VERY DISAPPOINTED!!! No 400+ battery until Jan. 2022?!?!?!

[scottkillmer]

an honest explanation would be appreciated. i too had my heart set on 400 mi option . Rivian has the luxury of being the first to market, a monopoly of sort. the biggest problem with monopolies is the lack of need to totally please your customer.

Sponsored

 

[Pherdnut]

I'm hopeful for everybody who is legitimately bummed 180kWh didn't make the cut for their first launch vehicles that both June and Jan are potential underpromises. Crash testing wrapped in early September. They've been building vehicles for QA validation ever since.

I'm sure there's months of that remaining, but this is a startup run by a supernerd in automotive industry in general and more specifically automotive manufacturing. His superpowers are getting talent invested in what he wants to do and thinking 40 steps ahead about most everything. They've got a factory floor no doubt full of highly experienced but also emotionally charged/invested people who used to work there when it was owned by Mitsubishi. They've got great partnerships, tons of cash, ~40k preorders minimum, and 100 freaking thousand Amazon vans to build.

So I hope they do better than January 2022 for the LRs. But all I'm really certain of is that they're not stupid. They knew this would piss people off and they probably would have avoided it if they could have.

 

[DucRider]

I will wait on the 400 mi+. And yes I'm disappointed they changed this. If the Hummer is available close to that time frame I might switch to it as I like the looks of it.

I own 2 Teslas and I can tell you that you can't have too much range, especially if you live in a rural area like I do.

If the "300+ mile" Rivian comes in at 330 miles, and the 1st edition Hummer is tentatively 350+ (for $112K), are the extra 20ish miles worth it?

 

[Godawgs]

If the "300+ mile" Rivian comes in at 330 miles, and the 1st edition Hummer is tentatively 350+ (for $112K), are the extra 20ish miles worth it?

FWIW... I attended the Rivian event in Atlanta last September and got to speak with RJ. He asked what I planned on getting (the 135kwh pack R1T) and he said that combo was currently getting 325-327 miles on the all season tires. I guess we’ll have to wait a few more days to know for certain.

 

[Lmirafuente]

I know what I am about to say is not currently the case, but it would be great if the 135kwh was upgradable to 180kwh.

 

[Ddowns2050]

If the "300+ mile" Rivian comes in at 330 miles, and the 1st edition Hummer is tentatively 350+ (for $112K), are the extra 20ish miles worth it?

No. But it isn't the 20 extra miles. It depends on how long they actually delay the 400+ mile battery. These are two completely different vehicles and I really like the Hummer. I'm just saying if both vehicles are available at the same time I would have to take a close look at which one I would want the most. I seriously doubt very many Hummers will be available for quite a while. If that is the case I would get the Rivian because I really like it also.

 

[azbill]

If the "300+ mile" Rivian comes in at 330 miles, and the 1st edition Hummer is tentatively 350+ (for $112K), are the extra 20ish miles worth it?

What if 350+ on the Hummer comes in at 375? Or 400? The Hummer is using mud terrain tires to start with, and I am sure changing those tires will add additional range. Both vehicles have the + and I am sure they are both trying to be conservative to not over promise.

 

[ajdelange]

If the "300+ mile" Rivian comes in at 330 miles,

I'm guessing it won't. You yourself speculated that perhaps the reason the 185 kWh battery pack is not being offered initially is that it turned out that 180 kWh is not sufficient to make 400 miles range possible. I too fear that this may be the case.

..and the 1st edition Hummer is tentatively 350+ (for $112K), are the extra 20ish miles worth it?

How do you define "worth it". What I am getting at is that in any practical sense the answer is doubtless "no" but in terms of customer satisfaction it may very well be "yes". I traded in a perfectly good 294 mile Model X for a 351 mile X Extended Range Plus. For 90% of my driving (around town) it obviously makes no difference whatsoever but for the occasional longer trips I am just delighted with the additional flexibility the extra 57 miles seems to give me.

I've come to look at 30% of the EPA range as a significant number. That's because I like to stop for recharge when 10 < SoC < 40%. You don't want to run below 10% for obvious reasons and you don't generally want to start charging above 40% because you get faster rates at lower SoC. Thirty percent of 294 miles is 88 miles. Thirty percent of 351 miles is 105. That only broadens the recharge band by 17 miles but with the density of Telsa stations out there today that implies more flexibility. A 400 mile vehicle's 30% band is 120 miles - 32 miles wider than the 294 miles and the 500 mile CT band is 150 miles wide. At these wider bandwidths you can pick charging stops more based on biology than battery.

 

[JeremyMKE]

A 400 mile vehicle's 30% band is 120 miles - 32 miles wider than the 294 miles and the 500 mile CT band is 150 miles wide. At these wider bandwidths you can probably picking charging stops more based on biology than battery.

THIS is why I wanted the bigger battery. Bladder not withstanding, the point being 30% charge on a bigger battery means more flexibility to get to my destination on a long trip.

 

[azbill]

No. But it isn't the 20 extra miles. It depends on how long they actually delay the 400+ mile battery. These are two completely different vehicles and I really like the Hummer. I'm just saying if both vehicles are available at the same time I would have to take a close look at which one I would want the most. I seriously doubt very many Hummers will be available for quite a while. If that is the case I would get the Rivian because I really like it also.

I have similar opinions about the Hummer, it definitely has some plusses over Rivian, but Rivian has some plusses over Hummer as well. I have reservations for both, and the one with the earliest delivery date will likely win. The Hummer reveal convinced me that I really want the removable roof. Now I have to wait until mid 2022 to get that for the Rivian, along with the 400+ range. Gear tunnel is a really good feature for Rivian and I plan on configuring the camp kitchen. With only 350+ miles that is a disadvantage for Hummer, but here are some definite advantages that I see:

1) Frunk is better, grill lifts with the frunk
2) MultiPro tailgate
3) Rock sliders
4) Larger tire capability for off road
5) So far appears to be faster charging in terms of mile/minute
6) Proven roadside assistance, repair and servicing network

If the 2 delivery dates are close, then I will need to decide which I want more. I expect to know my pricing on the Rivian on Monday, but price will not be the major factor in my final decision.

 

[ajdelange]

Yes, I think "flexibility" is the key word. It just occurred to me that given a uniform distribution of chargers out there, which, of course, we don't really have but it is helpful in thinking about this to model it so, the number of available chargers within a given range capability increases as the square of that range or at least linearly with it (as a road trip tends to be a 1 dimensional thing). Thus a 400 mile range vehicle has access to at least 33% more chargers than a 300 miles one.

 

[azbill]

I'm guessing it won't. You yourself speculated that perhaps the reason the 185 kWh battery pack is not being offered initially is that it turned out that 180 kWh is not sufficient to make 400 miles range possible. I too fear that this may be the case.

How do you define "worth it". What I am getting at is that in any practical sense the answer is doubtless "no" but in terms of customer satisfaction it may very well be "yes". I traded in a perfectly good 294 mile Model X for a 351 mile X Extended Range Plus. For 90% of my driving (around town) it obviously makes no difference whatsoever but for the occasional longer trips I am just delighted with the additional flexibility the extra 57 miles seems to give me.

I've come to look at 30% of the EPA range as a significant number. That's because I like to stop for recharge when 10 < SoC < 40%. You don't want to run below 10% for obvious reasons and you don't generally want to start charging above 40% because you get faster rates at lower SoC. Thirty percent of 294 miles is 88 miles. Thirty percent of 351 miles is 105. That only broadens the recharge band by 17 miles but with the density of Telsa stations out there today that implies more flexibility. A 400 mile vehicle's 30% band is 120 miles - 32 miles wider than the 294 miles and the 500 mile CT band is 150 miles wide. At these wider bandwidths you can pick charging stops more based on biology than battery.

I like your analogy about the 30%, I have had a similar idea about time to get 100 miles of charge. Electrify America has a target of providing chargers every 70 miles, but no more than 120 miles. On average that will put them at 100 miles or less. So when I arrive at a charging station, with reserve, I want to add enough to get to the next station with the same reserve. 100 miles will be a typical number that is needed and that equates to just under 2 hours of driving. And if stations get to 70 miles apart, then you may want 140 miles to be able to skip the next charging site. If you can charge at 10 mile/minute, then that equates to 10 minutes for 100 miles or 15 minutes for 150 miles. That seems like a good number for today's technology.

A friend of mine has a Tesla and told me he consistently puts on 100 miles in 7 minutes at 250KW. Obviously that is for a smaller sedan, but now we have 350KW capability for these larger trucks. GM has stated 100 miles in 10 minutes at 350KW.

 

[ajdelange]

... based on biology than battery.

I'm changing my charging stop criteria from the two B's to the 5 C's

Charge
Convenience
COVID
Cleanliness
Comestibles

 

[ajdelange]

... 100 miles will be a typical number that is needed and that equates to just under 2 hours of driving.

This is a factor I forgot to mention. I look at 30% of the rated range and compare that to the stage length we like. Thus for the 300 mile X or R1T that's 90 miles - about an hour and a half driving time. For the 351 mile X 30% is 105 miles. About an hour ane 45 minutes worth. For the 400 mile R1T it would be 120 miles (2 hrs) and for the 500 mi CT 150 miles (2:30). If my preferred charging band is comparable to the leg length I like to drive I figure things are pretty flexible.

 

[skyote]

A friend of mine has a Tesla and told me he consistently puts on 100 miles in 7 minutes at 250KW. Obviously that is for a smaller sedan, but now we have 350KW capability for these larger trucks. GM has stated 100 miles in 10 minutes at 350KW.

Rivian didn't cite charging speed, but they did mention that their charging network will be capable of "adding up to 140 miles of range in 20 minutes". @ajdelange , you wanna do the math on that based on your Wh/mile assumptions?

Sponsored