Is this the R2 spotted in the wild?

[vandy1981]

And why is the parking lot all wet, Todd?

I don't know Margo!

Sponsored

 

[Dark-Fx]

I figured it out. It's the R1T Bronco. Explains why they don't have the chrome strip on it. Also explains why the mirrors are on the pillar instead of the doors. Roof comes off, doors come off. I've cracked the code.

 

[COdogman]

Oliver Stone endorses this thread.

 

[DTown3011]

Sorry, but those photos are not real. Too many discrepancies.

 

[UnsungZero_OldTimeAdMan]

Yeah but is it an R2S or is it the R1X

Well, if we must play that game. R2. Shorter past C-pillar. Shorter rear overhang (behind rear wheel). Plus R1T style spoiler. Shorter overall, need spoiler to reduce drag and maximize efficiency. Head lights are shorter than what R1's would be. Also note space above front wheel flair and relation to where the hood line would be (less than R1). And, lack of fixed window pane in 2nd door. The light bar looks slimmer also. All in all, consistent proportionally.

Also, in the ad business, this is a code-red shoot. That entire level of the structure is closed off to public and anyone not associated with production. They just didn't account for nearby tall buildings. I've worked these types of shoots before.

And they wet the ground to get cool reflections (drama!) and darker ground plane (contrast!).

And they chose Glacier White, the best color, for the reveal. So all other colors can suck it. /s

 

[NY_Rob]

And why is the parking lot all wet, Todd?

Because Margo, they washed the vehicles for their beauty shots! Call me crazy...?

 

[NY_Rob]

Is this Gary? Why are they so much bigger than the people closer to the camera? I got questions, yo. ?

That's Beast Mode!! He's from Cali...

 

[kozak79]

Photos look real to me. It's shot with a very long lens, which makes the scale look deceptive, as foreground and background objects appear to be the same size, creating the illusion that the foreground objects are bigger.

 

[Dark-Fx]

Sorry, but those photos are not real. Too many discrepancies.

I talked with one of my friends that works at Rivian. And he confirmed what I expected...












































...that he's not going to tell me anything. Darnit.

 

[UnsungZero_OldTimeAdMan]

Frankly, a bit astonishing, and entertaining, how many people have difficulties with 3D perspective.

 

[Marchin_MTB]

Idly wondering if that rear black area is removable to make a short bed… not inferring this from the photo at all as it’s too blurry/corrected to be conclusive. Might be kind of cool.

 

[UnsungZero_OldTimeAdMan]

Idly wondering if that rear black area is removable to make a short bed… not inferring this from the photo at all as it’s too blurry/corrected to be conclusive. Might be kind of cool.

Like the Isuzu Amigo? Would be fun, but I doubt it. Cost, NVH and safety issues.

 

[UnsungZero_OldTimeAdMan]

I talked with one of my friends that works at Rivian. And he confirmed what I expected...












































...that he's not going to tell me anything. Darnit.

Like CIA's official position on everything? "We can not deny or confirm..."

 

[OldGoat]

Frankly, a bit astonishing, and entertaining, how many people have difficulties with 3D perspective.

So, the R1S is 77 inches tall, the person in front of the R1S is closer to the camera, so will appear to be bigger but he/she is not as tall as the R1S, so let's say they are an even 6'. The 'R2' is closer still to the camera so would appear taller, yet it hits the person at just about waist level. Now, I get that it is a downward shot; however the distance between the person and the 'R2' can't be more than a few feet minimizing that distortion. Heck, let's say that the person is only 5' 8" tall. So, based on this, I would guess this "R2" is ~ 42-48" tall or a bit shorter than a Porsche 911. Seems legit to me! (That's gonna be one aerodynamic ride! )

 

[UnsungZero_OldTimeAdMan]

So, the R1S is 77 inches tall, the person in front of the R1S is closer to the camera, so will appear to be bigger but he/she is not as tall as the R1S, so let's say they are an even 6'. The 'R2' is closer still to the camera so would appear taller, yet it hits the person at just about waist level. Now, I get that it is a downward shot; however the distance between the person and the 'R2' can't be more than a few feet minimizing that distortion. Heck, let's say that the person is only 5' 8" tall. So, based on this, I would guess this "R2" is ~ 42-48" tall or a bit shorter than a Porsche 911. Seems legit to me! (That's gonna be one aerodynamic ride! )

My gut feeling is he's more than 5'8". Also, height of RAN is a good clue.

Sponsored