Rants and Raves after 2 months of Rivian R1T ownership [DISCLAIMER: Unauthorized feedback from non-owner]

[LeoH]

Clearly you didn't digest my statement if you're suggesting that MyQ is "just as simple and far superior." But you're entitled to your opinion and so are the rest of us who strongly disagree that MyQ is in any way superior. And I'm sorry, but I can only laugh at your suggestion that using MyQ is just as simple as a using a factory integrated HomeLink button.

I have a MyQ enabled garage door opener. I never use MyQ. I don't need to open/close my garage door from anywhere, only when I'm coming/going in my car. And while I could make it work with Alexa (why I would want to do that escapes me but for argument's sake), I would have to cobble that together using IFTTT or some other bridge technology. I also don't want to have to pull out my phone, unlock it, open the MyQ app, tap to open, and then wait for the commands to traverse the internet all while I'm driving just to get my garage door open - it's not safe. There are also a lot of fence gates, etc that aren't "smart" and only support RF openers. Not a concern for me (or obviously for you) but it is for many and an RF transmitter such as HomeLink is required for this use case.

Yes, we absolutely can modify our Rivians to support HomeLink. The reason so many people complain about this is that we shouldn't have to.

But, this is starting to drift significantly OT for this thread so let's start a new thread (or find a more appropriate old thread) if this really warrants further discussion (which I don't think it does). If MyQ is good enough for you, great. Just don't be so myopic as to assume that means it's good enough for everyone.

The last I want to come in late at night, use MyQ to open my garage door, and wake up not just my household, but the whole freaking block with the atrocious beeping.

However, it's not the right place for this discussion. But as a feature, I think the R1T missed the mark. I would have been ok with physical buttons on the mirror as well.

Sponsored

 

[the long way downunder]

Close this thread?
Yes, if the admin/mod team want to close a thread, sure.
Delete it?
No, that would be to attempt to change history, to create a void, where the same thread will re-emerge, and to impose a dictum of "thought crime" that posts in this thread were not legitimate (even though they may be redundant or spurious.)

 

[SeaGeo]

Well, one thing this thread has made clear to me, those that work in a company that builds and releases hardware and software, and those that don't...

As someone who does, I can tell you, there are a litany of reasons to have "non-consumer" builds of software (and even hardware), even on released products.

Some folks on this board understand those reasons, and some... clearly do not.

To me the weird thing is isn't having the non-consumer builds, it's how Rivian is marketing them.

Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't recall the people I know who work (or worked)at Microsoft buying the Xbox, being asked (presumably) to share that they have it ahead of the general public release, and then reporting that they've started selling the xbox. I can imagine this analogy:

Microsoft at CES: the xbox 24 will be available for Holiday season 2024!
October 2024: The xbox is available for purchase!
November, December 2024: Hey, MKBHD and Gamespot gave it a great review! And look, we've been selling the xbox to customers! They're posting their unboxing on IG!

General consumer: sweet, let's see how the customers like it!
General consumer: Hey dude! How's your xbox? I heard the firmware is a bit glitchy?
MSFT employee:
MSFT Employee two days later: My truck is awesome!
General consumer: Sweet! Is it all you imagined?
MSFT employee: Yep!
General consumer: How is Fifa 2020? Microsoft says it runs at 460 fps!
MSFT employee: I can't tell you, the that information hasn't been released yet
General consumer: ... but.. it says...
Microsoft behind the scenes: make sure not to share to protect your confidential build information, but keep posting how much you love your xbox on IG!
General consumer: Whoa, look at all these xbox customers. Who is able to share their experience? Microsoft said they went into production in October!
Microsoft: ummm.. this awesome dude in NY. (Thanks @Iwantatesla)
General consumer: so... what're the dimensions of the xbox? I want to make sure it fits below my TV.
Microsoft: we'll tell you when we enter production (added, because I noticed today my configurator still says this actually and it made me laugh)


I'm not discounting the need or reasons to have non-consumer builds. But you have to admit that the delivery of the truck being almost entirely non-consumer builds that are also advertised on social media platforms makes it pretty weird.

 

[astonius]

Uh, what’s with this screenshot?

 

[Jarico75]

It's funny you mention the charging curve. My rant the other day about this was specifically because Rivian as a company hasn't produced one, it's exposing their employees to a bunch of people annoying the shit out of them and getting information that's semi-helpful back. None of which is really the employees fault.

Basically, it's this weird situation where Rivian has sold test builds to employees, and has seemingly encouraged them to share that they have their trucks, but at the same time locked down what can be shared about the trucks that are in production. It's this weird mix of a testing phase that I'd assume most manufacturers have done internally with actually selling the vehicles. Seems like a great way to get more data before pushing it in mass to the general public while also show that you're selling the trucks (GM delivered 1 Hummer in 2021...), but it does produce this weird several month limbo that we've been in.

It's not that weird. Most companies have the "do no harm" mentality. It is an inherent trust between an employer and employee. Company provides early access to R1T and employee agrees to "do no harm" to the company's reputation. This seems more like common sense.

This same trust is expected to exist for companies that are not producing a retail product. If I am working for a company, I have no intention of ever sharing any information that may damage its reputation. This is not just about me........ It's about the company and its employees who work hard to ensure their longevity in each respective industry.

 

[SeaGeo]

It's not that weird. Most companies have the "do no harm" mentality. It is an inherent trust between an employer and employee. Company provides early access to R1T and employee agrees to "do no harm" to the company's reputation. This seems more like common sense.

This same trust is expected to exist for companies that are not producing a retail product. If I am working for a company, I have no intention of ever sharing any information that may damage its reputation. This is not just about me........ It's about the company and its employees who work hard to ensure their longevity in each respective industry.

Yeah, I'm not arguing against a do no harm mentality. (to me) it seems like the twist here is that those customers, the employees, are essentially the only customers, and are actively advertising that they have the trucks on social platforms. I don't recall that broadly happening... anywhere before.

There were mules running around all over the place with manufacturer plates and nobody wanted much information from the people driving those mules around. But Rivian said they went into production, and sold trucks to customers. Except that for now going on three months they haven't delivered any meaningful number of trucks to people who can freely talk about about their truck, but those people are also actively engaging on social media about their truck.

Sell the truck to employees, and call them customers on the books. I don't particularly care about that. But at the same time, don't have those employees share that they have the trucks without some sort of disclaimer like "I am an employee of Rivian, and cannot talk about any details regarding my truck" or something.

For what it's worth, I've been in the "these are customers and deliveries" camp. And I still am. BUT, that the deliveries are all limited in what they can say has made for an awkward 3 months in my opinion. Maybe it's just me, but I don't recall a rollout of *anything* that has been like this. And thus it seems weird to me. I don't recall employees running around showing pictures of their yet to be released iPhone online. Nor do I remember employees being the only people to own the iPhone after it started shipping for a quarter of a year.

 

[moosehead]

So when do we hear an official, allowed, transparent consumer review?

 

[Guy]

So when do we hear an official, allowed, transparent consumer review?

Good question. Some real people should be receiving their vehicles in January/February and should have been notified of build dates. Communication seems very lacking again (after those good emails late last year gave some targets).

 

[Attesan997]

Yeah, I'm not arguing against a do no harm mentality. (to me) it seems like the twist here is that those customers, the employees, are essentially the only customers, and are actively advertising that they have the trucks on social platforms. I don't recall that broadly happening... anywhere before.

There were mules running around all over the place with manufacturer plates and nobody wanted much information from the people driving those mules around. But Rivian said they went into production, and sold trucks to customers. Except that for now going on three months they haven't delivered any meaningful number of trucks to people who can freely talk about about their truck, but those people are also actively engaging on social media about their truck.

Sell the truck to employees, and call them customers on the books. I don't particularly care about that. But at the same time, don't have those employees share that they have the trucks without some sort of disclaimer like "I am an employee of Rivian, and cannot talk about any details regarding my truck" or something.

For what it's worth, I've been in the "these are customers and deliveries" camp. And I still am. BUT, that the deliveries are all limited in what they can say has made for an awkward 3 months in my opinion. Maybe it's just me, but I don't recall a rollout of *anything* that has been like this. And thus it seems weird to me. I don't recall employees running around showing pictures of their yet to be released iPhone online. Nor do I remember employees being the only people to own the iPhone after it started shipping for a quarter of a year.

Reading through your post and putting into words how I feel. I understand why this was done, help with the IPO, help keep social media buzzing while the company delays vehicles. But couldn't they have put this effort into more first drive events or something tangible for the end customers? Hell they could've done a Max Pack only event and just had those reservation holders come to Normal for a consolation tour and drive. To your point, Tim Cook may be using the newest iPhone before it comes out but you'll only see media showing that during or after the keynote where its annouced to the world.

 

[the long way downunder]

Uh, what’s with this screenshot?

oops. "typo" …. I was going to reply to your earlier "go read salient threads" comment. Nevermind, just wasting time talking about technology … : )

 

[Jarico75]

Yeah, I'm not arguing against a do no harm mentality. (to me) it seems like the twist here is that those customers, the employees, are essentially the only customers, and are actively advertising that they have the trucks on social platforms. I don't recall that broadly happening... anywhere before.

There were mules running around all over the place with manufacturer plates and nobody wanted much information from the people driving those mules around. But Rivian said they went into production, and sold trucks to customers. Except that for now going on three months they haven't delivered any meaningful number of trucks to people who can freely talk about about their truck, but those people are also actively engaging on social media about their truck.

Sell the truck to employees, and call them customers on the books. I don't particularly care about that. But at the same time, don't have those employees share that they have the trucks without some sort of disclaimer like "I am an employee of Rivian, and cannot talk about any details regarding my truck" or something.

For what it's worth, I've been in the "these are customers and deliveries" camp. And I still am. BUT, that the deliveries are all limited in what they can say has made for an awkward 3 months in my opinion. Maybe it's just me, but I don't recall a rollout of *anything* that has been like this. And thus it seems weird to me. I don't recall employees running around showing pictures of their yet to be released iPhone online. Nor do I remember employees being the only people to own the iPhone after it started shipping for a quarter of a year.

I can see your point. I think for the most part, when a delivery is made to a non-employee and that person shares information they are clearly announcing that fact. Just like @Iwantatesla did here. The facts in this case is that someone other than the employee posted information that was posted as first hand knowledge. I am hungry as much as the next person for information, but let's direct our negative energy toward the true culprit here.

 

[Cosmacelf]

This and each bay/module is firewalled with venting via the sides, the issue is GM didn't fully design the pack they shopped it out to a subcontractor I believe while LG Chem made the cells.

Designing large batteries is very hard. It isn’t just a matter of stuffing cells into a package with a BMS. That companies like GM are outsourcing this critical component is pretty sad.

Nice to see you on this forum. I've been on TMC since 2012 and remembered your username lol

Yep, I was on the Tesla forums from the beginning of the Model S ramp in 2013, and now I get to do it all over again with Rivian

 

[SeaGeo]

I can see your point. I think for the most part, when a delivery is made to a non-employee and that person shares information they are clearly announcing that fact. Just like @Iwantatesla did here. The facts in this case is that someone other than the employee posted information that was posted as first hand knowledge. I am hungry as much as the next person for information, but let's direct our negative energy toward the true culprit here.

Agreed. Sorry, I think that's where I was probably confusing you (and other) I'm not trying to talk about this specific example (the person who shared info is a dick). Just that in the way mothership Rivian has handled this rollout has increased the likelihood that their employees are going to be asked to share information that they shouldn't be sharing (intentionally or not). It's not even really ire from me, I'm not riled up over this at all. I just feel bad for the employees.

 

[SeaGeo]

So when do we hear an official, allowed, transparent consumer review?

We have IwantTesla sharing info!

 

[SeaGeo]

Both Tesla and Rivian opted to use small cylindrical cells partly because cell short circuits could be safely contained in the pack. GM failed to design their pack to be able to contain cell short circuits.

Ok, so that's an interesting thought that I can get on board with. That being said, there are a lot of companies using prismatic cells.

Designing large batteries is very hard. It isn’t just a matter of stuffing cells into a package with a BMS. That companies like GM are outsourcing this critical component is pretty sad.

Agreed. I hadn't heard that GM had outsourced the actual pack design.

Sponsored