So...do you have ire over undocumented changes?

[BCondrey]

I would make a comment about how this is yet another example of an over exaggerated complaint, but then I’d have 20 replies telling me how big mean I am so I’ll refrain.

Okay, so let me do it for you. The reason we have these changes is because we actually get updates. Frequently. Updates that improve the vehicles every 6 weeks or so. Does anyone remember what the software was like in 2022? OMG. So much better now. The auto ride height was required because thats the way they tested with EPA. It's annoying, yes. And yes, the truck needs to know where it is so it knows it is home and that is where it has to charge. If you don't want to share location data (like Rivian doesn't already know where you live, your CC number, where you go, when you go there, and everything about your iPhone) then you really shouldn't be surprised when a connected vehicle like this requires it for functionality.

Sponsored

 

[VSG]

I'm not a fan because I don't believe there's a legitimate use case for giving that data freely to Rivian, since most OEMs collect similar data to sell to third parties. So I don't.

So you're implying that Rivian is outright lying and breaking the law by violating their privacy agreement? I mean, if you don't want to share your location, fine, but then don't complain that the LOCATION-BASED SERVICES don't work properly for you ... And why isn't a LOCATION-BASED SERVICE a legitimate reason for using your LOCATION data?

 

[VSG]

Are you saying that in some sort of devious arrangement with or to meet some sort of capricious EPA requirement or whatever, Rivian has actually decided that it will be the sole decider of what the height of your vehicle will be at any time, not up to you anymore!?

No need to go straight to conspiracy theories.
This has been discussed many times over the past ~year, since it was something that came with Gen2. But especially in the fall in relation to one of the updates. A search of the forum for "EPA default settings" comes up with a lot of information. Short answer is, if they want to advertise a certain EPA range, it can't be calculated using some special combination of settings that aren't default - that would be deceptive and fraudulent. Like when VW/Audi cheated on emissions testing by using a "low emissions mode" when on a testing machine but using a high-emissions mode in everyday driving.

 

[Kaiju]

I can't say I mind disagreements. That said I probably be reprociprically dismissive of anyone who calls it meritless because that's easy when it's not your problem. A feature I used since day one of ownership was disabled without any notice or explanation, I can't do anything about it and that's a valid complaint. This has happened a few times now and I'm not happy with how Rivian chooses to hide negative changes. If they didn't hide it, I'd simply be able to choose whether or not I wanted whatever they were offering regardless of how much or little I cared about the continual improvement software experience. People who wave the flag of 'Well my vehicle has gotten way better' seem to be missing the point that the thing I'm not happy about is not having a choice, because they're not being up front about everything they're changing. I don't care about youtube, I'd rather my scheduled charging worked.

I bought what I bought on the lot without expecting added value over time. That's how most sales work. You buy something on a promissary note it'll be better later you get FSD.

The thing is I probably picked the best vehicle that was available at the time, but I'm not convinced I picked the best company. My experiences with Rivian as an organization have been more frustrating than pleasant and to be frank I don't have much faith in the company as they seem to be reading too many pages out of Tesla's book. They have tech company attitudes towards their customers and that's not going to work when they hit mass-market consumers with the R2.

 

[Kaiju]

So you're implying that Rivian is outright lying and breaking the law by violating their privacy agreement? I mean, if you don't want to share your location, fine, but then don't complain that the LOCATION-BASED SERVICES don't work properly for you ... And why isn't a LOCATION-BASED SERVICE a legitimate reason for using your LOCATION data?

If you're angling to be a smartass here, you should probably check whether or not it was working without LOCATION BASED SERVICES as of last week. It has in fact been working for years and the last update stopped that from working and that's rather the basis of the complaint. A better question would be why does it need a location to set a charge time, or why does it need a web-based location service when it has a GPS, or why did it not need that stuff before and it is required now?

 

[Donald Stanfield]

I can't say I mind disagreements. That said I probably be reprociprically dismissive of anyone who calls it meritless because that's easy when it's not your problem. A feature I used since day one of ownership was disabled without any notice or explanation, I can't do anything about it and that's a valid complaint. This has happened a few times now and I'm not happy with how Rivian chooses to hide negative changes. If they didn't hide it, I'd simply be able to choose whether or not I wanted whatever they were offering regardless of how much or little I cared about the continual improvement software experience. People who wave the flag of 'Well my vehicle has gotten way better' seem to be missing the point that the thing I'm not happy about is not having a choice, because they're not being up front about everything they're changing. I don't care about youtube, I'd rather my scheduled charging worked.

I bought what I bought on the lot without expecting added value over time. That's how most sales work. You buy something on a promissary note it'll be better later you get FSD.

The thing is I probably picked the best vehicle that was available at the time, but I'm not convinced I picked the best company. My experiences with Rivian as an organization have been more frustrating than pleasant and to be frank I don't have much faith in the company as they seem to be reading too many pages out of Tesla's book. They have tech company attitudes towards their customers and that's not going to work when they hit mass-market consumers with the R2.

So you bought a vehicle from a manufacturer whose primary selling point is software upgrades and now you're pissed that it gets software updates? I think that's 100% your fault for not doing your research. Buy a Ford, they don't do dick with their software. My wife's BMW hasn't notably changed in the two years I bought that one as well.

For the record, the thing that makes your complaint stupid is software updates are a central point to Rivian ownership. Your complaint is a Luddite type complaint, the car knows where you are at all times regardless of you checking the location services box. If you didn't want to participate in the software as a service you bought the wrong vehicle.

 

[VSG]

If you're angling to be a smartass here, you should probably check whether or not it was working without LOCATION BASED SERVICES as of last week. The thing you don't seem to understand is why setting a time for charging needs a location at all, or why a vehicle with a GPS needs a web-based location service to do so. Or why it's worked that way for years and now suddenly it can't.

I've been using scheduled charging on and off for almost three years. It's always been tied to a location. In fact, that's one of the things that can trip people up - they wonder why their vehicle didn't charge overnight at home, and it turns out their location wasn't set to home because they set up the schedule when they were elsewhere (location defaults to your current location). This is not something that has changed recently.

So yes, scheduled charging is and has always been location-based. And it makes sense because the main use case for this is because of TOU rates, which are by definition location-based. If I take a road trip and charge overnight at a hotel, I don't want the charging schedule I set for my home to limit my charging at the hotel, only to wake up with not enough charge to continue my trip.

 

[malditofman]

I have a bit of a mixed history of satisfaction with Rivian software updates and it's less about bugs and more about things they intentionally fuss with that aren't in the patch notes. The reason I don't like it is because you only find out about it after you pass the point of no return, because Rivain won't allow reverts to previous versions.

My first experience was the forced enabling of auto ride height last year, which I still loathe even after they fixed the bug that made it come back on every time I touched the shifter. I thought it was underhanded to slip that in there at the time without announcing it (and, you know, screwing up the implentation), especially since it can cause (or did) actual damage to vehicles with unaware owners hitting low clearance doors or bottoming out on bumps and curbs because the suspension height that had stayed fixed was now changing without their notice. I find myself being caught again because since installing 2025.10 my scheduled charging doesn't work.

I use a dumb charger that doesn't do scheduling itself and for my ownership history I've just set times in the truck and let it do its thing off-peak. Since the latest patch I cannot schedule charging anymore, because for some reason it now requires precise location data sharing with Rivian or the feature is entirely disabled. Why? I figure that probably has to do with people wanting different charging behavior in different locations and the laziest way to do that is through a web app that requires the truck to phone home rather than use the locations in the GPS like for proximity locking. Except...as far as I can tell nobody got that either.

I'm not a fan because I don't believe there's a legitimate use case for giving that data freely to Rivian, since most OEMs collect similar data to sell to third parties. So I don't. Now a simple, dumb feature that previously worked well enough is nonfunctional and there's no mention in the patch notes of that change. First world problems yeah yeah, but I don't like when they do this sort of stuff trying to fly under the radar. It's dishonest. Also it's another 'smart' feature that doesn't need to be that will break at some point in the future, in the same way as features in my old truck stopped working years ago when its factory 2G became deprecated.

Skip all updates. Problem solved. Drive well

 

[bigsky]

No need to go straight to conspiracy theories.
This has been discussed many times over the past ~year, since it was something that came with Gen2. But especially in the fall in relation to one of the updates. A search of the forum for "EPA default settings" comes up with a lot of information. Short answer is, if they want to advertise a certain EPA range, it can't be calculated using some special combination of settings that aren't default - that would be deceptive and fraudulent. Like when VW/Audi cheated on emissions testing by using a "low emissions mode" when on a testing machine but using a high-emissions mode in everyday driving.

No conspiracy theory here. Just seemed odd that Rivian apparently is the sole decider on what the height of some(?) vehicles will be at any time, not the owner. Or else it overrides owner settings regularly. It sounds like a I-call-bs thing, but have not read anything about it other than OP posting.

 

[Kaiju]

So you bought a vehicle from a manufacturer whose primary selling point is software upgrades and now you're pissed that it gets software updates? I think that's 100% your fault for not doing your research. Buy a Ford, they don't do dick with their software. My wife's BMW hasn't notably changed in the two years I bought that one as well.

For the record, the thing that makes your complaint stupid is software updates are a central point to Rivian ownership. Your complaint is a Luddite type complaint, the car knows where you are at all times regardless of you checking the location services box. If you didn't want to participate in the software as a service you bought the wrong vehicle.

To answer the question directly, no I'm not pissed that it gets software updates. I'm annoyed that something that has worked through the entire history of software updates was changed without any apparent reason and now does not work. This isn't the first time. The crux of it lies in the fact that if Rivian hadn't left it undocumented, then I could have just...not installed the update and carried on with life because I value charging or whatnot not being broken over youtube. However Rivian doesn't allow rollbacks.

I'm not sure what sort of person buys an 'offroad' vehicle based on software, that seems like buying a toaster based on its wifi capability. The main selling point for me was...what it physically is. Engineering, interior, handling, drive train, range, build quality. It was better than its competitors for the price, so I bought it without needing to be sold on some techbro hype about its software experience.

I can't say I get why you're being so pointlessly antagonistic about this. Though if you're going to try to insult me in the future, you should know that Luddites were skilled craftspeople who well understood the fact that the looms were a threat to their livlihoods. It would (and did) see them replaced with unskilled labor at a fraction of their wages and their opposition was rooted in the fact they knew their skillbase would be made redundant and their income destroyed. History villifies them because they lost, not because they were fools. If Rivian doesn't care to listen to buyers like me who aren't happy when they screw with something that was working fine, then I suppose you'll get your wish and all those people will just fuck off and go to other brands.

I've been using scheduled charging on and off for almost three years. It's always been tied to a location. In fact, that's one of the things that can trip people up - they wonder why their vehicle didn't charge overnight at home, and it turns out their location wasn't set to home because they set up the schedule when they were elsewhere (location defaults to your current location). This is not something that has changed recently.

So yes, scheduled charging is and has always been location-based. And it makes sense because the main use case for this is because of TOU rates, which are by definition location-based. If I take a road trip and charge overnight at a hotel, I don't want the charging schedule I set for my home to limit my charging at the hotel, only to wake up with not enough charge to continue my trip.

Well I've had location services off since I bought mine and scheduled charging has just...mysteriously worked fine for what I needed it to do without it. Now as of the last update it doesn't. I don't know how I can be more clear about this, but it never had to be location-based.

 

[Kaiju]

No conspiracy theory here. Just seemed odd that Rivian apparently is the sole decider on what the height of some(?) vehicles will be at any time, not the owner. Or else it overrides owner settings regularly. It sounds like a I-call-bs thing, but have not read anything about it other than OP posting.

On dual motor vehicles Rivian forced auto ride-height to re-enable itself after being parked for more than 4 hours. So that meant that anyone who parked in low or lowest in some low-clearance space would be put into standard height when they came back and put it into drive and so on. A gen 1 quad would be unaffected. Owners can still turn it off, but have to do so every time. It was an undocumented 'feature' in a July update last year that led to a wave of tickets being put in by owners who were furstrated that it wouldn't stay off, thinking it was a bug. There was, of course, an associated bug that made it come back on much more frequently that they fixed after 6 months or so. The 4 hour timer remains. To this date Rivian has officially been quiet as to the reason and most speculate it's because they conducted the EPA dual motor range tests with it enabled and somehow a year later they had to fix their 'mistake'.

 

[bigsky]

On dual motor vehicles Rivian forced auto ride-height to re-enable itself after being parked for more than 4 hours. So that meant that anyone who parked in low or lowest in some low-clearance space would be put into standard height when they came back and put it into drive and so on. A gen 1 quad would be unaffected. Owners can still turn it off, but have to do so every time. It was an undocumented 'feature' in a July update last year that led to a wave of tickets being put in by owners who were furstrated that it wouldn't stay off, thinking it was a bug. There was, of course, an associated bug that made it come back on much more frequently that they fixed after 6 months or so. The 4 hour timer remains. To this date Rivian has officially been quiet as to the reason and most speculate it's because they conducted the EPA dual motor range tests with it enabled and somehow a year later they had to fix their 'mistake'.

Thank you.

 

[ThirteenElectrics]

@Kaiju your complaint is legitimate. Don’t get too ruffled by @Donald Stanfield ‘s behavior, member abuse is a common manifestation of cult indoctrination.

 

[VSG]

I don't know how I can be more clear about this, but it never had to be location-based.

Here's just one thread, from 2022, that confirms scheduled charging was location-based even back then:
https://www.rivianforums.com/forum/threads/scheduled-charging-home.6326/
There are many other threads with similar stories, and these are specifically what I was referring to when I said the location tied to the schedule is "...one of the things that can trip people up".

 

[therealcmj]

I'm annoyed that something that has worked through the entire history of software updates was changed without any apparent reason and now does not work

Before I owned a Rivian I owned a 2019 Volvo. I brought it in for regular maintenance for I literally can't even remember what, and they did that and did a software update. I didn't ask for a software update, they didn't ask if I wanted it, and what's more I didn't get any release notes about the change. They just did it as part of the annual maintenance without any warning.

When they did that it changed a bunch of stuff. And I had no choice in which things were changed and which weren't. One of the changes I didn't like was including switching the engine to automatic stop/start.

That's the nature of software.

And it's the same on my phone and laptop and (I swear I'm not crazy) my shower... which literally just added a bunch of presets that I do not want and would delete if I could.

SHOULD manufacturers do better? Yes.

Will they? Probably not.

Sponsored