Rivian Deliveries Pushed to 2022

Rivian has started notifying customers that they will need to wait a bit longer to receive their vehicles.

Rivian has sent notifications that lay out delivery windows for the “Launch Edition” that range from March to September. It’s reasonable to assume that the company’s less-pricey “Adventure” and “Explore” packages will also be pushed to the second half of 2022.

While Rivian has started production of its all-electric R1T pickup, few have been delivered. The R1S SUV was expected to go into production next month, but it is not clear if that will be the case.

Rivian currently operates a single factory in Normal, Illinois and is reportedly looking for a second factory location. 

Early reviews of the R1T pickup have been strong. And investors have been supportive, as the company’s recent IPO gave it a market capitalization of $100 billion.

 

[Brando]

Rivian stole from Tesla (people fine, everyone can work where ever they want, all patents free, Tesla procedures/methods are company secrets)

Rivian using Tesla SuperChargers --- perhaps no deal possible now?

 

[Ogre]

Rivian stole from Tesla (people fine, everyone can work where ever they want, all patents free, Tesla procedures/methods are company secrets)

Rivian using Tesla SuperChargers --- perhaps no deal possible now?

Most likely Tesla is going to support anyone with a CCS charger. It’s more about attracting and retaining customers. Rivian owners who want to use Superchargers will pay a higher rate or pay a monthly membership for Tesla Supercharging. Rivian wants their own monthly subscription/ membership also. That’s going to sting if your Rivian membership includes charging free and they have to pay Tesla fees.

 

[smithrukami]

Most likely Tesla is going to support anyone with a CCS charger. It’s more about attracting and retaining customers. Rivian owners who want to use Superchargers will pay a higher rate or pay a monthly membership for Tesla Supercharging. Rivian wants their own monthly subscription/ membership also. That’s going to sting if your Rivian membership includes charging free and they have to pay Tesla fees.

Isn’t Rivian just a research and development arm for Ford? That in itself is huge but isn’t that reality? Does anyone expect Rivian to produce for masses?

 

[HVM]

No tank turns: Why Rivian’s "Tank Turn" Stationary Spin Feature Is Delayed
No Ford: Ford and Rivian cancel plans to jointly develop an electric vehicle

 

[Ogre]

Isn’t Rivian just a research and development arm for Ford? That in itself is huge but isn’t that reality? Does anyone expect Rivian to produce for masses?

They have announced that Rivian won’t be making a truck for Ford or designing one.

I don’t think there will be any exchange of technologies or product between the two companies which is a shame.

 

[mark95476]

Rivian doesn't have any secret sauce and shows >50% range reduction while towing. Owners intending to tow will have to rely on a bigger pack.

First real-world Rivian R1T towing test shows huge range loss

The Rivian R1T has a towing capacity of 11,000 lbs. According to the company’s website, towing at that weight will reduce range “by about 50%.” In the first real-world R1T towing test, that number is […]

driveteslacanada.ca

 

[ecarfan]

That article about towing with a Rivian, while correctly noting that the high 73mph driving speed contributed significantly to the range decrease, then focused on the weight of the truck and tow vehicle as being another major factor and never mentioned anything about aerodynamics. In fact, at that speed, tow weight impact on energy usage is far from the primary factor; it’s all about air resistance and speed. And the aerodynamics of what was being towed – a car on a flat bed open trailer — are terrible, and the aerodynamics of the Rivian body design are poor compared to say, a Model X. I have not been able to find a CD figure for the RT1 and I suspect the reason for that is that it is well over 0.30.

Elon has stated that “with extreme effort” Tesla might be able to get the Cybertruck CD down to 0.30. So it sounds like that is his goal but it is unlikely to be achieved. Rivian doesn’t even talk about CD.

Rivian deliveries being pushed into 2022 is no surprise. As Elon has noted many times, it’s not that difficult to build a small number of great vehicles, but exponentially more difficult to build tens or hundreds of thousands of great vehicles.

I hope Rivian succeeds. I am not a fan of their styling but they are clearly innovating and could provide much needed competition for Tesla.

 

[Merrill]

That article about towing with a Rivian, while correctly noting that the high 73mph driving speed contributed significantly to the range decrease, then focused on the weight of the truck and tow vehicle as being another major factor and never mentioned anything about aerodynamics. In fact, at that speed, tow weight impact on energy usage is far from the primary factor; it’s all about air resistance and speed. And the aerodynamics of what was being towed – a car on a flat bed open trailer — are terrible, and the aerodynamics of the Rivian body design are poor compared to say, a Model X. I have not been able to find a CD figure for the RT1 and I suspect the reason for that is that it is well over 0.30.

Elon has stated that “with extreme effort” Tesla might be able to get the Cybertruck CD down to 0.30. So it sounds like that is his goal but it is unlikely to be achieved. Rivian doesn’t even talk about CD.

Rivian deliveries being pushed into 2022 is no surprise. As Elon has noted many times, it’s not that difficult to build a small number of great vehicles, but exponentially more difficult to build tens or hundreds of thousands of great vehicles.

I hope Rivian succeeds. I am not a fan of their styling but they are clearly innovating and could provide much needed competition for Tesla.

I agree with most of what you are saying I think the problem right now with the transition of trucks from gas to electric is the battery technology. Towing or hauling heavy loads is a problem for range, I’m hoping that will change in the future. As far as the styling of the Rivian R1T unless you see it in person you cannot go by the pictures, much better looking up close.

 

[chinney]

Presumably, in raw energy usage, ICE vehicles are similarly inefficient when towing large, heavy, non-aerodynamic loads. The difference is that ICE vehicles still tend to have higher beginning ranges and are easier to 'refill'. Or is there something about electric engines that makes them inherently less suitable for towing?

 

[Merrill]

Presumably, in raw energy usage, ICE vehicles are similarly inefficient when towing large, heavy, non-aerodynamic loads. The difference is that ICE vehicles still tend to have higher beginning ranges and are easier to 'refill'. Or is there something about electric engines that makes them inherently less suitable for towing?

As I said above it comes down to range when towing, as battery technology improves so will range and that is necessary for long range towing.

 

[mark95476]

Any regular pick-up truck can be easily modeled as a brick to extract the CD figure. There are many videos on YouTube that went through this exercise when CT was revealed. CT is going to be more efficient and get better range just based on it's aerodynamics/lower CD.

Tesla owners have been towing things for years and you'll see them report similar ~50% range reduction. It's about the same range reduction as towing with a gasser.

That article about towing with a Rivian, while correctly noting that the high 73mph driving speed contributed significantly to the range decrease, then focused on the weight of the truck and tow vehicle as being another major factor and never mentioned anything about aerodynamics. In fact, at that speed, tow weight impact on energy usage is far from the primary factor; it’s all about air resistance and speed. And the aerodynamics of what was being towed – a car on a flat bed open trailer — are terrible, and the aerodynamics of the Rivian body design are poor compared to say, a Model X. I have not been able to find a CD figure for the RT1 and I suspect the reason for that is that it is well over 0.30.

Elon has stated that “with extreme effort” Tesla might be able to get the Cybertruck CD down to 0.30. So it sounds like that is his goal but it is unlikely to be achieved. Rivian doesn’t even talk about CD.

Rivian deliveries being pushed into 2022 is no surprise. As Elon has noted many times, it’s not that difficult to build a small number of great vehicles, but exponentially more difficult to build tens or hundreds of thousands of great vehicles.

I hope Rivian succeeds. I am not a fan of their styling but they are clearly innovating and could provide much needed competition for Tesla.

 

[240W]

^yep, look at the threads on this forum, not even towing, but range loss with bikes on a bike rack.
pretty sure we'll see more clickbait articles on CT when it comes out and then a lot of crap journalism on what terrible range loss when it comes to towing...

Hence there's a tri motor for CT and max pack for Rivian, need the range

 

[ChadS]

Presumably, in raw energy usage, ICE vehicles are similarly inefficient when towing large, heavy, non-aerodynamic loads. The difference is that ICE vehicles still tend to have higher beginning ranges and are easier to 'refill'. Or is there something about electric engines that makes them inherently less suitable for towing?

It's not about the electric motors; they are great at towing. The difference is the energy stored onboard. An efficient vehicle - regardless of powertrain, but we notice this more in EVs because they are far more efficient - typically stores less energy because it requires less (and having more would make it less efficient). Dragging a trailer of x pounds uphill is going to use a fixed amount of energy (because physics!); that energy is a larger portion of the energy storage of an efficient vehicle than an inefficient one, and so will have an outsized effect on range. Dragging a trailer of x extra frontal area with a CD of y for z miles is similarly going to use a set amount of energy that is also a larger portion of a typical efficient vehicle's energy storage.

To tow farther, EVs just need more energy storage. As the price and weight of batteries come down, this will happen. Not everyone needs a 500-mile EV truck (my wife, for example, only has a 200-mile bladder), but it does make sense for those that tow. The 500-mile range is only for its (relatively) efficient non-tow mode; while towing it may get "only" 250 miles.

As ecarfan pointed out, aero is the largest factor affecting range on the highway while towing or not, and given that efficiency is lowered by the square of the speed, towing at lower speeds is FAR better. Towing at 73mph is a bad idea if you are concerned about range. Heck, I'd expect almost a 25% reduction over 60mph even if not towing. (See HERE for an 8-year-old thread with some non-towing numbers on how speed and elevation affect efficiency. The absolute hit is exactly the same on gas cars; it's just harder to see the relative hit in the noise of how much of their energy storage routinely gets wasted).

BTW, my cousin in the Seattle area has an appointment to test-drive an R1T on Friday. He asked me to go along, but I can't make it. I have an R1S reservation (we have a trailer on order and so will be among those towing soon), but haven't yet heard anything from Rivian about events or test drives in this area.

 

[ecarfan]

Presumably, in raw energy usage, ICE vehicles are similarly inefficient when towing large, heavy, non-aerodynamic loads. The difference is that ICE vehicles still tend to have higher beginning ranges and are easier to 'refill'. Or is there something about electric engines that makes them inherently less suitable for towing?

I agree that ICE vehicles use much more energy when towing, just like EVs do. But they start out with more energy available to them (gas is much more energy dense than batteries) and they can be “recharged” in 5 minutes.

Electric motors are excellent for towing due to their tremendous torque which is available immediately from zero mph. They are not somehow less efficient than an ICE when towing.

I’ve been towing a 2,200 lb travel trailer for years with my X. It does very well.

 

[Fred42]

It's not about the electric motors; they are great at towing. The difference is the energy stored onboard. An efficient vehicle - regardless of powertrain, but we notice this more in EVs because they are far more efficient - typically stores less energy because it requires less (and having more would make it less efficient). Dragging a trailer of x pounds uphill is going to use a fixed amount of energy (because physics!); that energy is a larger portion of the energy storage of an efficient vehicle than an inefficient one, and so will have an outsized effect on range. Dragging a trailer of x extra frontal area with a CD of y for z miles is similarly going to use a set amount of energy that is also a larger portion of a typical efficient vehicle's energy storage.

To tow farther, EVs just need more energy storage. As the price and weight of batteries come down, this will happen. Not everyone needs a 500-mile EV truck (my wife, for example, only has a 200-mile bladder), but it does make sense for those that tow. The 500-mile range is only for its (relatively) efficient non-tow mode; while towing it may get "only" 250 miles.

As ecarfan pointed out, aero is the largest factor affecting range on the highway while towing or not, and given that efficiency is lowered by the square of the speed, towing at lower speeds is FAR better. Towing at 73mph is a bad idea if you are concerned about range. Heck, I'd expect almost a 25% reduction over 60mph even if not towing. (See HERE for an 8-year-old thread with some non-towing numbers on how speed and elevation affect efficiency. The absolute hit is exactly the same on gas cars; it's just harder to see the relative hit in the noise of how much of their energy storage routinely gets wasted).

BTW, my cousin in the Seattle area has an appointment to test-drive an R1T on Friday. He asked me to go along, but I can't make it. I have an R1S reservation (we have a trailer on order and so will be among those towing soon), but haven't yet heard anything from Rivian about events or test drives in this area.

A relative recently did a day trip in an R1T. This person dislikes Tesla's spare interiors but was impressed with the quality and detail and the quiet power in the Rivian, and also with the storage tunnel and the pull-out kitchen. No sale though due to happiness with two year old ICE. When I pointed out how small the pickup bed is, I just got a blank look. I hope the CT's will be larger.

 

[ecarfan]

When I pointed out how small the pickup bed is, I just got a blank look. I hope the CT's will be larger.

Not everyone needs a long bed.

The Rivian is 217” long and has a 54” bed.

The Cybertruck is almost 232” long and purportedly will have a 78” bed.

The Cybertruck won’t fit in my garage. The Rivian will, and that bed length would be fine for me, though at this point I have no plans to buy either of them. But they are both very compelling vehicles in their own way.

 

[WhiteWi]

Not everyone needs a long bed.

The Rivian is 217” long and has a 54” bed.

The Cybertruck is almost 232” long and purportedly will have a 78” bed.

The Cybertruck won’t fit in my garage. The Rivian will, and that bed length would be fine for me, though at this point I have no plans to buy either of them. But they are both very compelling vehicles in their own way.

I disagree. People buy trucks to haul stuff and bed size does matter. One trip to Home Depot will prove that when you need to buy something for your house. Also never parked my ram in the garage. Trucks live outside.

 

[Merrill]

I can fit everything I would need to haul in the Rivian, also never park my vehicles outside so needs to fit in the garage.

 

[ecarfan]

I disagree. People buy trucks to haul stuff and bed size does matter.

You disagree with my statement that “Not everyone needs a long bed”? So you believe that every single person who buys a truck has an absolute requirement that the bed has to be 6 ft or greater?

Tens of thousands of Rivian reservation holders disagree with you. I’m not one of them, but I disagree with you.

Yes, many truck buyers want beds longer than what Rivian is going to offer. But not all truck buyers. There is clearly a market for trucks with beds shorter than 6 ft. It’s not the majority of the market, but it is a segment of the market.

 

[Ogre]

I would be quite happy with a Cybertruck with a 4.5 foot bed if it was 8” narrower and 2-3 foot shorter. Don’t need a giant truck. I need room for 5-6 people and the ability to haul a decent amount of stuff. A 4.5 foot bed would be tolerable. Being able to park it would be priceless.

Rivian doesn’t cut it for me for other reasons.