Rivian R2 Platform Photo From Q4 Shareholder Letter

[pangpang77]

I haven't bought rivian stock. Do I win?

Only if it tanks and they go bankrupt.

$10,000 invested in Tesla 10 years ago would be worth $2.1 million today. If Rivian even is half as successful as Tesla, with a stable CEO with great products, $10,000 to multiples in the tens or even hundreds is not inconceivable in 10 years...

Sponsored

 

[BigSkies]

Full transparency: I don't and never had made vehicles, but I've worked in manufacturing and made vehicle components.

That said, from what I know from extensive experience in manufacturing in general, and tidbits from being a nerd and enthusiast for automotive things and adjacent technologies:

It would be a gargantuan task to retool a given line to accommodate more than one product, unless they were verily similar. The benefit of building an R1T and R1S in the same facility is that they're verily similar.

Based on what's being teased so far, the R2 is even going away from the 'skateboard' design for a more traditional body on frame. That alone would require a gigantic divergence.

Notwithstanding if we're changing electronics architecture, reducing computers/systems, etc...

Yeah, bottom line is that: I cannot see a scenario where it'd be responsible for Rivian to switch gears. It wouldn't only affect (read: cost way more than anticipated) production of R2, but would inhibit their abilities to continue building the R1 platform the same.

I'd imagine, if anything, there's a small cell for development, but it's likely not mature enough to produce in volume. And volume is where Rivian is going to start making profits on their vehicle. So, it wouldn't benefit them at all to try to eke any out of their current facility unless that was already in the plans and we're just blissfully unaware of it.

Just my thoughts however. I could verily be wrong, but I suspect that everyone asking Rivian to 'figure out' how to manufacture R2 vehicles in Normal have zero appreciation for what it takes to manufacture even the simplest things.

It's also easy to overly focus on final assembly.

I suspect there will be significant parts overlap between R1 and R2 when you go a few levels above final assembly.

We know they plan to use the same motors. They'll likely use a lot of the same underlying battery and control components, even if they're arranging them in a different way. It sounds like the new wiring harness will have a common underlying architecture, even though the actual connectors would be different.

I speculate (with no real information) that some of the Perrigrine related changes will involve other minor components that can be standardized across the R1 and R2. It's not necessarily big stuff, but things like mounting brackets, fasteners, charging ports, etc can be standardized and manufactured in much greater quantities.

There can still be a lot of economies of scale and commonalities in the supply chain even if final assembly is very different.

 

[1T2022]

Bought at $50, 40, 30, 20, 15, 13. Dump everything around $16~18. Bought again at $15, 12, 11, 10. Ready to sale again.

 

[R1Thor]

It's also easy to overly focus on final assembly.

I suspect there will be significant parts overlap between R1 and R2 when you go a few levels above final assembly.

We know they plan to use the same motors. They'll likely use a lot of the same underlying battery and control components, even if they're arranging them in a different way. It sounds like the new wiring harness will have a common underlying architecture, even though the actual connectors would be different.

I speculate (with no real information) that some of the Perrigrine related changes will involve other minor components that can be standardized across the R1 and R2. It's not necessarily big stuff, but things like mounting brackets, fasteners, charging ports, etc can be standardized and manufactured in much greater quantities.

There can still be a lot of economies of scale and commonalities in the supply chain even if final assembly is very different.

I disagree that there's going to be 'enough' overlap to justify. I've worked on components that looked so very similar that required so much delta. Oversimplification is the problem here. Not only do you have to get your cell design down to a very very high standard, but you have to achieve repeatable tolerance for Cpk and Ppk and the process control required is orders of magnitude more difficult the second you need to be making tooling changes or swapping between parts.

This goes beyond compensation tables. MAYBE with the right mocap/ visual computation system and machine learning this can become repeatable, but the effort to do that...even simply, is months of data and A TON of overhead ($$$$$$$$$$$)


I'd also just like to point out that the entire narrative around "Peregrine" and an R1 refresh has also been speculation. There is ZERO substantiation around this, and quite frankly, Rivian isn't 'due' a refresh. Most OEMs produce the same vehicles for 4-8 years (depending on manufacturer) before refreshing. That alone is a costly endeavor. It's entirely possible that it's a cost savings initiative, so I won't dismiss it altogether. However, I'm exceptionally dubious, given that these forums are echo chambers of unsubstantiated hearsay (at best, and I'm being nice).

I'm super happy to be wrong on any/all of this. If I am, I really hope we get some data and a minimum of VIDEO on how they achieved such feats.


Because quite frankly, ANY investors worth their salt, if witnessing that level of Engineering feat, would put ALL of their money on Rivian. They'd be unstoppable. Sincerely. ANY manufacturing facility would be bolstered by that level of Engineering flexibility and the ability to adapt and pivot that quickly.

 

[jbssfelix]

Full transparency: I don't and never had made vehicles, but I've worked in manufacturing and made vehicle components.

That said, from what I know from extensive experience in manufacturing in general, and tidbits from being a nerd and enthusiast for automotive things and adjacent technologies:

It would be a gargantuan task to retool a given line to accommodate more than one product, unless they were verily similar. The benefit of building an R1T and R1S in the same facility is that they're verily similar.

Based on what's being teased so far, the R2 is even going away from the 'skateboard' design for a more traditional body on frame. That alone would require a gigantic divergence.

Notwithstanding if we're changing electronics architecture, reducing computers/systems, etc...

Yeah, bottom line is that: I cannot see a scenario where it'd be responsible for Rivian to switch gears. It wouldn't only affect (read: cost way more than anticipated) production of R2, but would inhibit their abilities to continue building the R1 platform the same.

I'd imagine, if anything, there's a small cell for development, but it's likely not mature enough to produce in volume. And volume is where Rivian is going to start making profits on their vehicle. So, it wouldn't benefit them at all to try to eke any out of their current facility unless that was already in the plans and we're just blissfully unaware of it.

Just my thoughts however. I could verily be wrong, but I suspect that everyone asking Rivian to 'figure out' how to manufacture R2 vehicles in Normal have zero appreciation for what it takes to manufacture even the simplest things.

Worked at a Big 3 (something about a high military ranking and power production module), and your thoughts are 100% in line with mine.

It's one thing to build the R1T/R1S, as they are effectively the same vehicle, much like the GMC Yukon, Chevy Tahoe, Chevy Suburban, and Cadillac Escalade (and variants) are all the same vehicle. Honestly, they probably could be built on the same line as their pickup equivalents, but the demand for both is great enough to have multiple entirely separate plants. When the core frame or body is wholly different, building a single line to handle both is generally unreasonable or unfeasible. There's a reason why the Chevy Colorado is built in Wentzville, MO and the Silverado is built in Springfield, OH/Flint, MI (mostly).

 

[downranger12]

It's also easy to overly focus on final assembly.

I suspect there will be significant parts overlap between R1 and R2 when you go a few levels above final assembly.

We know they plan to use the same motors. They'll likely use a lot of the same underlying battery and control components, even if they're arranging them in a different way. It sounds like the new wiring harness will have a common underlying architecture, even though the actual connectors would be different.

I speculate (with no real information) that some of the Perrigrine related changes will involve other minor components that can be standardized across the R1 and R2. It's not necessarily big stuff, but things like mounting brackets, fasteners, charging ports, etc can be standardized and manufactured in much greater quantities.

There can still be a lot of economies of scale and commonalities in the supply chain even if final assembly is very different.

They are building the R2 in Georgia as far as I know.

 

[R1Thor]

Well, I was happily wrong on this one! And I'm man enough to admit it

I'm betting Rivian had to pivot to building in Normal due to delays with the Georgia plant, but who knows?

Understanding how HUGE of an Engineering feat it is for them to add this line is inspiring. And with the additional reveals this year, this bolsters my confidence in the brand.

I hope everyone else can, even minimally, appreciate the immensity of this effort!

R2 will be my wife's next vehicle, replacing her Forester XT...!

Sponsored