Why would you order Dual Motor Performance? (cost breakdown)

[docwhiz]

You sound like a consultant ... or someone that has worked with consultants. However, it is a very effective way at looking at problems as in the trinity of quality/cost/time (as used in the business world) you can't deliver a significant project that delivers quality, costs little to implement and is done quickly. Something needs to go.

Tesla manages to do all three. Their manufacturing prowess is next level.

Sponsored

 

[CommodoreAmiga]

Tesla manages to do all three. Their manufacturing prowess is next level.

Tesla "quality" is often cited, but rarely in the context of a compliment.

 

[junkanoo]

it just seems like Rivian is trying to keep their Quad motor the halo vehicle. I've continued to play with the numbers in my spreadsheet, and the one way that it could be valuable to choose the dual motor performance is if the range really is a lot better, or you don't want to have to manually select conserve mode.

I guess that depends on how you define range that "is a lot better." Certainly, an EV towing a vehicle that has the range to travel a full day without need to recharge would be a step-change ... but we're not there yet.

To my way of thinking, 75 miles of increased range is largely meaningless to me and I expect to others. Why? Like many, I have a ICE vehicle that I would use for multi-day trips as I have zero interest in spending 30+ minutes at a recharging spot when I can spend 7 minutes (including a bio-break) at the pump. Additionally, how often is the average EV user doing long road trips?

 

[junkanoo]

You sound like a consultant ... or someone that has worked with consultants. However, it is a very effective way at looking at problems as in the trinity of quality/cost/time (as used in the business world) you can't deliver a significant project that delivers quality, costs little to implement and is done quickly. Something needs to go.

Tesla manages to do all three. Their manufacturing prowess is next level.

Well, I did say "project" but you're making my point.

Tesla took years to develop their current manufacturing process at a high cost in money and resources (including the CEO sleeping at the plant). But, if you're happy with the end result, I'm happy for you.

 

[docwhiz]

Well, I did say "project" but you're making my point.

Tesla took years to develop their current manufacturing process at a high cost in money and resources (including the CEO sleeping at the plant). But, if you're happy with the end result, I'm happy for you.

 

[usofrob]

Good, fast, cheap. Pick 2 out of 3.

You want cheap that is obvious and you want good that is given. So stick with the $79,000 R1S.

End of story for you.

For others who chose fast and good, they will go with Quad motor.

If you want fast and cheap, you can pick up a used R1T with 15,000 miles or more and some free pinstriping from going offroading.

Figure out your budget and needs, there is a vehicle for every bean counter.

I wasn't asking for you advice on what I should do. This entire thread was started because I was pointing out that the dual motor performance just doesn't seem like a good value. You also seem to agree, as you didn't list that in one of your suggested options.

I find it frustrating and annoying that you think you understand all my concerns based on reading a few ore my comments. If I wanted cheap, I wouldn't be buying a Rivian. I like unique vehicles that do what they do well. The reason I wanted a Rivian is for all the stuff that the quad motor has been advertising. But, because of my situation, I wanted to get the longer range of the dual motor. Depending on how well the dual compares to the quad, I might just get the quad large, or maybe since Rivian's will be able to use the Tesla network soon, I'll go for the dual standard battery and keep my model 3 performance for my electric fun vehicle.

Separately, based on my calculations, If you can get the $7500 tax rebate, it's likely the used vehicle won't actually be any cheaper to own per month than a used model for 2-3 years based on a typical depreciation curve. So, for probably at least 2 more years, the cheapest to own Rivian will be a new dual motor standard pack.

 

[MidnightRivian]

I wasn't asking for you advice on what I should do. This entire thread was started because I was pointing out that the dual motor performance just doesn't seem like a good value. You also seem to agree, as you didn't list that in one of your suggested options.

I find it frustrating and annoying that you think you understand all my concerns based on reading a few ore my comments. If I wanted cheap, I wouldn't be buying a Rivian. I like unique vehicles that do what they do well. The reason I wanted a Rivian is for all the stuff that the quad motor has been advertising. But, because of my situation, I wanted to get the longer range of the dual motor. Depending on how well the dual compares to the quad, I might just get the quad large, or maybe since Rivian's will be able to use the Tesla network soon, I'll go for the dual standard battery and keep my model 3 performance for my electric fun vehicle.

Separately, based on my calculations, If you can get the $7500 tax rebate, it's likely the used vehicle won't actually be any cheaper to own per month than a used model for 2-3 years based on a typical depreciation curve. So, for probably at least 2 more years, the cheapest to own Rivian will be a new dual motor standard pack.

LMFAO. You really didn't need to write all that up and make a bunch of spreadsheets to figure out the cheapest car will be the cheapest base model option to own. lol.

Just go with the cheapest option and move on to your next bean to count.

 

[usofrob]

LMFAO. You really didn't need to write all that up and make a bunch of spreadsheets to figure out the cheapest car will be the cheapest base model option to own. lol.

Just go with the cheapest option and move on to your next bean to count.

I can tell you're really enjoying yourself, but, I still didn't ask for your opinion. Your abrasive and unhelpful comments are going to make you the first person I've ever blocked on a forum. But, I still bet you can't help yourself from replying (because even I couldn't. )

 

[Arky]

If you're not literally trying to do Jeep obstacles I'd feel pretty confident that you wouldn't be missing much off road with the dual motor. If anything it opens the door to a locking or limited slip rear differential which the quad doesn't have. I'd like some more clarity from Rivian on what the different modes really even do besides 'surface level' settings like real torque split and mapping, that'd be neat.

Most forest roads and trails can be run fully open, the ones that can't be are really more the territory for armored jeeps, side by sides, and dirtbikes. Do you really want to take a $100k pickup truck in there?

 

[usofrob]

There are at least two reviews out with the dual motor R1T. It seems Rivian misquoted their HP, the performance is 350HP front and rear motor individually, but 663HP when combined. This is normal to be less, but they shouldn't have advertised 700+ HP on the performance ans 600+ hp on the base, when neither will be the case. Regardless, it seems the 663HP is still nearly as fast as the 835HP. So, meh. They've now updated their website to show the new HP including 533 HP for the base.

But it's also concerning that Car and Driver got the same range with the same wheels between their quad motor and their dual motor performance on their 75mph test, 280 miles. But, I'm still pretty happy to be able to get 280 miles. Car and Driver also tested the 20" AT's at 75 mph and got 220, which seems a lot lower than anyone else. So, maybe they don't have the most consistent means of measuring range. I'm looking forward to other outlets getting their hands on the vehicle.

And the other thing on my mind is the automatic AWD. That means it'll drive like a front wheel drive car above 18 mph until it detects slip. So, it'll have torque steer when accelerating, and more understeer when turning, and because of those things it'll have more front tire wear. Putting it into anything except All Purpose should solve these problems, i.e. Sport mode for Performance or Quad.

All in all, that kind of increases the value of sport mode for me and decreases the value of dual motor for range purposes and makes removing conserve mode also a detriment. I was mostly selecting the Dual Motor for the less cost and increased range. But there doesn't seem to be much better range if at all and there are clear handling sacrifices compared to quad. Hmm, but is it work $100/month over the 7 years I might own it...hmmmm.

 

[MidnightRivian]

QUAD FTW

 

[Ripped]

Not really a choice when the maxpack quad went to a maxpack dual. Trailer towing with a heavy trailer in mountain passes means .7 to 1 kWh/mile. Large is going to get 100 miles, maxpack should get about 150 miles.

If you consider that you are likely going to have to unhook the trailer each time you charge, that's why. My time on vacation is more valuable to me than when I am at work.

 

[usofrob]

Not really a choice when the maxpack quad went to a maxpack dual. Trailer towing with a heavy trailer in mountain passes means .7 to 1 kWh/mile. Large is going to get 100 miles, maxpack should get about 150 miles.

If you consider that you are likely going to have to unhook the trailer each time you charge, that's why. My time on vacation is more valuable to me than when I am at work.

Well, that's certainly a good reason to get dual motor. Do you think you'll get the performance or base?

One of the things that I saw on the Edmunds review is that they testing the 0-60 of All Purpose mode at 4.4 seconds. That coincides with the base dual motor's estimated 0-60 time of 4.5 seconds. So, I wonder if the full HP is only available in Sport mode, or if it was automatically going into FWD mode at 18 mph. Either way, it's pretty weird to have such a slow all purpose mode compared to the tested 3.5 for sport mode. My understanding is that people with the Quad's have said that the sport and all purpose are about the same. But, I also remember hearing that they only put like 70-90% of the total power in All Purpose, so maybe it's not detectable by one's butt dyno.

 

[Ripped]

Well, that's certainly a good reason to get dual motor. Do you think you'll get the performance or base?

One of the things that I saw on the Edmunds review is that they testing the 0-60 of All Purpose mode at 4.4 seconds. That coincides with the base dual motor's estimated 0-60 time of 4.5 seconds. So, I wonder if the full HP is only available in Sport mode, or if it was automatically going into FWD mode at 18 mph. Either way, it's pretty weird to have such a slow all purpose mode compared to the tested 3.5 for sport mode. My understanding is that people with the Quad's have said that the sport and all purpose are about the same. But, I also remember hearing that they only put like 70-90% of the total power in All Purpose, so maybe it's not detectable by one's butt dyno.

I'm definitely going for the performance version Not quite all of the fun the Quad people have, but at least it's a part.

 

[Sconces]

I'm really curious where the ex90 and ev9 and up pricing. I still have an ex90 reservation, but am 90% sure we will cancel it.

The dual motor has an offroad setting, it's basically just the default all terrain mode for the quad. Even the base dual motor variant should smoke the top of thenline ev9 in performance, and that's ignoring the suspension and ground clearance differences.

EX90 pricing came out. R1S again is looking good.


https://electrek.co/2023/07/13/polestar-3-electric-suv-new-polestar-5-debut-goodwood/

The standard long-range dual motor produces 489 hp and 620 lb-ft of torque for a 0 to 60 mph time of 4.9 seconds. With up to 300 miles of EPA range, the standard version starts at $83,900

Packing 517 hp and 671 lb-ft of torque, the performance pack model can go 0 to 60 mph in 4.6 seconds. Despite the extra power, the performance version has slightly less range (270 miles) and starts at $89,900.

Sponsored