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

Rivian R2: Electric Mid-Size SUV

rivian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 353 posts

Re: Rivian R2: Electric Mid-Size SUV

#261

Post by alberto467 »

bobchadwick wrote: post #260
grugdev42 wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The car version of this stopped being produced 15 years ago. Old petrol Toyotas and Hondas met your criteria. And the back catalogue of parts is huge and supported for a long time. Modern cars aren't built as well. Maybe the modern non-turbo petrol Mazdas are the best fallback.

Modern cars aren't built as well. Can you cite a source for this? There's no question that they're vastly more complex, but I would think that modern car manufacturing is far more exacting (and efficient) than in the past. If you're saying that older cars are more repairable, I'm happy to agree with you, even without a source to back up that claim.

Efficient manufacturing means exactly building stuff as cheaply as you can get away with.

There's a reason why roman architecture is still standing: it is massively overbuilt, the very opposite of efficient (they also used to make the architect stand under his own arches as they removed the temporary support, that could have contributed to the overbuilding).

Re: Rivian R2: Electric Mid-Size SUV

#262

Post by 1970-01-01 »

This is their "bet the farm" moment that Elon took with the Model 3. If this doesn't become a best seller, stick a fork in them. If it does, the sky is the limit and we're very likely going to see half a million sold. There's not much in-between room for Rivian as they have no solar wildcard and their charging network is another also ran.

Re: Rivian R2: Electric Mid-Size SUV

#263

Post by lunias »

My friend has the R1S, he likes it a lot, but he's also got a lemon law case open and is hoping that Rivian will have to take the vehicle back. I rode in it and it's nice, but it's way too big for me. The R2 sounds like a step in the right direction, but it still looks too large. I had to shop cars recently and I bought a Golf R. The Golf is "mid-size" to me. I moved across the country in a packed Golf GTI.

Re: Rivian R2: Electric Mid-Size SUV

#264

Post by rssoconnor »

jader201 wrote: post #127
baumy wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is completely false. I own one. It goes up to the low 80s mph before the gas engine kicks in. Acceleration from a stop is sub 6 second 0-60. Hardly weak. Charges from fully empty to full in about 2.5 hours. Mine gets a 40-45 mile all electric range. I drive 10-12k miles per year, and ignoring extended multi-day vacation road trips once every couple years, I fill up the tank 2-3 times per year.

> Mine gets a 40-45 mile all electric range. That sounds like the real issue, vs. EVs. This sounds like you basically have to plug it in every time you park it. And there’s no way you could do any sort of (even small) road trip without using gas. (For comparison, our EV6 has about 200-250 mile range, and we charge it about once a week or so, give or take, unless we take a road trip.) Also, one of the main advantages…

Not that I'm disagreeing with your main point, but I will say that Toyota's hybrid design is one of the best ICE engines out there. The transmission is replaced with planetary gears and the starter and alternators are replaced with a pair of motors to control the throttle and continuously variable transmission, making it one of the gentlest engine designs out there.

But yes, there is engine oil to be replaced and whatnot.

And also, to your point, my experience with my PHEV is my short range driving is electric, but it turns out most of my miles is consumed by annual long range trips. If I commuted to work, things would tip more in favour of EV driving. All to say how much EV you get out of your PHEV will depend highly on the type of driving one does.

Re: Rivian R2: Electric Mid-Size SUV

#266

Post by dalyons »

rsynnott wrote: post #217
dalyons wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/oct/16/plug-in-... “ The researchers attributed most of the gap to overestimates of the “utility factor” – the ratio of miles travelled in electric mode to the total miles travelled – finding that 27% of driving was done in electric mode even though official estimates assumed 84%. ” Perhaps the rav4 prime @ 41ml max ev range is a better system than all the other low range…

_If used correctly_, they're pretty good. Most people don't use them correctly.

If you build a product that most people don’t “use correctly” then you have not built a good product suitable for that use. Blaming the customer and expecting them to change is a losing strategy

Re: Rivian R2: Electric Mid-Size SUV

#267

Post by jebarker »

JeremyNT wrote: post #258

Still a massive vehicle! Bulky electric cars make so little sense, because then you need bigger batteries, which... further increase the weight. The upcoming R3/R3x is likely to be a way more practical vehicle for most people, unless you have a large family to haul around. [0] [0] https://www.caranddriver.com/rivian/r3

AIUI this might not be as bigger problem as you’d imagine. Aerodynamics dominate most of the resistance at medium to highway speeds. This was discussed in the recent Rivian R1T cannonball run conversion videos where they doubled the battery capacity (and therefore drastically increased the weight of the vehicle) without substantially affecting efficiency.

Re: Rivian R2: Electric Mid-Size SUV

#268

Post by mortos »

dragonwriter wrote: post #98
pertymcpert wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In California with PG&E which most people have, no you don't save much. It's different if you can charge for free at work. And yes EVs depreciated worse than any other vehicle.

> In California with PG&E which most people have, Most people in California don’t have PG&E. Most of the land area in the northern 2/3 of the State or so is covered by PG&E, but people and land area aren't the same thing. Southern California Edison alone serves almost as many people as PG&E, and other smaller utilities, including public utilities like LADWP, SMUD, Silicon Valley Power, etc., serve another big chunk o…

SCE will screw you nearly as hard. We are on a tiered usage which is the cheapest they offer and it's $0.32/kWh and even at that rate the EV isn't much cheaper than the non-hybrid I replaced. I'd need to switch to a ToU plan which would increase my other electricity costs.

Also for depreciation:

2020 Mazda 3 - sold $18k at dealer, originally $28k, 64% retained

2022 Kia EV6 - bought $25k, originally $55k-$7.5k federal, 53% retained

Re: Rivian R2: Electric Mid-Size SUV

#269

Post by mschaef »

gorgoiler wrote: post #153

I bought a new salad spinner recently, after having broken yet another one. I’ve had fancy brands like Zyliss and OXO. I’ve had cheap store brand models and cheaper Amazon MYSSNGVWL type stuff as well. Knowing they would probably break didn’t make it feel better when they eventually broke. Anyway the new salad spinner is large, heavy, with a steel pin into a brass bushing, has a metal handle and nylon gears in a seal…

That's a $125 salad spinner... I get the appeal, but it's definitely a premium product.

Re: Rivian R2: Electric Mid-Size SUV

#270

Post by PatentlyDC123 »

bobchadwick wrote: post #260
grugdev42 wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The car version of this stopped being produced 15 years ago. Old petrol Toyotas and Hondas met your criteria. And the back catalogue of parts is huge and supported for a long time. Modern cars aren't built as well. Maybe the modern non-turbo petrol Mazdas are the best fallback.

Modern cars aren't built as well. Can you cite a source for this? There's no question that they're vastly more complex, but I would think that modern car manufacturing is far more exacting (and efficient) than in the past. If you're saying that older cars are more repairable, I'm happy to agree with you, even without a source to back up that claim.

It seems like you both are looking at different definitions of built well. One pertaining to how well the car will perform over its lifetime. The other describing the build process. Not necessarily exclusionary, but different.
Post reply on HN