Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Amazon, GM in talks to invest in electric pickup truck maker Rivian: sources

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 99 posts

Re: Amazon, GM in talks to invest in electric pickup truck maker Rivian: sources

#41

Post by carlivar »

greglindahl wrote: post #27
carlivar wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla also struggles with this, and I think it's because of their direct model. If Rivian uses dealers they should have an easier time in theory. It strikes me that Rivian is combining the advantages of electric vehicles with the advantages of auto industry know-how, instead of independent hubris.

Lots of people have theories as to what Tesla's problems are, but you'd be hard-pressed to find many Tesla owners who think they'd be better off with a dealer. I can name several things Tesla ought to do better, and none of them have anything to do with dealers.

Parts supply logistics and repair times wouldn't improve with dealers?

Re: Amazon, GM in talks to invest in electric pickup truck maker Rivian: sources

#42

Post by kwhitefoot »

greglindahl wrote: post #26
Element_ wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the reason the spare tire isn't more easily accessible is because of the importance of aerodynamics in electric vehicles (It can't just be bolted underneath or to the back). Also the CEO mentioned in an interview that the spare tire can be removed to gain a large water proof storage compartment under the bed.

It was fun watching car spares shift to mini-spares, and now many high-end cars don't have a spare.

In over forty years of driving I have had only one flat that wasn't just a slow leak. And the weather was so bad that I chose to slowly drive home, about fifteen miles, on the flat rather than change the wheel. The next day I drove another couple of miles to a tyre supply company and just had the tyre replaced.

Not sure if I would be so quick to do it in a modern car with alloy wheels and an even mass distribution but the car in question was a tough old Volvo Amazon with steel wheels and the flat was on a back wheel; in the Amazon most of the weight of the car is over the front wheels so the flat really didn't stress the wheel much.

That was about thirty five years ago.

Re: Amazon, GM in talks to invest in electric pickup truck maker Rivian: sources

#43

Post by taurath »

bonestamp2 wrote: post #36
microcolonel wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They could probably build rail much faster in certain areas and they could use it for people and order logistics. You're not alone in this, but why do you think passenger rail makes any sense in the U.S? As far as I can tell, it makes very little. People's big plans for rail in the U.S. tend to rely on some major change in one or more factors of feasibility, and people justify these plans by calling that or those f…

Well, I don't think high speed passenger rail makes a lot of sense on its own. But, it might make sense along with high speed delivery trains, especially on certain routes: West Coast: (Seattle?), SF, LA, SD Midwest: Twin Cities, Madison, Milwaukee, Chicago, Detroit Northeast: NY, Philly, DC Southeast: Atlanta, Jacksonville, Orlando, Miami Yes, flying is faster and maybe even cheaper. But, the experience of flying is…

Along those routes though you’re talking 3hrs max in the air, vs like 6 in a direct hs rail train with no stops. I’d love to ride a train mind you, ESPECIALLY to get around within metro areas or between close ones (sea to Portland is more time in security and preflight than time in the air). But the long distance ones seem like it’d only make sense along the eastern seaboard

Re: Amazon, GM in talks to invest in electric pickup truck maker Rivian: sources

#44

Post by kwhitefoot »

greglindahl wrote: post #9
dangrossman wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla had a joint venture with Toyota years ago. They were making the drivetrain for the RAV4 EV. Toyota offered to provide the same kind of training in assembly methods to Tesla that they once provided to GM in the very same place (Tesla's factory is the former GM/Toyota NUMMI factory), but reportedly Tesla clashed with Toyota's engineers and management, so the whole partnership dissolved. I don't think anyone wants…

Huh. The other version of the story is that Toyota refused to accept "one pedal" driving, which by all reports is a huge success.

No idea if that was the reason but you are correct, one pedal driving works very well and is very intuitive in my 2015 Tesla S 70D.

One of the best things about the Tesla cars is not the drive train but the UI; by which I mean the pedals, Autosteer, traffic aware cruise control, as well as the dash. The UI is much less cluttered than most other cars; compare the S and the I-Pace for instance, the I-Pace has loads of buttons and knobs and two screens in addition to the instrument cluster.

After a year of driving the Model S I have concluded that my reasons for buying the car were the wrong ones (electric drive train mostly), the reason for keeping it is that the S is simply better to drive because of one pedal driving, TACC, and Autosteer. Most of those features could be added to any car with automatic transmission. Certainly Mercedes could do it and in their top of the range cars already do some of it.

Re: Amazon, GM in talks to invest in electric pickup truck maker Rivian: sources

#45

Post by kwhitefoot »

bonestamp2 wrote: post #29
newnewpdro wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it sounds like they have their shit together a lot more than Tesla. Is that really a meaningful comparison considering the tremendous difference in scale? They probably won't have their shit together when they have to deliver thousands of vehicles per week.

Delivering thousands of vehicles per week could be where GM's experience becomes helpful.

Is GM getting involved or just investing?

Re: Amazon, GM in talks to invest in electric pickup truck maker Rivian: sources

#46

Post by kwhitefoot »

carlivar wrote: post #41
greglindahl wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lots of people have theories as to what Tesla's problems are, but you'd be hard-pressed to find many Tesla owners who think they'd be better off with a dealer. I can name several things Tesla ought to do better, and none of them have anything to do with dealers.

Parts supply logistics and repair times wouldn't improve with dealers?

No, it would simply add another layer of annoyance, indirection, and excuses to an already fraught situation.

Re: Amazon, GM in talks to invest in electric pickup truck maker Rivian: sources

#47

Post by scarejunba »

taurath wrote: post #43
bonestamp2 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I don't think high speed passenger rail makes a lot of sense on its own. But, it might make sense along with high speed delivery trains, especially on certain routes: West Coast: (Seattle?), SF, LA, SD Midwest: Twin Cities, Madison, Milwaukee, Chicago, Detroit Northeast: NY, Philly, DC Southeast: Atlanta, Jacksonville, Orlando, Miami Yes, flying is faster and maybe even cheaper. But, the experience of flying is…

Along those routes though you’re talking 3hrs max in the air, vs like 6 in a direct hs rail train with no stops. I’d love to ride a train mind you, ESPECIALLY to get around within metro areas or between close ones (sea to Portland is more time in security and preflight than time in the air). But the long distance ones seem like it’d only make sense along the eastern seaboard

SF to SD is 3.5 hrs using Eurostar speeds (not inclusive of Channel Tunnel slowdown). I'm an opponent of CA HSR (on the grounds that America isn't capable of the project management) but I think the technology isn't out of reach.

Re: Amazon, GM in talks to invest in electric pickup truck maker Rivian: sources

#48

Post by vinay427 »

taurath wrote: post #43
bonestamp2 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I don't think high speed passenger rail makes a lot of sense on its own. But, it might make sense along with high speed delivery trains, especially on certain routes: West Coast: (Seattle?), SF, LA, SD Midwest: Twin Cities, Madison, Milwaukee, Chicago, Detroit Northeast: NY, Philly, DC Southeast: Atlanta, Jacksonville, Orlando, Miami Yes, flying is faster and maybe even cheaper. But, the experience of flying is…

Along those routes though you’re talking 3hrs max in the air, vs like 6 in a direct hs rail train with no stops. I’d love to ride a train mind you, ESPECIALLY to get around within metro areas or between close ones (sea to Portland is more time in security and preflight than time in the air). But the long distance ones seem like it’d only make sense along the eastern seaboard

Sure, but it's rather unfair to compare time in the air to time from city to city. In the best case (comparing airport entrance to airport exit with TSA PreCheck and no check-in baggage) Detroit to Chicago would take just over 2 hours. In a more reasonable case, considering most people want to end up closer to the city center than the airport, may have check-in bags, and may not be eligible for PreCheck, the train would be noticeably faster and likely more convenient.

Re: Amazon, GM in talks to invest in electric pickup truck maker Rivian: sources

#50

Post by mft_ »

bonestamp2 wrote: post #36
microcolonel wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They could probably build rail much faster in certain areas and they could use it for people and order logistics. You're not alone in this, but why do you think passenger rail makes any sense in the U.S? As far as I can tell, it makes very little. People's big plans for rail in the U.S. tend to rely on some major change in one or more factors of feasibility, and people justify these plans by calling that or those f…

Well, I don't think high speed passenger rail makes a lot of sense on its own. But, it might make sense along with high speed delivery trains, especially on certain routes: West Coast: (Seattle?), SF, LA, SD Midwest: Twin Cities, Madison, Milwaukee, Chicago, Detroit Northeast: NY, Philly, DC Southeast: Atlanta, Jacksonville, Orlando, Miami Yes, flying is faster and maybe even cheaper. But, the experience of flying is…

I love your positivity, and agree with your overall premise, but let's not get too carried away:

> catch a nap in an actual bed, use my cellphone and wifi, collaborate with colleagues, eat good food

* Can you recommend a fast train service with affordable sleeper cars; I'm not aware of one? * Mobile phones frequently drop signal moving between cells on fast trains, as anyone trying to stay connected to a meeting will have experienced * My experience of train wifi (at least, in France, UK, Germany, Switzerland) is that it's also patchy and unreliable (does it rely on the same patchy mobile networks?) * Almost without exception, the food I've experienced on trains is very similar to that available on budget airlines - plastic-packed ready-made soups, noodles, sandwiches, etc.

Socially and environmentally, though, it's far more pleasant on a train. :)

Post reply on HN