By on September 15, 2021

Despite EV startups taking a lot of flak for habitually overpromising, sometimes on a level that approaches criminal fraud, things appear to be going rather well at the Rivian factory. Founder and CEO Robert Joseph “RJ” Scaringe announced that the company started building its very first production units on Tuesday.

With the necessary regulatory certifications in hand, Rivian can now begin delivering vehicles directly to customers and the timing couldn’t be much better. The electric brand had said it was basically done with prototypes and ready to spin up the assembly lines for the final product late last month. While this still placed it a bit behind schedule, the company now says it has all the necessary certifications from the relevant regulatory agencies (NHTSA, EPA, CARB, etc.) and an automobile that’s been federally approved for sale. 

Considering most EV startups never even deliver a finished automobile, this is already an achievement of note. Though Rivian has some incredibly strong backing, with ties to both Amazon and the Ford Motor Company, it’s typically wise not to make assumptions. But Scaringe had indeed promised the public that September would be the month when the business went from being a prospective automaker to a real-deal manufacturer and it’s nice to see someone in the industry delivering on their word.

“Over the last several months we have been focused on not only ramping our production rate, but also dialing in our quality across each of the five areas of our plant: stamping, body, paint, assembly and propulsion (battery and drive units). This challenging process involves multiple build phases – many of the vehicles from these non-customer build phases have been seen out testing across a range of environments during the last year,” the CEO explained in August. “These validation, tooling tryout and pilot build vehicles are critical for our ongoing mileage accumulation program that has helped us drive refinements to the product. With all of this, I am excited to report we have started producing vehicles that reflect all of our quality iterations and design refinements. We are currently working with various governing agencies on the final approvals needed for us to make the first deliveries to preorder customers in September.”

That makes it sound as though Rivian was ready to rock and simply need regulators to give it the go-ahead. However, the months leading up to that quote were loaded with talk about supply chain issues. In fact, the company told customers it would need to delay its all-electric SUV (the R1S) to contend with parts shortages and ensure that the pickup (R1T) would be out by September.

“After months of building pre-production vehicles, this morning our first customer vehicle drove off our production line in Normal [Illinois]!” Scaringe wrote on Tuesday. “Our team’s collective efforts have made this moment possible. Can’t wait to get these into the hands of our customers!”

While we don’t know who will be receiving the first models, or when the delayed R1S is supposed to commence assembly, Rivian has managed to position itself more favorably than its direct rivals. Legacy automakers will soon be delivering full-size electric pickups of their own and it’s looking like Rivian will be the only competition they’ll have until Tesla’s Cybertruck arrives.

Meanwhile, the Rivian Forums have begun reporting that the company’s first charging stations have begun to appear at a campsite near the off-road trails in Moab, Utah. They’re only Level 2 chargers (and exclusive to patrons of the venue) but they’re the first such stations we’re aware of and again represent the brand having some forward momentum. The company has previously stated that it wants to install over 10,000 Level 2 chargers, and an additional with an additional 3,500 DC fast chargers (over 200kW), in the United States and Canada by 2023.

[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.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

79 Comments on “Rivian Completes First Production Vehicles Intended for Customers...”


  • avatar
    Lou_BC

    Nice to see new companies coming on-line.

    It looks more like a Ridgeline.

    There were a few incorrectly worn facemasks and one without a mask. Nice to see a high compliance rate.

    (Tosses fuel on flame) ;)

    • 0 avatar
      slavuta

      you mean when coal is dumped into the burner?
      https://www.bbc.com/news/business-58469238

      Also

      Quote:
      “Natural gas and electricity markets were already surging in Europe when a fresh catalyst emerged: The wind in the stormy North Sea stopped blowing.

      The sudden slowdown in wind-driven electricity production off the coast of the U.K. in recent weeks whipsawed through regional energy markets. Gas and coal-fired electricity plants were called in to make up the shortfall from wind.”

      • 0 avatar
        Lou_BC

        I’m not surprised that you completely missed the snark.

      • 0 avatar
        Luke42

        @slavuta,
        “The sudden slowdown in wind-driven electricity production off the coast of the U.K. in recent weeks whipsawed through regional energy markets. Gas and coal-fired electricity plants were called in to make up the shortfall from wind.”

        That’s *exactly* how this is supposed to work.

        When the wind blows and/or the sun shines, we run on those. When they aren’t enough, we fire up the gas/coal generators, and turn them off when we’re done.

        The lights stay on, and we save like half of the emissions and save the expensive dirty fuel for later. That’s a huge win.

        Since we’re a capitalist society, of course the price of natural gas and coal will go up when the demand increases. That’s how it’s *supposed* to work — that way, the dead dinosaurs can be allocated to the most valuable tasks.

        This is exactly how it’s supposed to work!

        • 0 avatar
          slavuta

          “Since we’re a capitalist society, of course the price of natural gas and coal will go up when the demand increases.”

          But in this case this is not the issue. The issue is that Europeans decided not to award Russia long contracts and they told them to trade spot. Those who signed long term with Russia pay now $260 per unit, others – $1000.

          In other words, sign long term deals and demand will not increase the price. This is BTW how airlines manage fluctuations. They sign long contracts when price is low. And when price goes up, they still receive cheap fuel.

      • 0 avatar
        EBFlex

        “ Quote:
        “Natural gas and electricity markets were already surging in Europe when a fresh catalyst emerged: The wind in the stormy North Sea stopped blowing.

        The sudden slowdown in wind-driven electricity production off the coast of the U.K. in recent weeks whipsawed through regional energy markets. Gas and coal-fired electricity plants were called in to make up the shortfall from wind.”

        It’s laughable how inferior these so called “green” sources of energy are. These people don’t actually believe in wind energy or solar energy. They just build them to appear virtuous.

        If these people really wanted to provide clean, EFFICIENT energy while having the smallest footprint they would build nuke plants.

        Until then all this EV crap and wind/solar energy is smoke and mirrors.

        • 0 avatar
          Luke42

          @EBFlex:
          “If these people really wanted to provide clean, EFFICIENT energy while having the smallest footprint they would build nuke plants.”

          Many environmentalists agree that nuclear is part of the solution.

          The new clean-energy law in Illinois decommissions fossil fuel plants, funds the nuke plants, and provides carrots & sticks to toward building renewable energy.

          Illinois law: https://www.wbez.org/stories/whats-in-illinois-massive-green-energy-bill/84a3d48d-e82c-45f9-add3-200923f1fab2

          Greenpeace founder comes out in favor of nuclear energy: https://www.wired.com/2007/11/co-founder-of-greenpeace-envisions-a-nuclear-future/

        • 0 avatar
          Luke42

          @EBFlex:
          “Until then all this EV crap and wind/solar energy is smoke and mirrors.”

          Not at all.

          They are an engineering challenge for those who manage the electric grid.

          But paying through the nose for fossil fuel when you can harvest power from the wind and the sun is just waste.

          When will all y’all put conservation back in “conservative”? What happened to waste not / wont not and living off the bounty of the land?

  • avatar
    kcflyer

    Serious question. If the politicians really wanted to encourage growth of BEV’s wouldn’t be a great idea to mandate uniform charging ports that are public use? Why does Rivian have to start from scratch? I’ll admit to being in the dark on this subject but that seems like a no brainer. Oh, and start building nuclear power plants in every county in the country with population over 200K if they don’t have a hydro plant or existing nuc.

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      @kcflyer – It is odd that there isn’t uniformity. I guess it’s a selling feature if one brand has more charging stations.

      As far as expanding electricity generation, everyone is in favour of it until it’s proposed for one’s backyard.

      • 0 avatar
        CoastieLenn

        My hope is that, like the gasoline filler necks, the EV charging port will become standardized as well. If EV’s are in fact the wave of the future, nobody will long tolerate having 432 proprietary fittings to charge their vehicle.

        The year is 2027, there are now 89,000 EV charging stations in the country. Sadly, your car is only able to charge at 206 of them because the rest don’t use the same plug. Sorry.

        • 0 avatar
          JMII

          Same reason we different phone charging ports – every manufacturer thinks their solution is the best. As much as everyone hates government oversight this is one of things that should be standardized on the federal level. You don’t have to buy different wall outlets to plug in a TV or a toaster, so the same system needs to be applied to EVs.

          • 0 avatar
            CoastieLenn

            Sort of, but not really. To my knowledge, the only company that uses anything other than either USB-C or mini-USB is Apple. The saving grace there is that, no matter WHAT cord your phone uses, the receptacle they’re plugged into is standardized by country at least. Maybe the solution here is the standardize EV charging stations with a singular “outlet” and each manufacturer can come up with whatever portable cord they want so long as it has at least one of the standardized ends.

            Much like your phone, if you want to charge your car, you’d best make sure you bring your charge cable.

          • 0 avatar
            mcs

            Charging ports are standardized. CCS is an SAE standard. Tesla has an adapter for their North American proprietary connector, so that’s not a problem. The European Teslas are shipped with CCS type 2 ports, so no adapter is needed there. Chademo was an older Japanese standard that is being abandoned. My prediction is that we’ll see Tesla switch to CCS for North America eventually. Probably once they have CCS at all of the North American Superchargers.

          • 0 avatar
            thegamper

            Apple actually uses USB-C for many of their newer laptops, I suspect because power users demand the state of the art and the highest transfer speeds, etc. USB-C has long been a superior standard vs Lightening. Android and PC have been Using USB-C for the better part of a decade now. The only reason that Apple sticks with lightening is $$$$. They would sell fewer chargers if all their customers could just use the same USB-C chargers they had around the house to charge their phones too.

            I think many of the electric startups will lean toward the Apple model where the manufacturer will have its hand in every aspect of ownership and maintenance of your electric vehicle to maximize profit to the detriment of the customer. Even to the point of limiting options for charging and repairs.

            I hope a national standard is adopted, this is one area where we probably NEED legislation.

          • 0 avatar
            mcs

            “I hope a national standard is adopted, this is one area where we probably NEED legislation.”

            No, we don’t since there is a standard. CCS. The only non-standard with newer cars is on Teslas for North America and even then, Tesla will be providing an adapter.

        • 0 avatar
          28-Cars-Later

          One zero too many there.

        • 0 avatar
          RHD

          Pretty soon there will be multi-charger adapters available on Amazon for 99.99, with free* two-day Prime shipping. Made in China, of course, and guaranteed to quit working as soon as the return window closes.

          *13.93/month, whether you buy anything or not.

      • 0 avatar
        redgolf

        “everyone is in favour of it until it’s proposed for one’s backyard.”

        “everything is fine until you’re punched in the face!” ( Mike Tyson quote) Chevy Bolt ! GM is now saying ” do not park within 50 feet of other vehicles! Handicap vehicles, start walking!;-(
        https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/technology/2021/09/us-chevrolet-bolt-owners-told-to-avoid-parking-near-other-vehicles-due-to-fire-risk.html

    • 0 avatar

      It looks like Rivian is using CCS ports, which are now the most common. Also the standard that Tesla will likley allow to use their stations in the near future. It looks like their own charging units are being placed at major offroad and hiking spots to support the adventure lifestyle, and as a bone to the people out there who think Tesla only survived by having it’s own charging network.

    • 0 avatar
      Imagefont

      kcflyer
      Because nuclear power plants are not economically viable.
      Simple economics. Go ask Westinghouse.

      • 0 avatar
        28-Cars-Later

        Why is the PRC building them then?

        https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2021/07/27/china-to
        -build-the-first-small-modular-nuclear-reactor–of-course/

        • 0 avatar
          haze3

          NIMBY and super strong safety regulations drive costs in the US.

          Guessing there is no NIMBY in PRC (party will fix that for you) and safety is likely solid but… pragmatic? Certainly, safety is subservient to the needs of the state (power w/ good air quality).

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            I’m more curious to know the argument against economic viability.

            “Certainly, safety is subservient to the needs of the state (power w/ good air quality).”

            I don’t think they are that stupid. If these plants were placed in distant locations to shield the country from the higher possibility of accidents I may believe it but I think many of those plants are in the eastern zones near major populations. I believe safety is a top concern for nuclear operators post Fukushima… now would the Party sacrifice XXXX lives to prevent a disaster if forced? Absolutely, but so would D.C. and nearly every major Western Gov’t.

          • 0 avatar

            From the newsreel: “Once again, a Chinese rocket has doused a village with toxic fuel.” In other countries rockets are launched over ocean or desert but in China nobody cares about your backyard. That is the country that will lead humanity into brighter future after racist US empire crashes. Happy 21st century!

          • 0 avatar
            Imagefont

            Look up VC Summer AP1000 power plant project cancelled / abandoned 9 billion dollars in and less than 40% complete.
            Imagine an electric “can” motor that must operate for 40 years without being serviced (rotor assembly is not accessible). Would you guarantee that? Would anyone? Something always goes wrong.

          • 0 avatar
            bullnuke

            @imagefront – “Imagine an electric “can” motor that must operate for 40 years without being serviced (rotor assembly is not accessible). Would you guarantee that? Would anyone? Something always goes wrong.”. I personally know of 14 total 1mW canned rotor electric circulating pumps that ran for a total of 40+ years without failure in four nuclear propulsion plants stopping only for a total of 6 months during refueling operations and no maintenance performed during that 40+ years. There are another 30 to 32 of the same that had no reported issues but I have no personal knowledge of these. These pumps were manufactured in the mid- to late 1950’s. Two failed during that period, not due to the pumps themselves but due to damage caused by operator errors during refueling outage periods. Large canned rotor pumps are very reliable.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            @Imagefont

            I’m not up on the PRC’s nuclear project designs but 17 are still under construction, so even if the AP1000 is cancelled apparently there is at least one other design in play. I’m not sure why the AP1000 was cancelled but it may be because the ongoing trade conflict between the US and PRC. This still however does not answer the question of economic viability for nuclear.

        • 0 avatar
          chuckrs

          @28 Cars

          re: Chinese reactors. First? Possibly, but

          https://apnews.com/3737699443a50ebc3a24fccde562fd3f

          Six modular Nuscale reactors being built for a Utah electricity collective. They will be installed in southeastern Idaho.

          The things are small enough to be built offsite using a standard design.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            Those are exciting because although they will only be 462 MW, the smallest reactor in the US is 581 MW. Being smaller and modular, they should be cheaper and easier to construct than R.E. Ginna was, perhaps in a decade enough could go live to start to offset the power generation going offline from the 50yo+ Gen 2 plants.

            “The R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant in New York is the smallest nuclear power plant in the United States, and it has one reactor with a net summer electricity generating capacity of about 581 megawatts (MW).”

            https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=104

        • 0 avatar
          mcs

          NuScale thinks they can ve economically viable too. In Idaho.

          https://www.nuscalepower.com/projects/carbon-free-power-project

      • 0 avatar
        slavuta

        Imagefont

        “Because nuclear power plants are not economically viable. Simple economics. Go ask Westinghouse.”

        I just did a little bit of research, why does it work for Russia. Here is the finding – in Western countries private companies get gov. subsidies for nuclear powerplants, etc. And there is a lot of drain in there. In Russia they have State-owned Rosatom and they building 12 projects abroad with expectations of profit in the long term. For example, they build Turkish plant for free but they will operate it to recover the cost. Now, they don’t have burden to turn huge profits like private corporation would. But they are not an isolated gov. agency. They work with innovative private firms where they can buy designs and ideas.

        And while generated electricity hopefully breaks even at some places, the result of its generation should produce some products that should generate profit.

    • 0 avatar
      Scoutdude

      Rivian uses the CCS port like every other MFG in the US except for Tesla and Nissan though Nissan is going CCS on new models. Mitsubishi also used Chademo on the discontinued i-Miev.

      Teslas can charge at CCS stations with an adapter and since they have announced they are going to open up the network other cars will be able to charge there, with an adapter.

    • 0 avatar
      stuki

      Mandating that everyone use the same charging port Fred Flintstone used on his first battery toy, likely would not have nencouraged growth at all… Which is just another special case of “mandating doesn’t encourage growth of anything other than an army of non-productives trying to get their own particular special snowflake mandated.”

      A priori, standardized charging MAY be efficient. Or it may not. Or it may be efficient for the first 3 weeks or decades, then not…

      5 year planing, or 3 week planning, or 3 decade planning, simply doesn’t reliably contribute to improved economic resource allocation. It just doesn’t. Period.

      • 0 avatar
        stuki

        On the other hand, what does reliably contribute to improved economic resource allocation, is getting out of the way, and letting people experiment. Specifically letting people build anything they want anywhere they want anytime they want. Such that charging stations, garages, houses, workplaces and all else, are not artificially priced higher than market prices.

        That’s what is killing adoption of useful things in general: The massive, and ever rising, share of total end user spend which goes not to those who develop, build and market something useful; but rather to idle, non-productive but well connected, leeches collecting unearned rent. Effectuated by arbitrary and artificial limits on who can compete with the rent seeking leeches.

        As well as to the armies of equally non-productive makeworkers who do nothing but waste resources squabbling over exactly what arbitrary restrictions government should throw it’s coercive apparatus, and kangaroo courts, behind this time.

        Get out of the way so that productive people can route around (build around) those deadweights, and increased adoption of any useful innovation is guaranteed.

        • 0 avatar
          Ol Shel

          Please point out the utopia that has no rules and laws. Y’all keep saying how great it would be, so I’m sure it exists.

          Where is it? Somalia?

          • 0 avatar
            stuki

            Existe_d_. Not _s_.

            The US. Back in the civilized era. Noone ran around suggesting banning horses from eating from non standard feeding troughs…. Nor was Jedediah Smith’s main problem in life complying with arbitrary regulations, lest he got dragged into some kangaroo court by Peta and an army of ambulance chasers.

            More recent: The guys who lounged around in sandals while casually kicking “our” rear in all of about a week of running barely above idle.

            Nowhere has “no rules or laws.” That’s just a strawman. OTOH, the America which went from largely empty, to the greatest power on earth, had many fewer of them than it does now.

            Which is why it’s now going backwards: From the greatest power on earth, to getting buttkicked by dudes in sandals. The latter whom, not at all coincidentally, don’t have nearly as many arbitrary laws and rules, and “law”-and-rule profiteers to deal with.

    • 0 avatar

      KCFlyer: your comment brought this to mind – all ICE vehicles can go to any gas station and the nozzle at the pump fits into the fuel opening in any vehicle. Indeed, why aren’t all charger ports on vehicles standardized so any charging station can be used regardless of make? The example that comes to mind – although totally outside this industry – is MIDI. This interface for music/audio was arrived at with the cooperation of many manufacturers and is still in use today being ubiquitous in that sphere.

      • 0 avatar
        kcflyer

        That’s exactly what I’m talking about. I’m not an early adapter. If and when I by a BEV I want to know I can use any charger in the country. I don’t expect to do so for free. Tesla, Nissan, Ford, VW, whoever spent the money to provide that station should expect to get paid to use it. But if I can’t use it, all of them, I am highly unlikely to buy the BEV to begin with.

      • 0 avatar
        Ol Shel

        In ‘Murrica, we have the freedumb to pay ‘campaign contributions’ -along with stock tips and a revolving-door system of employment for personal enrichment- to our elected officials. This prevents sensible standards that help to overcome electric-car acceptance here in America. It would have been quite easy for all manufacturers to build a chargers and vehicles that are cross compatible… but they don’t prefer to.

        That the largest electric brand is run by a mentally-ill billionaire doesn’t help either.

        • 0 avatar
          mcs

          “It would have been quite easy for all manufacturers to build a chargers and vehicles that are cross compatible… but they don’t prefer to.”

          Except, they have. J1772 has always been on every EV for level 1 and 2. Now the standard is CCS. Tesla will provide adapters for North America which is the only place as far as I know that still uses the Tesla proprietary plug. In Europe, Tesla is CCS.

    • 0 avatar
      mcs

      “Serious question. If the politicians really wanted to encourage growth of BEV’s wouldn’t be a great idea to mandate uniform charging ports that are public use?”

      No need to since the manufacturers have already standardized on the CCS charging standard all on their own.

      “Why does Rivian have to start from scratch?”
      They didn’t. They use the CCS standard.

      You even have situations like this happening in Europe:

      https://www.slashgear.com/flaw-in-tesla-superchargers-in-europe-allows-competing-brands-to-charge-for-free-14637940/

  • avatar
    indi500fan

    How much mfg equipment did Mitsu leave behind at this place? Did Riv have to buy all new presses, robots, paint equip, etc?

  • avatar
    jalop1991

    Paint optional. $2500.

    • 0 avatar
      SCE to AUX

      For blue and yellow, you are correct. Five other colors are $1500, and two are no extra charge.

      Not a cheap vehicle.

    • 0 avatar
      bunkie

      It seems that every vehicle these days charges more for anything except white. Some charge a LOT more. Tesla is particularly bad in this respect.

      Vinyl wraps are beginning to look attractive, cost-wise…

      • 0 avatar
        thegamper

        I would love to see automakers give buyers the option to go pick up their vehicle at the factory and save the destination charge. With destination charges skyrocketing, getting on a plane and driving it back is starting to look like a pretty good option. That will never happen though because half of that charge is just BS profit padding at least in the case of those charging over $1000 per vehicle.

        That seems like another area that needs consumer protection. Why shouldnt it be based on an actual cost since that is what it is billed as to the consumer. Paint on the other hand, some of those colors are pretty pricey and labor intensive as I recently found out with the white pearl tricoat. It is nice to look at though.

        • 0 avatar
          CoastieLenn

          @thegamper: Volvo does this. You can order your car under the OSD program, take delivery from the factory in Gotemberg, drive the car around Sweden for a few days. It then gets loaded up and delivered to your local dealer. It actually saves many customers a chunk of money somehow. Even after 8 years of working in a dealer, I was unsure how that actually was a cost saver.

          • 0 avatar
            thegamper

            I think every European luxury automaker does this (Euro Delivery). I actually looked into it once for Volvo. Pretty sure it is not a way to save money. It is just a way for North American owners to drive their vehicle in Europe before taking delivery in the US. I think it may actually cost more as I recall.

  • avatar
    DenverMike

    Where’s the pre-production R1T pickups? Were they destroyed with no media testing? I suspect the first customers will be industrial type fleets strictly.

    • 0 avatar
      Luke42

      They’ve been out and about:

      https://www.torquenews.com/13820/rivian-r1s-sighting-pasadena-mustang-mach-es-wild-vehicle-drought-coming-end

      https://www.thedrive.com/news/35528/rivian-sent-two-r1t-electric-pickup-prototypes-on-a-13000-mile-trip-from-patagonia-to-la

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QgBNBLU0tk0

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0clLMUVH9A

  • avatar
    SCE to AUX

    Lots to like here:

    1. First electric pickup (arguably)

    2. Good range (300 miles). (I know: towing, cold, etc)

    3. Attractive exterior and interior (https://i.ytimg.com/vi/EeTKYs4z4BQ/maxresdefault.jpg). YMMV. The front end has grown on me.

    4. Real, actual hardware with interesting features

    5. Long, presumably cautious development cycle

    6. Clear-eyed CEO

    The R1T is nice, but I’m more interested in the R1S.

    As for the charging, I don’t know why Rivian would waste resources on developing their own. But I think they were going to focus on out-of-the-way locations in keeping with the outdoorsy theme of their vehicles.

    I still believe the EV mfrs should lay down their arms and adopt the Supercharger protocol. J1772/CCS is great, but the Tesla connector is more physically compact and Superchargers are everywhere. More importantly, they are extremely reliable.

    However, the charging battle is now about 800 Volts (vs 400 Volts), which Tesla does not have (yet). The upcoming Hyundai Ioniq will be the fastest-filling EV, and I think VAG is going to 800V soon (if they haven’t already). Rivian would do well to hop on the 800V charging train.

    • 0 avatar
      mcs

      @SCE: “I don’t know why Rivian would waste resources on developing their own.”

      They didn’t. Rivian uses CCS.

      ” still believe the EV mfrs should lay down their arms…”

      They did and CCS won. Telsa’s proprietary connector is North America only. Eventually, I think they’ll make the switch here as they have in Europe. It’s too much hassle to ship their cars and maintain 2 different standards. Here’s a CCS equipped Model 3:

      https://i.redd.it/o1m5qcnc3stz.jpg

      • 0 avatar
        mcs

        @SCE: My bad, I thought you were talking about charging standards. I now realize you meant the network. Coding is frying my brain today.

      • 0 avatar
        SCE to AUX

        @mcs: I left out a word… “their own *network*”. I knew Rivian used CCS.

        Your photo there was photo-shopped, but here is a real one:

        https://cleantechnica.com/files/2018/11/Model-3-CCS-charging-port.jpg

        I was unaware that Tesla uses CCS elsewhere, so if they switch to CCS in North America that would be great. The best thing for EVs would be a universal (at least continental) charging protocol.

    • 0 avatar
      Luke42

      I currently own a GMC Sierra Hybrid which I use on the Midwestern Dad duty cycle.

      I’m expecting to replace it with a Tesla Cybertruck, but I’m going to drive the Rivian and the Lightning — and all three will get a fair consideration for my truck-dollars. I will buy whichever truck is better for me!

      The Rivian looks like a great truck, and it’s the home-town favorite here in Illinois! I hope they sell a lot of them!

  • avatar
    FreedMike

    Wishing them nothing but success.

  • avatar
    aja8888

    It’s nice to hear some good news every once in a while. I hope they are successful!

  • avatar
    Carlson Fan

    Honestly if I’m going to make the leap to an EV PU I’ll wait for something from Ford or GM. At least I know that will last and the company will still be around after I purchase it.

    I wish them success but no way would I be giving them my money, so kudos to those willing to roll the dice & lay down their hard bucks for one of these.

    • 0 avatar
      Luke42

      Ford is taking reservations on the F-150 Lightning EV pickup.

      GM has shown their Hummer EV pickup, and announced a Silverado EV.

      And, of course, the Tesla Cybertruck has been announced.

      And the Rivian R1T has made it to Job 1!

      Rivian has an early lead, but the next 24 months could mean there are a lot of electric pick up trucks available.

      As someone who is into new-tech pick up trucks (I own a hybrid-powered GMT900 which I use for towing), this could become a target-rich environment.

  • avatar
    Oberkanone

    Bravo! Not an easy task.

  • avatar
    slavuta

    Meanwhile, in UK it will be charged from a coal fired plant
    https://www.bbc.com/news/business-58469238

    • 0 avatar
      Luke42

      @Slavuta:
      “Meanwhile, in UK it will be charged from a coal fired plant.”

      EVs would be cleaner and lower emissions, even if your local electric generation mix were 100% coal.

      However, that is not the case in the UK — or anywhere, really.

      According to your article, the UK fired up a coal plant to address a shortfall. Running a coal plant for a month a year is way better than running a coal plant 12 months a year.

      Here’s a nicely presented way to look up the electric generation mix for your state:
      https://www.eia.gov/beta/states/overview

      • 0 avatar
        slavuta

        This is all nice but 2 things.. The fact itself, and.. you know what this is all about – slow down development of countries. Because if country grows, it needs energy. No way a country can have more energy without more emissions. Emissions – punishment – $fines$.

        BTW, look at European Gas market now. Fun. If you don’t understand what is going on, I can explain.

  • avatar
    stuki

    Now, for the real hurdle: Produce and sell it profitably at prices competitive in markets without artificial subsidies and mandates distorting purchasing decisions……

  • avatar
    Imagefont

    Rivian spontaneous combustion watch starts today.
    When will the first R1T burst into flames and who will the company try to scape goat?

  • avatar
    EBFlex

    300 mile range (which is a deceiving number as that’s doing everything possible to conserve energy in ideal conditions and not reflective of real world) is just a joke.

    When are these automakers going to realize that if you want people to by these mediocre compliance vehicles you are going to have to give them a range that works for daily commuting AND long trips while using the vehicle for its intended purpose? On top of that, make the range a third farther than that to make up for the long recharge times.

    Gasoline vehicles have a 400-500 mile range and a 10 minute fill up time (to 100% not this 80% garbage that EVs have). Until that is met EVs will continue to be completely inferior to ICE vehicles.

  • avatar
    tankinbeans

    What happens with the test vehicles that were manufactured previously when Rivian were dialing in their process? I assume these can’t be registered. Do these get donated to repair facilities/colleges to build out the knowledge base for maintenance, or will they be destroyed?

  • avatar
    ToolGuy

    First picture: How long until GM paints the inside of its assembly plants white?

    [Down to only 11, so not that difficult to do.]

  • avatar
    zipper69

    Rather surprised that some enterprising Chinese manufacturer hasn’t created a variable convertor plug in the style of the international outlet plugs sets beloved of world travelers.
    Could be a nice money spinner in the EV market…

    • 0 avatar
      mcs

      “hasn’t created a variable convertor plug ”

      Not really needed since the only quick charge plug other than CCS is Tesla and they’ll be providing an adapter to CCS until they get more CCS ports at the superchargers. In fact, for Europe, even Tesla puts CCS ports on their cars.

      For portable chargers that can plug into 120v or 240v ac, there are adapters for the various outlets like NEMA 14-50 or NEMA 10-30. That’s for situations like if you are in need of a charge and in the middle of nowhere, you could go to a campground with RV power and get a level 2 charge.

      For the US going forward, everyone is using CCS type 2 including Rivian. Soon, you’ll even be able to get CCS charging at Tesla superchargers. I think the only car left with CHadeMO is the Leaf. Nissan’s new EV, the Arriya will be CCS. Teslas for Europe are equipped with CCS right from the factory. Rivian is CCS. The EV manufacturers have standardized on CCS.

  • avatar

    To appease the stockholder’s Barra and GM jumped into EV’s hook line and stinker. However, they weren’t ready to do the hard work like creating charging infrastructure and ensuring the technology was reliable. Once again Toyota takes the long term view and is slowly and methodically creating a EV future without decimating their current lineup.

  • avatar

    If things go well maybe they will sell 5,000 of these a year. The truth is nobody really asked for an electric truck.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • mcs: I trust Tesla, especially their drivetrain technology, over Ford and GM. Ford and GM somehow know less about...
  • Inside Looking Out: No, that’s wrong, that cannot be true. Tesla are bunch of republican idiots from Silicon...
  • JD-Shifty: Pete Seeger, the Smithsonian Collection
  • 28-Cars-Later: I think you’re paranoid.
  • Jeff S: I will not buy a Tesla product either. As much as I don’t like GM and Ford I would trust either of them...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber