R2 lift kit (aftermarket) by EVSportline

[MaskedRacerX]

Yep, 2011 Sienna AWD. Did 2” but others did 3.5”. Did it for higher H-point and just to f-around with it a bit out of curiosity. Also did modest wheel spacers. Now for kids to drive.

Oh shit, hahaha, I kind of dig on this

Sponsored

 

[RivAW]

Unless Rivian sells these directly, they're only going to tell you that modifying your vehicle risks voiding your warranty on related components.

That is a common misconception. Federal law says that modifications do not cause a general voiding of the vehicle warranty. The only place one would run into a problem is if you attempt to make a warranty claim on something that they (any manufacturer) can show was directly related to the non-OEM modification.

 

[EV Sportline]

Soflo already did it and has been throwing custom made subframe cradles on R1s for years now. You cant say say "Its not coming and not happening" when its already been done. I would bet any amount of money that Soflo will have a lifted R2 out in no time... and not with a puck lift.
https://www.rivianforums.com/forum/threads/soflo-r1s.27692/

Ha ha, okay go for that. Enjoy!

On our end - we're making lift kits for the masses, diy bolt-on parts that work well and drive and retain function and don't require massive one-off customizations and total elimination of ADAS and self driving and range and etc....

 

[UnsungZero_OldTimeAdMan]

I wonder if we might see an arrangement like this for lift kit install, similar to Rivian and Xpel? However only two EVS install shops, unless SC are willing to do it?

https://evsportline.com/blogs/news/...r-r1t-bed-extender-through-official-gear-shop

Don’t bet on it. Equating cosmetic appliqué and fairy benign add-ons to parts that fundamentally change suspension geometry and stress parameters (outside of what is acceptable within warranty)… That is a false equivalence.

 

[Dark-Fx]

That is a common misconception. Federal law says that modifications do not cause a general voiding of the vehicle warranty. The only place one would run into a problem is if you attempt to make a warranty claim on something that they (any manufacturer) can show was directly related to the non-OEM modification.

Which would be really easy for them to do here and I already covered.

 

[UnsungZero_OldTimeAdMan]

That is a common misconception. Federal law says that modifications do not cause a general voiding of the vehicle warranty. The only place one would run into a problem is if you attempt to make a warranty claim on something that they (any manufacturer) can show was directly related to the non-OEM modification.

And just as common misunderstanding of the law and existing realties. Reality: It’s rare for OEMs to straight up void entire warranties. The law requires them to provide proof beyond reasonable doubt, IF their decision to void is challenged in the legal system by plaintiffs. And this has already been discussed in thread. Before that official challenge is made, and what often happens, is denial of service or warranty coverage on damages they believe is not their fault (but fault of the customer’s decision to install and use unapproved aftermarket parts). These instances are rarely challenged in courts, because legal fees are potentially far higher than cost of repairs.

The law is not a free pass for consumers to be free of any personal responsibility. That is an overly optimistic interpretation—one that the aftermarket likes to promote, in interest of commerce—and one that is simply too good to be true. The law only specify how a formal legal challenge is to proceed. It does not bar OEMs from attempts to deny coverage on specific repairs.

Believe whatever you wish. Ultimately, it’s your property and your consequences to bear. Read the warranties and the fine print. Notice that EVS has been careful in this thread and has not claimed there will be no problems whatsoever. Every aftermarket business has their own CYA too. If you were in business, and to protect yourself, you would too.

Caveat emptor.

 

[goldburger]

What’s the largest tire the R2 currently fits and what does this lift kit increase it to?

 

[NeedSumCoffee]

Ha ha, okay go for that. Enjoy!

On our end - we're making lift kits for the masses, diy bolt-on parts that work well and drive and retain function and don't require massive one-off customizations and total elimination of ADAS and self driving and range and etc....

I never said it was a good solution. Simply that you can't claim it's not happening when other have been doing it for years.

I think there has to be some kind of happy middle ground between custom subframe cradles and $500 pucks. That cannot possible be the only 2 shitty choices we have as owners.

 

[NeedSumCoffee]

Don’t bet on it. Equating cosmetic appliqué and fairy benign add-ons to parts that fundamentally change suspension geometry and stress parameters (outside of what is acceptable within warranty)… That is a false equivalence.

To Be Fair... I once had Infiniti void a warranty claim on my seized brake caliper because I had them painted red. They claimed the extra layer of paint caused excess heat, leading the premature failure of the caliper and hit me with a $2800 bill to repair.

There are countless similar examples on Tesla forums. I saw a Model X owner who had a burnt out headlight get refused warranty because he put black pff over them. There was a model Y owner who had a headlight fail and got refused warranty because he installed an auto frunk opener. There has been multiple Model X owners refused warranty on failed motor because they installed aftermarket camber adjustment arms.

While I agree its rare, you can not say its a false equivalence, as it personally has happened to me and many others. I think the correct claim is that it is a low chance. As most dealerships are not going to piss off and lose a customer over a warranty repairs, but there absoultly are some that will.

Don't let the Magnussen-Moss Act give you a false sense of security. Despite what the law states, a manufacturer/dealer absolutely can deny warranty coverage claiming your modification affected the failed part. The law does not STOP them in any way. All the law does is give you legal recourse to challenge the denial. To enforce the MM Act, you would have to hire an attorney at $450-650/hr and take a billion dollar company to court. They know the chance of you taking it to that level is pretty much 0%, so they have no risk or fear of denying claims.

Sponsored