Rants and Raves after 2 months of Rivian R1T ownership [DISCLAIMER: Unauthorized feedback from non-owner]

[AndroidAppBundle]

Couldn't agree more. There are more than a few worrying aspects of the review.

Charging experience and infotainment is such a big factor in owning an EV. Brands (like Ford and Rivian) cannot put old laggy, feature-poor, buggy infotainment and expect consumers to want to own one of their vehicles.


The difference between Tesla and any other brand in this regard is night and day. First class experience vs. Everything else (which is to say only Tesla provides a good experience, everything else seems to still suck to a varying degree). Rivian seems to have made no improvements on issues that plagued the iPace.

Some real concerns there. I can only hope the R1T/R1S doesn't go the way of the iPace.. immense early hype, excellent all around car, completely crippled by poor range/charging/software.

Whenever a company says "oh we'll just OTA fix it!" my immediate reaction is "if it's that easy to fix, why'd you sell it broken?"

Also just could be a lemon. I hate to say it but I fully expect 5-15% of LE R1T/R1S cars to be lemon or near lemon status. It's a pretty consistent problem with EVs. See Mach E, Polestar, Taycan, iPace, eTron, etc etc..

Sponsored

 

[RideAlong]

There are some SERIOUS negatives/cons listed here that simply MUST be addressed ASAP. Especially at this price point from a new to market brand.

 

[AndroidAppBundle]

Btw - IMO, AA/CP is not the solution for EV owners. They lack EV awareness, and are only suitable for ICE, vehicles.

I do not want Rivian to try and shove all these problems under a rug, saying AA/CP is the solution. Because these solutions are from third party vendors, and come with their own layer of abstraction, which isn't always good (has its own defects, outside of Rivian control)

 

[lmr]

I'm trying to figure out what was proprietary about anything he/she wrote. Sounds to me like Rivian came down hard in whomever's truck it was due to the negative aspects of the post.

Not cool.

I'll put a disclaimer on the first post, and @Administrator can take the whole thing down if he wants. But I don't think that's necessary.

When I worked as a durability engineer for a different car manufacturer, I was under several NDAs about the vehicles I was working with and even owned personally that were made by that manufacturer, to the point that I was not allowed to say anything publicly that would place those vehicles and/or the manufacturer of them in a negative light. I was also barred from showing software or talking about features of the software, that my personal vehicle might have been given access to because I was an employee, that was not yet released to the general public.

The same is true of software companies in general, like the company I currently work for, where employees are often encouraged to be the first adopters of beta versions of software and apps before the software is released to the general public. As an employee I often have access to areas of the software, such as screens or features, that are not yet available to the general public, and thus am barred from posting screenshots of any software I have access to that is not a publicly released version. I can also get into trouble if a family member or friend were to post something publicly that is not public knowledge, about the software I work with that could be traced back to me.

I would be highly surprised if the employee owner of the R1T in question doesn't similarly have a fairly robust NDA barring them from sharing information about their personal experience with their vehicle, especially this early in the product lifecycle, beyond generalizations that the public is already well aware of.

And since modern car companies are also very much software companies with the ability to selectively push OTA updates to select recipients, I would also not be surprised if some employees are beta testing unreleased versions of the R1T software too.

Just my two cents on it all..

 

[SeaGeo]

I'm trying to figure out what was proprietary about anything he/she wrote. Sounds to me like Rivian came down hard in whomever's truck it was due to the negative aspects of the post.

Not cool.

I'll put a disclaimer on the first post, and @Administrator can take the whole thing down if he wants. But I don't think that's necessary.

I suspect "proprietary" is just lazy language that the owner used with @CarterGee, and they were really just worried about whatever contract they have in place with Rivian. I didn't see anything proprietary or really unknown from any of their posts other than providing some less filtered feedback.

I do find it really annoying that Rivian doesn't allow 90%+ of their current customer base to share the experience they're having with their truck unless it's entirely positive.

 

[r1t_kev]

Yeah, the simple explanation is usually right - somebody said some stuff they shouldn’t, in a place they shouldn’t have. Doesn’t seem nefarious, regardless of its validity.

 

[Scoiatael]

Well this took an unexpected turn

Maybe a short seller trying to tank the stock ?

 

[_evtrk]

It's going to be years before we see Rivian improve. Tesla is like 10 years old now. And in the past 6 months, the Model Y build quality has been reportedly really good. So......just do the math.

Rivian will get better, no doubt. But this won't be overnight, and it might take years....and even a few vehicle purchases (hardcore Tesla fans are in their 4th-5th vehicle now. It says something when they are finally raving about the build quality).

I had thought Rivian might have less of a learning curve. But they might have no less of a learning curve than Tesla did ten years ago.

I thought the same, then i remembered reading some details about RJ, as smart as Musk may be he's a physics / economics major. RJ on the hand has a phd in Mechanical engineering with a focus in Manufacturing and Operations Management, his father also operates an engineering firm that has manufacturing experience. it may not be much but i got to give Rivian the edge.

 

[Cavalryscout18]

I don’t get why people are surprised that someone who took delivery of an R1T 2 months ago is a Rivian employee and that the employee would be barred from sharing information to the public about their early model vehicle. It’s been radio silence from owners until just the last couple of weeks when some actual customers have gotten their R1Ts. And then people are concerned that there are issues in a 2 month old R1T that was a very early version of the truck that was specifically given to an employee for that exact purpose. Did people not read iwantatesla’s posts in this thread about his experience with his truck. From what I can see, he is not a Rivian employee and seems to have a fairly good truck; this seems to show that the trucks given to employees were very early beta models and the ones going to customers are in better shape, as it should be. And yes, once the owner found out that confidential information had be shared, of course they asked for it to be taken down. I’m sure these employees are getting these super early models at a discount. Thus, it’s not a surprise that there would be some issues with these trucks and with everything going on, I doubt Rivian is prioritizing the employee trucks over its customers. This pain comes with the discount and the privilege of getting the first trucks off the line.

 

[SeaGeo]

I don’t get why people are surprised that someone who took delivery of an R1T 2 months ago is a Rivian employee and that the employee would be barred from sharing information to the public about their early model vehicle. It’s been radio silence from owners until just the last couple of weeks when some actual customers have gotten their R1Ts. And then people are concerned that there are issues in a 2 month old R1T that was a very early version of the truck that was specifically given to an employee for that exact purpose. Did people not read iwantatesla’s posts in this thread about his experience with his truck. From what I can see, he is not a Rivian employee and seems to have a fairly good truck; this seems to show that the trucks given to employees were very early beta models and the ones going to customers are in better shape, as it should be. And yes, once the owner found out that confidential information had be shared, of course they asked for it to be taken down. I’m sure these employees are getting these super early models at a discount. Thus, it’s not a surprise that there would be some issues with these trucks and with everything going on, I doubt Rivian is prioritizing the employee trucks over its customers. This pain comes with the discount and the privilege of getting the first trucks off the line.

My guess was it was an ex-employee who received their truck (I know of a few). Or an employee that was willing to risk sharing. My surprise is that what I'm guessing is a spouse or family member seemingly risked their job.

 

[the long way downunder]

Maps and nav aren’t even what I use CarPlay for most of the time. Even still, Rivian’s maps don’t provide everything you can get from apps like Waze or ABRP. My preferred music, podcasts, and meetings apps, as well as better phone and message integration are used way more frequently and don’t have equals on Rivian’s system. Dismissing CarPlay as nav and maps is naive.

This is why you should read the relevant threads. You’ll learn in detail why people feel strongly about these features rather than straw-manning their argument.

What is the steel man argument for AA/CP?
I have an F-150 Hybrid with both AA and CP. I can't find a single feature/function/benefit in either worth bothering to connect the phone.
We have both Android and iPhone in the family. I can't remember when I stopped buying "the next iPhone" and preferring "vanilla" Android phones but I'm not zealous about either OS – they're equally flawed and limited.
When it comes to vehicle integration, if anything, I prefer having the vehicle touchscreen available for vehicle operations and have a phone on a magnetic mount on the dash handling the phone functions.
Maybe the Ford implementation of AA and CP is inferior. It is useful to be able to "give up" the vehicle touchscreen when a passenger controls a nav destination, but that's trivial and often easier to just receive the destination "pin" on my phone and leave the vehicle to "vehicle stuff."
I think these integration interfaces would make sense if the vehicle could accept multiple simultaneous phones, allowing anyone in the car to receive a call or control nav or play music. The next step for AA/CP integration would be for the occupants to control the vehicle from their phone.

For now, that's simple things like seat controls and lighting or hvac. In the future that could be launching, flying and retrieving a drone or handling driver tasks from off-road handling (suspension, traction, steering modes, exterior view 360º "spotter" views) to towing (trailer steering, tire pressure) or things like camping, external lights, onboard power. Vehicle makers have to give up the UX to the handheld devices. Tesla has an Apple-like vertical integration (which has lost market to Android) and will eventually realize they're not a software company – they build factories to build batteries to put into anything from cars to grids. Tesla will use vertical integration to build cars in robotic factories, but they'll still have to let the UX go to the software companies (they won't have a choice because the next generation of electric vehicle makers, BYD, Xpeng and the legacy auto industry, Toyota, VW, etc. will offer a better cabin experience than the Tesla dog food.)

Of what little exists in "the app" (Ford "pass" or the Tesla app in my experience) these functions are currently proprietary and clumsy. Like homes, they'll become "automation" systems that integrate the car with the cargo, the trailer, the passengers and the home (for example to configure the car to provide vehicle-to-grid power.) This is the recurring history of user software.

In the context of what's possible, AA and CP are trivial toy apps, what's the steel man argument for Android Auto and Apple CarPlay today?

 

[CommodoreAmiga]

I'm trying to figure out what was proprietary about anything he/she wrote. Sounds to me like Rivian came down hard in whomever's truck it was due to the negative aspects of the post.

it does give anecdotal support to the idea that Rivian has NDAs with early deliveries.

 

[Attesan997]

I don’t get why people are surprised that someone who took delivery of an R1T 2 months ago is a Rivian employee and that the employee would be barred from sharing information to the public about their early model vehicle. It’s been radio silence from owners until just the last couple of weeks when some actual customers have gotten their R1Ts. And then people are concerned that there are issues in a 2 month old R1T that was a very early version of the truck that was specifically given to an employee for that exact purpose. Did people not read iwantatesla’s posts in this thread about his experience with his truck. From what I can see, he is not a Rivian employee and seems to have a fairly good truck; this seems to show that the trucks given to employees were very early beta models and the ones going to customers are in better shape, as it should be. And yes, once the owner found out that confidential information had be shared, of course they asked for it to be taken down. I’m sure these employees are getting these super early models at a discount. Thus, it’s not a surprise that there would be some issues with these trucks and with everything going on, I doubt Rivian is prioritizing the employee trucks over its customers. This pain comes with the discount and the privilege of getting the first trucks off the line.

I took the review here/Reddit with a spoonful of salt. The timing of delivery meant it had to be an employee vehicle which meant there were going to be issues. Iwantatesla did enough in his videos to show his truck had negligible fit and finish issues and decent software. I was confused on why someone would go out on a limb now to discuss an early truck. But it makes sense it’s a third party that’s going out on a limb on behalf of the actual owner.

 

[astonius]

In the context of what's possible, AA and CP are trivial toy apps, what's the steel man argument for Android Auto and Apple CarPlay today?

With respect, this has been covered ad nauseam in the relevant threads. I (and I’m sure others) have no desire to rehash it here.

 

[Guy]

Wow. So this review came from someone with a predisposition...a bias....in favor of Rivian? As in..... this review could be way worse, if it were from someone without as much of a bias in favor of Rivian?

If that is the case, I don't think we have an accurate picture of just how bad Rivian vehicles are.

A lot of people on this forum had been praising Rivian, saying Rivian will never have Tesla build quality issues, or Rivian will only put out quality vehicles, but they seem to have drunk the Kool aid. At a bare minimum, Rivian seems like a worse Tesla....

You certainly have a bias against Rivian and looking at the Chicago Pros video Rivian has better paint quality and interior quality than Tesla does after 17 years!

Sponsored