Biggest downgrade for Gen2 R1?

[MountainBikeDude]

Fairly sure both are RGB. They have a hazard mode that can help inform traffic where to go.

41:25 if the link doesn't pull in the proper time.

I know it's part of the refresh, but the OG R1 was slated to have somewhat similar functionality, so was it a hardware cost decision just prior to production to scale it back so it's not possible, or was never implemented, and now was just a decision to implement it in a more stylish fashion as a differentiating thing between the two?

Sponsored

 

[Dark-Fx]

For long distance towing, it is the aerodynamic profile that has a huge impact on the range more than just the weight.

so now it's a $10,000 upgrade. if you want the 11,000lb towing capacity, vs standard across the board. (I wonder if its a limitation of the LFP chemistry?)

Vehicles have to pass the SAE J2807 test. I find the R1T standard battery towing capacity being the same as the R1S a little suspect here.

 

[MountainBikeDude]

Approach angle actually went up slightly. My ground clearance is technically slightly less than stock because I'm running rock sliders anyhow.

R1T still says 43.1" water fording. I'm definitely curious why the R1S went from 43.0" to 39.4" when the R1T hasn't changed.



I hadn't seen the towing reduction for dual+standard R1T before, thanks for pointing it out. Every other vehicle+battery combo looks to have retained capability.

https://rivian.com/support/article/what-is-the-maximum-towing-capacity

R1S was changed from a Class IV to Class V hitch, so has the higher tongue load now- Unless this was a copy/paste mistake from the R1T, which wouldn't surprise me.



Necessary evil, making room for the heat pump stuff up front and the larger quad drive units front and back. Probably also the reason the ground clearances have changed slightly? R1S with base audio has an additional storage pocket in the rear. I do understand why people would be disappointed though.

Jose from RivianTrackr did a good job of summarizing the key differences between the two.

Most notable were the towing figures for the now optioned LFP pack, suspenion height which seems to be slightly shorter, and the frunk volume.

credit where credit is due, follow the link to see the side by side. I think it a bit unfair to pull content from his site and post it here.

https://riviantrackr.com/news/r1-gen-1-vs-gen-2-capabilities-comparision/

 

[narmstrong79]

Headlights
Smaller frunk
Less ground clearance
Air compressor and gear guard optional

 

[Ottoman]

Approach angle actually went up slightly. My ground clearance is technically slightly less than stock because I'm running rock sliders anyhow.

R1T still says 43.1" water fording. I'm definitely curious why the R1S went from 43.0" to 39.4" when the R1T hasn't changed. I'm fairly sure the original numbers have bounced around a little, the 39.4" could be just old information getting copied over.



I hadn't seen the towing reduction for dual+standard R1T before, thanks for pointing it out. Every other vehicle+battery combo looks to have retained capability.

https://rivian.com/support/article/what-is-the-maximum-towing-capacity

R1S was changed from a Class IV to Class V hitch, so has the higher tongue load now- Unless this was a copy/paste mistake from the R1T, which wouldn't surprise me.



Necessary evil, making room for the heat pump stuff up front and the larger quad drive units front and back. Probably also the reason the ground clearances have changed slightly? R1S with base audio has an additional storage pocket in the rear. I do understand why people would be disappointed though.

I pondered the approach/departure angles as well..

I dunno if it's something to do with the new wheel/tire choices, or they profiled the lower parts of the bumper differently now:

as for R1S fording, I doubt it's related to the wheelbase, I wonder what is in the back "3rd row" area that would require a 4 inch difference (ventilation? electronics? wiring?)

 

[Dark-Fx]

I know it's part of the refresh, but the OG R1 was slated to have somewhat similar functionality, so was it a hardware cost decision just prior to production to scale it back so it's not possible, or was never implemented, and now was just a decision to implement it in a more stylish fashion as a differentiating thing between the two?

I am guessing the light bar and electrochromatic roof on gen 1 were victims of covid era supply chain issues that have since resolved. (where is my removable roof, Rivian?!)

Now that I think about it, the switch to electronic door latches would simplify window control if Rivian came out with frameless windows for the removable roof...

 

[Dark-Fx]

Jose from RivianTrackr did a good job of summarizing the key differences between the two.

Most notable were the towing figures for the now optioned LFP pack, suspenion height which seems to be slightly shorter, and the frunk volume.

credit where credit is due, follow the link to see the side by side. I think it a bit unfair to pull content from his site and post it here.

https://riviantrackr.com/news/r1-gen-1-vs-gen-2-capabilities-comparision/

I think Rivian needs to have someone double check the R1T and R1S pages against their support articles, and check what actual capability is for all the numbers, since some are inconsistent.

 

[Dark-Fx]

as for R1S fording, I doubt it's related to the wheelbase, I wonder what is in the back "3rd row" area that would require a 4 inch difference (ventilation? electronics? wiring?)

If they've both actually lost some height, it could be the change for the door handles becoming electronically controlled. Otherwise maybe they changed motor vents around to accommodate the new quad motors? Definitely wouldn't mind hearing why from Rivian.

 

[MountainBikeDude]

NO MORE GREEN INTERIOR. ???

Also agree with the door handles, and they should have just switched to NACS at this point. If this is "1.2", are we going to get a "1.3" in a few more months with just a switch to NACS?

1.3 will have 800V or more accurately 900V architecture and NACS port.

SInce Rivian is 550ish amp vehicle, would that mean a theoretical peak of 490kW charging?

 

[djsider2]

1.3 will have 800V or more accurately 900V architecture and NACS port.

SInce Rivian is 550ish amp vehicle, would that mean a theoretical peak of 490kW charging?

Wouldn't all this extra voltage take a lot more in costs? Home charging isn't passing level 2 anytime soon so all of this extra cost would just be to appease the infrequent fast charge?

 

[Ecupip]

If Snazzylabs is correct, my vote would be the premium audio. I was under the impression until reading that review the premium audio would be a new “premium” audio system. Not the same as what’s in the 23-24 R1’s…but I guess it’s more of a let down then a downgrade ?

 

[R1Tom]

If Snazzylabs is correct, my vote would be the premium audio. I was under the impression until reading that review the premium audio would be a new “premium” audio system. Not the same as what’s in the 23-24 R1’s.

That seems to have been some pretty slick marketing by the Rivian team...I suspect many didn't catch that...

Sprinkled with Dolby Atmos and the "hey....look over here.....not over there" seems to be pretty successful based on comments I have seen in general on various forums...

 

[sirna7]

Biggest downgrade would be the $$$!! Otherwise, it's a huge win for everyone ?

 

[TigerWuxia]

Battery is the largest downgrade.

 

[zipzag]

Not a downgrade, but I'm curious why they did not go ahead and switch to NACS at this point since the writing is on the wall already. Also, I was really hoping for something with 450+ range, but I digress.... I'm still plenty happy with my QM G1 Launch Edition that cost me 70K.

They may want to coordinate changing RAN to NACs. Its a bit of a mess for existing owners

Sponsored