Tesla engineer urges Rivian to move charge port location on R2, R3, R3X for Supercharger access

[Dark-Fx]

Lastly, if you have a bike rack, you should be taking it off because most garages aren't long enough to accommodate it remaining on the vehicle, and therefore it isn't a great argument to use here.

LOL. The concern here is not home use. It's DC charging on trips. Clearly not a use case for you because cameras tend to get blocked by racks and you'd know that instead of suggesting just using the cameras.

And my rack folds up close enough to the vehicle to fit in the garage just fine.

Sponsored

 

[Watty]

LOL. The concern here is not home use. It's DC charging on trips. Clearly not a use case for you because cameras tend to get blocked by racks and you'd know that instead of suggesting just using the cameras.

And my rack folds up close enough to the vehicle to fit in the garage just fine.

Again, design for the typical use case, not the edge case. How many charging sessions are done with a bike on vs. not? Besides, once EVs are ubiquitous, we may have stations more like gas stations in design.

And you can back up without cameras.

 

[Dark-Fx]

Again, design for the typical use case, not the edge case. How many charging sessions are done with a bike on vs. not? Besides, once EVs are ubiquitous, we may have stations more like gas stations in design.

And you can back up without cameras.

Traveling with bikes is my typical use case. Not being able to reach the cable means I am parking like an asshole because there's no way I would be unloading a rack of bikes.

Putting the charging port on the back creates a problem for me where I otherwise have none. At all.

 

[Watty]

Traveling with bikes is my typical use case. Not being able to reach the cable means I am parking like an asshole because there's no way I would be unloading a rack of bikes.

Putting the charging port on the back creates a problem for me where I otherwise have none. At all.

Then you are the edge case and they shouldn’t design to meet your specific need over everyone else.

 

[Dark-Fx]

Then you are the edge case and they shouldn’t design to meet your specific need over everyone else.

I am not an edge case for Rivian's market.

 

[Watty]

I am not an edge case for Rivian's market.

Agree to disagree.

 

[Dark-Fx]

Agree to disagree.

Rivian would agree with me considering the way they are demonstrating their new products.

 

[emoore]

Does anyone get mad at Exxon or Costco because their fueling stations have hoses on the wrong side? No they don't. EV charging needs to be the same way. Can accommodate any EV.

 

[Watty]

Rivian would agree with me considering the way they are demonstrating their new products.

Obviously not considering you’re here ostensibly complaining they did not consider you when designing the charge port location…

 

[Grabs10]

Own both a Tesla and a Rivian. Many that think they are going to screw over a Tesla owner by taking up 2 charging stall are likely in for some frustrations as well if not way more then a Tesla driver. When a Tesla is charging it is taking up 2 charging stalls for something like a Rivian. Teslas easily and greatly outnumber all other EV’s combined and will likely continue to for the long term future. Most Tesla owners based out of 150kw charger habit use every other stall. Supercharger is likely going to be a lot of teslas charging when you pull in. Especially in bigger cities. So if every other charger is used up the entire supercharger station is useless to non rear drivers side charge ports or front passenger side charge ports. They won’t be able to charge until a Tesla leaves. At which point the every other charging stall that was open may and will be taken by a Tesla that just pulled in unless you are going to be one of those type EV owners that take up a charging stall without actively charging.

Rivian if you want to cater to Europe put the charger location in the front passenger side cause at least it will be useable in the US.

 

[Dark-Fx]

Obviously not considering you’re here ostensibly complaining they did not consider you when designing the charge port location…

It's strictly a cost savings measure. Easily several hundred dollars saved per vehicle. Likely more once you consider warranty costs. Rivian made a lot of mistakes on how the R1s are put together with respect to servicing them. I'm sure they are going over everything with a fine tooth comb this time around.

 

[Watty]

It's strictly a cost savings measure. Easily several hundred dollars saved per vehicle. Likely more once you consider warranty costs. Rivian made a lot of mistakes on how the R1s are put together with respect to servicing them. I'm sure they are going over everything with a fine tooth comb this time around.

Whatever the reason, I don’t see a huge problem with it, especially if it keeps costs down as, for the vast majority of charging sessions, it won’t matter one bit.

 

[Dustyshades]

All I heard was “can you make our cord replacement cost problem your model redesign cost problem?”

 

[ksurfier]

#Chargeportgate

 

[PBRAZ]

There is zero, and I mean zero, justification for having the charge port anywhere on the driver side given 99.9% of us parallel park with the sidewalk on the pasenger side. Neither Rivian nor Tesla really thought it out but hey, hindsight. Respect RJ but R2 charge port location continues with the Tesla screw you/denial that Rivian owners will/would use Tesla charging locations. And it goes both ways...RAN will be open to other vehicles so why not adopt both NACS AND the existing charge port location as defaults.

In order for wide EV adoption standards have to be implemented. Tesla was there first and so their engineer is absolutely right that with saturation, taking up two spots is idiotic. Rivian and other car manufacturers need to stop being cute and face the reality that a seamless charging experience at a Tesla SC is the way forward. Tesla having to install longer cables due to this rediclousness is a poor fix.

Ultimately Rivian's ego is hurting, not helping its customers.

Sponsored