6 ms·

I think it's actually quite the opposite. If you need a truck for its utility which one makes more sense? The Cybertruck is less expensive, has more range, bigg

I think it's actually quite the opposite. If you need a truck for its utility which one makes more sense? The Cybertruck is less expensive, has more range, bigger payload, higher towing capacity, access to the best charging network in the world. Why would you buy a Rivian instead? The only reason I can think of is that it looks more conventional. If you need a truck, you buy the Tesla. If you want a lifestyle truck that looks pretty, you buy the Rivian.

DaiPlusPlus 7y ago
I'm not convinced that the Cybertruck prices Tesla advertised during the unveiling were anything beyond promotional.
- x3haloed 7y ago
  Okay fine. As long as we're not believing announcements, then Rivian’s prices are promotional too. And so are the specs. So this conversation is pointless.
  - DaiPlusPlus 7y ago
    Part of me wants to believe Elon et al. at Tesla has a soft-spot for Rivian and - yes - while the Cybertruck could crush Rivian - they want to see Rivian succeed because an EV monopoly over all vehicle classes might mean an own-goal for combating global climate change: competition is important, and the appearance of competition even more-so.
    - clouddrover 7y ago
      If Tesla's priority was combating global climate change then Tesla would open its chargers to all EVs. Other charging networks charge all EVs (including Tesla cars) whereas Tesla's charging network only charges Teslas. Tesla's lack of reciprocity is disappointing.
      - jsight 7y ago
        Tesla has said that they are willing to do so, just not for free. I also get the impression that they don't want every slow-charging electric vehicle to have access to their network, and I honestly can't blame them. They have capacity issues as it is, it would be much worse if slow-charging Bolts were able to use it. Its the early days still, though, so hopefully this will change as Tesla's competitors become more competitive.
        clouddrover 7y ago
        Tesla only has capacity problems in North America because they've stuck with a proprietary plug. If they switch to CCS and provide a CCS adapter for older cars then their capacity problems will be solved. There don't need to be any special deals for them to open their network to other EVs. Tesla can just keep the old proprietary plug on their chargers, add on a CCS plug as well, and get on with it.
        jsight 7y ago
        I see people say this online from time to time, but I see very little evidence for it. The Madonna Inn charger was clogged with traffic yesterday, despite it being a massive charger relative to what the other US networks have built. Is there any indication that there are other companies wanting to open up massive charging stations along this route and are simply being held up by Tesla? I can't see evidence of that. It isn't like there are massive waves of EA chargers available along the way. Granted, the Tesla owners with Chademo adapters often did ok, but that was mostly because so few bothered to buy or use them. The available options would have been just as overwhelmed if more owners used them. Around here, we are actually have some issues with hotels being hostile towards Tesla owners and Tesla having issues finding properties to place chargers.
        clouddrover 7y ago
        > The Madonna Inn charger was clogged with traffic yesterday You'd plan a different route if there was access to other chargers. There's an EVgo site 5 km from the Madonna Inn. An Electrify America site is going in 19 km from that site. Electrify America is adding new sites every week at the moment. EVgo is adding a Tesla plug to their chargers. It's essentially a built-in CHAdeMO adapter. It's dumb having to support three different plugs. The sooner it gets to one plug the better. Europe has taken the correct approach by setting CCS type 2 Combo as the standard plug for all cars and chargers. > Around here, we are actually have some issues with hotels being hostile towards Tesla owners and Tesla having issues finding properties to place chargers. All the more reason to spread the work around to multiple companies.
- VectorLock 7y ago
  I hope you're wrong but I suspect they're right. If they're accurate I and I think a ton of other people will buy them. The performance per dollar just seems too good to be true.
thdrdt 7y ago
When it comes to utility design the Rivian is far far ahead. It's not about more conventional but about more convenient. One example: you cannot throw stuff in the back of the Tesla from the side. And when it comes to towing: nobody will use an electric vehicle yet. You can buy a gas truck for half the price with the same towing capacity. A gas truck with the same price as the Tesla will have twice the towing capacity.
- x3haloed 7y ago
  What?! Sure it can be more convenient to drop things into the bed, but have you ever tried to get things back out of the bed of a full size pickup? Beds are tall. That's why it's more convenient to store things in the storage room compartments on the side of the Tesla's bed. Give me another example of how Rivian’s utility design is "far ahead".
  - samstave 7y ago
    Have you seen the side loading compartment o nthe Rivian? Its a pretty cool design... However - I am interested in neither the rivian and the tesla for their beds -- what I really want is the skateboard from the rivian and the ability to custom build the car I want on it -- if this takes off we can get back to the boutique still car shops of the 20s and earlier.
- tartrate 7y ago
  Do you mean that you can't throw stuff in the back of the Cybertruck when the bed cover is open? If so, why not?
  - rudedogg 7y ago
    They’re talking about access from the side. Since the body of the CyberTruck gradually raises to the roof line, you can’t easily reach into the bed close to the rear window.
    - abledon 7y ago
syshum 7y ago
>> truck for its utility which one makes more sense Anyone that used thier Truck for actual work will tell you the CyberTruck is 100% not practical as a work Truck for many reasons not the least of which is the Bed (or Vault) design. The CyberTruck seems to appeal to Hipsters and Urbanites that want a "Urban" truck, you are not going to be seeing the CyberTruck on the Farm or Jobsite Ohh it also appeals to Gen X's that grew up watching 80's SciFi
- x3haloed 7y ago
  OK, list them out. What are the reasons that the design is impractical?
  - crocodiletears 7y ago
    I think the Cybertruck looks like a fantastic SUV, but here would be my critiques of it as a competitor in the pickup truck: As oft stated, the slope of the bed's walls makes side-loading difficult. This may not seem too significant day-to-day given the bed's volume, but if you're doing commercial work (construction, professional moving, etc), you'll get a lot of items that don't properly fit in the bed's volume. Even the cladding like on the Chevy Avalanche can be obnoxious, if not impossible to work around with some loads. The body also doesn't look as ammenable to aftermarket modifications as its competitors. Standard racks and bed rails won't be compatible with it, which are pretty much standard mods for any contractor. On the more elaborate side, you couldn't replace the back end of the vehicle with a domain-oriented work box. I think a more utility-oriented cybertruck would have gone cab-over like an Isuzu elf, and used a more raditional, if elongated bed-design. The tonneau cover and specs are nice, but it needs to function more as a modular platform, and have traditional rear end if it wants to compete broadly in the "practical pickup" space. Great as a lifestyle vehicle, I expect your average truck owner will get more than enough utility from it, and it'll be a dream off-road. But I don't think most of the critiques leveraged against it are being made from the mindset of a consumer who only occasionally needs the pickup portion of their vehicle.
    - shiftpgdn 7y ago
luckydata 7y ago
the problem with the Cybertruck is going to be its size, it's humongous, it's in the same class as a Ford F-250. Going to be hard for a lot of folks to find the space for that behemoth, especially for the people that like to camp but don't have hard core needs like farmers and construction workers. I think Rivian will have the suburban-outdoors people market down pat if they ever manage to actually ship and the car doesn't suck.
- crca 7y ago
  It’s in the same weight class as the F250 but it’s roughly the same dimensionally as an F150. Batteries are heavy.
  - x3haloed 7y ago
    This. Dimensionally, it's almost exactly the same as an F-150. There's no reason to complain about the size.

DaiPlusPlus 7y ago

I'm not convinced that the Cybertruck prices Tesla advertised during the unveiling were anything beyond promotional.

x3haloed 7y ago
Okay fine. As long as we're not believing announcements, then Rivian’s prices are promotional too. And so are the specs. So this conversation is pointless.
- DaiPlusPlus 7y ago
  Part of me wants to believe Elon et al. at Tesla has a soft-spot for Rivian and - yes - while the Cybertruck could crush Rivian - they want to see Rivian succeed because an EV monopoly over all vehicle classes might mean an own-goal for combating global climate change: competition is important, and the appearance of competition even more-so.
  - clouddrover 7y ago
    If Tesla's priority was combating global climate change then Tesla would open its chargers to all EVs. Other charging networks charge all EVs (including Tesla cars) whereas Tesla's charging network only charges Teslas. Tesla's lack of reciprocity is disappointing.
    - jsight 7y ago
      Tesla has said that they are willing to do so, just not for free. I also get the impression that they don't want every slow-charging electric vehicle to have access to their network, and I honestly can't blame them. They have capacity issues as it is, it would be much worse if slow-charging Bolts were able to use it. Its the early days still, though, so hopefully this will change as Tesla's competitors become more competitive.
      - clouddrover 7y ago
        Tesla only has capacity problems in North America because they've stuck with a proprietary plug. If they switch to CCS and provide a CCS adapter for older cars then their capacity problems will be solved. There don't need to be any special deals for them to open their network to other EVs. Tesla can just keep the old proprietary plug on their chargers, add on a CCS plug as well, and get on with it.
        jsight 7y ago
        I see people say this online from time to time, but I see very little evidence for it. The Madonna Inn charger was clogged with traffic yesterday, despite it being a massive charger relative to what the other US networks have built. Is there any indication that there are other companies wanting to open up massive charging stations along this route and are simply being held up by Tesla? I can't see evidence of that. It isn't like there are massive waves of EA chargers available along the way. Granted, the Tesla owners with Chademo adapters often did ok, but that was mostly because so few bothered to buy or use them. The available options would have been just as overwhelmed if more owners used them. Around here, we are actually have some issues with hotels being hostile towards Tesla owners and Tesla having issues finding properties to place chargers.
        clouddrover 7y ago
        > The Madonna Inn charger was clogged with traffic yesterday You'd plan a different route if there was access to other chargers. There's an EVgo site 5 km from the Madonna Inn. An Electrify America site is going in 19 km from that site. Electrify America is adding new sites every week at the moment. EVgo is adding a Tesla plug to their chargers. It's essentially a built-in CHAdeMO adapter. It's dumb having to support three different plugs. The sooner it gets to one plug the better. Europe has taken the correct approach by setting CCS type 2 Combo as the standard plug for all cars and chargers. > Around here, we are actually have some issues with hotels being hostile towards Tesla owners and Tesla having issues finding properties to place chargers. All the more reason to spread the work around to multiple companies.
VectorLock 7y ago
I hope you're wrong but I suspect they're right. If they're accurate I and I think a ton of other people will buy them. The performance per dollar just seems too good to be true.

thdrdt 7y ago

When it comes to utility design the Rivian is far far ahead. It's not about more conventional but about more convenient. One example: you cannot throw stuff in the back of the Tesla from the side. And when it comes to towing: nobody will use an electric vehicle yet. You can buy a gas truck for half the price with the same towing capacity. A gas truck with the same price as the Tesla will have twice the towing capacity.

x3haloed 7y ago
What?! Sure it can be more convenient to drop things into the bed, but have you ever tried to get things back out of the bed of a full size pickup? Beds are tall. That's why it's more convenient to store things in the storage room compartments on the side of the Tesla's bed. Give me another example of how Rivian’s utility design is "far ahead".
- samstave 7y ago
  Have you seen the side loading compartment o nthe Rivian? Its a pretty cool design... However - I am interested in neither the rivian and the tesla for their beds -- what I really want is the skateboard from the rivian and the ability to custom build the car I want on it -- if this takes off we can get back to the boutique still car shops of the 20s and earlier.
tartrate 7y ago
Do you mean that you can't throw stuff in the back of the Cybertruck when the bed cover is open? If so, why not?
- rudedogg 7y ago
  They’re talking about access from the side. Since the body of the CyberTruck gradually raises to the roof line, you can’t easily reach into the bed close to the rear window.
  - abledon 7y ago

syshum 7y ago

>> truck for its utility which one makes more sense Anyone that used thier Truck for actual work will tell you the CyberTruck is 100% not practical as a work Truck for many reasons not the least of which is the Bed (or Vault) design. The CyberTruck seems to appeal to Hipsters and Urbanites that want a "Urban" truck, you are not going to be seeing the CyberTruck on the Farm or Jobsite Ohh it also appeals to Gen X's that grew up watching 80's SciFi

x3haloed 7y ago
OK, list them out. What are the reasons that the design is impractical?
- crocodiletears 7y ago
  I think the Cybertruck looks like a fantastic SUV, but here would be my critiques of it as a competitor in the pickup truck: As oft stated, the slope of the bed's walls makes side-loading difficult. This may not seem too significant day-to-day given the bed's volume, but if you're doing commercial work (construction, professional moving, etc), you'll get a lot of items that don't properly fit in the bed's volume. Even the cladding like on the Chevy Avalanche can be obnoxious, if not impossible to work around with some loads. The body also doesn't look as ammenable to aftermarket modifications as its competitors. Standard racks and bed rails won't be compatible with it, which are pretty much standard mods for any contractor. On the more elaborate side, you couldn't replace the back end of the vehicle with a domain-oriented work box. I think a more utility-oriented cybertruck would have gone cab-over like an Isuzu elf, and used a more raditional, if elongated bed-design. The tonneau cover and specs are nice, but it needs to function more as a modular platform, and have traditional rear end if it wants to compete broadly in the "practical pickup" space. Great as a lifestyle vehicle, I expect your average truck owner will get more than enough utility from it, and it'll be a dream off-road. But I don't think most of the critiques leveraged against it are being made from the mindset of a consumer who only occasionally needs the pickup portion of their vehicle.
  - shiftpgdn 7y ago

luckydata 7y ago

the problem with the Cybertruck is going to be its size, it's humongous, it's in the same class as a Ford F-250. Going to be hard for a lot of folks to find the space for that behemoth, especially for the people that like to camp but don't have hard core needs like farmers and construction workers. I think Rivian will have the suburban-outdoors people market down pat if they ever manage to actually ship and the car doesn't suck.

crca 7y ago
It’s in the same weight class as the F250 but it’s roughly the same dimensionally as an F150. Batteries are heavy.
- x3haloed 7y ago
  This. Dimensionally, it's almost exactly the same as an F-150. There's no reason to complain about the size.