Rivian News: R2, Production, Preorders, 2024, Amazon, NACS, Self Driving (from Global Auto Industry Conference 2023)

[Sgt Beavis]

Can you imagine how many Magneto Jeep could sell if they would get that thing to market?

Well, I'd definitely be considering one. Or I should say my wife would be punching me in the kidneys if I didn't. We already have one Wrangler.

Sponsored

 

[Cactus]

SUMMARY (original source link below) from fireside chat with Claire McDonough, CFO of Deutsche Bank:

Enduro ramp slightly ahead of schedule

2024 : couple weeks of downtime to introduce new tech into R1.

• Network based architecture,
• Simplify wire harness
• Better manufacturing
• Intro of LFP
• Additional changes to nickel battery pack

How many were thinking-for Just nanosecond, “should I delay my R1S to get:

• Network based architecture,
• Simplify wire harness
• Better manufacturing
• Intro of LFP-maybe not
• Additional changes to nickel battery pack?

I am all for simplifying wire harness and better manufacturing, but thats At least another 6 months!

 

[Guy]

How many were thinking-for Just nanosecond, “should I delay my R1S to get:

• Network based architecture,
• Simplify wire harness
• Better manufacturing
• Intro of LFP-maybe not
• Additional changes to nickel battery pack?

I am all for simplifying wire harness and better manufacturing, but thats At least another 6 months!

The better manufacturing would be the big reason to wait given the number of issues that seem to be occurring from panel and wheel alignment, to suspension and other noise issues.

 

[sabotage14]

It will push my Q1 24 RS1 to Q2

 

[Trandall]

How many were thinking-for Just nanosecond, “should I delay my R1S to get:

• Network based architecture,
• Simplify wire harness
• Better manufacturing
• Intro of LFP-maybe not
• Additional changes to nickel battery pack?

I am all for simplifying wire harness and better manufacturing, but thats At least another 6 months!

Problem with this line of thinking is that next year they will only be a year away from further improvements... and so on.
I've had so man people comment on "wow this thing is like a space/ rocket ship" when I give rides. IMO the tech. is sufficiently current, it's best to just enjoy what's available now and replace with the newest best thing out there as needed/ desired.

 

[Cactus]

Problem with this line of thinking is that next year they will only be a year away from further improvements... and so on.
I've had so man people comment on "wow this thing is like a space/ rocket ship" when I give rides. IMO the tech. is sufficiently current, it's best to just enjoy what's available now and replace with the newest best thing out there as needed/ desired.

Agree on tech and acceleration, etc. And "manufacturing improvements" could be anything. The one thing that gives me pause is the "Simplify Wire Harness" bullet point. Not sure which wire harness Rivian is referring to, but people have mentioned a wire harness rubs against the AC compressor for example. How many yards of wire is there in the R1 vehicles?

 

[DuoRivians]

Agree on tech and acceleration, etc. And "manufacturing improvements" could be anything. The one thing that gives me pause is the "Simplify Wire Harness" bullet point. Not sure which wire harness Rivian is referring to, but people have mentioned a wire harness rubs against the AC compressor for example. How many yards of wire is there in the R1 vehicles?

Network based architecture significantly reduces the need for wiring harness throughout the car

 

[VSG]

Rivian shouldn’t bother with their own charging network or have it be minimal number. Talk to Tesla immediately and get in bed with them for the supercharger network.

Well, that's just short-sighted, and yes I'll say it: ignorant.

Ask yourself, why did Rivian bother with the RAN in the first place?
Do you really think that the primary purpose was to copy Tesla and replicate Tesla's proprietary supercharger network?
Or perhaps, just perhaps, there are other business reasons here that you haven't thought about?

At least half of Rivian's business plan is centered around delivery vehicles and being a turnkey supplier of delivery vehicle solutions. That means, in part, fleet charging. That means they need to be able to supply purpose-built chargers for fleets. That means they need to design and manufacture their own DC fast chargers. And as long as they're doing that, it makes sense to leverage this investment by deploying some DC fast chargers for use by the general public. Not only do they get some advertisement and provide a benefit to Rivian owners, but they also get a HUGE amount of data on Rivians, on how their chargers works, and (eventually) on all the other EV models on the market. The incremental cost of deploying a public network is minor, while the payback is immense. And the payback is even better now that the government is going to fund part of the RAN deployment.

As a secondary consideration, everyone complains about the CCS network, so why not take the opportunity to do better, demonstrate they're better, and make a profit at it? The RAN is likely to be profitable as soon as they start collecting money for charging. Why would they not continue to build it out? It's a premium, reliable network that people love to use and will preferentially use over EA/ChargePoint/EVGo/etc. Shutting it down would be throwing away money and would be throwing away the long-term benefits (marketing and otherwise) that come from this very public infrastructure.

Tesla 100% needed to create its own network because without the infrastructure to charge Tesla couldn't be successful. That is absolutely NOT the case with the RAN; the infrastructure exists, many other manufactures have no charging network and rely on the existing infrastructure, and there is industry consensus on a standardized plug. The RAN does not need to invent the wheel, or to re-invent the wheel - just improve the existing wheel. There are many reasons for the RAN, but there is no one (at least no one at Rivian) who believes that they need to build a nationwide, complete infrastructure in order for Rivian to succeed.

Yes, it would be great for everyone if Tesla would allow us to charge at their proprietary superchargers. They and only they can make the proprietary adapters needed, or install Magic Docks on their chargers. But they don't want to do that, even though it would make them a lot of money. They would rather hold everyone hostage for even MORE money, because money is the key - if they primarily cared about converting the world to EVs then they would be doing everything they could to encourage that, which means opening up their proprietary supercharger network (which requires a lot more than just an "NACS" receptacle). Instead, they are demonstrating that the primary motivation is money, even if it hurts the consumer and even if it hurts the adoption of EVs. That is their right as a business in a capitalist society, but you need to recognize that and not fall for all the misinformation pushed out by Tesla to further their goal of monopoly.

 

[docwhiz]

https://www.autoevolution.com/news/...duction-downtime-in-2024-and-more-216593.html

In 2024, however, the Normal factory will be temporarily shut down to add new technologies for the R1-series vehicles, like the network-based architecture. This lowers the need for semiconductors and the cost of production again because instead of having several chips per device, there will be multifunctional chips for each part of the car that control multiple systems. As a direct consequence, the wiring harness will also be simplified.

The production line will also be expanded to have an output of 20,000 more R1-series units per year, growing from 65,000 to 85,000. The EDV program will be moved to a single-shift schedule, running at half capacity until other customers join Amazon in buying the commercial vans.

The existing nickel battery pack will also be changed, but the CFO didn't say what exactly will be addressed.

The factory downtime will also allow for the introduction of the lithium iron phosphate battery (LFP), which gives owners more peace of mind since it can be charged to 100% without risking advanced degradation. They will be available for the cheaper, standard battery pack-equipped R1 vehicles. The entry-point dual-motor R1T with the LFP energy storage unit will have a starting cost of $73,000 next year.

Rivian remains dedicated to expanding its Level 2 (Waypoints) and fast-charging (RAN) networks, but it is not considering changing to the NACS port for now. It remains open to partnerships, however.

 

[VSG]

Also a little disappointed that the Q4 shutdown has moved back for the improvements. I wonder if “manufacturing improvements” are general assembly improvements and wheel alignment etc.

This was inevitable.

If Rivian doesn't hit their target production this year, then Wall Street will murderlize them. Rivian doesn't really have any discretion here - they need to meet (and probably need to exceed) Wall Street expectations in order to continue. This is one of the big downsides of going public. Yes, they got a huge initial investment out of it, but now decisions have to be made based on what greedy investors want rather than what is most logical from a manufacturing or technical standpoint.

 

[Insight75]

Well, that's just short-sighted, and yes I'll say it: ignorant.

Ask yourself, why did Rivian bother with the RAN in the first place?
Do you really think that the primary purpose was to copy Tesla and replicate Tesla's proprietary supercharger network?
Or perhaps, just perhaps, there are other business reasons here that you haven't thought about?

At least half of Rivian's business plan is centered around delivery vehicles and being a turnkey supplier of delivery vehicle solutions. That means, in part, fleet charging. That means they need to be able to supply purpose-built chargers for fleets. That means they need to design and manufacture their own DC fast chargers. And as long as they're doing that, it makes sense to leverage this investment by deploying some DC fast chargers for use by the general public. Not only do they get some advertisement and provide a benefit to Rivian owners, but they also get a HUGE amount of data on Rivians, on how their chargers works, and (eventually) on all the other EV models on the market. The incremental cost of deploying a public network is minor, while the payback is immense. And the payback is even better now that the government is going to fund part of the RAN deployment.

As a secondary consideration, everyone complains about the CCS network, so why not take the opportunity to do better, demonstrate they're better, and make a profit at it? The RAN is likely to be profitable as soon as they start collecting money for charging. Why would they not continue to build it out? It's a premium, reliable network that people love to use and will preferentially use over EA/ChargePoint/EVGo/etc. Shutting it down would be throwing away money and would be throwing away the long-term benefits (marketing and otherwise) that come from this very public infrastructure.

Tesla 100% needed to create its own network because without the infrastructure to charge Tesla couldn't be successful. That is absolutely NOT the case with the RAN; the infrastructure exists, many other manufactures have no charging network and rely on the existing infrastructure, and there is industry consensus on a standardized plug. The RAN does not need to invent the wheel, or to re-invent the wheel - just improve the existing wheel. There are many reasons for the RAN, but there is no one (at least no one at Rivian) who believes that they need to build a nationwide, complete infrastructure in order for Rivian to succeed.

Yes, it would be great for everyone if Tesla would allow us to charge at their proprietary superchargers. They and only they can make the proprietary adapters needed, or install Magic Docks on their chargers. But they don't want to do that, even though it would make them a lot of money. They would rather hold everyone hostage for even MORE money, because money is the key - if they primarily cared about converting the world to EVs then they would be doing everything they could to encourage that, which means opening up their proprietary supercharger network (which requires a lot more than just an "NACS" receptacle). Instead, they are demonstrating that the primary motivation is money, even if it hurts the consumer and even if it hurts the adoption of EVs. That is their right as a business in a capitalist society, but you need to recognize that and not fall for all the misinformation pushed out by Tesla to further their goal of monopoly.

I guess GM and Ford are ignorant too.

 

[VSG]

I don't follow. You said that Rivian should shut down the RAN because it's obsolete. Where do GM and Ford come into play?

 

[s4wrxttcs]

Wall Street will murderlize them

I googled this and according to Urban Dictionary it means to excessively murder someone or something.

Considering its Wall Street I'll say the usage of the word is appropriate.

 

[VSG]

It's from the Three Stooges. Yeah, that dates me ...

 

[FormulaR1T]

2024 : couple weeks of downtime to introduce new tech into R1.

• Network based architecture,
• Simplify wire harness
• Better manufacturing
• Intro of LFP
• Additional changes to nickel battery pack
• Material cost savings
• 85K production capacity for R1

I'm pretty confused by this statement.... Downtime in 2024 for upgrades?

1. When will there be downtime and for how long?? Q1? Q2?
2. And downtime means what? They will stop production at some point and completely stop making the current version and only produce vehicles moving forward with these upgrades?
3. So at this point should I wait for the "upgraded 2024" model?
4. Material cost saving sounds like cheaper materials, no?

I plan on getting the quad motor. Need help to decide if I should get my R1T in Q4 of 2023 or push and hold off until 2024? Thanks!

Sponsored