R1 Gen 2 Quad Large?

[Flank Steak]

As this is been a hugely popular configuration in Gen 1, it presents an obvious hole in the revised lineup. Any others who love quad all terrain but may have no need for the Max pack and additional (superfluous?) horsepower. It seems like a natural that we will see this.

Sponsored

 

[Dark-Fx]

As this is been a hugely popular configuration in Gen 1, it presents an obvious hole in the revised lineup. Any others who love quad all terrain but may have no need for the Max pack and additional (superfluous?) horsepower. It seems like a natural that we will see this.

Max pack is necessary for the horsepower the new quad motor has. Would be too hard on the smaller battery packs. It's not a range decision.

 

[Flank Steak]

Max pack is necessary for the horsepower the new quad motor has. Would be too hard on the smaller battery packs. It's not a range decision.

What requirement would that be? That's not making sense to me at all. It would have lower horsepower and less range. That certainly a solvable engineering problem.

 

[Dark-Fx]

What requirement would that be? That's not making sense to me at all. It would have lower horsepower and less range. That certainly a solvable engineering problem.

So you'd pay extra for the motors without getting the capability of them?

 

[Flank Steak]

I have a quad R1T now that has less HP and less range. Why do you feel that the same would not be possible in the Gen 2. It would of course cost less without the Max pack.

 

[edman007]

What requirement would that be? That's not making sense to me at all. It would have lower horsepower and less range. That certainly a solvable engineering problem.

Battery C rates. Max is 143kWh (about the same as the old Large). 1025HP is 764kW. Add motor loss and stuff you're probably pulling 800kW from the battery. That's a C rate of 5.6, normally 1 is easy on the battery, 5C is pretty damn hard on the battery. I wouldn't be surprised if the quad gets a bigger "Max" pack to help this.

For reference, the C rate of the 2024 quad is 4.4, so the new quad will be driving the pack much harder with the max pack than the old quad drives the large pack.

 

[Flank Steak]

Again, that is an entirely solvable engineering problem. would be very surprised if Rivian eliminates what is likely their most popular configuration in the very appealing middle ground price point.

 

[ddimit]

It feels like Rivian is doing what the large manufacturers are doing bundling 1 option so you have to get the other high-priced options you might not or don't want.

 

[Dark-Fx]

Again, that is an entirely solvable engineering problem. would be very surprised if Rivian eliminates what is likely their most popular configuration in the very appealing middle ground price point.

I don't think Rivian is interested in diminishing the quad motor vehicle at all, nor introducing additional complexity into the operations by manufacturing yet another battery just to meet someone's ideals here.

 

[Flank Steak]

I don't think Rivian is interested in diminishing the quad motor vehicle at all, nor introducing additional complexity into the operations by manufacturing yet another battery just to meet someone's ideals here.

For what it's worth, this configuration is what Rivian cut their teeth on, and was their only configuration at launch. It is what they wanted to show the world. It's also likely Rivian's most popular configuration, even at the time of this new launch. "someone's ideal here" seems to imply that it is a lot less than that .

 

[Dark-Fx]

For what it's worth, this configuration is what Rivian cut their teeth on, and was their only configuration at launch. It is what they wanted to show the world. It's also likely Rivian's most popular configuration, even at the time of this new launch. "someone's ideal here" seems to imply that it is a lot less than that .

There might be a chance down the line of them offering a software locked version of it if they aren't selling well enough, but then you're still dragging around the weight of the extra battery capacity you aren't able to use. I'm expecting pretty much every quad will be built-to-order though, that only ones people changed their mind on at delivery time could end up in the shop. Low volume, higher margins.

 

[Eric9610]

So, I think the issue is not that they don't want to offer it but with the new battery configuration the MAX is actually = to old large in total power output, density increased on the new pack so they can use less total cells. This is the reason you could not get a QM with a smaller pack. This is also the reason the Tri and QM will need MAX now.

 

[Flank Steak]

There might be a chance down the line of them offering a software locked version of it if they aren't selling well enough, but then you're still dragging around the weight of the extra battery capacity you aren't able to use. I'm expecting pretty much every quad will be built-to-order though, that only ones people changed their mind on at delivery time could end up in the shop. Low volume, higher margins.

Again, that is not making sense to me. it is a risk to take what is likely your highest volume volume configuration and change it to a low volume configuration, in the hoax that people will accept a three motor in its place. I'm not seeing that.

 

[edman007]

Again, that is an entirely solvable engineering problem. would be very surprised if Rivian eliminates what is likely their most popular configuration in the very appealing middle ground price point.

Yes, it's a solvable engineering problem. It's solved by a bigger battery pack.

And at the end of the day, quad will always be their halo product, the top of the line product, and they are not going to cut corners to make it cheaper. If you want a cheaper vehicle they have plenty of other options. If you're willing to do anything to get the best, they will take your money.

For what it's worth, this configuration is what Rivian cut their teeth on, and was their only configuration at launch. It is what they wanted to show the world. It's also likely Rivian's most popular configuration, even at the time of this new launch. "someone's ideal here" seems to imply that it is a lot less than that .

I think it's pretty clear from what they are building, they cut their teeth on the R1T quad, but the R1S dual is by far their most popular vehicle. They are not even building the R1T at all right now, too much stock and not enough demand.

The vast majority of people want a 7-seat family hauler as cheap as they can get it. That's why the R2 is basically a cheaper R1S, and they are making no attempt at a cheaper R1T.

 

[R1Tom]

What are thoughts on the tire options for G2 QM? Looks like it can be had with this new staggered street tire option, which is what is used for ultimate performance...but also the 20" AT offering.

The street tire will be sweet for acceleration and handling for sure...but...without being able to rotate front to back....wear is going to be brutal.

But....what kinda performance hit can be expected to be taken with the AT's?

I probably would go AT for my use case, but cool they are offering a extreme street set up too.

Sponsored