11 ms·

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

109 points by Element_ 8y ago

mlacks 8y ago
Why do auto makers seem to be so against working with Tesla to bring electric vehicles to market? Now that I think about it, it seems like most car companies are trying to do the electric thing on their own, and if they do ask for help it’s from somebody that’s sort of out of their industry and not a direct competitor (yet). This is in contrast with for example how Mazda is working with Toyota on hybrid drive, and how GM used to work with Toyota on hybrid drive. Or is it Tesla that is ‘anti-cooperation’ with industry leaders? I was under the impression that it was teslas goal to make electric cars more common, not necessarily Tesla cars were common. I’ve never properly researched this, but I’ve always wondered why a business model for them isn’t to just provide the skateboard platform for other companies to build upon...
- TylerH 8y ago
  It's likely that Amazon and GM want far more control in the car manufacturing process than someone like Elon Musk would be willing to give. So it's not so much why Amazon and GM aren't willing, but that Musk isn't. Rivian makes superb trucks, but it's incredibly small right now and not likely to last a long time without some kind of deep-pocket investment... especially considering its business strategy is as much an electric vehicle platform as it as a 'traditional' electric automobile manufacturer... that last bit is probably super enticing for a company like Amazon.
  - RankingMember 8y ago
    > Rivian makes superb trucks I want EV makers to succeed, but these vehicles haven't even launched yet (won't until 2020), so how can you say that? We'll know what kind of truck they really are once the general public gets their hands on them.
    - sangnoir 8y ago
      Not parent, but we can make judgements on the specs alone - 180 kWh battery, 400+ mile-range, one motor per wheel (with possibility of left and right wheels going in opposite directions - they could theoretically reduce turning radius to almost 0 like a forklift or tank). That sounds superb to me.
      - RankingMember 8y ago
        > we can make judgements on the specs alone Can we? The vehicles we've seen are concepts. We know nothing of the build quality, reliability, safety, or a multitude of other characteristics of a mass-production version of these vehicles. A hand-built concept vehicle built in extremely low volumes for press outings (what they have now) would be expected to be impressive, but the real test is whether all of those wonderful specs make it to mass production in a safe, reliable, high-build-quality package (...that doesn't bankrupt the company in the process). The automotive industry is littered with the corpses of companies who touted killer concepts w/ insane specs but couldn't make it happen, or did, and the production vehicle was but a shadow of the concept. Tesla is amazing in that it didn't become one of these companies. That Rivian can mass produce these vehicles to the touted specs for the given prices should not be assumed, and to look at a few concept vehicles and company-provided specs and say "Rivian makes superb trucks" brings to mind George W Bush's premature "Mission Accomplished" banner from way back when. I hope for their success, but they're pretty far from the finish line right now, and getting there will be a real challenge; just ask Elon Musk.
        sangnoir 8y ago
        > Can we? Absolutely! The norm in a lot of industries is to judge on projected figures (electronics, CPU, GPU, automotive, aerospace, mining, etc). > We know nothing of the build quality, reliability, safety, or a multitude of other characteristics of a mass-production version of these vehicles. "Superb" is subjective - I could say a 1965 Porsche 911 is a superb car, even though it compares terribly with a 2018 Toyota Corolla on build quality, reliability, safety or a number of other features.
- willart4food 8y ago
  Well it's a question of ego. 2 parts: 1. If GM were to - like you say - "work with Tesla", who would be in charge of what to do, when and how? GM would want GM cronies to do that. It would be like Apple after they fired Steve Jobs 2. Even if TSLA would be in the driver's seat (pun intended) who would be working for whom? TSLA is already as big as GM in terms of market cap, and with better future, but in a TSLA-GM JV GM would want to be "da boss". Things are fine the way they are GM, F, FCAU will either die, consolidate or become irrelevant; and the new TSLA-like companies will be the new "energy and transportation" players. Clayton M. Christensen's The Innovator's Dilemma is still valid.
- dangrossman 8y ago
  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 to work with them now.
  - greglindahl 8y ago
    Huh. The other version of the story is that Toyota refused to accept "one pedal" driving, which by all reports is a huge success.
    - kwhitefoot 8y ago
      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.
  - bobsil1 8y ago
    Toyota also made its big platform bet on mild hybrids and hydrogen, which Elon rightly scoffed at. No doubt there was big culture friction.
    - ProfessorLayton 8y ago
      Agree with your hydrogen point, but curious to know a bit more about your mild hybrid reference. AFAIK Toyota’s Hybrid Synergy Drive was the best in class parallel hybrid system. In fact, many hybrids on the market, such as the Fusion Hybrid, were licensed HSD from Toyota. Honda now has a more advanced 2-motor series hybrid system, similar to the Volt, but both systems are a lot more complex (expensive) than the brilliantly simple way HSD combines power from the motor and engine. Additionally, the hybrid bet paid off handsomely for Toyota.
- clouddrover 8y ago
  > I’ve always wondered why a business model for them isn’t to just provide the skateboard platform for other companies to build upon Volkswagen beat them to it. Volkswagen has developed their MEB electric car platform which they will use across their VW, Audi, SEAT, and Skoda brands: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_Group_MEB_platform https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_Group_MEB_platform https://jalopnik.com/the-fascinating-engineering-behind-vws-electric-car-pla-1829257860 https://jalopnik.com/the-fascinating-engineering-behind-vws-... VW is also open to licensing the platform to other manufacturers. Ford is thinking about using the MEB platform for their EVs: https://jalopnik.com/volkswagen-wants-other-automakers-to-use-its-meb-electr-1832269531 https://jalopnik.com/volkswagen-wants-other-automakers-to-us...
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - mlrtime 8y ago
    Porsche/Audi will need a small redesign after tearing apart a model 3. https://electrek.co/2019/02/09/tesla-model-3-cost-surprise-porsche-audi-reverse-engineering/ https://electrek.co/2019/02/09/tesla-model-3-cost-surprise-p...
- robterrell 8y ago
  Both Toyota and Mercedes sought Tesla's help with EVs for their California "compliance" vehicles: both the RAV4 EV and the Mercedes B-class EV had a Tesla frame, motors, batteries, and drive controller underneath. I don't know about the MB but the Toyota was rumored to cost roughly 2x the list price. In 2014, after Toyota made roughly 2000 of them (the minimum required by law) they stopped. You can read about the common problems on the forums; lots of the same problems Teslas had in the time period (i.e. loss of all propulsion while driving, loud motor noises followed by eventual motor failure, etc) in addition to software problems bridging the two companies' systems. All solvable but I'm sure Tesla prefers selling $100k cars better than selling $15k generic skateboards.
  - ams6110 8y ago
    I thought the MB B-class EV had Tesla motors but their own battery tech. MB has made huge investments in battery factories. https://electrek.co/2018/10/08/mercedes-benz-breaks-ground-battery-factory-us-electric-vehicles/ https://electrek.co/2018/10/08/mercedes-benz-breaks-ground-b...
    - greglindahl 8y ago
      Isn't the B-class that Tesla was involved with the one that was discontinued (in 2017) after selling fewer than 4,000 cars? http://www.thedrive.com/sheetmetal/13097/mercedes-benz-discontinues-the-b-class-electric-drive http://www.thedrive.com/sheetmetal/13097/mercedes-benz-disco...
  - greglindahl 8y ago
    The Rav4 and B-class had much better performance and range than the cars we usually call "compliance cars".
- dankube 8y ago
  Mazda and GM (and Nissan, and probably a few others) work with Toyota on hybrid drive because of the wonderful CVT Toyota designed. It's really light years ahead of what the competition had at the time. Everybody has licensed it because it's patented, and demonstrably better than alternatives.
whalesalad 8y ago
I saw this vehicle at the LA Auto Show and was able to speak to a team member prior to the general doors opening for a little while. Really cool technology at play here and it sounds like they have their shit together a lot more than Tesla. The fact that they take advantage of the individual motors to steer the vehicle without turning the wheels is pretty cool. It can rotate in-place similar to a tank.
- newnewpdro 8y ago
  > 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.
  - carlivar 8y ago
    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.
    - greglindahl 8y ago
      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.
      - carlivar 8y ago
        Parts supply logistics and repair times wouldn't improve with dealers?
        kwhitefoot 8y ago
willart4food 8y ago
This is interesting, so now Rivian is worth between 1 and 2 billion, while TSLA is worth "only" 53; makes TSLA look undervalued.
- avelis 8y ago
  Tesla kind of is for what it has pulled off with the Model 3. Either Tesla is undervalued or Rivian is overvalued.
- cowsandmilk 8y ago
  Tesla had a very similar valuation at the same stage of their company.
jschwartzi 8y ago
The only thing I really take issue with on this truck is that the spare tire is accessed through the top of the bed. There are two reasons you don't want to do this in a truck: 1.) The bed needs to be very strong because people routinely put weight on dunnage in the bed, and the door doesn't appear to be corrugated to withstand load. 2.) If you want to change your flat tire you need to unload everything in the bed, which will be a huge pain in the ass on the side of the road. Otherwise thank god someone is actually trying to capture this market. I really want one of these and can't wait until they're closer to market.
- yyyymmddhhmmss 8y ago
  >you need to unload everything in the bed, which will be a huge pain in the ass on the side of the road. Who says that’s even going to be possible? It sounds like a complete design flop to me.
  - 15155 8y ago
    One could always place the spare in the cabin for situations where it will be less accessible. But yeah, major design problem.
    - yyyymmddhhmmss 8y ago
      That is a good point.
    - ianai 8y ago
      That’s a bad idea in itself, but maybe a necessity. It’s a safety hazard to have big or heavy things that can turn into projectiles or blunt forces in a cabin during an accident.
  - chiph 8y ago
    Honda stores the spare in the in-bed trunk. But there's also a threaded insert in the front of the bed where you can attach the spare. Either because you needed all of the trunk room for tools/golf-bags, etc., or in case of getting a flat while you were hauling gravel and couldn't open the trunk.
ravedave5 8y ago
I really hope Rivian makes it. They seem to have the right idea working from the top of the market down like Tesla. They could probably survive on only high-end low volume sales for quite a while. I hope Tesla gives them time and room to grow before introducing their own truck. Also - There was a video with Sandy Munro on it and he couldn't talk about Rivian so he's either working with them or someone who wants to invest in them. So it seems like they are getting the right brains working on their problems. Edit - this video, which is very interesting - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVnRQRdePp4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVnRQRdePp4
dmode 8y ago
Plenty of recent car startups have raised giant sums like Lucid, Karma, Faraday Future etc. , but none of them have produced a viable car yet. Hope Rivian does better, but car manufacturing is HARD
bonestamp2 8y ago
This is great, but I also want Amazon to build a high speed rail network across the country. I think they're trying to build their own airline, at least for package logistics but they can't get planes fast enough. They could probably build rail much faster in certain areas and they could use it for people and order logistics.
- microcolonel 8y ago
  > 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 factors "trivial, with political will!"; I find it unconvincing.
  - bonestamp2 8y ago
    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 awful and getting worse. If it's between 3 hours in airports, security and an airplane or 4 hours on high speed rail where I can put my feet up, catch a nap in an actual bed, use my cellphone and wifi, collaborate with colleagues, eat good food, etc... I'd take the train every time. Hell, on the Toronto/Ottawa route, flying is cheaper and there's no high speed rail, but many business travelers still choose slow rail because the experience is so much better. Make it a little more competitive in travel time, and it starts to become very attractive. Business travelers aren't as price sensitive, and if they can make good use of the time working or resting then it can easily be justified.
    - taurath 8y ago
      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
oakesm9 8y ago
The Fully Charged YouTube channel did a great piece of this car: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMfxJEfb4lw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMfxJEfb4lw If you're interested in electric cars then it's well worth a subscribe.
- rhegart 8y ago
  Wow great video! I had ZERO idea this company existed and I’m on my 2nd EV...this is awesome
  - oakesm9 8y ago
    The YouTube channel is even better if you're a Red Dwarf fan. Robert is amazing!
- radicalbyte 8y ago
  Their channel is fantastic, it's like what the core of Top Gear used to be before it jumped the shark and turned into the circle-jerk that was the last season. I've always hated large vehicles and trucks because they're so unwieldy. The Rivan however looks amazing. I can see myself buying one in a few years.
- jillesvangurp 8y ago
  Yes, they do very informative reviews of basically any electric car you can name. They are self admitted EV fan boys of course but their reviews are interesting nonetheless. I've been subscribed for half a year or so and they seem to have good relations with a lot of manufacturers. E.g. they got an early test ride in a prototype VW e-golf recently. Also worth checking out their video on the electric land rover, similar to the Rivian product. It looks like electrical vehicles are going to be seriously competitive for off road stuff. The Rivian product is extremely ambitious. The challenge for such a company is not going to be sales or marketing (like Teslas, these things should sell themselves) but the capital investments needed to go from the early product prototype stage to having the production capability to scale the business and serve their market. This investment makes a lot of sense for GM as they are essentially pretty far done with dismantling their combustion engine business and are now trying to ramp up their fully electric vehicle business as fast as they can before it is too late. For those not familiar, the Rivian truck has tons of very practical features. Here's what I remember: - Waterproof battery. This car can basically drive through a river without issues. The battery and engines can operate while fully submerged. The main challenge is stopping the car from floating or stopping the interior from flooding. When I was watching the review, I couldn't help wondering .... why not put a rudder and propeller on it already?! -Individually operating engines on each wheel and they can even spin in opposite direction. - Enormous torque. This car can pull enormously heavy loads. This is a big bonus since that is a common usecase for trucks like this. - Huge amount of battery and a projected range of more than 400 miles. - Tons of practical space, including front trunk, a storage space accessible with doors on both sides behind the cabin that you pull down that you can stand on to access e.g. the roof or sit on. - A flashlight using one of the battery cylinders that they use internally as well that pops out of the door. Naturally, if you pop it back in it charges. This is a bit of a gimmick, but a clever one and it sounds super practical to always have a fully charged flashlight handy. There was lots more but these were things that stood out to me. It seems like this should tick a lot of boxes for people interested in buying any kind of truck. Of course it remains to be seen if it lives up to expectations in terms of build quality, production volume, etc. But it looks like they are getting ready to ship in just a few years. I don't actually own a car and doubt I ever will (I rent when I need one, which is a few times per year) but this one seems cool to me.
therealforsen 8y ago
Why would an electric pickup truck sell well? Needing to use a pickup truck isn't correlated with caring about electric cars. No one wants to try to find a gas station with an electric car charger in the middle of the countryside, where most people who actually need a pickup truck live. This doesn't pass my sanity check.
- cujo 8y ago
  Bring this down to el camino style (or ute if you prefer) and I'm game. I've long been after a "city" truck. This thing is still too big for me. However, give me a car frame with a bed so I can make runs to the hardware store and/or haul trash and yard waste and I'm in.
- cornellwright 8y ago
  It won't be right for everyone, but if you aren't driving more than a couple hundred miles in a day, being able to charge it at night vs driving a long ways to the one overpriced rural gas station sounds pretty appealing to me. Also there's better torque for towing and lower maintenance.
- freehunter 8y ago
  You're conflating need with desire... and you're also wrong. Not everyone who drives a pickup needs a pickup. That's pretty apparent by the fact that the F-150 is the highest selling vehicle in the US while less than 20% of Americans live in rural areas. Plenty of people buy pickup trucks and also live in the city. Even living in the countryside, most people in rural areas don't need (or even own) pickup trucks. And pickup trucks aren't just useful for farm work. I'd wager that most of the pickup trucks sold in the US are for commercial use. Plumbers, construction workers, contractors, lawn care/snowplows. These people tend to live and work in cities, and they buy pickup trucks. And what's important for a truck? Torque. What do electric motors have? Lots of torque. For businesses buying pickup trucks for work, they don't need range or lots of chargers. They just need to get to the job site, park, then go back to the office at the end of the day to charge it. That's also ignoring the millions of people who buy pickup trucks as daily commuter vehicles, who have the normal daily commute of 20 miles. Well within the range of even the worst electric car in the US. Pickup trucks are a status symbol for these people, not a work vehicle. An electric pickup is an even greater status symbol.
linuxftw 8y ago
I've been an electric car naysayer for some time. I just don't think the price to value is there. However, with proper towing and payload, these could have a large impact on the job-site truck market. It's common to have to travel > 60 miles each way for construction type jobs, and this much range would fit the bill. Bed just needs to be longer. At $61k and about $25k (roughly) in fuel savings over an F250 diesel over 250k miles, this could potentially be a huge win.
yellowapple 8y ago
Looks like a great truck, but the entirely-touchscreen interface makes it a non-starter for me. I'm still holding out for the Bollinger B1 (and hoping it won't be terribly bank-breaking).

109 points by Element_ 8y ago

Why do auto makers seem to be so against working with Tesla to bring electric vehicles to market? Now that I think about it, it seems like most car companies are trying to do the electric thing on their own, and if they do ask for help it’s from somebody that’s sort of out of their industry and not a direct competitor (yet). This is in contrast with for example how Mazda is working with Toyota on hybrid drive, and how GM used to work with Toyota on hybrid drive. Or is it Tesla that is ‘anti-cooperation’ with industry leaders? I was under the impression that it was teslas goal to make electric cars more common, not necessarily Tesla cars were common. I’ve never properly researched this, but I’ve always wondered why a business model for them isn’t to just provide the skateboard platform for other companies to build upon...

TylerH 8y ago
It's likely that Amazon and GM want far more control in the car manufacturing process than someone like Elon Musk would be willing to give. So it's not so much why Amazon and GM aren't willing, but that Musk isn't. Rivian makes superb trucks, but it's incredibly small right now and not likely to last a long time without some kind of deep-pocket investment... especially considering its business strategy is as much an electric vehicle platform as it as a 'traditional' electric automobile manufacturer... that last bit is probably super enticing for a company like Amazon.
- RankingMember 8y ago
  > Rivian makes superb trucks I want EV makers to succeed, but these vehicles haven't even launched yet (won't until 2020), so how can you say that? We'll know what kind of truck they really are once the general public gets their hands on them.
  - sangnoir 8y ago
    Not parent, but we can make judgements on the specs alone - 180 kWh battery, 400+ mile-range, one motor per wheel (with possibility of left and right wheels going in opposite directions - they could theoretically reduce turning radius to almost 0 like a forklift or tank). That sounds superb to me.
    - RankingMember 8y ago
      > we can make judgements on the specs alone Can we? The vehicles we've seen are concepts. We know nothing of the build quality, reliability, safety, or a multitude of other characteristics of a mass-production version of these vehicles. A hand-built concept vehicle built in extremely low volumes for press outings (what they have now) would be expected to be impressive, but the real test is whether all of those wonderful specs make it to mass production in a safe, reliable, high-build-quality package (...that doesn't bankrupt the company in the process). The automotive industry is littered with the corpses of companies who touted killer concepts w/ insane specs but couldn't make it happen, or did, and the production vehicle was but a shadow of the concept. Tesla is amazing in that it didn't become one of these companies. That Rivian can mass produce these vehicles to the touted specs for the given prices should not be assumed, and to look at a few concept vehicles and company-provided specs and say "Rivian makes superb trucks" brings to mind George W Bush's premature "Mission Accomplished" banner from way back when. I hope for their success, but they're pretty far from the finish line right now, and getting there will be a real challenge; just ask Elon Musk.
      - sangnoir 8y ago
        > Can we? Absolutely! The norm in a lot of industries is to judge on projected figures (electronics, CPU, GPU, automotive, aerospace, mining, etc). > We know nothing of the build quality, reliability, safety, or a multitude of other characteristics of a mass-production version of these vehicles. "Superb" is subjective - I could say a 1965 Porsche 911 is a superb car, even though it compares terribly with a 2018 Toyota Corolla on build quality, reliability, safety or a number of other features.
willart4food 8y ago
Well it's a question of ego. 2 parts: 1. If GM were to - like you say - "work with Tesla", who would be in charge of what to do, when and how? GM would want GM cronies to do that. It would be like Apple after they fired Steve Jobs 2. Even if TSLA would be in the driver's seat (pun intended) who would be working for whom? TSLA is already as big as GM in terms of market cap, and with better future, but in a TSLA-GM JV GM would want to be "da boss". Things are fine the way they are GM, F, FCAU will either die, consolidate or become irrelevant; and the new TSLA-like companies will be the new "energy and transportation" players. Clayton M. Christensen's The Innovator's Dilemma is still valid.
dangrossman 8y ago
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 to work with them now.
- greglindahl 8y ago
  Huh. The other version of the story is that Toyota refused to accept "one pedal" driving, which by all reports is a huge success.
  - kwhitefoot 8y ago
    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.
- bobsil1 8y ago
  Toyota also made its big platform bet on mild hybrids and hydrogen, which Elon rightly scoffed at. No doubt there was big culture friction.
  - ProfessorLayton 8y ago
    Agree with your hydrogen point, but curious to know a bit more about your mild hybrid reference. AFAIK Toyota’s Hybrid Synergy Drive was the best in class parallel hybrid system. In fact, many hybrids on the market, such as the Fusion Hybrid, were licensed HSD from Toyota. Honda now has a more advanced 2-motor series hybrid system, similar to the Volt, but both systems are a lot more complex (expensive) than the brilliantly simple way HSD combines power from the motor and engine. Additionally, the hybrid bet paid off handsomely for Toyota.
clouddrover 8y ago
> I’ve always wondered why a business model for them isn’t to just provide the skateboard platform for other companies to build upon Volkswagen beat them to it. Volkswagen has developed their MEB electric car platform which they will use across their VW, Audi, SEAT, and Skoda brands: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_Group_MEB_platform https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_Group_MEB_platform https://jalopnik.com/the-fascinating-engineering-behind-vws-electric-car-pla-1829257860 https://jalopnik.com/the-fascinating-engineering-behind-vws-... VW is also open to licensing the platform to other manufacturers. Ford is thinking about using the MEB platform for their EVs: https://jalopnik.com/volkswagen-wants-other-automakers-to-use-its-meb-electr-1832269531 https://jalopnik.com/volkswagen-wants-other-automakers-to-us...
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- mlrtime 8y ago
  Porsche/Audi will need a small redesign after tearing apart a model 3. https://electrek.co/2019/02/09/tesla-model-3-cost-surprise-porsche-audi-reverse-engineering/ https://electrek.co/2019/02/09/tesla-model-3-cost-surprise-p...
robterrell 8y ago
Both Toyota and Mercedes sought Tesla's help with EVs for their California "compliance" vehicles: both the RAV4 EV and the Mercedes B-class EV had a Tesla frame, motors, batteries, and drive controller underneath. I don't know about the MB but the Toyota was rumored to cost roughly 2x the list price. In 2014, after Toyota made roughly 2000 of them (the minimum required by law) they stopped. You can read about the common problems on the forums; lots of the same problems Teslas had in the time period (i.e. loss of all propulsion while driving, loud motor noises followed by eventual motor failure, etc) in addition to software problems bridging the two companies' systems. All solvable but I'm sure Tesla prefers selling $100k cars better than selling $15k generic skateboards.
- ams6110 8y ago
  I thought the MB B-class EV had Tesla motors but their own battery tech. MB has made huge investments in battery factories. https://electrek.co/2018/10/08/mercedes-benz-breaks-ground-battery-factory-us-electric-vehicles/ https://electrek.co/2018/10/08/mercedes-benz-breaks-ground-b...
  - greglindahl 8y ago
    Isn't the B-class that Tesla was involved with the one that was discontinued (in 2017) after selling fewer than 4,000 cars? http://www.thedrive.com/sheetmetal/13097/mercedes-benz-discontinues-the-b-class-electric-drive http://www.thedrive.com/sheetmetal/13097/mercedes-benz-disco...
- greglindahl 8y ago
  The Rav4 and B-class had much better performance and range than the cars we usually call "compliance cars".
dankube 8y ago
Mazda and GM (and Nissan, and probably a few others) work with Toyota on hybrid drive because of the wonderful CVT Toyota designed. It's really light years ahead of what the competition had at the time. Everybody has licensed it because it's patented, and demonstrably better than alternatives.

whalesalad 8y ago

I saw this vehicle at the LA Auto Show and was able to speak to a team member prior to the general doors opening for a little while. Really cool technology at play here and it sounds like they have their shit together a lot more than Tesla. The fact that they take advantage of the individual motors to steer the vehicle without turning the wheels is pretty cool. It can rotate in-place similar to a tank.

newnewpdro 8y ago
> 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.
- carlivar 8y ago
  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.
  - greglindahl 8y ago
    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.
    - carlivar 8y ago
      Parts supply logistics and repair times wouldn't improve with dealers?
      - kwhitefoot 8y ago

willart4food 8y ago

This is interesting, so now Rivian is worth between 1 and 2 billion, while TSLA is worth "only" 53; makes TSLA look undervalued.

avelis 8y ago
Tesla kind of is for what it has pulled off with the Model 3. Either Tesla is undervalued or Rivian is overvalued.
cowsandmilk 8y ago
Tesla had a very similar valuation at the same stage of their company.

jschwartzi 8y ago

The only thing I really take issue with on this truck is that the spare tire is accessed through the top of the bed. There are two reasons you don't want to do this in a truck: 1.) The bed needs to be very strong because people routinely put weight on dunnage in the bed, and the door doesn't appear to be corrugated to withstand load. 2.) If you want to change your flat tire you need to unload everything in the bed, which will be a huge pain in the ass on the side of the road. Otherwise thank god someone is actually trying to capture this market. I really want one of these and can't wait until they're closer to market.

yyyymmddhhmmss 8y ago
>you need to unload everything in the bed, which will be a huge pain in the ass on the side of the road. Who says that’s even going to be possible? It sounds like a complete design flop to me.
- 15155 8y ago
  One could always place the spare in the cabin for situations where it will be less accessible. But yeah, major design problem.
  - yyyymmddhhmmss 8y ago
    That is a good point.
  - ianai 8y ago
    That’s a bad idea in itself, but maybe a necessity. It’s a safety hazard to have big or heavy things that can turn into projectiles or blunt forces in a cabin during an accident.
- chiph 8y ago
  Honda stores the spare in the in-bed trunk. But there's also a threaded insert in the front of the bed where you can attach the spare. Either because you needed all of the trunk room for tools/golf-bags, etc., or in case of getting a flat while you were hauling gravel and couldn't open the trunk.

ravedave5 8y ago

I really hope Rivian makes it. They seem to have the right idea working from the top of the market down like Tesla. They could probably survive on only high-end low volume sales for quite a while. I hope Tesla gives them time and room to grow before introducing their own truck. Also - There was a video with Sandy Munro on it and he couldn't talk about Rivian so he's either working with them or someone who wants to invest in them. So it seems like they are getting the right brains working on their problems. Edit - this video, which is very interesting - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVnRQRdePp4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVnRQRdePp4

dmode 8y ago

Plenty of recent car startups have raised giant sums like Lucid, Karma, Faraday Future etc. , but none of them have produced a viable car yet. Hope Rivian does better, but car manufacturing is HARD

bonestamp2 8y ago

This is great, but I also want Amazon to build a high speed rail network across the country. I think they're trying to build their own airline, at least for package logistics but they can't get planes fast enough. They could probably build rail much faster in certain areas and they could use it for people and order logistics.

microcolonel 8y ago
> 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 factors "trivial, with political will!"; I find it unconvincing.
- bonestamp2 8y ago
  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 awful and getting worse. If it's between 3 hours in airports, security and an airplane or 4 hours on high speed rail where I can put my feet up, catch a nap in an actual bed, use my cellphone and wifi, collaborate with colleagues, eat good food, etc... I'd take the train every time. Hell, on the Toronto/Ottawa route, flying is cheaper and there's no high speed rail, but many business travelers still choose slow rail because the experience is so much better. Make it a little more competitive in travel time, and it starts to become very attractive. Business travelers aren't as price sensitive, and if they can make good use of the time working or resting then it can easily be justified.
  - taurath 8y ago
    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

oakesm9 8y ago

The Fully Charged YouTube channel did a great piece of this car: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMfxJEfb4lw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMfxJEfb4lw If you're interested in electric cars then it's well worth a subscribe.

rhegart 8y ago
Wow great video! I had ZERO idea this company existed and I’m on my 2nd EV...this is awesome
- oakesm9 8y ago
  The YouTube channel is even better if you're a Red Dwarf fan. Robert is amazing!
radicalbyte 8y ago
Their channel is fantastic, it's like what the core of Top Gear used to be before it jumped the shark and turned into the circle-jerk that was the last season. I've always hated large vehicles and trucks because they're so unwieldy. The Rivan however looks amazing. I can see myself buying one in a few years.
jillesvangurp 8y ago
Yes, they do very informative reviews of basically any electric car you can name. They are self admitted EV fan boys of course but their reviews are interesting nonetheless. I've been subscribed for half a year or so and they seem to have good relations with a lot of manufacturers. E.g. they got an early test ride in a prototype VW e-golf recently. Also worth checking out their video on the electric land rover, similar to the Rivian product. It looks like electrical vehicles are going to be seriously competitive for off road stuff. The Rivian product is extremely ambitious. The challenge for such a company is not going to be sales or marketing (like Teslas, these things should sell themselves) but the capital investments needed to go from the early product prototype stage to having the production capability to scale the business and serve their market. This investment makes a lot of sense for GM as they are essentially pretty far done with dismantling their combustion engine business and are now trying to ramp up their fully electric vehicle business as fast as they can before it is too late. For those not familiar, the Rivian truck has tons of very practical features. Here's what I remember: - Waterproof battery. This car can basically drive through a river without issues. The battery and engines can operate while fully submerged. The main challenge is stopping the car from floating or stopping the interior from flooding. When I was watching the review, I couldn't help wondering .... why not put a rudder and propeller on it already?! -Individually operating engines on each wheel and they can even spin in opposite direction. - Enormous torque. This car can pull enormously heavy loads. This is a big bonus since that is a common usecase for trucks like this. - Huge amount of battery and a projected range of more than 400 miles. - Tons of practical space, including front trunk, a storage space accessible with doors on both sides behind the cabin that you pull down that you can stand on to access e.g. the roof or sit on. - A flashlight using one of the battery cylinders that they use internally as well that pops out of the door. Naturally, if you pop it back in it charges. This is a bit of a gimmick, but a clever one and it sounds super practical to always have a fully charged flashlight handy. There was lots more but these were things that stood out to me. It seems like this should tick a lot of boxes for people interested in buying any kind of truck. Of course it remains to be seen if it lives up to expectations in terms of build quality, production volume, etc. But it looks like they are getting ready to ship in just a few years. I don't actually own a car and doubt I ever will (I rent when I need one, which is a few times per year) but this one seems cool to me.

therealforsen 8y ago

Why would an electric pickup truck sell well? Needing to use a pickup truck isn't correlated with caring about electric cars. No one wants to try to find a gas station with an electric car charger in the middle of the countryside, where most people who actually need a pickup truck live. This doesn't pass my sanity check.

cujo 8y ago
Bring this down to el camino style (or ute if you prefer) and I'm game. I've long been after a "city" truck. This thing is still too big for me. However, give me a car frame with a bed so I can make runs to the hardware store and/or haul trash and yard waste and I'm in.
cornellwright 8y ago
It won't be right for everyone, but if you aren't driving more than a couple hundred miles in a day, being able to charge it at night vs driving a long ways to the one overpriced rural gas station sounds pretty appealing to me. Also there's better torque for towing and lower maintenance.
freehunter 8y ago
You're conflating need with desire... and you're also wrong. Not everyone who drives a pickup needs a pickup. That's pretty apparent by the fact that the F-150 is the highest selling vehicle in the US while less than 20% of Americans live in rural areas. Plenty of people buy pickup trucks and also live in the city. Even living in the countryside, most people in rural areas don't need (or even own) pickup trucks. And pickup trucks aren't just useful for farm work. I'd wager that most of the pickup trucks sold in the US are for commercial use. Plumbers, construction workers, contractors, lawn care/snowplows. These people tend to live and work in cities, and they buy pickup trucks. And what's important for a truck? Torque. What do electric motors have? Lots of torque. For businesses buying pickup trucks for work, they don't need range or lots of chargers. They just need to get to the job site, park, then go back to the office at the end of the day to charge it. That's also ignoring the millions of people who buy pickup trucks as daily commuter vehicles, who have the normal daily commute of 20 miles. Well within the range of even the worst electric car in the US. Pickup trucks are a status symbol for these people, not a work vehicle. An electric pickup is an even greater status symbol.

linuxftw 8y ago

I've been an electric car naysayer for some time. I just don't think the price to value is there. However, with proper towing and payload, these could have a large impact on the job-site truck market. It's common to have to travel > 60 miles each way for construction type jobs, and this much range would fit the bill. Bed just needs to be longer. At $61k and about $25k (roughly) in fuel savings over an F250 diesel over 250k miles, this could potentially be a huge win.

yellowapple 8y ago

Looks like a great truck, but the entirely-touchscreen interface makes it a non-starter for me. I'm still holding out for the Bollinger B1 (and hoping it won't be terribly bank-breaking).