Search results

Looking at ATs, you'd definitely want more sidewall so 20"...and since there aren't really any 21" options currently that would also point to getting the 20"s...another option is to get the 21" and then buy another set of 19/20" rims from a vendor (like Atomic)...

Unless it has CarPlay/AA no one here cares…actually I think no one here cares either way…

Will the $45k Rivian R2 actually happen? A. Yes — absolutely. Rivian will deliver it. B. Technically yes, but barely. Limited production, limited options, limited appeal. C. Not really. Maybe a ~$50k version, but likely not profitable. D. No freaking way. $45k is the dream, not the business...

This clears things up. Two corrections are needed before comparing the efficiency numbers apples-to-apples: 1. Tailwind adjustment If the observed efficiency was 3.1 MPK at 70 mph with a 5 mph tailwind, the vehicle was only seeing about 65 mph of effective airspeed from an aero standpoint...

If XC40 is approximately 30% more efficient than R1 at 75 mph, and R2 is 5-10% more efficient than XC40, math would tell us that R2 is somewhere around 2.6 MPK at 75 mph. If 3.0 MPK, that would mean a 130 mile trip would only consume 50% vs 60%, here’s implied ranges: R2 75-mph efficiency Range...

Great data point and comparison with XC40, this would seem to confirm R2 being slightly more efficient than the XC40 (5%?), does that seem right? If so, this suggests: R2 75-mph highway range = ~235 miles at 100% Road-trip usable 80% → 10% = ~165 miles 90% → 10% = ~188 miles

An easy way to understand this: why would Rivian intentionally build a much lower-cost R2 that competes directly with (or even beats) the range of its own R1 lineup? They probably wouldn’t. The R2 looks more like it is replacing the outgoing R1 Dual Motor Standard from a range-positioning...

sounds like you should go ahead get the Ix3 then, you can capitalize 10% better efficiency, always trader offs, Rivian gave me a BMW loaner once, too futuristic for me…

Tesla made physics work by designing low, slippery cars; Rivian chose tall, capable adventure vehicles. That means the starting geometry is much less forgiving, and R2 is an attempt to claw back efficiency without giving up the SUV/adventure package. Everything considered, it’s impressive that...

see if they can give you Rivian Shop cash, $2500, if it’s even a combo you’d be willing to take…

2023 Gen 1 Quad with 128 kWh pack could hit 230 miles using 100% range at 75 mph. It was rated 276 miles so 83% of EPA range. If we use 88 kWh pack and 307 EPA range, we can say R2 gets 225 miles at 75 mph, which is only 73% of EPA range drop of 10%). an additional check using the 2026 DM...

OPs wife wants 4 hour drive time x 75 mph, so far it looks like the R2 would need a significantly bigger battery to make that happen (about 60% bigger than the current 88 kWh pack). Even at 70 mph that’s not going to happen. It does become plausible once speed is dropped down in 55-60 mph...

Not even Rivian can overcome physics. Tesla managed to package extremely low drag-area values into the Model 3, Model S, Model Y, and even Model X — roughly ~0.49, ~0.50–0.56, ~0.61, and ~0.62 m² CdA, respectively. Rivian’s R1 appears closer to ~0.9-1.0 m² CdA, while the R2 looks to be around...

“ EDIT: adding some info: 20" A/Ts with only 45 miles on them when we left 5-10mph tail/cross wind on interstate and 5-10mph cross/head wind on 2-lane HWY Starting elevation 700' ending elevation of 1,200' - flat and rolling hills of the upper midwest All-Purpose drive mode”

I’d expect the R2 to do slightly better on average/slower speeds, but at 75-80 mph it’s likely within a couple percent of EV9 due to similar aero.

I think it actually implies that Rivian sized it to the exact same specs as the Gen1, they decreased battery 45% and the efficiency is increased 45%, so end result is Gen 1 and R2 can both travel ~200 miles at ~75 mph, with usable range (80-10% SOC) being 150 miles (2 hours driving, then 25 min...

The wait is over: 20” A/Ts 80% to 22% covering 131 miles @78 mph and 78 degrees F. This implies a max 100% range of ~230 miles in a mixed format…for the highway only portion this suggests 2.55 MPK at 78 mph. so not likely to drive much over 200 miles if traveling at high speeds, maybe can...

There appear to be a lot of Gen1 peeps here thinking the same math will apply to the R2, it will not…seriously, what’s everyone in her smoking?

Or maybe that ignores the fact that ICE vehicles became economically dominant largely because cheap crude oil made them affordable enough to overcome their higher operating costs. That gave the market enough runway to mature, scale, and displace the original EVs that existed in the late 1800s...

For those of you getting close to lease return, has anyone bought cheaper replacement tires and been pleasantly surprised by the efficiency or performance? I’m thinking EngineX tires may be a decent budget option for lease turn-in, especially if the goal is simply to meet the return...