R2 in NYC (Cloud White R2 Photos)!

[UnsungZero_OldTimeAdMan]

That first pic looks pretty close in size to the R1S. Probably the angle but it makes me feel better about whether my big ass will look silly in it.

Not probably. Most definitely is, with lens distortion thrown in for free. If interpreting 3D perspectives in 2D medium is a challenge, you can always look to the rear doors/windows. Divider vs no divider. R1S needs to partition the window because it has a larger rear door—to facilitate 3rd-row ingress/egress. If they didn't partition the window, the large single pane glass would not be able to roll down. You can also see how short the R1S's cargo space is (because of the 3rd row being up).

Sponsored

 

[pitbull-ny]

Definitely . That building was also the location where the Glenn Close / Alex Forrest character of Fatal Attraction lived

 

[Ced]

ive heard the R2 white is not the same as the R1 white - it apparently has a light grey tint. but in these pics it looks indistinguishable.

It’s a sharp color, very light grey with some blue in it.

 

[Ced]

That first pic looks pretty close in size to the R1S. Probably the angle but it makes me feel better about whether my big ass will look silly in it.

It’s much smaller, they had a Rivian Blue R1S right behind and it’s not even close (with the yellow roof tent.)

 

[VGA]

I checked it out yesterday…literally the ‘mini me’ of R1S…tbh looked really tiny relative to the big brother…once you have the R1S…this doesn’t even come close…but probably more practical for nyc and a great px point…

 

[Jnz]

I saw it yesterday, too. It is much, much smaller in person than an R1S, but the interior space in the front and second row seemed very good. Second Row legroom seemed on par with the R1S. Obviously, no third row and less overall cargo volume (much smaller frunk). But if you only need 80% of the cargo room of an R1S and don‘t truly need a third row, it’s a great size.

 

[Proxy]

It has a tent on top now.

 

[TigerEyeJazz]

It has a tent on top now.

Really cool to see how parts from the R1 lineup directly fit on the R2.

 

[kurtlikevonnegut]

I saw it yesterday, too. It is much, much smaller in person than an R1S, but the interior space in the front and second row seemed very good. Second Row legroom seemed on par with the R1S. Obviously, no third row and less overall cargo volume (much smaller frunk). But if you only need 80% of the cargo room of an R1S and don‘t truly need a third row, it’s a great size.

were you able to sit in it at all or did they have similar rules to other locations about that? I'm curious about how headroom compares against the R1S as that is something that I really like about my R1 and is really hard to gauge from videos.

 

[Proxy]

When I was there they had both drivers side doors open and signs that you aren’t supposed to sit in it.

Edit for speling

 

[VGA]

Not allowed to sit…so was hard to get a real feel for legroom or headroom for that matter and thats why will be a big adjustment i think for R1S owners.

 

[Jnz]

were you able to sit in it at all or did they have similar rules to other locations about that? I'm curious about how headroom compares against the R1S as that is something that I really like about my R1 and is really hard to gauge from videos.

We could not sit in the vehicle, but the doors were open and one of the Rivian engineers sat in it at one point. He was probably 5’10” and had plenty of room in the front. For the back, I would think the headroom is just as good, but it’s really harder to gauge headroom without sitting in it. Legroom in the back seemed very good, though.

 

[kurtlikevonnegut]

We could not sit in the vehicle, but the doors were open and one of the Rivian engineers sat in it at one point. He was probably 5’10” and had plenty of room in the front. For the back, I would think the headroom is just as good, but it’s really harder to gauge headroom without sitting in it. Legroom in the back seemed very good, though.

I'm mostly concerned because I am 6'5, so what seems like plenty of room to a normal size person can be cramped for me. I find the R1 cabin to be very spacious and love that aspect of it. One thing I did consider with the R1 vs R2 is that when comparing dimensions between R1 and R2, it shows the height of the R1 as 78", 11" taller than the R2 at 66.9". I am assuming that is in the highest drive mode though, as when I went out to my R1T I noticed that I can clearly see over the roof in Standard ride height, which means the roofline is about 72" so the actual difference interior height of the cabin may not be that significant between R1 and R2.

 

[Proxy]

I think the height dimension is the top of the shark fin antenna for the R1. The R2 allegedly isn’t height adjustable like the R1. It looked like about 60” to the top of the roof to me. The seats also seemed like they were about a foot lower too. It might have similar head room.

 

[kurtlikevonnegut]

I think the height dimension is the top of the shark fin antenna for the R1. The R2 allegedly isn’t height adjustable like the R1. It looked like about 60” to the top of the roof to me. The seats also seemed like they were about a foot lower too. It might have similar head room.

The R1 height listed (78") is in highest and includes the shark fin. The prototypes of the R2 shown don't have a shark fin, and it seems unknown whether they will have one or not. Either way it would make sense that the height advertised doesn't include a shark fin. It's probably about 5" shorter than the R1 in Standard when all of that is taken into account.

The easiest thing to do would be to measure each from the rocker to the roofline and compare if someone in NY wants to volunteer to show up with a tape measurer.

Sponsored