Are you excited or dissapointed?

[MJB28]

When I pre-ordered I simply stated that I wanted the R1T, nothing else. There was nothing in the pre-ordering that indicated battery size or any other options. So Rivian will not have that actual data until Monday, when we start to configure the vehicles. They are basically forcing the data in the direction of the smaller battery by making that the only one available next year.

I personally will stick to the larger battery and wait, because I want the right truck for me, I will not let the emotion of getting it sooner cause me to end up disappointed in the long run.

November last year Rivian sent out a survey to early pre-holders and it asked battery size you would want. I chose the 135 on the survey

Sponsored

 

[Babbuino]

November last year Rivian sent out a survey to early pre-holders and it asked battery size you would want. I chose the 135 on the survey

Ugh.... well thanks for that MJ!

 

[ajdelange]

The batteries will supply fewer Wh when cold

I think the discussion is turning more philosophical than technical at this point. The battery doesn't "supply" any fewer kWh when cold. The question is one of whether what they supply is useful which relates to what I think is the fundamental question "will you have shorter range when the weather is cold". The answer is "sometimes". How often one experiences range loss depends on how cold it is and how one drives, prepares the car etc.

If the car is cold soaked certain components must be warmed in order to make the car usable. In particular, cold makes two fluids too thick so that more force is required to move their particles thus requiring that energy be delivered to those fluids' particles. This energy is naturally converted to heat which makes the fluids less viscous so that the system sort of bootstraps itself into an operable state. The philosophical question is as to whether we should consider this energy "lost". It did do work that had to be done but it is, of course, work that we would prefer not to have to do so that it could be applied to transportation rather than conditioning the vehicle.

I'm going to leave it there.

Forgot to say what the fluids are. The first is the hypoid oil in the differentials and the second is the soup of lithium ions in the battery.

 

[ajdelange]

November last year Rivian sent out a survey to early pre-holders and it asked battery size you would want. I chose the 135 on the survey

Can't say I remember getting that survey but whether I did or not it is apparent that Rivian at least has an idea as to what a sample of the customer base wants. Perhaps this informed their decision.

 

[drhnbtx]

Me, and I can assure you I am of sound mind. I can afford the 180, but have wanted the 135 since the beginning after rationalizing. This is for 2 main reasons:

1) 135 is plenty for 98% of my usage. Also, looking at the negligible time differences in even longer road trips that some members here have posted, I'm now 100% confident that the 135 pack is plenty with current charging infrastructure (and that will only improve in the coming years).

2) I do plan to take my Rivian off road, and will encounter both mud & sand. From many years of off road experience, I know how much difference even a couple hundred pounds of extra weight can make. I don't want that extra battery weight in soft surface conditions, or even climbs/descents.

Im in a similar situation as you regarding the 135. i also have 2500 duramax and that is what i will use to tow our travel trailer and my wifes XC90 is great on extended trips that dont require towing. check out "riding river ranch". it is an approx 3000 acre private ranch with trails of varying difficulty. about 175 miles from Austin. We are in New Braunfels, right down the road from you. no day use limits traffic to the people staying in one of the 10+/- cabins. great swimming spots also for the summer months

 

[drhnbtx]

Can't say I remember getting that survey but whether I did or not it is apparent that Rivian at least has an idea as to what a sample of the customer base wants. Perhaps this informed their decision.

I didnt receive the survey but in a chat with Sara, she stated that popularity of the 135 was a factor in the launch decision

 

[ajdelange]

Well there it is.

 

[Lil'O Annie]

I didnt receive the survey but in a chat with Sara, she stated that popularity of the 135 was a factor in the launch decision

I wonder what percent of the people surveyed actually have experience with EV's, or own one. I would speculate that those actually owning an EV would have opted for the 180kW hands down. The Poll in this forum had a majority interested in the 180kW option.

 

[Njmc]

Pretty much disappointed in the 400 + RT1 not coming-out for another year , loss of some additional pre-stated standards as well, agree with statements above and also don't appreciate the loss of rebate with the more expensive milage RT1 later.

 

[ajdelange]

I wonder what percent of the people surveyed actually have experience with EV's, or own one.

I wondered the same thing so I put up a poll under General Topics

 

[DucRider]

I think the discussion is turning more philosophical than technical at this point. The battery doesn't "supply" any fewer kWh when cold. The question is one of whether what they supply is useful which relates to what I think is the fundamental question "will you have shorter range when the weather is cold". The answer is "sometimes".

The manufacturer not only states that the batteries will indeed supply less energy when cold, but quantifies the amount. The EPA testing procedures specify the temperature(s) at which they are to conducted. If you ran the UDDS or Hwy tests at 30 degrees vs the specified 70 (without any climate control, seta heat, etc.), the resulting range would be significantly lower (and not from the gear oil).
And yes, there are strategies the owner can take to reduce this impact, but the impact is there

Nobody but you has postulated or addressed any theory that the energy is "lost".

I wonder what percent of the people surveyed actually have experience with EV's, or own one. I would speculate that those actually owning an EV would have opted for the 180kW hands down. The Poll in this forum had a majority interested in the 180kW option.

I've been driving EVs for 7 years. I chose the 135 kWh as my likely preference.
The poll did indicate a preference for the 400+ mile pack, But without knowing the cost increase for the 180 kWh, I don't know how many will actually vote with their wallets.

If we look at cost/kWh bump on the Mach-e, that would translate to a little over $11K for the Rivian.
If we look at the Model 3, it's would be about the same (rough estimation since the bigger battery also gets you a stereo upgrade, LED foglamps and floormats).

If the Poll stated that the 400+ mile versions would cost at least $10K more and be delivered 6 months or more after the 300+ mile version, I think the results would be different.

... don't appreciate the loss of rebate with the more expensive milage RT1 later.

I don't know how this got the traction it did, but the 100K Amazon vans stretch out to 2030. The 400 mile version will be eligible for the Federal Tax Credit (assuming no changes by Congress to the current program)

 

[ajdelange]

The manufacturer not only states that the batteries will indeed supply less energy when cold, but quantifies the amount.

Nobody but you has postulated or addressed any theory that the energy is "lost".

Sounds like lost to me.


I

 

[electruck]

in a chat with Sara, she stated that popularity of the 135 was a factor in the launch decision

Enough people seemed to want the 400+ mile range to warrant updating the design of the R1S to accommodate that and 3rd row seating at the same time, they had to know there was significant demand for the "Max" pack.

Pretty much disappointed in the 400 + RT1 not coming-out for another year

Hey, at least they gave you a production start date for the R1T. They can't even tell us what to expect for the R1S. That is really irritating after years of stating it would be available from launch.

If the Poll stated that the 400+ mile versions would cost at least $10K more and be delivered 6 months or more after the 300+ mile version, I think the results would be different.

I want the 400+ mile battery and was already expecting an extra $10k or more with availability from launch. The lack of availability at launch for the R1S combined with the lack of an estimate of when it might ever become available is what really gets my knickers in a knot. Makes it much more difficult to evaluate my path forward from here.

I am hoping the configurator will have pricing for the R1T/400 on Monday so that we can at least see exactly what the battery upgrade should cost.

 

[DucRider]

Sounds like lost to me.


I

I think "unavailable" better describes it. If you warm the batteries, it becomes available and you have "found" it.

 

[UT Rivian]

I want the 400+ mile battery and was already expecting an extra $10k or more with availability from launch. The lack of availability at launch for the R1S combined with the lack of an estimate of when it might ever become available is what really gets my knickers in a knot. Makes it much more difficult to evaluate my path forward from here.

I am hoping the configurator will have pricing for the R1T/400 on Monday so that we can at least see exactly what the battery upgrade should cost.

I’m in the same boat. I will need a car next summer when my daughter comes back from college and takes her car with her. I was planning for the R1S 400+ mile battery and 5 seats and had budgeted for this. I was also planning for this to be available sometime in the fall of 2021. Now, it seems like mid 2022 may be optimistic, without even a projected target date.

I‘m not sure whether I will compromise and just buy the LE R1S. For such a large purchase, I would rather just buy what I want. I guess we’ll see what Monday has in store.

Sponsored