R1S interior size vs. other SUVs?

[Blakeney]

Wondering what people think about the interior size of the R1S vs other or their other comparable SUV’s. Obviously you cannot compare to a suburban or Tahoe.

We have a Kia Telluride which our R1S will replace and unfortunately today when I had an R1S demo drive it was not at home to really compare

I can tell you the size difference is interesting and unfortunately not in the favor of the R1S :0(

The telluride although technically 4-6” shorter in overall length is much more roomy inside. Of course the seats can sit lower as there is no battery, but the space between rows, the trunk and head room and shoulder room is more in the Kia than in the Telluride which is sad.

Would love to hear some comparisons first hand!

Sponsored

 

[lmr]

Yep, you are losing about 4 inches of hip room in the R1S vs the Telluride, despite a similar exterior width. Perhaps the off-road prowess or sheer weight the R1S made Rivian prioritize rigidity over passenger volume, hard to to say without talking to the designers and engineers, but the R1S while doing many things well certainly will not be the vehicle for everyone's situation.

 

[MuskOxFamily]

Rivian is very tight inside for its exterior dimensions, which makes some sense given the beefy frame and offroad hardware. I can live with the compromised space efficiency, but they need to be realistic and make a long-wheelbase R1S to accommodate families who actually need to use the third row. The solution is simple - put the SUV body onto the 14 inch longer R1T chassis. Throw in captains chairs too. This also solves the handling woes of the short wheelbase R1S.

 

[mkg3]

Rivian is very tight inside for its exterior dimensions, which makes some sense given the beefy frame and offroad hardware.....

The frame can affect the vertical dimension, along with the battery skateboard layout, but not the width.

The comment is interesting as I do not find the interior to be tight. It feels about what anyone would expect from a midsized SUV (e.g., XC90, Durango, GC). I suppose the perception comes from how big or small the person is.

As for the captain's chair, perhaps it can be an option for R1S as a 6 seater by taking out the middle seat at some point, once the production is humming along.

As is, the R1S is over 200". Adding another 12+" would make it too long and big for my liking so I'm on the other side of the argument on this subject.

 

[Tall_Rider]

The frame can affect the vertical dimension, along with the battery skateboard layout, but not the width.

The comment is interesting as I do not find the interior to be tight. It feels about what anyone would expect from a midsized SUV (e.g., XC90, Durango, GC). I suppose the perception comes from how big or small the person is.

As for the captain's chair, perhaps it can be an option for R1S as a 6 seater by taking out the middle seat at some point, once the production is humming along.

As is, the R1S is over 200". Adding another 12+" would make it too long and big for my liking so I'm on the other side of the argument on this subject.

I would prefer and having been arguing for a extended wheelbase as well. There's no reason they can't make two lengths seeing as plenty of other manufacturers do exactly that with their mid / large SUV offerings. I'll also add that the legroom dimensions are tight relative to the XC90, Durango, etc. The XC90 has more rear legroom and is 5" shorter.

 

[mkg3]

I would prefer and having been arguing for an extended wheelbase as well. There's no reason they can't make two lengths seeing as plenty of other manufacturers....

There is a very good reason why Rivian cannot do what you are suggesting. For every variant, it introduces complexity to the production.

For legacy manufactures (e.g., GM, F), they have been producing hundred of thousands trucks that forms the basis of their SUVs with different length. For new company still trying to learn to walk, let alone to run, its a huge impact to the production line and the ramp up efforts. Additionally, it also stress the need for added capital requirements before they are anywhere near cashflow positive even on the marginal basis per vehicle.

So, again, there is every reason they should not introduce any more variants than they already have with different options. Perhaps they can consider the stretched version in the next gen R1S after R2 platform is up and running...

 

[Shaqdeez]

Wondering what people think about the interior size of the R1S vs other or their other comparable SUV’s. Obviously you cannot compare to a suburban or Tahoe.

We have a Kia Telluride which our R1S will replace and unfortunately today when I had an R1S demo drive it was not at home to really compare

I can tell you the size difference is interesting and unfortunately not in the favor of the R1S :0(

The telluride although technically 4-6” shorter in overall length is much more roomy inside. Of course the seats can sit lower as there is no battery, but the space between rows, the trunk and head room and shoulder room is more in the Kia than in the Telluride which is sad.

Would love to hear some comparisons first hand!

Yeah I'd love to hear more of this. I'm a bit concerned that the R1S appears to be smaller in the interior than the Telluride. I was hoping it's bigger. Arghhh... The R1S is supposed to be my new family hauler that's replacing the CX9 (had a Traverse before that and that was awesome as far as space). This idea that Off-Roading has a higher priority then fitting 7 people comfortably sounds a bit unrealistic as far as what people think their priorities are. All I hear from people who justify the R1S is that "well it's better Off-Road then vehicle X". I don't have any polls but I find it very hard to believe that the majority of owners of 7 passenger SUVs are taking their vehicles Off-Road. Why they are prioritizing this over passenger space makes no sense.

 

[Tall_Rider]

There is a very good reason why Rivian cannot do what you are suggesting. For every variant, it introduces complexity to the production.

For legacy manufactures (e.g., GM, F), they have been producing hundred of thousands trucks that forms the basis of their SUVs with different length. For new company still trying to learn to walk, let alone to run, its a huge impact to the production line and the ramp up efforts. Additionally, it also stress the need for added capital requirements before they are anywhere near cashflow positive even on the marginal basis per vehicle.

So, again, there is every reason they should not introduce any more variants than they already have with different options. Perhaps they can consider the stretched version in the next gen R1S after R2 platform is up and running...

I completely disagree. You are making excuses for them and failing to see the business opportunity. You're overestimating how much it takes to produce the same chassis / body in different lengths. It would take relatively minimal capital and introduce minimal complexity - if they had properly planned for that. Moreover, they could get away with a significant uncharge for the larger model, likely anywhere between $5-8k per vehicle, which would dramatically increase margin on those models on a per unit basis.

Per your logic, they never should have made the R1S and R1T different lengths.

Do you know what is going to be a massive capital outlay? Designing and gearing up to manufacture the R2 models. My guess is they don't make it.

 

[Tall_Rider]

Yeah I'd love to hear more of this. I'm a bit concerned that the R1S appears to be smaller in the interior than the Telluride. I was hoping it's bigger. Arghhh... The R1S is supposed to be my new family hauler that's replacing the CX9 (had a Traverse before that and that was awesome as far as space). This idea that Off-Roading has a higher priority then fitting 7 people comfortably sounds a bit unrealistic as far as what people think their priorities are. All I hear from people who justify the R1S is that "well it's better Off-Road then vehicle X". I don't have any polls but I find it very hard to believe that the majority of owners of 7 passenger SUVs are taking their vehicles Off-Road. Why they are prioritizing this over passenger space makes no sense.

Unfortunately it's much smaller inside than a Telluride. It was designed by Tech bros who went a little overboard in making it hella cool, for an uncritical fanboy base. Rivian will be gone in a few years because the product is niche, overengineered and not designed for derivative models. The legacy manufacturers are going to crush them. And all the fanboys on this site are going to cry with their orphaned trucks.

 

[Blakeney]

Yeah I'd love to hear more of this. I'm a bit concerned that the R1S appears to be smaller in the interior than the Telluride. I was hoping it's bigger. Arghhh... The R1S is supposed to be my new family hauler that's replacing the CX9 (had a Traverse before that and that was awesome as far as space). This idea that Off-Roading has a higher priority then fitting 7 people comfortably sounds a bit unrealistic as far as what people think their priorities are. All I hear from people who justify the R1S is that "well it's better Off-Road then vehicle X". I don't have any polls but I find it very hard to believe that the majority of owners of 7 passenger SUVs are taking their vehicles Off-Road. Why they are prioritizing this over passenger space makes no sense.

You know, we love our Telluride and captains chairs and that was a big draw back when they made the change to not include or have those as an option at launch. Having said that, we are one of those people that do not need the 3rd row really. We carpool a few times a week and may have 2 extra people on road trips. Really we wanted something electric and NOT a model X. The 3rd row is a bonus but also a must for 25% of the time.

 

[SoCal Rob]

Unfortunately it's much smaller inside than a Telluride. It was designed by Tech bros who went a little overboard in making it hella cool, for an uncritical fanboy base. Rivian will be gone in a few years because the product is niche, overengineered and not designed for derivative models. The legacy manufacturers are going to crush them. And all the fanboys on this site are going to cry with their orphaned trucks.

I think the real competition for the R1S is the Land Rover Defender 110 and upmarket trims of the Jeep Grand Cherokee 3-row. Maybe the Toyota Land Cruiser and Lexus equivalent but last I checked the 3rd row was fold-down jump seats and the suspension tech was lacking. While I may be missing some true competitors, the Telluride doesn't seem like an apples-to-apples comparison to me.

I don't think any of us know with certainty what the future holds for Rivian. I'm critical enough of Rivian that I don't consider myself to be a fanboy and I always assumed that there was a possibility that the vehicle could be orphaned in the future so I'd be disappointed but I promise that I won't be crying if this comes to pass.

 

[3l3c7r1c]

I can certainly tell that cargo space behind second row (at least diagonally) is bigger than my Palisade. I can fit my skis diagonally where previously I had to use the pass through between captains chairs with Palisade.


but the second row legroom is definitely smaller! My 2 years old can kick to the back of the driver’s seat which he could not do with my palisade (very scientific test. Lol).

 

[lg3103]

The Palisade, Telluride, VW Atlas, etc. are family haulers priced at $40-60k max, and some vehicles in this category are amazing vehicles for that exact purpose.

The R1S competes with a Defender, BMW X7, Mercedes GLS, Audi Q7, Jeep Wagoneer, Audi Etron, Tesla Model X, etc on price, performance, interior, and the R1S either equivalent or bigger on the inside and that's not counting the frunk.

The Telluride/Palisade are great vehicles and sell like hotcakes...seems that every soccer mom in our neighborhood now drives a Telluride, but they are not the competition for the R1S.

Consumers have choices, go buy the one that suits you best.

 

[3l3c7r1c]

The Palisade, Telluride, VW Atlas, etc. are family haulers priced at $40-60k max, and some vehicles in this category are amazing vehicles for that exact purpose.

The R1S competes with a Defender, BMW X7, Mercedes GLS, Audi Q7, Jeep Wagoneer, Audi Etron, Tesla Model X, etc on price, performance, interior, and the R1S either equivalent or bigger on the inside and that's not counting the frunk.

The Telluride/Palisade are great vehicles and sell like hotcakes...seems that every soccer mom in our neighborhood now drives a Telluride, but they are not the competition for the R1S.

Consumers have choices, go buy the one that suits you best.

By off road capability, power, and luxury, possibly yes. But for camping, skiing, and long road trips, Palisade has served me pretty well. IF R1S didn't have that interior capacity, that would have been a dealbreaker for me. After that I will think about luxury and fun.

Btw, one more thing. I am absolutely became a fan of the tailgate thing. My driveway is on a slope and I always have to park it backwards if I have to open the rear cargo door. Now the tailgate is keeping things very secure

 

[lg3103]

By off road capability, power, and luxury, possibly yes. But for camping, skiing, and long road trips, Palisade has served me pretty well. IF R1S didn't have that interior capacity, that would have been a dealbreaker for me. After that I will think about luxury and fun.

Btw, one more thing. I am absolutely became a fan of the tailgate thing. My driveway is on a slope and I always have to park it backwards if I have to open the rear cargo door. Now the tailgate is keeping things very secure

I used to have an X5 and always loved the tailgate to stop stuff from falling out, but also to sit on and stay clean when putting ski boots on the kids, etc.

Sponsored