Range Finder: Rivian Offers Smaller Battery on R1S and R1T

Matthew Guy
by Matthew Guy

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

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


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


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


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


[Images: Rivian]


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

Matthew Guy
Matthew Guy

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

More by Matthew Guy

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

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

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

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

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

  • Calrson Fan Calrson Fan on Feb 13, 2024

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

  • Varezhka I have still yet to see a Malibu on the road that didn't have a rental sticker. So yeah, GM probably lost money on every one they sold but kept it to boost their CAFE numbers.I'm personally happy that I no longer have to dread being "upgraded" to a Maxima or a Malibu anymore. And thankfully Altima is also on its way out.
  • Tassos Under incompetent, affirmative action hire Mary Barra, GM has been shooting itself in the foot on a daily basis.Whether the Malibu cancellation has been one of these shootings is NOT obvious at all.GM should be run as a PROFITABLE BUSINESS and NOT as an outfit that satisfies everybody and his mother in law's pet preferences.IF the Malibu was UNPROFITABLE, it SHOULD be canceled.More generally, if its SEGMENT is Unprofitable, and HALF the makers cancel their midsize sedans, not only will it lead to the SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST ones, but the survivors will obviously be more profitable if the LOSERS were kept being produced and the SMALL PIE of midsize sedans would yield slim pickings for every participant.SO NO, I APPROVE of the demise of the unprofitable Malibu, and hope Nissan does the same to the Altima, Hyundai with the SOnata, Mazda with the Mazda 6, and as many others as it takes to make the REMAINING players, like the Excellent, sporty Accord and the Bulletproof Reliable, cheap to maintain CAMRY, more profitable and affordable.
  • GregLocock Car companies can only really sell cars that people who are new car buyers will pay a profitable price for. As it turns out fewer and fewer new car buyers want sedans. Large sedans can be nice to drive, certainly, but the number of new car buyers (the only ones that matter in this discussion) are prepared to sacrifice steering and handling for more obvious things like passenger and cargo space, or even some attempt at off roading. We know US new car buyers don't really care about handling because they fell for FWD in large cars.
  • Slavuta Why is everybody sweating? Like sedans? - go buy one. Better - 2. Let CRV/RAV rust on the dealer lot. I have 3 sedans on the driveway. My neighbor - 2. Neighbors on each of our other side - 8 SUVs.
  • Theflyersfan With sedans, especially, I wonder how many of those sales are to rental fleets. With the exception of the Civic and Accord, there are still rows of sedans mixed in with the RAV4s at every airport rental lot. I doubt the breakdown in sales is publicly published, so who knows... GM isn't out of the sedan business - Cadillac exists and I can't believe I'm typing this but they are actually decent - and I think they are making a huge mistake, especially if there's an extended oil price hike (cough...Iran...cough) and people want smaller and hybrids. But if one is only tied to the quarterly shareholder reports and not trends and the big picture, bad decisions like this get made.
Next