Why You Should Get an R2 Over an R1S

[Gen(R3)Xer]

Love the R2 and not saying there is no value in what you posted, however, there are many more potential dealbreaker features that the R1 offers that the R2 does not.
So for some, the R2 may not be an option regardless of its price.

So I'll play that game on the other side for a moment

Why you should get an R1 vs R2:

- Seats more than 5​

- More towing capacity (7,700 vs 4,400)​

- More storage space​

- Powered Frunk​

- AM/FM​

- Adjustable suspension​

- More range option​

- Faster acceleration​

If affordability is the primary concern and none of the above are dealbreakers, then the R2 is probably the right choice.

Sure. I even mentioned these aspects in one of my replies. Personally though if I had the money to buy an R1 I’d wait for a Gen 3 that benefits from all of the enhancements brought about by the R2/R3 platform, which I don’t think are just based on affordability, but who wouldn’t want a more affordable R1 if possible, right? Rivian will definitely continue to iterate on each model and platform they have.

Sponsored

 

[Gen(R3)Xer]

That's doesn't mean much. 215kw is the peak charging speed. How long does it hold that rate? I'm not saying the R2 charges faster -- I haven't read anything regarding its charging curve. That said, even if the R2 has the same peak charging rate, it could easily charge faster if it holds that speed longer than the R1

There were only a couple of reviewers who were able to charge the R2 and they weren’t as low as 10%, so they didn’t hit the 220kW peak. They did notice that it held a higher charge longer than usual though. Something like 170-180 kW for a while. I’ll try to find the videos.

Skip to about 9:10 in the video to see how the charging curve holds at a higher charge longer than usual.

 

[iamnid]

There were only a couple of reviewers who were able to charge the R2 and they weren’t as low as 10%, so they didn’t hit the 220kW peak. They did notice that it held a higher charge longer than usual though. Something like 170-180 kW for a while. I’ll try to find the videos.

I’m sure once Tom from State of Charge gets ahold of it he’ll put it through its paces.

Another thing to consider -- since the R2 likely has a smaller battery than the R1, it might charge "faster" 10-80% just because there's less Kwh to put into it.

 

[jrmbadger]

That's doesn't mean much. 215kw is the peak charging. How long does it hold that rate? I'm not saying the R2 charges faster -- I haven't read anything regarding its charging curve. That said, even if the R2 has the same peak charging rate, it could easily charge faster if it holds that speed longer than the R1

I doubt the R2 will hold the peak speed faster. The cell chemistry they use is unchanged and they are still on 400v.

I suspect the R2 will be much like my model Y, which is faster in terms of getting from a first SOC to a second SOC than my R1S only because it has a smaller battery - 76kwh vs 131 kwh, but the Y has a weaker charging curve.

This is because, for a given SOC, the R1S can hold a higher charge rate because at a given state of charge for the R1S vs the Y, the uncharged capacity of the R1S is still larger and so the pack resistance (which lowers charge rate) is lower. Of course, charging curve behavior is also influenced by cell chemistry, pack voltage, thermal management, taper strategy, and BMS limits, so there are lots of variables. LFP packs will charge slower for example.

Here's a comparison of a model y vs. Rivian R1S curve. (Note, I used a 2021 model y because the 2023 they had for comparison used the 4680 cells which have a slower curve). Source: Out of Spec

 

[Gen(R3)Xer]

Another thing to consider -- since the R2 likely has a smaller battery than the R1, it might charge "faster" 10-80% just because there's less Kwh to put into it.

Yeah, I mentioned that. It’s a new structural battery pack as well that has 4695 cells. R1 will get all of this in the future for sure.

 

[kanundrum]

Why should you get a R2 over a R3X

1. It doesn't exist

 

[Nixapatfan]

Sounds like biased justification for choosing one over the other.

 

[Jeremy3292]

I doubt the R2 will hold the peak speed faster. The cell chemistry they use is unchanged and they are still on 400v.

I suspect the R2 will be much like my model Y, which is faster in terms of getting from a first SOC to a second SOC than my R1S only because it has a smaller battery - 76kwh vs 131 kwh, but the Y has a weaker charging curve.

This is because, for a given SOC, the R1S can hold a higher charge rate because at a given state of charge for the R1S vs the Y, the uncharged capacity of the R1S is still larger and so the pack resistance (which lowers charge rate) is lower. Of course, charging curve behavior is also influenced by cell chemistry, pack voltage, thermal management, taper strategy, and BMS limits, so there are lots of variables. LFP packs will charge slower for example.

Here's a comparison of a model y vs. Rivian R1S curve. (Note, I used a 2021 model y because the 2023 they had for comparison used the 4680 cells which have a slower curve). Source: Out of Spec

This is incorrect; R1 and R2 have completely different cells. R1 uses 2170 NCA cells while R2 uses 4695 NCMA cells.

The one video below shows the charging curve from 6% to 78% in 28 minutes. He got into the upper 180s and it held for a long time unlike Tesla. Very different curve than a Model 3/Y.

 

[jrmbadger]

This is incorrect; R1 and R2 have completely different cells. R1 uses 2170 NCA cells while R2 uses 4695 NCMA cells.

The one video below shows the charging curve from 6% to 78% in 28 minutes. He got into the mid 180s and it held for a long time unlike Tesla. Very different curve than a Model 3/Y.

Got a source that NMC is faster charging? My sources show that it's slower NMC v. NCA

 

[Jeremy3292]

That's doesn't mean much. 215kw is the peak charging speed. How long does it hold that rate? I'm not saying the R2 charges faster -- I haven't read anything regarding its charging curve. That said, even if the R2 has the same peak charging rate, it could easily charge faster if it holds that speed longer than the R1

The R2 charges faster without a doubt for sure. I linked the video in the above post. 6% to 78% in 28 minutes.

C rate is what is important here when comparing R1 vs R2 charging:

R1: 200 kW / 140 kWh pack = 1.43 C
R2: 200 kW / 88 kWh pack = 2.27 C

R1 charges comically slow bc it is kW limited due to heat generation bc it's 400v. 400v x 500a = 200 kW. It needs a lot more than 500 amps to charge fast or it needs to be 800v to lower the amps needed. It also has poor cooling of the battery due to the cooling plate being sandwiched between the cells and not surrounding them like R2 does. If it was 800 volts it would charge just fine (less heat and more kW). R2 has ribbon cooling into between the cells to allow for much better heat dissipation. Since it is a smaller battery, it also charges faster bc it doesn't "need" more 200 kW.

 

[Jeremy3292]

Got a source that NMC is faster charging? My sources show that it's slower NMC v. NCA

Huh? I just gave you the video that shows the R2 charging curve. That isn't my opinion - it's literally in the video of an R2 charging. R2 is also NCMA not NMC.

 

[jrmbadger]

Huh? I just gave you the video that shows the R2 charging curve. That isn't my opinion - it's literally in the video of an R2 charging.

I don't know wtf you are arguing with me about. Of course the R2 will charge faster from a given SOC to another SOC. It has a smaller battery.

My point was that the R1 will maintain a higher KW per SOC and your VIDEO PROVES IT. At 9:15 He shows 182KW at 24%. The charge curve I posted shows the R1S still doing over 200 at that point.

 

[Jeremy3292]

I don't know wtf you are arguing with me about. Of course the R2 will charge faster from a given SOC to another SOC. It has a smaller battery.

My point was that the R1 will maintain a higher KW per SOC and your VIDEO PROVES IT. At 9:15 He shows 182KW at 24%. The charge curve I posted shows the R1S still doing over 200 at that point.

Ok your original post was unclear bc you said R1 and R2 have the same battery cells, which is incorrect. R1 is a larger battery so of course it will have a higher peak, but it charges MUCH slower than R2.

 

[ENVErider]

This is just my personal opinion, but I think getting an R2 over an R1S is definitely the way to go. I really appreciate Rivian trying to become a more affordable mainstream vehicle company. Fun fact, Rivian’s original name was Mainstream Motors. I’m all for it and I wish them the best of luck. I’m looking forward to leasing an R2 in 2027, when my Model 3 lease is finally up. Anyway, feel free to comment, refute, or add to this list as you wish.

• The R2 is more affordable starting at $44,990 and going to $57,990 vs. the R1S starting at $76,990 and going to $121,990. That’s a difference of $32K on the low end and up to $64K on the high end!

• The R2 has a more traditional suspension giving it a softer, more comfortable ride vs. the R1S’ air suspension that has been described as too stiff and truck-like. The R2 does have a Sport Mode that can stiffen the ride if desired. Another advantage of the R2’s more traditional suspension is that it should be easier to service and “cheaper” to repair. A disadvantage is that you can’t adjust the ride height, like on the R1S, making it less capable off road. You can’t level your bed for camping either, so you’ll have to park on a flatter surface.

• The R2 appears to have a better charging curve (ie holds a higher kW number longer) than the R1S even at a higher battery percentage based on recent reviews. The battery is also smaller on an R2, so that should help it to charge up faster as well. Charging time between 10% to 80% is said to be just under 30 minutes, so pretty average, especially compared to a Tesla, but the larger battery options on the R1S are often sited as taking 40-45 minutes to charge from 10% to 80%.

• The R2 has more leg room in the second row (40”) vs. the R1S (36.6”).

• The R2 should be cheaper to repair and as a result insure. It has dark gray cladding around the vehicle (bumpers, etc), as well as some of the panels being separated out for easier replacement if you’re involved in an accident (ie the quarter panels), cutting down on repair costs.

• The R2 is quieter on city streets and especially highways based on recent reviews and test drives. It doesn’t seem to have the wind noise of the R1S, although at least one reviewer said he could hear wind noise from the rear spoiler at speeds over 70MPH.

• The R2 has better fit and finish based on recent reviews and test drives vs. the R1S that has had issues with panel gaps, creaking door handles, loud AC systems causing rattling in the dashboard, rubber trim falling off around the trunk lid, and wind noise around specific windows and the windshield. Of course the R2 isn’t fully rolled out yet and hasn’t been driven by any customer long-term, so we don’t know if any issues will crop up in the future (rear wiper embedded in the tailgate, capacitive buttons on the frunk and rear lift gate, the drop glass itself, and the haptic halo wheels, I’m looking at you).

I agree with your overall assumption that the R2 is a better financial choice and better value Rivian for a lot of us, but respectfully, it is not a better vehicle than the R1! Some of your points are not yet verified by anyone, nor could they be verified, and some are clearly false as any R1 owner could attest.

1) Kyle from Out of Spec cited the R2 road noise wasn't impressively quiet, and after more than a dozen reviewers, I have yet to hear one state the difference is a huge leap. Yes, the heat pump is much quieter.
2) Reporting is that the charging performance is very similar, but the R2 might be a little slower above 80%. Time will tell; none of us knows whether they are still tuning things or whether OTA updates will improve charging.
3) The R2 finishes ARE NOT equal, much less better than the R1. Yes, you can search and find all kinds of examples of panel gap issues with R1, but that has more to do with Rivian being a startup, and the R2 will be assembled in the same plant by the same people, for now. There are well-documented compromises and reductions to finishes in the R2; I approve of most R2 cost-cutting decisions made overall, including finishes, but no reviewer has cited that they are superior to R1.
4) I agree that the R2 suspension should be cheaper to own and maintain, but honestly, have you even driven the R1? In the R1, we all have lots of settings and drive modes available. Yes, we can make it darn stiff in sport mode and the lowest setting, but we can make the same vehicle soft and super high. I love the R2 overall but honestly I'm not sure I'm ready to step down in features and give up my amazing air suspension. Yes, it will be higher maintenance over time, but once you get spoiled by driving it, it's hard to imagine giving up and going back to springs and a fixed ride height.

In short, I agree with you that the R2 is a better value and better choice for most of us, BUT I stop well short of agreeing that the R2 is a better vehicle.

 

[loqueid]

For that that get an R2, use OP's referral code. For those that will get the R1S, use mine.

Sponsored