Finished R2 demo test drive? Share your review / impressions

[Husky]

I'm not about to sift through 39 pages of replies, to see if my review falls on the majority or minority of the opinions, but here goes.


Early adopter R1T owner, Day 1 R2 reservation holder, 2 min after launch, invitation to configure was received on 6/16, did my demo drive on 6/18.

As it stands right now, I guess I have three options: Configure and take delivery, cancel my reservation, or sit on it a while and see how things go. I'm leaning toward the third and here's why:

The R2 is a cool vehicle. It builds off of what Rivian started with the R1 vehicles, but in a package that's available to the masses. That said, maybe I was expecting a scaled down R1 and that is not at all what it is.

It's too small for my liking. I think the most obvious size change is the height. It sits low, and standing next to it for some reason made it feel very not-SUV-like. It's probably the exact right size for most people, but again, coming from an R1, it's more of a change than I was expecting.

The materials are appropriate for the $50k price point, but not anything special. The R1 by comparison feels like a luxury vehicle. A lot of this is the result of the manufacturing simplicity needed to reach the target price. Trim and pieces seem to be larger and molded together. The quality of the plastics is average. I hate hate hate the recycled material on the dash used as trim. In a test unit with about 1100 miles on it, there were already more creaks and rattles than there should have been. I assume this was a production unit, not a pre-pro demo.

The sound system is below average. I've never been in the camp of "give me CarPlay or give me death" that seems prevalent on these forums, but that's because I felt like the native UI, with Apple Music and Dolby Atmos in my Gen1 R1T was actually pretty good, just not great. I did not get a chance to fiddle with the equalizer too much, but the sound quality was lacking. Even with the correct source and a song I knew should put spatial audio to the test, it sounds pretty flat and hollow.

The ride is ok. You will definitely know you aren't on an air suspension, for better or worse. My R1T has had some air suspension issues, so I was optimistic the more traditional setup on the R2 would be a welcome change. Over rougher Dallas city streets, it felt a little unsettled. The reviews seem to indicate the suspension in the R2 over performs when pushed, so I didn't get a chance to experience that.

I don't hate the color palate, but it seems like a miss that Rivian isn't offering a darkout package on the R2. I get that not everyone wants the black trim, black wheels look, but I think that may tone down the cartoonish look that some people dislike about Rivian.

Some good things - I actually thought the halo rings were easy and intuitive. The roll down back glass is one of my favorite features (although I feel like the rocker switches to control them operate the opposite of what you would expect). The frunk has a lot of good usable space, something a lot of competitors don't necessarily lean into.

I think it's a good start for the entry into Rivian ownership for most people. The problem is, I entered Rivian ownership with what I feel like was a better product. For someone who was comfortable paying $80-100k for a vehicle, I think you'll absolutely feel like you're downgrading to the R2.

Maybe future variants will bridge the gap between the current upper end of the R2 trims and where R1 begins. I think a tri-motor possibly with an upgraded Ascend interior once LiDAR models roll out would feel more palatable. Either that, or maybe another refresh of the R1 into gen 3 where they incorporate things like the roll down window or the halo buttons and improved UI into the range would keep the R1 fresh and keep people paying a premium for it.

I went in expecting to love it, so maybe those expectations were too high. I think it's a great vehicle for many, most maybe, but too much of a downgrade for some. Where the R1S really did compete with the luxury brands in the same space, the R2 competes with Tesla, and while that's a good space for the company to be, I would never consider a Model Y and even if the R2 bests it in every measure, that's not really an accomplishment I care about.

Yeah, you're clearly looking for a larger, more expensive, more luxurious vehicle than the R2.
I know things are bigger in Texas but "it sits low"?? It has 9" of ground clearance!

Sponsored

 

[mr2]

Had my 20min test drive today. The car was showing 95% charge and 265 miles - not impressive.
I drive currently MYP 2023 so here is comparison:
R2 feels slower than MYP, less sporty drive, much higher position, you see the hood when you drive.
Suspension was fine , absorbing speed bumps and potholes. Nice to have second screen in front and don't look right down to the screen like in Tesla. AC and vent seats performs very well in ATL 92F. The materials inside feels the same class as Tesla's (not luxurious LOL).
Overall, if you want rugged medium size SUV R2 Is a good fit. If you want more rounded, sporty city SUV Tesla is good for that.

 

[tivoboy]

Had my 20min test drive today. The car was showing 95% charge and 265 miles - not impressive.
I drive currently MYP 2023 so here is comparison:
R2 feels slower than MYP, less sporty drive, much higher position, you see the hood when you drive.
Suspension was fine , absorbing speed bumps and potholes. Nice to have second screen in front and don't look right down to the screen like in Tesla. AC and vent seats performs very well in ATL 92F. The materials inside feels the same class as Tesla's (not luxurious LOL).
Overall, if you want rugged medium size SUV R2 Is a good fit. If you want more rounded, sporty city SUV Tesla is good for that.

It DOES depend On what the settings is.. the “sport” or rally setting is totally going to change the represented in car expected range.. I switched between modes quickly just to see how much the car thought each mode would affect efficiency.

What setting was the car On when you took the test drive?

 

[mr2]

was in sport and I tested in sport mode. Do you think the range calculated depending on the mode ?

 

[tivoboy]

was in sport and I tested in sport mode. Do you think the range calculated depending on the mode ?

Yes

 

[Apprunner]

Really interested to see the 10% test from Out of Spec on conserve. I'm hoping it can get above the 100 miles. Since they do it at 80 mph, its much more indicative of the speeds I see around where i live.

 

[Alan in Tempe]

was in sport and I tested in sport mode. Do you think the range calculated depending on the mode ?

I suspect the only significant difference in Sport vs other is that Sport mode is full time AWD, while the other modes will disengage the front (front on R2, rear on R1) motors during most driving scenarios where 2WD is good. Differences in shock dampening and accelerator pedal mapping will have minimal range differences.

Note that more aggressive acceleration has a very tiny impact on range itself. There is a very slight reduction in efficiency due to I^2R losses with the massively larger currents (I), but since the resistance is virtually zero, that is a small difference. However, quicker acceleration will mean getting to a less efficient higher speed quicker, and therefore have you at a higher speed longer, which will reduce range. Air resistance is what dominates range at speeds over 40-50 MPH. Even huge additional weight (interior cargo not affecting air resistance) makes little difference to range away from major altitude changes.

 

[DuoRivian]

Really interested to see the 10% test from Out of Spec on conserve. I'm hoping it can get above the 100 miles. Since they do it at 80 mph, its much more indicative of the speeds I see around where i live.

Other reviewers do decent charging session and range reviews.

 

[Apprunner]

Other reviewers do decent charging session and range reviews.

Almost none of them do 80mph. 70mph is kinda worthless to me. Even the highway patrol is going 80mph where i live.

 

[TXR1SMD]

Yeah, you're clearly looking for a larger, more expensive, more luxurious vehicle than the R2.
I know things are bigger in Texas but "it sits low"?? It has 9" of ground clearance!

66.9" (R2) vs 75.7" (R1 in standard setting) is a huge difference. I really could not care less about ground clearance, but the R2 is batting in the same league as a Subaru Outback Wilderness, so I don't know that 9" is the flex you think it is. But you are right on one thing, I expect more from a vehicle and I'm happy spending more for it.

 

[Husky]

66.9" (R2) vs 75.7" (R1 in standard setting) is a huge difference. I really could not care less about ground clearance, but the R2 is batting in the same league as a Subaru Outback Wilderness, so I don't know that 9" is the flex you think it is. But you are right on one thing, I expect more from a vehicle and I'm happy spending more for it.

I'm so happy for you.

 

[TXR1SMD]

I'm so happy for you.

Thanks!

 

[Jeremy3292]

Thanks!

What is the point of this picture? Showing a G-Wagon that has less ground clearance than an R2? Trying to flex to strangers on the internet? Confusing.

 

[TTedP]

Thanks!

More like

 

[racekarl]

I’m a relatively early R1T owner with a relatively early R2 reservation, with a 4-8 week order window as of June 30 2026.

The ride quality (on 20” AT) was better than I expected. We were allowed to take it ourselves and we made a point to find bad roads and hit every pothole we could find. The initial impact is absorbed well and the car is solid and quiet. The after-impact dampening was a little bouncy for my tastes, even on firm. The R1 does a better job staying composed after hitting a bump, even if it does sound like a Conestoga wagon while doing it, but the R2 surprised me with how well it did. Our other main point of comparison is our Volvo XC90, which has always felt over-sprung and under-dampened to me. The R2 is better over broken pavement.

The steering was also a pleasant surprise, firmer and more direct than the R1T, though both lack feedback.

The interior was also nicer than I expected. In photos the dark crater interior can look a bit dour and monochromatic since it lacks the metal accents which provide visual contrast in the R1 dark interior. In person, the different dash materials provide a nice texture contrast that is more apparent than it is in photos.

One of the main negatives that stood out relative to the R1 is the displays. The drivers display is much smaller but presents even more data, so it felt cramped and harder to parse. I am sure you get used to it, but it was definitely less user-friendly than the R1 driver's display. Similarly, the smaller main display and re-designed UI are not as driver-friendly as the R1's. In particular the R2 UI moves important information to the left of the display where it is blocked by my right hand on the steering wheel. To see info on the left side of the display, I had to move my head or move my hand off the steering wheel.

I did not hate the button operated doors as much as I expected to. They work pretty instantaneously, so it was a natural motion to hit button and push against the door to open it. My wife has a minor disability which makes the door button (vs. a traditional handle) difficult for her when she is the diver, though, so this remains a negative for us, just not as much as I expected.

Overall the R2 exceeded my expectations. I had just about convinced myself to let my reservation lapse and keep the R1T, but the R2 was so good that now I am tilting back towards trading our R1T for it. Our life has evolved over the past 3 years such that the R2 is now a better fit for us than the R1T, and the R2 seems good enough to make the hassle of swapping cars seem worthwhile.

Sponsored