What's your R2 predictions?

[Trandall]

My prediction? It has to match the Model Y at the very least.

- 800V main battery divided into two 400V sections
- 48V architecture for non drive devices, this will flow into the the next gen R1
- Glass roof (Model Y has one)
- Charge port in back driver side fender
- Good size frunk
- No air suspension
- No BT speaker
- No air compressor (or will be optional)
- No cooled seats
- No real wood trim
- Less elaborate seat design
- No third row
- Smaller gauge cluster screen
- Still comes with flashlight in the door
- Still has heated seats (F/R) and steering wheel
- Still has wireless charger (hopefully one that actually works)

I"d rephrase that to say it has to compete with MY. I don't wan't it to match it or I'd just buy a model Y.
For clarity MY does not have 800V HV battery or 48V low volt battery does it? I don't think R2 needs these either nor a standard glass roof. Most of all it should not be fugly like the MY.
Also I'm predicting base trim price is ~$40K AFTER fed tax credit.

Sponsored

 

[Dark-Fx]

For clarity MY does not have 800V HV battery or 48V low volt battery does it? I don't think R2 needs these either

I think 800+V HV should start being industry standard, but I am having a hard time with the change to 48V for LV stuff when you have HV available for non-critical high energy devices.

Tesla decided they needed 48V for their steer-by-wire steering rack, which would be enough to make me steer away from any model that includes it. Total LV failures are pretty rare, but I am just not interested in taking that chance.

 

[mkg3]

In addition to a more complicated body, extra doors, and ports, it would also mean extra high-voltage wires. Doesn't make sense from a complexity and cost perspective.

Don't think having a second charge port would add much cost. That said, highly unlikely that they would do it.

Although, an interesting idea to have NACS on one and CCS1 on the other...

It would be better, if Rivian considered a center mounted charge port, like Leaf, in the front or the back so that charger cable length does not create a parking spot issue.

With NACS port being much smaller than CCS1, it would be easy to hide it behind the Rivian logo, if they chose it to put one on the front or the rear somewhere. If R2 has a F150 style clam front, then its bit more complicated though...

 

[SamDoe1]

I"d rephrase that to say it has to compete with MY. I don't wan't it to match it or I'd just buy a model Y.
For clarity MY does not have 800V HV battery or 48V low volt battery does it? I don't think R2 needs these either nor a standard glass roof. Most of all it should not be fugly like the MY.
Also I'm predicting base trim price is ~$40K AFTER fed tax credit.

It doesn't have 800V/48V yet but you can bet it's coming soon, maybe in the next refresh which is why we haven't seen the refreshed Y yet.

The Y definitely has a standard glass roof.

 

[DuoRivian]

No way there would be a sedan. Sedans are off-brand and have not been in demand for at least 10 years. R2 is most likely SUV only. A small truck would be a tough sell given the Maverick tops out at $40k loaded (and is faster to “refuel”).

The Maverick has the same length bed as the R1T so there is the possibility of a shorter R2T with a 4.5’ bed and a smaller hood (limited trunk) to get the length down towards 200” like the Maverick. There is the market since Ford can’t make enough Mavericks three years into production and Fisker have a smaller truck planned.

 

[emoore]

I just can't see Rivian putting in an 800V system for the R2 when the R1 is still 400V. I think eventually they both go 800V but I think the R1 gets it first.

 

[DuoRivians]

I just can't see Rivian putting in an 800V system for the R2 when the R1 is still 400V. I think eventually they both go 800V but I think the R1 gets it first.

R1 gets it this year

 

[UnsungZero_OldTimeAdMan]

The Maverick has the same length bed as the R1T so there is the possibility of a shorter R2T with a 4.5’ bed and a smaller hood (limited trunk) to get the length down towards 200” like the Maverick. There is the market since Ford can’t make enough Mavericks three years into production and Fisker have a smaller truck planned.

Maverick tops out at just below $40k before taxes and fees. $40k is Rivian's target entry point for R2; they said it themselves. Can Rivian make a R2T that is still competitive at that price? I very much doubt it. Less range and longer to "refuel". That on top of consumer demand that is very much biased toward CUVs... Sorry. The odds are fully stacked against a small BEV truck.

R2 represents a pivotal/critical moment in Rivian's growth and sustainability. They can't afford to distract themselves with offerings that do not target the majority of the mainstream audience. You, individually, might want a small BEV truck. But if there aren't enough of you to be a majority, there is no business case.

 

[srnyoung]

1. Due to flagging R1 sales, they have decided to start production of R2 T & S in Normal at the end of this year.

2. R2T will have the choice of a 4.5 or 6ft bed along with integrated rack mounts for full length lumber / canoe / etc. loads.

3. R2s will have 6 dynamic buttons/knobs that works things from A/C/Heat to volume and tuner. (DREAMY.)

For the record, I created this post when the title was still; "Far out predictions..."

I don't really think any of these will come true.
I'd pick #2 if I could get my wish...

 

[emoore]

Maverick tops out at just below $40k before taxes and fees. $40k is Rivian's target entry point for R2; they said it themselves. Can Rivian make a R2T that is still competitive at that price? I very much doubt it. Less range and longer to "refuel". That on top of consumer demand that is very much biased toward CUVs... Sorry. The odds are fully stacked against a small BEV truck.

R2 represents a pivotal/critical moment in Rivian's growth and sustainability. They can't afford to distract themselves with offerings that do not target the majority of the mainstream audience. You, individually, might want a small BEV truck. But if there aren't enough of you to be a majority, there is no business case.

Shorter to refuel is every ICE advantage over EVs. There a plenty of ICE SUVs that are cheaper and easier to refuel than the R2 so I'm not sure why you are not comparing those to the R2 and only comparing the Maverick.

 

[NY_Rob]

If Rivian wants to keep up technology wise, they should go 48v/800v, LFP and Gigapress. A lot to ask for, but they’re building their new Georgia plant from the ground up. Now’s the perfect time!

Tesla's IDRA GigaPresses were super, super expensive... yes Rivian has deep pockets, but not that deep at a time they're not even profitable. Tesla had the luxury of being profitable when they built the GT plant, Rivian is still bleeding red.

 

[UnsungZero_OldTimeAdMan]

Shorter to refuel is every ICE advantage over EVs. There a plenty of ICE SUVs that are cheaper and easier to refuel than the R2 so I'm not sure why you are not comparing those to the R2 and only comparing the Maverick.

That is only one of the market factors towards a business case. As I said clearly, "That on top of consumer demand that is very much biased toward CUVs". Maverick may be a good seller for Ford, but how is that number in relation to their SUV/CUV sales?

Soon enough, we'll know who's right.

 

[srnyoung]

Oh, I forgot to request V2H power options.

And, because I think that will arrive soon, I think an R2T that is smaller will be a fleet manager's dream. Construction and service companies would eat that up, especially roof-rack ready and still with plenty of weight and power to tow at a ~$40k pricepoint with a bare-bones interior.

 

[NY_Rob]

Maverick tops out at just below $40k before taxes and fees. $40k is Rivian's target entry point for R2; they said it themselves. Can Rivian make a R2T that is still competitive at that price? I very much doubt it. Less range and longer to "refuel". That on top of consumer demand that is very much biased toward CUVs... Sorry. The odds are fully stacked against a small BEV truck.

I agree, how can they compete with a $39.9K ICE pickup truck? They probably can't and won't even try.

If they can come up with a CUV that's more like a SUV than the Model Y is... and price it at $49K decently equipped it has a chance.

It seems there's lots of rich folks here (just look at the griping in any of the IRS Tax Credit threads about the "too low" $300K income limits) that love to spend other people's money saying they'll be happy to spend $69K for this smaller Rivian... well the overall American public is not willing to spend that much for a small CUV EV. For 2024 the average annual salary across the U.S. is $59,428... this is supposed to be the vehicle for "the people".

 

[SANZC02]

I agree, how can they compete with a $39.9K ICE pickup truck? They probably can't and won't even try.

If they can come up with a CUV that's more like a SUV than the Model Y is... and price it at $49K decently equipped it has a chance.

It seems there's lots of rich folks here (just look at the griping in any of the IRS Tax Credit threads about the "too low" $300K income limits) that love to spend other people's money saying they'll be happy to spend $69K for this smaller Rivian... well the overall American public is not willing to spend that much for a small CUV EV. For 2024 the average annual salary across the U.S. is $59,428... this is supposed to be the vehicle for "the people".

Don’t forget Rivian is targeting that 7500 credit so to compete with a 39.9k ICE price a target around 47.4k gets them there.

Sponsored