Range Finder: Rivian Offers Smaller Battery on R1S and R1T

Matthew Guy
by Matthew Guy

Hitting the powertrain of its pickup truck and SUV with a shrink ray has permitted Rivian to offer a new battery option – and a new price point – for its pair of all-electric models.

A so-called Standard battery is in the pipe, packing 106 kWh of capacity and an estimated 270 miles of driving range on a full charge. There will also be a Standard+ configuration, with 121 kWh and 315 miles range. In comparison to other options on the order sheet, the Large battery is rated at about 350 miles of total driving distance while the mighty Max battery carries a 410-mile estimate from the EPA eggheads.


You may expect these new arrangements to be accompanied by a lower price – and you’d be right. The fresh Standard arrangement is just over nine grand less expensive than the Large, meaning customers can get into an R1T for $71,700 or an R1S for $76,700. This sum unlocks the Dual Motor powertrain, good for 533 horsepower. Right now, that’s the only way to get the Standard battery, though the Standard+ can be paired with the tastier 665 hp Dual Motor Performance model. 


For those keeping track, the Standard+ will be a $3,100 walk from the Standard; adding the Performance gubbins tacks on another five grand. Before destination fees, the R1T now slides under 70 large in Standard Dual Motor guise. And with numerous trims ducking under the $80,000 limbo bar, there could be some federal tax incentives in the offing. However, structure for EV rebates in America confuse this author to no end, so he will defer to our own Matt Posky, who is the resident expert on that topic.


These rigs are available to build and price on the Rivian website, suggesting they could be ordered and delivered before the snow melts.


[Images: Rivian]


Become a TTAC insider. Get the latest news, features, TTAC takes, and everything else that gets to the truth about cars first by  subscribing to our newsletter.

Matthew Guy
Matthew Guy

Matthew buys, sells, fixes, & races cars. As a human index of auto & auction knowledge, he is fond of making money and offering loud opinions.

More by Matthew Guy

Comments
Join the conversation
5 of 17 comments
  • Lou_BC Lou_BC on Feb 13, 2024

    I've read that the body design and integration means exceptionally expensive repair costs for minor damage.

    • See 2 previous
    • SCE to AUX SCE to AUX on Feb 14, 2024

      My first post here got wiped out, but there is a fellow on YouTube who was quoted $41k for a crushed lower rear corner of his R1T. Using PDR, it was fixed for much less.

      Thing is, it was nearly perfect, but not perfect. I suspect an authorized repair shop pretty much has to use new parts.

  • Calrson Fan Calrson Fan on Feb 13, 2024

    Still way too expensive for a PU or SUV with such limited capability and no resale value. Extra bonus is they are from a company that probably won't be around in 5 years due to their poor business model. I can think of so many better ways to foolishly spend $80K!

  • Mason Had this identical car as a 17 year old in the late 90's. What a ball of fun, one of many I wish I still had.
  • FinnEss At my age, sedans are difficult to get into without much neck and hip adjustment.I apologize sincerely but that is just the way it is. A truck is my ride of choice.Pronto
  • Ajla The market for sedans is weaker than it once was but I think some of you are way overstating the situation and I disagree that the sales numbers show sedans are some niche thing that full line manufacturers should ignore. There are still a sizeable amount of sales. This isn't sports car volume. So far this year the Camry and Civic are selling in the top 10, with the Corolla in 11 and the Accord, Sentra, and Model 3 in the top 20. And sedan volume is off it's nadir from a few years ago with many showing decent growth over the last two years, growth that is outpacing utilities. Cancelling all sedans now seems more of an error than back when Ford did it.
  • Duties The U.S . would have enough energy to satisfy our needs and export energy if JoeBama hadn’t singlehandedly shut down U.S. energy exploration and production. Furthermore, at current rates of consumption, the U.S. has over two centuries of crude oil, https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/energy/exclusive-current-rates-consumption-us-has-more-two-centuries-oil-report.Imagine we lived in a world where all cars were EV's. And then along comes a new invention: the Internal Combustion Engine.Think how well they would sell. A vehicle HALF the weight, HALF the price that would cause only a quarter of the damage to the road. A vehicle that could be refueled in 1/10th the time, with a range of 4 times the distance in all weather conditions. One that does not rely on the environmentally damaging use of non-renewable rare earth elements to power it, and uses far less steel and other materials. A vehicle that could carry and tow far heavier loads. And is less likely to explode in your garage in the middle of the night and burn down your house with you in it. And ran on an energy source that is readily extracted with hundreds of years known supply.Just think how excited people would be for such technology. It would sell like hot cakes, with no tax credits! Whaddaya think? I'd buy one.
  • 3SpeedAutomatic I just road in a rental Malibu this past week. Interior was a bit plasticity, but, well built.Only issue was how “low” the seat was in relation to the ground. I had to crawl “down” into the seat. Also, windscreen was at 65 degree angle which invited multiple reflections. Just to hack off the EPA, how about a boxy design like Hyundai is doing with some of its SUVs. 🚙 Raise the seat one or two inches and raise the roof line accordingly. Would be a hit with the Uber and Lyft crowd as well as some taxi service.🚗 🚗🚗
Next