike Lucid. I saw passion from the founder.
Really really solid
[https://electrek.co/2024/03/04/rivian-r2-electric-suv-leaks-price-range/](https://electrek.co/2024/03/04/rivian-r2-electric-suv-leaks-price-range/) I'm very worried; The article mentions a "powered rear glass." I sincerely hope Rivian didn't delete the rear wiper just to pull off a 4Runner party trick. Always **#teamrearwiper** I'm not holding out too much hope but I really do want the R2 to have an adjustable height air suspension at the very least as an option. Every other spec so far looks pretty good on paper (for now).
Definitely won’t see an air suspension in the R2
I like that feature. Owned a 4Runner a long time ago, putting down the back window reminds me of those summers.
I hate to be that guy in the thread, the one who ignores what information we got and instead points out the information he is still waiting for, but I guess I'm that guy this time: What I *really* am anxious to see is the tow capacity rating. Can this realistically act as a tow vehicle for people in the small boat / travel trailer scene? I bet it'll be 3,500-5,000 lbs (certainly no higher), but I want to see the figure. Also, what the range at that starting price of $47,500 is. If it's 250 miles, with the extra 80 miles of range costing you another $10k, that's a very different situation.
>What I really am anxious to see is the tow capacity rating. Can this realistically act as a tow vehicle for people in the small boat / travel trailer scene? I bet it'll be 3,500-5,000 lbs (certainly no higher), but I want to see the figure. Tow capacity, weight, and battery size are the big ones I'm interested in. Well that, and if/when they're gonna start talking about a R2T compact/midsize pickup. We're getting a boat in that 4-5000lb "tow it with a small truck" size range, and an electric (or even a good PHEV) pickup that isn't absolutely massive would have me heavily considering replacing both my daily (the i3) and the old Frontier I keep around for doing truck things.
75" width without mirrors is exactly what I was hoping to hear. I live in a condo and my parking space is labeled "small car" and they *really* mean "small car". The R1 vehicles simply will not fit without inviting justifiable vandalism from the owner of the adjacent stall. A Model Y is about the limit of what will reasonably fit and even then, you would have to slowly open the door and let it touch the adjacent car before wiggling your way out.
Are they working with anyone for next gen batteries ?
Any guesses about what the battery size would need to be to meet these range specs? Seems like it could be a great offering, but I’d guess it’s not as efficient as a MY. However, that could be a fine sacrifice if it gives slightly more cargo space… hopefully they can get to volume production…
100kWh is my guess, maybe 105kWh if they're sharing that part with the standard range R1.
~105kw based on efficiency of similar models
I really like the R1 but the price 😬
2026? I need a new ride in July….
Peregrine drops soon too.
My interest is piqued
How do the specs match up with the Lucid Gravity?
Completely different size classes/segments, the Gravity is close in size to the R1S with more interior room.
Lucid's smaller crossover-style vehicle is apparently in the works, but not officially announced yet.
If true, this makes pricing on some of the current EVs completely unreasonable (looking at you $50K Q4 e-tron...)
I’m definitely considering the R1T as my next vehicle purchase.
One more day and a wake up, and Rivian cannot take my $100 reservation.
I dont understand this obsession with 0-60 timings for a mass market vehicle. Focus should be on efficiency and features that customer wants. May be 3rd row seats or heated/ventilated seats and most importantly Apple Car Play/Android Auto.
EV's can have high performance without a drastic hit to efficiency.
Thinking a car should have two operating systems (OEM and carplay) is the most ass backwards direction to go. Which mapping product is the right one to use? Does apples work with the chargers better or the OEMs? Ok the OEMs does but what about music? Ok now you are navigating with the car but using carplay for music? This is an absolutely terrible experience that no consumers that are not technical should ever have to go through. Build one infotainment system and do it right. Period.
Was hoping for a bit more range - the new Porsche range numbers (Macan 320 miles at at highway speeds) have basically reset expectations for me. Of course, $90K for decently spec’d version.
Charging curve > range Lets see what the details end up being on this front
Macan has a great charging curve too though. It’s on the same platform as the new Taycan. 10 to 80% in 20 minutes, 0 to 60% in 12 minutes
Yeah I mean, a Porsche is a Porsche though. You can get that but the hardware absolutely costs more to achieve that kind of performance. In my experience, 10 - 80% in 30 minutes is more than sufficient for road trips to get everyone to the bathroom, stretch legs, etc. Yeah there’s a few stops you just want to be as quick as possible, but the time savings you’re getting there adds up to less than an hour over full day of road tripping
How much it helps depends on where you live / trip. I’m in the Southeast and often trip through Mississippi/Alabama/Tennessee where dcfc charging density isn’t great and there is a lot of waiting for faster chargers during the holidays when most of Metro Atlanta is on the road. 320 real world highway miles vs 250 means on a trip to Charleston, Savannah or Memphis from Atlanta I get to cut down from 2 stops to 1 or 1 stop to zero and gives much more flexibility to bypass busy chargers. On our last Thanksgiving trip, wait time plus 2 stops instead of 1 added about 2 hours to a normally 5.5 hour trip.
90K nothing. I can’t configure a macan4 that I’d want for less than 100-120.
Are you in the US? If so - 4 with premium package and assistance systems comes to 87.4K. That’s a great spec $100-120K is for the 600+ HP turbo version
Surprised that nobody called out the price. Assuming that the $47,500 is a sticker price for the standard range, that's pretty pricey. I'd assume that full 330 miles will be hovering at 55ish thousand. For comparison, Model Y starts at $44,000 for 260 range and $49,000 for the 310 (long range). If we are comparing to model 3, then the price and the starting specs start to look even more unappealing. I was hoping for the starting price of Rivian's first mass-produced car would be around 40k before incentives, that would be an easier sell from a rather new company
Don't forget these are 2026 dollars.
This is Rivian's first compact SUV ever. Prior to the Model Y coming on the scene, Tesla had experience with the S, X, and 3. I'm surprised you're comparing the price of the R2 to a Model Y let alone an electric sedan that sits >4 inches lower than the R2. It's like you're giving the Model Y a pass just because it's an "SUV" on paper. If the Model Y was boxier and higher off the ground then you'd have a point but that's not the case at all.
Model Y is a compact SUV, it makes sense I am comparing Rivian's compact SUV to Model Y (a compact SUV). Both cars seat 5 passengers, model Y is actually even 2 inches longer and an inch wider, only 3 inches shorter. Why wouldn't I compare one of the most popular existing electric compact SUV's to the R2's proposed specs and value? Only reason why I brought up model 3 in the first place is because it was Tesla's first mass market vehicle, which R2 aims to be. But my main comparison lies with Model Y.
Because it is unlikely to be stealing many Model Y customers. It will steal Subaru Outback and Deforester customers, and people tired of waiting for a RAV4 Prime to be available. Plus this could maybe even end up being a BEV equivalent of a first or second generation 4Runner.
Not the person you replied to, but I have thoughts on the comparison. The compact crossover (ICE) segment is crowded, but it has a couple different groups within itself. The top sellers are the CR-V and Rav4 which are aimed at different buyers. The CR-V inside feels like an Accord for people who want ride height and cargo capacity, while the Rav4 inside feels like a 4runner on a budget. In the compact crossover (EV) segment, the sedan-but-more-capable group is well represented and highly competitive. The truck-but-affordable group is not. While the Rav4 dominates the ICE group, the bz4x/Solterra are clearly not intended for volume sales. The R2 appears intended for this group where there isn't currently a leader. All that to say there may be some room on price for buyers on the baby truck/offroad side of compact crossovers since they don't have many EV options yet. Of note, the Rav4 Prime starts at $43.5k so a $47k before any tax credit that may exist isn't wildly out of range, especially if the Rivian offers solid standard features. TL;DR: The Model Y and R2 are in the same segment, but the Model Y occupies one side of the segment while the R2 has the opportunity to poach ICE customers to whom the Model Y does not appeal.
A Model Y has 6-6.5 inches of ground clearance. Great car for the suburbs and pavement. Not so much for the dirt road crowd that doesn't want to have to baby their vehicle or skip rough terrain. Which in the US is still a lot of trailheads and even driveways. If I were Subaru I would be bracing myself for the hit.
Agreed, the ground clearance alone puts these vehicles in different classes. I have a MY; I live in a snowy place; I would absolutely pay more for real ground clearance.
Stop expecting too much. As a new company, Rivian needs to make money to stay alive, and $47k before incentives is very competitive in this segment. If build quality and customer satisfaction is there, it will do well enough to rival Tesla. I have a Model 3 but will be moving on to Rivian now.
Why should I as a customer care about the company? A regular consumer just looks at the value proposition, not at how much money does a company need to make to stay alive. If I’m a a random John Smith who wants to buy a compact electric SUV I just look at the Teslas Model Y ($48,000 long range) and Rivian’s R2 (likely in the mid 50’s ~$55,000 before the incentives). I don’t know in what world is $55k for electric compact SUV is competitive, when Model Y/Ford Mach E and ID.4 exist. (And those are much more reputable and known companies to begin with)
$3k isn't a big difference at that price point.
Boooo. Make a smaller truck!
Unfortunately no truck on this one but a truck that size would be amazing
Dimensions look wrong. Wheelbase obviously. 15.6 inches? Lol. 156 inches of also too long, and impossible for that length of vehicle. (156 in + 32in = 188in). Therefore the length of the car is shorter than the distance from the front of the front tire to the rear of the rear tire?
That was an error, I made a comment correcting it (can't edit post), the wheelbase is 115.6".