Biggest downgrade for Gen2 R1?

[Giddy89]

Battery size and price. Although I think the price is totally fair.
GEN 1 was a steal!
I’m interested to see gen 2 range tests. I don’t see how the eeked out 3mi/kwh efficiency.

Sponsored

 

[Ecupip]

It looks like the gen2 dual motor max is about 22 pounds lighter (according to the EPA document) than the gen1 dual motor ?large.

So they removed 40lbs of copper and added 18lbs of something else.

 

[Sempervirens]

Not that these are some fan motors, etc...that Rivian just slapped into a truck?

Lost my coffee.

 

[R1Tom]

Lost my coffee.

That is an "off the shelf" motor!

I honestly think some people on here think that is about what Rivian did....go to Bosch service counter and ask "what you got we can throw in a truck"? Or maybe McMaster-Carr?

 

[Riv E In]

To me, the biggest “downgrade” other than those already mentioned is that Rivian failed to meaningfully upgrade any of the things that required after-market adjustments by me (and many others).

For example, the open floorspace up front where my after-market cupholder/storage area now sits; the cavernous center console where an after-market divider is; the charging pad where an after-market magnetic one with storage has replaced; they got rid of the silly speaker but now charge for it AND replaced it with a drawer, meanwhile I’ve got an after-market fingerprint reading locking drawer; still no running boards as an optional add-on; poor lighting in the (now smaller) frunk remains. The list could go on…

I’m pleased with my 2024 R1S, and I’m glad they are refreshing the line, but I don’t see a reason to upgrade (personally), and I think they really missed some low hanging fruit.

 

[SANZC02]

People talk about how expensive they are but it is good to see you can configure an R1S or R1T for under 80k.

Considering they are LFP at that price and can charge to 100% the day to day range is not much less than the G1 large pack.

 

[racekarl]

the charging pad where an after-market magnetic one with storage has replaced;

It does look like Rivian addressed this one, at least. There is now a divider separating this area into two separate chargers:

 

[Dark-Fx]

Fair, but the bosch motor was a generic motor where as the Rivian's are a purpose built motor from the start. You see this with the ability to cool the motors between the two variants.

I do like that they partnered with Bosch to make the Quad a reality early on, but if you've watched a Munro teardown of the two, you see the immediate advantages of the Enduro/Ascent in terms of design and execution over the Bosch. My only gripe with the Enduro is the clutch. I wish they had gone with a similar tesla strategy of Permanent magnet full time motor and induction part time.

I disagree with that. Ignoring the efficiency differences, it's better to just not rotate the extra mass when you don't need to. Saves on bearing wear and gear wear. Makes the single axle accelerate slightly faster since you have less rotating mass.

The efficiency differences are even better. If you tow, you're going to have both axles engaged, so the improvement in PMAC motors is important there at a time when you're otherwise significantly less efficient.

(As the consumer, I’m focusing on the “what” I get, rather than the “how,” with things like 800v architecture in the “how“ category.)

I was surprised they didn't make the Ascend drivetrains 800V. I'm guessing Rivian wanted to keep that one in their pocket for a redesign instead of a mid cycle refresh. People need a reason to upgrade out of Launch vehicles, and I think 800V charging actually hitting that 300kW number and sustaining it might do it for some folks that otherwise wouldn't.

 

[Riv E In]

It does look like Rivian addressed this one, at least. There is now a divider separating this area into two separate chargers:

From what I read and watched in hands-on reviews, there’s simply a divider. Still no magnet - so the phones will still slide. (Also kept that pointless hole in the front)

 

[Hillbilly]

To me, the biggest “downgrade” other than those already mentioned is that Rivian failed to meaningfully upgrade any of the things that required after-market adjustments by me (and many others).

For example, the open floorspace up front where my after-market cupholder/storage area now sits; the cavernous center console where an after-market divider is; the charging pad where an after-market magnetic one with storage has replaced; they got rid of the silly speaker but now charge for it AND replaced it with a drawer, meanwhile I’ve got an after-market fingerprint reading locking drawer; still no running boards as an optional add-on; poor lighting in the (now smaller) frunk remains. The list could go on…

I’m pleased with my 2024 R1S, and I’m glad they are refreshing the line, but I don’t see a reason to upgrade (personally), and I think they really missed some low hanging fruit.

It's what makes the car feel like it came from a tech company instead of a truck manufacturer. They should make all the decision makers drive proper trucks for a month to get a feel for what's lacking and can be easily addressed.

 

[MountainBikeDude]

I disagree with that. Ignoring the efficiency differences, it's better to just not rotate the extra mass when you don't need to. Saves on bearing wear and gear wear. Makes the single axle accelerate slightly faster since you have less rotating mass.

The efficiency differences are even better. If you tow, you're going to have both axles engaged, so the improvement in PMAC motors is important there at a time when you're otherwise significantly less efficient.

I agree that permanent magnet motors are more efficient when driving, but consider the wear on the clutch mechanism. Per the videos on the Refresh, the clutch disconnect on the enduro motors is much improved as far as the smoothness of the engage/disco because they moved the controller to the inverter housing (might be wrong on this) to reduce it's latency.

But hearing from an owner of a QMT and a DMS, he can't stand the constant engaging/disengaging of the rear motor on the dual. I think it comes down to the fact that he's accustomed to the full time quad, but still begs the question, what's better for the customer, a perceptible "clunk" and slightly greater efficiency, or smooth transition power up, power down with a slight hit to overall range?

PS
This entire post might seem scattered, too many people around me clucking away.

 

[RivianRunner]

To me, the biggest “downgrade” other than those already mentioned is that Rivian failed to meaningfully upgrade any of the things that required after-market adjustments by me (and many others).

For example, the open floorspace up front where my after-market cupholder/storage area now sits; the cavernous center console where an after-market divider is; the charging pad where an after-market magnetic one with storage has replaced; they got rid of the silly speaker but now charge for it AND replaced it with a drawer, meanwhile I’ve got an after-market fingerprint reading locking drawer; still no running boards as an optional add-on; poor lighting in the (now smaller) frunk remains. The list could go on…

I’m pleased with my 2024 R1S, and I’m glad they are refreshing the line, but I don’t see a reason to upgrade (personally), and I think they really missed some low hanging fruit.

You think Rivian missed the low-hanging fruit because you can't see beyond your own preferences. Not everyone has the same issues with the things that were carried over to the new model.

 

[Riv E In]

You think Rivian missed the low-hanging fruit because you can't see beyond your own preferences. Not everyone has the same issues with the things that were carried over to the new model.

Right. That’s why it’s my opinion.

 

[R1Tom]

You think Rivian missed the low-hanging fruit because you can't see beyond your own preferences. Not everyone has the same issues with the things that were carried over to the new model.

I think you missed the fact Riv E In literally started the post with "To me", which clearly acknowledges it is a personal opinion on a public forum?

 

[DaveA]

I agree that permanent magnet motors are more efficient when driving, but consider the wear on the clutch mechanism. Per the videos on the Refresh, the clutch disconnect on the enduro motors is much improved as far as the smoothness of the engage/disco because they moved the controller to the inverter housing (might be wrong on this) to reduce it's latency.

But hearing from an owner of a QMT and a DMS, he can't stand the constant engaging/disengaging of the rear motor on the dual. I think it comes down to the fact that he's accustomed to the full time quad, but still begs the question, what's better for the customer, a perceptible "clunk" and slightly greater efficiency, or smooth transition power up, power down with a slight hit to overall range?

PS
This entire post might seem scattered, too many people around me clucking away.

I have clunks with the quad, so I wouldn't notice.

Sponsored