[subego]

I was just so sad when I saw my first R1T a few days ago.

[reader50]

Originally Posted by subego 

I was just so sad when I saw my first R1T a few days ago.

Any particular reason? I have good impressions of Rivian products, and owner sentiment seems to agree.

Admittedly, I've seen a grand total of one (1) on the road so far, and have yet to look one over in person.

[subego]

That I can’t get it in a two-seater with a full sized bed.

[Laminar]

Single cab long beds are work trucks, designed for real work, purchased by people looking for the most function at the lowest price. Manufacturers are trying to maximize margins on electric vehicles, which means appealing to buyers that are willing to pay high prices for luxuries that automakers can add for very little actual cost like extra seats, electronic features, and luxurious interior materials.

[subego]

I figured they’d be taking a swing at the more utilitarian stuff by now, but of course these are car companies.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

I mean everyone is still mostly losing money on these as far as I can tell. Not a lot of companies in any industry looking to lose even more.

[reader50]

I believe they're calculating losses by: total company spending divided by the number of trucks & SUVs shipped. Something like $35K loss per truck, if I recall correctly.

But R&D overhead, and building factories are initial costs more than running costs. So I'd rather figure the cost-to-manufacture for the R1Ts and compare that to retail price. Then class the R&D + Production investments as capital overhead. The trucks probably sell at a profit over their manufacturing cost.

But I'm not an accountant, and Ford calculates things the same way Rivian does. Ford Blue makes their EVs, and with all the new factory investments, it's billed as losing a ton on each Mach-E or F-150 Lightning sold. Expected to remain that way for a few more years, too.

[Laminar]

I would believe that's why companies are spinning off EV manufacturing as its own division - they can pile the losses of initial investment on that division, protecting the profitability of their ICE manufacturing and giving them the ability to drive a narrative of "EVs are expensive!" so they can justify high prices.

[Thorzdad]

Originally Posted by subego 

I figured they’d be taking a swing at the more utilitarian stuff by now, but of course these are car companies.

I don’t think Rivian is aimed at that market. They took a look at the pickup-used-as-family-car-and-occasional-bags-of-mulch crowd and saw an opportunity to offer something more bespoke to their actual needs.

[subego]

That was a general “they”, though since Rivian makes Amazon trucks, they might enter the market.

[reader50]

My impression is Rivian is offering the delivery van for generic sales now. I saw a YouTube reviewer looking over the generic version, which omitted any Amazon colors.

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by Thorzdad 

I don’t think Rivian is aimed at that market. They took a look at the pickup-used-as-family-car-and-occasional-bags-of-mulch crowd and saw an opportunity to offer something more bespoke to their actual needs.

I agree. I think Rivian wants to be a high-end brand, and so they want to stay away from designs that seem “utility vehicles”. The delivery van thing isn’t apparently aimed at consumers, but rather fleet sales. There they don’t need to be as concerned with a look.

[subego]

This was posted to dunk on, but I kinda like it.



Edit: also, with one exception, some nice service loops.

[Thorzdad]

Those are nice loops.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by subego 

This was posted to dunk on, but I kinda like it.

I think my issue with the Cybertruck is that it's like a Bronco, Wrangler, or G-Wagen - it serves no practical purpose. It is a status symbol masquerading as capability, and in the case of CyberTrucks today, they're only being driven by people who can throw away a $2200/month payment on a joke of a status symbol. At least a Porsche 911 can use some of its capability on an onramp.

I'm no fan of diesel truck bros, but at least they have actual capability - a real bed, real payload, real range, and real towing capacity. You can get one new for $50-60k and you can use its capability for value-added tasks that make money. When a Bronco or Wrangler is living out its actual purpose, it is a toy for a hobby - no one needs to scale Moab to add value to society. And again at least a Wrangler is actually capable of the claims that Jeep makes, whether or not they're actually useful capabilities or just a hobby.

But the CT can't even do the literal things Tesla/Musk are claiming. "Bulletproof," "Apocolypse-proof," "...better truck than a truck, while also being a better sports car than a sports car," "can 'briefly' serve as a boat," "3500lbs of payload," "500 mile range," all of these things are objectively false. It's not actually good at the things it purports to be good at.

[ghporter]

The CT in subego’s picture is a nice color. That’s all I can say that’s positive. I’m not saying any of the negatives that come to mind - not all of which are directly related to the design/utility/intelligence of the CT design…

[ghporter]

Separate issue that I think goes here: extra wide pickup truck wheels, particularly rear wheels.

Is there a function or purpose behind equipping a pickup with rear wheels that stick out well past the fenders?

[subego]

One thing I’m beginning to notice is the combination of a cramped cab and a tiny bed, but the thing is enormous.

It’s like they put one pound of shit in a two-ton bag.

[Laminar]

Nope, none whatsoever. Some people believe a wider stance increases stability and rollover resistance, but they're ignoring the ruinous effects that changing your tire centerline location has on your suspension geometry and scrub radius, not to mention the huge increase in likelihood of failure if you got the wheels to stick out that far by installing wheel spacers.

[reader50]

Originally Posted by ghporter 

Separate issue that I think goes here: extra wide pickup truck wheels, particularly rear wheels.

Is there a function or purpose behind equipping a pickup with rear wheels that stick out well past the fenders?

There are for the rear-dualie pickups, which come with fender flares from the factory. The reason for these funny-looking trucks is regulatory: you cannot add a 3rd axle on a consumer vehicle. So you double-up the tires for greater load capacity.

If you add a 3rd axle, then the buyers need commercial drivers licenses to use them on public roads. Most members of the public only have the common drivers license - good for two axles. So it would kill your pickup sales.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

I think my issue with the Cybertruck is that it's like a Bronco, Wrangler, or G-Wagen - it serves no practical purpose. It is a status symbol masquerading as capability, and in the case of CyberTrucks today, they're only being driven by people who can throw away a $2200/month payment on a joke of a status symbol. At least a Porsche 911 can use some of its capability on an onramp.

Doesn't that argument apply to almost all pickups and SUVs, though? People prefer them over e. g. station wagons or vans for aesthetic purposes. Auto makers then leaned into it and produced 2wd versions of “SUVs” (the RAV4 comes to mind) and vehicles that are not made for offroad purposes.

The CyberTruck is just another vehicle along the lines of a Hummer H1 (and its less capable successors), just electric. I reckon people like it for the reasons that Elon has designed it as such: it is a physical manifestation of insecurities.

Originally Posted by Laminar 

But the CT can't even do the literal things Tesla/Musk are claiming. "Bulletproof," "Apocolypse-proof," "...better truck than a truck, while also being a better sports car than a sports car," "can 'briefly' serve as a boat," "3500lbs of payload," "500 mile range," all of these things are objectively false. It's not actually good at the things it purports to be good at.

I'd even step back and ask: why do you need to design a vehicle for regular people that is bullet resistant (which it seems to be, although, ≠ bullet proof)? Or pretend it can pull 3.500 lbs?

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

Doesn't that argument apply to almost all pickups and SUVs, though?

No - my line in the sand is that the vehicle's capability can add tangible value to society. A contractor can load a stack of drywall or a ton of gravel or 6 ladders or pull a skid loader 400 miles with an average pickup. Even if most truck buyers don't do that, at least the capability is real and not illusory. It's a capability that some people actually need in order to put food on their table. The Wrangler and Bronco capability is to climb a mountain, which is a fun lil hobby and not really a value-add to society, but at least they can actually do it. The CT's capability doesn't exist, at least not in any way, shape, or form that Tesla claims. And it costs twice as much as any other more capable vehicle, so CT buyers are paying twice what they need to for none of the capability.

I'd even step back and ask: why do you need to design a vehicle for regular people that is bullet resistant (which it seems to be, although, ≠ bullet proof)? Or pretend it can pull 3.500 lbs?

If you stop thinking of Tesla as a car company that makes cars and instead think of them as a hype company that makes stock prices then everything makes sense. The truth doesn't matter, reality doesn't matter, capability doesn't matter. Only press coverage and hype matter.

[subego]

Despite the numerous failures involved, I still can’t help but like the part where it’s coloring outside the box. Car companies are so fucking boring, Tesla included (with a few exceptions).

[subego]

I feel this is related somehow.

[Laminar]

That's a spot-on comparison. It's good at nothing it purports to be. I assume it only stole market share from the Corvette, as that's another V8 RWD vehicle that can't carry any things or people or do anything useful. Except this thing is lifted and heavy so it isn't fast or good-handling.

But GM for a while had a bright idea where they were going to invent new market segments, so they came up with vehicles that were outside the box enough to try and kick start a new market segment. That was the Avalanche, the Envoy XUV, maybe the first Volt?

[andi*pandi]

is that a rollaway roof or something? while there may be a use case for it, surely flattening the middle seat and putting that shelf flat inside would be better?

[subego]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

It's good at nothing it purports to be.

It’s not good at being adorable?

[Laminar]

I assume if any of its target market heard you call it "adorable" they'd either punch you in the face or at least later make a Facebook post complaining about how your generation doesn't respect its elders.

[subego]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

I assume if any of its target market heard you call it "adorable" they'd either punch you in the face…

This might be an overreaction.

[Laminar]

Yes, the toxic masculinity boomers aren't known for their emotional stability.

[reader50]

Originally Posted by subego 

It’s not good at being adorable?

Lam, I got the impression subego was talking about the red Chevy ... whatever that was. It does look cute in my opinion, but I won't be buying one.

[subego]

Yes.

[Thorzdad]

Originally Posted by reader50 

Lam, I got the impression subego was talking about the red Chevy ... whatever that was. It does look cute in my opinion, but I won't be buying one.

Chevy SSR. Kind of a cousin to the HHR.

[andi*pandi]

It is cute. It is the volkswagen bug of small trucks. It may not haul a trailer or camper, but if it holds a bale of hay and some mulch, seems functional.
A subaru baha is better.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by reader50 

Lam, I got the impression subego was talking about the red Chevy

Yes, and so was I.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by andi*pandi 

It is cute. It is the volkswagen bug of small trucks. It may not haul a trailer or camper, but if it holds a bale of hay and some mulch, seems functional.

It's barely a bed, less room than a small hatchback. It's a hardtop convertible, so what looks like a bed is mostly just storage for the convertible top.

Here's a peek into the mind of SSR enthusiasts:
https://www.ssrfanatic.com/threads/s...oblems.203417/

I was considering buying an SSR, as my current head turning convertible has almost no cargo or hauling space.

"I need attention."

The SSR on the other hand can easily carry all the luggage you would need on a vacation and even your golf clubs! Well, that is as long as your wife or girlfriend doesn't overdo it on the luggage!

"It can carry about the same cargo as a hatchback, but women be shopping!!"

When I need to haul big stuff (or reduce weight for speed), I take the saddlebags out. If I still need more room, I take out those two silver bolts and get a buddy to help me take the bed cover off.

It has a bolted-on bed cover preventing you from carrying anything taller than the bed unless you unbolt and remove it, which is a two person job.

Just don't forget that stuff is in there and try to put the top down!
Don't ask me how I know!
I tell my wife my memory is perfect, all the information is still there, it's the retrieval system that's failing!!!

"Bed capacity is reduced with the top down, putting the top down with stuff in the bed breaks things, and I'm a boomer."

[andi*pandi]

ah, so totally not functional. boo.

[subego]

I feel there must be a way to manage the cover removal with one person. Like stick a wedge in it or something.

Of course, I haven’t seen the procedure, and I’m too lazy to watch a video.

[Laminar]

Someone could certainly design a lift or tool to do it. The issue is that it is a heavy and awkward piece, so even once it is unbolted, extending your body far enough over that you could reach all of the way across it side to side and then also counterbalance it properly to lift it up without dragging it across the body and scratching everything up isn't really possible.

[subego]

Got it! I imagined it being lighter.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by reader50 

There are for the rear-dualie pickups, which come with fender flares from the factory.

Circling back on this: Not true, at least in 99.9% of cases. Maybe someone in some backwoods barn is taking multiple dually wheels and installing them backwards on a truck that happens to have the same bolt pattern, but probably not.

Dually pickups use special wheels designed to be installed face-to-face in the rear.



That's why the front wheels of a dually pickup always look different - they have special front knuckles that push the wheel mounting surface way out so that the wheel centerline is where it's supposed to be in relation to the knuckle steering axis.

Single-rear-wheel F-350:



Dually F-350 (notice the front wheel is different):



The relationship between the wheel's mounting face centerline and the wheel's geometric centerline is called the Offset.



Most factory wheels look like the left picture - typical street offsets are +30 to +50mm, meaning that the wheel is tucked into the wheel well and the wheel centerline is further inward than the wheel mounting surface. The more you deviate from the factory offset, the more you affect the steering geometry. The offset between the steering axis and the tire centerline is called the scrub radius, it's how much the tire rotates vs. how much you have to scrub it forward and backward when turning. Moving the tires further and further out changes the scrub radius drastically, making steering effort heavier, increasing tire wear, and changing how the vehicle handles on the road.

A really really crazy truck wheel designed to stick way out of the wheel well would probably be around a -50mm offset, like this one:


Because dually wheels are designed to be installed face-to-face in the rear, the wheel mounting surface is actually outside of the wheel itself, with a factory offset of something like 125mm. If you wanted to make the wheels stick out, you'd have to install dually wheels backwards so that they stuck out. It would have to clear the brakes and the lug nuts would have to secure it properly, though they're usually only designed to go on one way. It would look absolutely crazy, far beyond the normal ridiculous trucks with the dumb pokey wheels. I Googled around a bit and couldn't even find pictures of this. Not saying it's never happened, but I can't find evidence of it.

[subego]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

look different

This should Apple’s slogan for the Vision Pro.