Ty012
Well-Known Member
My guess is that it is still being tested and will be an option on later models. Hopefully there will be a way to add later as well ?What happened to the winch?
Sponsored
Announcing our new "CLUBS" section where you can join or create a Rivian club or group! You can use this new feature to conveniently plan and discuss local events, gatherings or other club/group related topics.
So we encourage you to join (or start) special-interest and regional-based Rivian clubs at: https://www.rivianforums.com/forum/group-categories/clubs-groups.1/
My guess is that it is still being tested and will be an option on later models. Hopefully there will be a way to add later as well ?What happened to the winch?
I agree that it shouldn’t have a big impact on range. However, even with regenerative braking, adding dead weight will reduce range on a level road or exact round trip. There’s no escaping the physics: on a level trip with all else the same: you’ll expend more energy when accelerating more mass and you’ll only recover a portion of that (never 100%) via regen when braking.If it is a range thing and not supply or exactly what they told us is they heard from many who did not want or need the option.
Seems like another 1-200 lbs added to the bottom essentially smoothing it out would not be a huge impact to range. If it is lost range could be the air disruption around the tow hooks disrupting airflow for aero dynamics may be impacting range.
Personally, unless there is a lot more to the off-road package than they have listed, not sure how it could be a big impact to the range.
If 200 lbs makes that much difference, don’t tell my wife, she’ll take the R1S and make me stay home….I agree that it shouldn’t have a big impact on range. However, even with regenerative braking, adding dead weight will reduce range on a level road or exact round trip. There’s no escaping the physics: on a level trip with all else the same: you’ll expend more energy when accelerating more mass and you’ll only recover a portion of that (never 100%) via regen when braking.
If the underside was already smooth to minimize drag then I doubt the off-road shield will improve that much, if at all.
While I expect that a possible reduction in range will be minimal, any reduction will matter to some buyers. Between the price reduction and mitigating any potential range reduction this makes a lot of business sense to me.
For customers who want the added protection, it should be worth the money and minor reduction in range, if any. I’m getting it no matter what.
The 20s are going to give you more options for tires - all season, winter, etc. Only 1 tire option for the 21s for now…maybe I should change mine to 20s ? I need do some some research to see how much a set of 20inch aftermarket wheels and tires plus spare would be. I’d like to keep the 21s for range and less road noise with the option to put on 20s If going off roading or for driving in snow if 21s not up to the task.I set my wheels to the 20 inch all terrain back in November. Now I'm wondering if I should just go with the 21 inch road tires. I don't go off-roading , but I love the look of the 20 inch wheels. But I'm wondering how much it will lower the range at this point.
You think 20 miles less?
I'm leaning towards adding the Off-Road for the safety aspect. I've asked Rivian but didn't get as direct an answer as I wanted so I'm asking for more data at some point. But if you recall in 2013 Tesla had I think 2 cars that were involved in crashed and the battery pack was punctured and started on fire. In 2014 Tesla retrofitted Model S's with a Titanium battery shield for added protection. Tesla stated the following: "The protective qualities of the underbody shields are substantial, but their effect on the overall structure of the vehicle is minimal. In total, the shields only have a 0.1 percent impact on range and don’t affect ride or handling. Wind tunnel testing shows no discernible change in drag or lift on the car."I agree that it shouldn’t have a big impact on range. However, even with regenerative braking, adding dead weight will reduce range on a level road or exact round trip. There’s no escaping the physics: on a level trip with all else the same: you’ll expend more energy when accelerating more mass and you’ll only recover a portion of that (never 100%) via regen when braking.
If the underside was already smooth to minimize drag then I doubt the off-road shield will improve that much, if at all.
While I expect that a possible reduction in range will be minimal, any reduction will matter to some buyers. Between the price reduction and mitigating any potential range reduction, this makes a lot of business sense to me.
For customers who want the added protection, it should be worth the money and a minor reduction in range, if any. I’m getting it no matter what.
I will start by saying I am not an LE holder so free wheel upgrade was not an option. I originally configured 20s on the R1S, also thinking about future tire options, but switched to the 21s. My thinking is the majority of my driving will be asphalt(21s will have better range), and for the $1800 upgrade cost I can find aftermarket rims and tires and choose my wheel size (probably would not choose 20s for an AT set), and I get the 21s. Upgrading on the non-LE means you are really paying $3000+, for AT tires, considering you don’t get the free 21s as well) Easily can find a set of five wheels and tires for that.The 20s are going to give you more options for tires - all season, winter, etc. Only 1 tire option for the 21s for now…maybe I should change mine to 20s ? I need do some some research to see how much a set of 20inch aftermarket wheels and tires plus spare would be. I’d like to keep the 21s for range and less road noise with the option to put on 20s If going off roading or for driving in snow if 21s not up to the task.
I agree the range hit should be minimal. So why make it optional this late?I agree that it shouldn’t have a big impact on range. However, even with regenerative braking, adding dead weight will reduce range on a level road or exact round trip. There’s no escaping the physics: on a level trip with all else the same: you’ll expend more energy when accelerating more mass and you’ll only recover a portion of that (never 100%) via regen when braking.
If the underside was already smooth to minimize drag then I doubt the off-road shield will improve that much, if at all.
While I expect that a possible reduction in range will be minimal, any reduction will matter to some buyers. Between the price reduction and mitigating any potential range reduction this makes a lot of business sense to me.
For customers who want the added protection, it should be worth the money and minor reduction in range, if any. I’m getting it no matter what.
It could be a materials cost and availability issue, for sure. If they don’t have, or a supplier doesn’t have, materials to make the underbody shields then omitting them on most builds would definitely speed up production.I agree the range hit should be minimal. So why make it optional this late?
I admittedly know nothing about manufacturing vehicles, but what if the addition of the off road package increases build time to such a degree that offering the LE without it, could result in them getting significantly more vehicles out the door? By making it optional, they have the a way to speed up certain LE builds, to get as many out as possible this summer. Maybe they can also eek out a few extra miles of range, but that might not be the driving force.
I’m going to go with phone or email, or a combination thereofI'd sure like to know who/where/how all these "customers" that Rivian listened to were actually found and communicated with....
Funny.... and none on this forum apparently. And no chatter in the bloggosphere about it ahead of time. I call B.S. on the whole claim by Rivian. It's a PR made-up story.I’m going to go with phone or email, or a combination thereof