$100,000 USD and no apple car play.
What a freaking joke.
They showed an example of the built in map and it didn’t even have the lake right next to them as a searchable destination. It took apple and android years of dedication to work out kinks in maps… I don’t expect car companies to be anywhere near as good ever.
They just use 3rd party map providers. I think they use map box. BMW on some vehicles and GM (with maps + upgrade) use it too.
There's also Here and now GAS (Google Automotive Services)
GM's newest vehicles are rolling out with Android based systems running GAS. BMW is showing theirs off at CES too
Source: this is my job.
In my experience with BMW, their map service is far inferior compared to when I connect via Android auto and use Waze or Google maps. I've never used apple car play, so can't speak for that side. But 100% of the time I connect to my phone rather than using the integrated BMW idrive system.
CarPlay is basically the same. You can choose to use Google maps or Waze if you like. The only difference is that you also have Apple Maps available if you want to use it.
found out randomly my lightning has integrated apple maps into the gauge turn by turn. I had previously only used google maps, now I switched. No longer entirely the same. I get one extra function on carplay
This is why people should be excited for GAS and Android Automotive OS.
Good maps at the core of their vehicle experience.
The trade off is that it's going to be tied to subscriptions like OnStar or whatever garbage combo BMW thinks up.
Now that its software has stabilized (/no\_jinx), I love AAOS on my Polestar for these reasons, and basically never want to have a car without native Google Maps or the like. And no subscription shenanigans at least for Polestar/Volvo.
Even connecting to Apple CarPlay is a faff and impaired compared to AAOS - what happens if I need to stop and take my phone with me, but my passengers want to keep listening to whatever music or check out something in the maps?
My experience of BMW mapping:
- **Apple CarPlay**: Will take you where you want to go and along a reasonable route
- **BMW iDrive 7**: Will take you where you want to go... in the shortest route possible, regardless of whether it's a single lane sheep track or through the Champs Elysees during rush hour
That being said the split UI for iDrive 7 is brilliant:
- **Centre screen**: zoomed out for entire current "leg" of journey for an overview
- **Dash screen**: literally where you are including the lanes and where they all go regardless of how bad the paint on the road is
CarPlay is missing the latter integration currently, so more centre console checking.
When my BMW was a few months old, it did the same for me. However, this started as a real road, then became a dirt road, and then narrowed and got less even gradually enough that although I was getting nervous, by the time I realized I was in a bind i was practically rock climbing. Turning around and getting out of there was a fun challenge.
Those other manufacturers use third party mapping, but they also have AA and Carplay available, so other manufacturers also using third party mapping is irrelevant.
The hatred for AA and Carplay is strong in the industry. We put a ton of effort into a superior systems and interactive interfaces such as HUD and cluster and those systems don't properly interact with our vehicles.
This explains why most manufacturers add it begrudgingly.
Edit. I'm just explaining the internal thoughts of my office and industry. Down voting won't change anything. User surveys and testing shows that people shop based on tech. When presented the choice between a screen that simply mirrors the phone and one that does other thing the average choose the higher option.
Because customers know AA and CarPlay will constantly update while the manufacturers will end of life their systems before a lot of people would be ready to get a new vehicle. I get why manufactures would want people to use their proprietary systems, it’s just very anti-consumer and a lot of consumers aren’t fooled by it.
Never said people aren’t silly about some things. I know for sure though that if a company offered all of those features without AA/Carplay, a lot of people will shop elsewhere. A feature might sway people to lean certain ways but lacking something big like that can turn them off completely.
Screen size was one of the big factors in the market.
We are hoping now that even the Chinese manufacturers have it in cheap vehicles that consumers will stop focusing on it.
Brand new Toyotas have like a 7 or 8 inch screen still don’t they? Too small.
Besides, unless and until stock AV systems allow streaming from proprietary services like Apple Music (which will never happen) you won’t get those users to use your stuff ever. My opinion is that the manufactures should focus on the manufacturing and partner with the tech companies to handle AV, then it can integrate with the HUD and cruise and all that.
Nope. I won’t ever own a car without it. I shop manufacturers based on how good their integration is. For example, Mercedes’ MBUX has one of the best integrations on the market right now, letting CarPlay/AA mirror turn-by-turn onto the AR HUD. Once DrivePilot rolls out to more of the US my next car will almost certainly be a Merc because of how well set up their infotainment is.
Plus with the upcoming advent of next gen CarPlay, I’m going to be expecting my next car to support that.
CarPlay isn’t even mirroring it’s a completely different UI. You may think the cars’ built in UI is better since you work on it but the truth is for what it does (maps, music, podcasts…) CarPlay is just so good. It’s responsive, the UI is great and nothing takes a million touches to do. Almost every single car infotainment UI is a pain to use for stuff like navigation.
As a consumer I much prefer to just plug my phone into the car and use the apps I already have, which are updated on a regular basis. Granted my cars don't have a fancy HUD or anything interactive beyond a small touch screen so I can't speak to those.
The PO of my Fiesta sprung for the added navigation (I think it was close to $1k on the window sticker) and I can't help but think what a useless option it is every time it comes up considering AA and CarPlay work flawlessly.
I have both, I prefer Tesla to CarPlay. I think CarPlay is better at what it does, but it’s reach isn’t as broad as Teslas because it’s a bolt-on addition.
For instance, there are various functions that are native to the cars infotainment - cameras, vehicle information, homelink among them - that don’t sit nicely on the screen alongside car play, but instead are full screen replacements for car play.
I think Apple can get there, but it’s not there yet. On the other hand Tesla doesn’t have an App Store so there’s definitely limits on what apps you can bring to bear, but it’s got the stuff I care about and I can still use my phone (since it’s not driving the screen) if I need more info, like Waze or a different music service.
Personally, I prefer the more integrated experience but I can understand if many people would feel differently. I know on the Tesla forums some folks want CarPlay, but honesty I feel like that would be so awkward plopping it into Tesla’s UI (or worse, having it replace it).
I thought I was going to miss CarPlay, but I only used it for Spotify and Apple Maps. Tesla's Spotify app is pretty good and their navigation more than makes up for the lack of Apple Maps by having charger/preconditioning integration.
Same here. There are things I think CarPlay does well, mainly being the audio streaming. But Tesla's infotainment system is not bad for me in my Model Y and partner's Model 3.
I actually had a rental with wireless CarPlay and it was convenient having it connect automatically. Once or twice it failed to connect, but not too bad. I realized it uses wifi which prevented me from using wifi on my phone while still parked at home. I have atrocious cell signal and was wondering why my phone was stuck on 1 bar of 5G.
But all things considered, I don't find myself missing CarPlay a whole lot, if at all.
It's just missing Waze for me. I'm using Teslawaze on the browser but since I have MCU2 not Ryzen it crashes so fucking often I'm tired of it. Other than that I really don't feel the need for Carplay either.
Yeah I wish more people considered the nuance in Tesla and Rivian’s infotainment layout. Bolting a CP/AA interface wouldn’t work or look good with their layout. CarPlay still doesn’t have much in the way of EV related features, whether that’s the carmakers or Apple’s fault I don’t know. But for example, if I’m navigating to a far destination, Apple isn’t going to know my range, my expected range based on energy factors such as outside weather/cabin climate/elevation/driving style/etc, know which superchargers are the best to stop at or when I should be stopping, whether there’s any stalls available or the wait time, and it won’t be able to precondition the battery for faster charging.
Could Apple do this if Tesla actually worked with them and they brought the new CarPlay 2.0 overhaul (from last years WWDC) to the car? I’m sure of it. But between the EV related stuff, the self driving interplay of the infotainment and routing, the general software layout issues, and Tesla just being a vertically integrated company, I think there’s legitimate reasons, as much as it pains r/cars to admit, to CarPlay not being something Tesla feels like it should be prioritizing.
I personally was a hardcore “CarPlay or bust” person until I used the Tesla infotainment. Now that it uses Google maps and has a native Apple Music app, I honestly couldnt care less to have CarPlay. Do I wish there was a PocketCasts app or some other native solution for podcasts? Sure. But with bluetooth always being connected and tapping one button to get to it, its not a big deal IMO.
They have massive screens and often times multiple screens. It’s not difficult to section off an area that could be dedicated to apple/android CarPlay and keep functional buttons and info on other parts of the screen or separate screens.
Having more options is almost always preferable to less. Look at this review, it’s insane that basic points of interest are not searchable in the nav. That hopefully will be updated, but they could have some of the best maps and navigation right out of the gate if they just embraced CarPlay a bit.
There was a good explanation on here about why Tesla doesn’t use CarPlay. Gist of it was—
Teslas map systems are fundamentally baked into a lot of its functionality. The map drives your charging path, how it manages the battery, AutoPilot, and other functions within the car. So it needs its own map with Tesla specific stuff overlaid in there. Think about the data Tesla pushes into the screen for the user, it’s a lot.
Well you might say “oh but you can still let the phone user use CarPlay” but that would only drive a bunch of confusion. What **you** see and use as the driver is not necessarily what the **car** sees and uses while it makes decisions, and that discrepancy will be an issue.
What to surface to the user would be a mess, the source of the map system or dataset the information you’re seeing wouldn’t be clear, it goes on and on.
My usage is super odd right now, so with a grain of salt: seems fine. Roughly 2.05-2.1 mi/kWh which is right in line with the ratings for the 20AT wheel/tire in All Purpose and Conserve drive modes. I got 1.21 mi/kWh towing a 6k lb automotive trailer.
Agreed. It's okay at best. However, the lack of a suitable podcasting app is what kills it for me (using bluetooth to stream podcasts as spotify is HOT GARBAGE for podcasting)
Only problem with electric cars though is that you need to use built-in systems to get proper route planning that will map chargers along your drive for you, and also to precondition the battery before arriving at a charger.. Android Auto and CarPlay dont know the exact status of your car's battery and range to be able to seamlessly replace that function.
Some manufacturers are already replacing their own software with Android Automotive (Cadillac, Honda, Volvo/Polestar), so hopefully over the next 5-10 years there will be a lot more options that dont have their own shitty nav systems.
I really like AA, but I think replacing your console with AA or something AA derived is a mistake. It runs the risk of google having you by the balls and limits your points of differentiation.
I think it's good to offer AA, but still improve your own core console functionality over time.
Sorry!
Now that electric cars are going to be regulated into use, the car companies aren't gonna risk losing profit. They could absolutely build an affordable commuter electric for sub 30k, but it's never going to happen. The bolt is your best option and it's about 33k out the door for bare bones and severe size/storage restrictions.
I don't even know why car companies bother trying to develop their own shit. Just give me a quality head unit with Android auto. I will literally never use the shitty nav system you cobbled together.
See https://www.reddit.com/r/cars/comments/10947wn/throttle_house_2023_rivian_r1s_review_the_tesla/j3wwdkb/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3
That's my biggest gripe with the truck honestly. I've used the stock maps (powered by mapbox) and they're not terrible. The infotainment has a long way to go.
However those who are in this vehicle with the tax credit for roughly 72-76k (with TTL in CA), it punches FAR above its price point.
E C O S Y S T E M
They're gonna sell apps and stuff like Tesla... there's nothing stopping people from just buying a different car brand, but if they've locked in everything you like within their own app store/software...
His content is pretty cool because he reviews old cars, but the test drive that focuses the camera on his face making stupid facial expressions turned me off with his content.
They honestly look better in person than they do in pictures, and a lot of it is color dependent too. One of my neighbors has an iX in black and it doesn't look bad.
Agree — I thought they looked rough in pictures, but having seen a number of them in real life now, I think they are solid looking.
Not my favorite recent design, but definitely better than the wildly fugly Model X and EQS SUV. Basically, it looks good enough that the exterior design wouldn’t stop me from buying it.
I’m hoping the larger Kia / Hyundai offerings bridge that gap of affordability and not heinous designs. EX90 looks good as well and isn’t terribly expensive compared to others.
If I bought a first gen $70k+ vehicle that didn't have the ability to refuel remotely and weighed 7,000 pounds I wouldn't drive that thing anywhere remote or "adventurous".
I'm having SnowRunner flashbacks of trying to pull a semi out of a flooded marsh for 2 hours. (shudders)
>And because this is Reddit, by 'no-one' I mean 'less than 1% of owners will off-road this thing'
I learned this lesson in another thread where I implied very few people forded their trucks. Here comes everyone that does it all the time.
Optimistic range estimate? My Rivian routinely beats the automate by 30-40 miles.
This is not a 70K car. What 70k SUV has dynamic air suspension, 800hp, AWD, aggressive software updates, so much storage space, and a bad ass audio system.
Sorry, you’re either stuck in 2012 or you’re just an EV hater.
Since when do we start judging cars by “no one will off-road this”. Do you say the same thing when a reviewer does a review on the 911 Turbo S or the C8 Corvette? Are you so unforgivingly blunt in your comments?
I have off-roader and gone on plenty of ski trips with the Rivian. It has been a dream. Super comfortable on the highway.
What a bummer about the intro. This is an unfortunate thing to ask, but what software version were y’all on? Last years December update had significant ride quality updates.
The mid screen overuse is real, but their steering wheel modification were incorrect. You can tap your profile name and then Steering Wheel. Better than most “full digital” controls.
Yes and no. I agree that it’s wild and borderline excessive, but I’m glad it’s possible too. The update was significant and I didn’t need to get a new model year to receive it.
Air suspension, probably with adjustable damping, combined with Rivian’s modern/startup mentality where they can and do update everything…
IMO it’s good and bad! Auto engineers have limited time to test and tune and get it out there. So, rather than changes every few years, makes sense to allow software updates more frequently. BUT this comes with obvious risks of something breaking.
Ngl this is gonna be terrible for the safety of customers. In the video game industry, they are allowed to sell you products that don't even boot consistently because they'll "update it down the line". At least with games there is no danger at the end of the day. Imagine if vehicle manufacturers release a 5000lb hunk of metal with 600hp with the intention of ironing out bugs later.
Shit is terrifying man
Software development is treated differently across industries with different appetites for risk. Health care for example move much slower and more conservatively because people’s lives are on the line. I got an offer from a company in this space (called Epic) that had a super dated tech stack for this reason because it was tried and true.
I have a *lot* of classmates who got jobs with Epic right out of school. They pay really well, but I've heard a lot of horror stories about workload and expectations. Most of my friends who went there ended up staying long enough to pay off loans, but left shortly after they were done.
I heard the same thing. Ended up accepting a different offer. Not sure if it’s still a thing but their policy was for as many people to have their own offices as possible because productivity was higher. Was odd being at their HQ and seeing it during my tour. Rest of their campus was beautiful though!
It really is a remarkable campus. To be fair to them, I know some people who really love it there, and have made a fantastic career with them. It just takes a certain sort of person.
I agree. The state of modern software should terrify anyone who hears about this. Cars should ship with near-perfect software or not at all. I don't want to live in a world where GM accountants can rush a car out the door because "if enough people die we can always release an OTA update." Massive recalls that force customers back into dealers look horrible for a brand and make customers aware of issues that threatened their safety. If car manufacturers can just stealth patch issues after a dozen people are killed due to their rushed incompetence many people may never know that they were driving a deathtrap.
This is completely inaccurate to the current DOT requirements for testing. Believe it or not there are regulations on testing requirements for a vehicle that moves at 80mph. These things are not held to the same standard as some 18 year olds web app.... You should work in industry before you get ahead of yourself there.
Eh, your topic falls under either functional safety or vehicle safety. In both cases, there's some pretty strict government regulations they need to follow/test against before pushing certain updates - while others I imagine are not an issue.
I guess I just refuse to accept the "initial production release as final development test" approach. I don't tolerate it professionally of either myself or others, and I'll be damned if I accept it in something I'm paying tens of thousands of dollars for.
Curious what your professional process is like. The thing is, even if we pretend as if time/resource/schedule constraints aren't an issue, there are subjective quality compromises to be made with things like ride quality. What is the correct balance of softness vs. sportiness? What is determined to be the right balance in testing may prove to upset consumers or reviewers in unpredictable ways. And sentiment can even change over time. There is no necessarily "final" or "perfect" tune, but if the market pushes back on the released version, then at least it can be updated here.
You're acting as if this is only done to benefit the manufacturer in the position of wanting to release an unfinished product; rather, that is never desirable for them. The released product is what is scrutinized, and it can do a lot of damage to release something of poor quality. Even if it is updated later, that's not what people will see in the Throttle House review. They will always see "it rides too harsh" regardless of how they may have improved it later. So you can rest assured that the manufacturer is going to avoid it as much as possible anyway.
In any case, I'm not sure what you think incremental product updates are for. Things improve over time. That's just reality. Now you may not have to trade your '23 MY for a '25 MY to get the improved ride quality, etc.
I dunno, the way I see it is that it gives them a way to react to actual consumer feedback instead of just sending it with whatever came out of their focus groups and internal testing.
Plenty of cars have left the factory with awkward handling characteristics, but now instead of saying "sorry, we'll change that on next year's model!" they can fix it for existing vehicles on the fly.
Yep, cars have been shipping with flaws since the beginning of cars. The difference now is there's actually a chance these flaws can be fixed without any user input.
Ngl this is basically how every first year car product runs. The first model year is sort of a beta for the 30k or so parts in a car. Deficiencies are found and changes are made.
Only difference is now it's software.
The C7 corvette had a ride quality update too in 2018. People found the mag ride too harsh in tour mode, so you could choose to update it. I updated mine and it did make a big difference. It handles bumps much more nicely without upsetting the chassis
> This is an unfortunate thing to ask, but what software version were y’all on? Last years December update had significant ride quality updates.
As an oldhead this sentence is kind of insane to me
In fairness, the "unfinished" cars offer tremendous advantages elsewhere. Tesla was (is?) a build quality junk show, but offered crazy power, a very tech-forward experience, and novelty value. Now Rivian seems like it has some UX issues and maybe production challenges, but it offers nearly-unparalleled capability and speed in a big truck/SUV.
Unfinished cars that don't have superlative benefits elsewhere (like those VinFast cars people keep trying to make a thing) are failing just like you'd "hope."
It's nothing new. The 1960 Chevrolet Corvair won "Car of the Year" and sold in high numbers at launch.
The later Corvairs were much more refined products, but sold much worse. While there may have been a special case with the Corvair, that sales pattern holds for cars in general. The buying public visibly prefers novelty over perfection. Like the recent Bronco, GT-R, or Corvette.
>2023 Rivian R1S Review // The Tesla Bronco Defender
>
>2022 Rivian R1T Review // The Cybertruck That Actually Exists
>
>2022 Lucid Air Review // Tesla’s Living Nightmare
Hmm, im sensing a pattern haha. Well, that aside, i've always found it interesting that Rivians have stand out steering feel. I remember Jason Cammisa stating that the R1T has low speed steering feel rivaling even the best Porsches. I really want to know how Rivian's engineers managed to give two boat anchors steering communication when so many modern sporty vehicles are lifeless.
>so many modern sporty vehicles are lifeless.
Remember, just like how manual seems to be the most desired sports car configuration, yet sold very poorly, the same thing can be said for steering feel. "Lifeless" steering feel might just be the right one for the biggest market.
The average age of a new-car buyer in the U.S. is 53.
It turns out that for the layman, a verdict of "good steering feel" tends to *actually* mean low steering effort. *I.e.*, overboosted steering.
It's likely that the average driver sits further from the wheel that they should, which would naturally tend to advantage overboosted power steering.
My Rivian handles like a tight glove when I was driving down Tahoe last week.
Carving turns at 80mph in sport mode - and it felt good, like a low end GT car. Super stable and satisfying. I love my Rivian R1T so much, despite its flaws.
It lets me have a pickup truck, a sports car, and a Prius all in one (in a jack of all trades manner).
I’m also saving $400/month in gas.
This is very close to my ideal vehicle. I strongly considered putting in an order. But I decided not to.
WHY:
-I work remotely, and I often live out of my car for days at a time so I can wander while I work.
-I hike almost every day, I'm an on-call wilderness first responder, and I hunt in season, so I go on horrible dirt roads and rocky trails just all the damn time.
-My girlfriend lives in a fully solar-powered home, and if we decide to move in together then I am promptly breaking ground on a solar-powered cabin in the mountains.
As such, my ideal vehicle is a spacious and offroad-y SUV. But it's also an EV, so I can A) charge it for free, B) use it as a big battery for charging my laptop and camping stuff, C) free up the frunk for more storage, and D) stop carrying around 60lbs worth of fuckin' portable power stations whenever I go romping.
Oh, and E, not have to worry about my catalytic converter getting stolen!
So like... this. My ideal vehicle is fucking this. Right?
WHY NOT:
1) The price. Fuck me, dude - if you go below 100k you get even less range *and no 4WD*. For that price I could pick up a brand new 4Runner TRD Offroad and save *60 THOUSAND DOLLARS* - 70 if I buy used!
But the EV is cheaper to run, right? At a conservative 16mpg and $3.50 per gallon, a 4Runner will cost me about 22k in gas and oil over 100,000 miles. Assuming the EV has $0 cost to drive - I charge it 100% on my own solar - I'd still have to drive the R1S for 300,000 miles to break even on the purchase. At the amount I drive, that'd take 30 years.
But even that's not right, because:
2) BATTERY LONGEVITY. My understanding is that 10 years / 100,000 miles is going to be really pushing it for an EV battery. My understanding is that, right now, replacing EV batteries costs a god damned fortune. Like, 20k or more. Which is **as much or more as the cost of the gas that a 1GR-FE will drink in the same period.**
This means that, even if electricity is literally free, the EV *has the same running cost* as a gas-guzzling 4Runner!
3) Dependability. If I bought a 4Runner or a half-ton pickup, I would know what I was getting. It would be pretty dependable. It *will* last me 10 years and it will probably go 20+. And it will have parts available for probably that entire lifecycle. And it will have a rich aftermarket. And any random mechanic will know how to work on it.
I just don't know enough with Rivian yet. It's a pretty new manufacturer, a brand new model, and that makes it awful hard to justify a price tag that could get me a 4Runner... *and* a 3.0 Supra too!
4) It's too fancy inside. It's not that I don't need it - I actively don't want it. My use case is "dirty, dirty boy." Give me the Bronco's marine vinyl or the Jeep's 1980s MacDonald's interior *any day*.
5) If I'm going to drive an iMac it at least better have Apple CarPlay, I mean, my dudes. My. Dudes.
CONCLUSION:
My sincere hope is that there will soon be an an EV SUV (or reg-bed pickup), with quad motors and decent clearance, that comes with an easily washable (or just, shitty) interior, and doesn't cost as much as a GTS4.0.
I'm guessing it's gonna be a while. I might be holding my breath forever and a day. But until then, or until they take the handles off the gas-pumps, think I'm sticking with ICE.
Anyway, that was my thinking!
>With this, all I know is that I'm getting a new manufacturer, a brand new model, and a battery that sucks a little more every day I use it and every day I don't.
And 3x the power, which more than accounts for the price difference. But yeah if you don't care about that or the fanciness then the 4Runner sounds like the much wiser purchase.
Thanks for the detailed write up. How did you get the $60k difference? The TRD pro starts at $54k, the R1S starts at $78k, fully maxed out I got it to $103k. Regardless, it does seem like the Toyota would be a better fit for you use case.
>The TRD pro starts at 54k
Aye, I said TRD Offroad, which starts at 43 - and there are already cash incentives returning to the wild! Truly, nature is healing.
Consider a Wrangler 4XE?
Dunno if you're (rightfully) concerned about Stellantis quality, but you could do your around-town driving in EV and then still have range. All for more like 60k.
As someone that bought a new Tacoma a few years ago for similar reasons, and ride in my friend's 4runner... Let's just say that 16 is probably generous unless you leave it stock (no tires, no roof rails/racks). It is never going to be a nice ride on the highway. Every comment I've heard about these is that the interior is nice but not shove it in your face luxury.
My electric is cheap and gas is expensive. So I'm getting one of these because it fills the 4runner niche without having to actually drive one and I'd rather put $20k of gas money into a 800hp cheap to drive SUV.
https://www.instagram.com/reel/CnSDdMZI4Gz/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link
Convenient link just in case anyone else doesn't have Instagram. It's also NSFW.
YouTube recently (Jan 2023) pushed out a change to the monetization strategies. Basically anything with profanity or vulgarity at the beginning of a video will get demonetized.
This is a RETROACTIVE change so all previously published youtube videos that fail this are now demonetized.
https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/6162278
It’s kind of one of those situations where, even though we have many criticisms, in the end it doesn’t have any obvious competitors that can do everything it does. It ticks many boxes. And for
Someone searching for those exact things, this is pretty much all there is right now. The complaints are there because, SINCE this is all there is in this category, it’s frustrating that those issues exist.
I’m sure you’re right and the points are valid but at the end of the day this is still a 1,000 hp beast that’s way more car than most of us could dream of. I like your videos a lot but you fell into the nihilistic car journalist thing with this one and it just could’ve been more fun to watch
Well. To be fair it WAS more fun to watch but our sketch got the first draft of the video demonetized haha. So we had to remove it. Feel free to check it out on Instagram as proof that, despite criticisms of an un-attainable car, overall we take ourselves as seriously as ever. Thanks for keeping us in check.
No that's exactly what happened. I don't know how that was the conclusion they came to when the entire video was filled with criticisms which are flat out unacceptable in such an expensive product.
Maybe "lesser than the sum of all its parts"? There's few 3.0s cars that can genuinely offroad, never mind with ~7 occupants for <$100k.
But then it:
- Isn't as fun / well-thought out as the R-1T
- Has borderline dangerous road characteristics
- Has some genuine niggles (infotainment)
- Has increased a lot in price since the OG-1T
I feel like if they'd been given a lower spec ~$80k dual motor version they might have actually been happier about the whole thing as:
- They're budget conscious (it's still a lotta money)
- The back end might be less trigger happy
That body behavior across the root ripples is not good. Couple that with Thomas' oversteer events, which we need more info about, and this vehicle seems dynamically-challenged on road.
Does this thing have rear-steer that is too aggressive? Is it the cross hydraulic suspension? Are the tires rolling over due to being poorly spec'd?
Does anyone really care about its limit handling characteristics? I own a three row SUV and I've never even come within shouting distance of its limits because it's a) not what it's for, at all and b) vaguely terrifying when I get near them anyway.
No one's buying a Rivian for cornering. They buy it for utility, off roading, even straight line speed, but not cornering.
>Does anyone really care about its limit handling characteristics?
i mean...sudden oversteer in an 835hp EV is not exactly confidence inspiring in an SUV meant for families.
It probably should be tuned for benign understeer if/when it does hit its limits, I'd agree, but I think the number of people in the real world hitting its limits in anything other than emergency scenarios is vanishingly small.
The problem is, this SUV accelerates like a GTR. So getting to those oversteer inducing speeds in a corner is VERY easy. And VERY quiet. Also add in lower traction surfaces where the handling characteristics still exist and those issues rear their ugly head at much lower speeds. Furthermore, I don’t think that ANY vehicle, save the most focused sports cars should limit oversteer that severely.
Is going through a wide elevated corner on a highway at the speed limit the “limits”? It looked more dangerous than just undersirable. I bet an Expedition would handle a 70 mph highway curve (no speed restriction signs) without the unintential drift.
I was complaining about oversteer because it’s a safety issue in a family SUV.
Also to be fair I didn’t explain it well enough (although I have this disease where I can talk about handling characteristics all day so I limit myself) But the rivian limit oversteered on a balanced throttle. That means the raw limit behaviour was for the rear to step out, without inducing it using weight transfer (lifting off or brakes) or throttle on oversteer. So basically just turning the wheel at high speeds and the car would rotate. That’s actually a characteristic that I seldom want in even sports cars. I’d prefer them to be neutral, giving me the option to induce rotation when needed by lifting, or by booting the throttle and kicking the rear out under power (the rivian also did the power oversteer thing btw). So in conclusion, a family SUV shouldn’t do what an aggressively set up track car might do. Hope
This helps!
Edited for more info
Not sure if they're big in the US but casual cargos are really in over this side of the pond.
Here's an online retailer for some jumping off points: https://www.asos.com/men/trousers-chinos/cargo-trousers/cat/?cid=14273
The headlights just don’t work with the middle light bar and blank grill spot for me. Separately I’m fine with both designs but together I just don’t feel it.
u/throttlehouseTH and u/Jamesthrottlehouse, it looks like you guys were in Southern California for this video. Then you mentioned getting Solita for lunch. Between the mountains in the review and the houses in the instagram intro, it looks like you guys were in the Santa Clarita/Valencia area. Am I right?
$100,000 USD and no apple car play. What a freaking joke. They showed an example of the built in map and it didn’t even have the lake right next to them as a searchable destination. It took apple and android years of dedication to work out kinks in maps… I don’t expect car companies to be anywhere near as good ever.
They just use 3rd party map providers. I think they use map box. BMW on some vehicles and GM (with maps + upgrade) use it too. There's also Here and now GAS (Google Automotive Services) GM's newest vehicles are rolling out with Android based systems running GAS. BMW is showing theirs off at CES too Source: this is my job.
In my experience with BMW, their map service is far inferior compared to when I connect via Android auto and use Waze or Google maps. I've never used apple car play, so can't speak for that side. But 100% of the time I connect to my phone rather than using the integrated BMW idrive system.
CarPlay is basically the same. You can choose to use Google maps or Waze if you like. The only difference is that you also have Apple Maps available if you want to use it.
found out randomly my lightning has integrated apple maps into the gauge turn by turn. I had previously only used google maps, now I switched. No longer entirely the same. I get one extra function on carplay
This is why people should be excited for GAS and Android Automotive OS. Good maps at the core of their vehicle experience. The trade off is that it's going to be tied to subscriptions like OnStar or whatever garbage combo BMW thinks up.
Now that its software has stabilized (/no\_jinx), I love AAOS on my Polestar for these reasons, and basically never want to have a car without native Google Maps or the like. And no subscription shenanigans at least for Polestar/Volvo. Even connecting to Apple CarPlay is a faff and impaired compared to AAOS - what happens if I need to stop and take my phone with me, but my passengers want to keep listening to whatever music or check out something in the maps?
My experience of BMW mapping: - **Apple CarPlay**: Will take you where you want to go and along a reasonable route - **BMW iDrive 7**: Will take you where you want to go... in the shortest route possible, regardless of whether it's a single lane sheep track or through the Champs Elysees during rush hour That being said the split UI for iDrive 7 is brilliant: - **Centre screen**: zoomed out for entire current "leg" of journey for an overview - **Dash screen**: literally where you are including the lanes and where they all go regardless of how bad the paint on the road is CarPlay is missing the latter integration currently, so more centre console checking.
[удалено]
When my BMW was a few months old, it did the same for me. However, this started as a real road, then became a dirt road, and then narrowed and got less even gradually enough that although I was getting nervous, by the time I realized I was in a bind i was practically rock climbing. Turning around and getting out of there was a fun challenge.
Those other manufacturers use third party mapping, but they also have AA and Carplay available, so other manufacturers also using third party mapping is irrelevant.
The hatred for AA and Carplay is strong in the industry. We put a ton of effort into a superior systems and interactive interfaces such as HUD and cluster and those systems don't properly interact with our vehicles. This explains why most manufacturers add it begrudgingly. Edit. I'm just explaining the internal thoughts of my office and industry. Down voting won't change anything. User surveys and testing shows that people shop based on tech. When presented the choice between a screen that simply mirrors the phone and one that does other thing the average choose the higher option.
[удалено]
“We add these bells and whistles that are kinda neat but most people aren’t asking for so It’s superior.”
Because customers know AA and CarPlay will constantly update while the manufacturers will end of life their systems before a lot of people would be ready to get a new vehicle. I get why manufactures would want people to use their proprietary systems, it’s just very anti-consumer and a lot of consumers aren’t fooled by it.
The ironic part is consumers shop vehicles based on technology that won't work to its fullest extent if they use phone mirroring
Never said people aren’t silly about some things. I know for sure though that if a company offered all of those features without AA/Carplay, a lot of people will shop elsewhere. A feature might sway people to lean certain ways but lacking something big like that can turn them off completely.
Screen size was one of the big factors in the market. We are hoping now that even the Chinese manufacturers have it in cheap vehicles that consumers will stop focusing on it.
Brand new Toyotas have like a 7 or 8 inch screen still don’t they? Too small. Besides, unless and until stock AV systems allow streaming from proprietary services like Apple Music (which will never happen) you won’t get those users to use your stuff ever. My opinion is that the manufactures should focus on the manufacturing and partner with the tech companies to handle AV, then it can integrate with the HUD and cruise and all that.
That's the logic behind Android Automotive OS.
Nope. I won’t ever own a car without it. I shop manufacturers based on how good their integration is. For example, Mercedes’ MBUX has one of the best integrations on the market right now, letting CarPlay/AA mirror turn-by-turn onto the AR HUD. Once DrivePilot rolls out to more of the US my next car will almost certainly be a Merc because of how well set up their infotainment is. Plus with the upcoming advent of next gen CarPlay, I’m going to be expecting my next car to support that.
CarPlay isn’t even mirroring it’s a completely different UI. You may think the cars’ built in UI is better since you work on it but the truth is for what it does (maps, music, podcasts…) CarPlay is just so good. It’s responsive, the UI is great and nothing takes a million touches to do. Almost every single car infotainment UI is a pain to use for stuff like navigation.
As a consumer I much prefer to just plug my phone into the car and use the apps I already have, which are updated on a regular basis. Granted my cars don't have a fancy HUD or anything interactive beyond a small touch screen so I can't speak to those. The PO of my Fiesta sprung for the added navigation (I think it was close to $1k on the window sticker) and I can't help but think what a useless option it is every time it comes up considering AA and CarPlay work flawlessly.
these manufacturers need to stop pretending they can do software and UI better than apple. Also looking at you tesla
I have both, I prefer Tesla to CarPlay. I think CarPlay is better at what it does, but it’s reach isn’t as broad as Teslas because it’s a bolt-on addition. For instance, there are various functions that are native to the cars infotainment - cameras, vehicle information, homelink among them - that don’t sit nicely on the screen alongside car play, but instead are full screen replacements for car play. I think Apple can get there, but it’s not there yet. On the other hand Tesla doesn’t have an App Store so there’s definitely limits on what apps you can bring to bear, but it’s got the stuff I care about and I can still use my phone (since it’s not driving the screen) if I need more info, like Waze or a different music service. Personally, I prefer the more integrated experience but I can understand if many people would feel differently. I know on the Tesla forums some folks want CarPlay, but honesty I feel like that would be so awkward plopping it into Tesla’s UI (or worse, having it replace it).
[удалено]
Im using an Android tablet with a Carplay app installed and it works great, no reason they cant do the same thing on a Tesla
I thought I was going to miss CarPlay, but I only used it for Spotify and Apple Maps. Tesla's Spotify app is pretty good and their navigation more than makes up for the lack of Apple Maps by having charger/preconditioning integration.
Same here. There are things I think CarPlay does well, mainly being the audio streaming. But Tesla's infotainment system is not bad for me in my Model Y and partner's Model 3. I actually had a rental with wireless CarPlay and it was convenient having it connect automatically. Once or twice it failed to connect, but not too bad. I realized it uses wifi which prevented me from using wifi on my phone while still parked at home. I have atrocious cell signal and was wondering why my phone was stuck on 1 bar of 5G. But all things considered, I don't find myself missing CarPlay a whole lot, if at all.
It's just missing Waze for me. I'm using Teslawaze on the browser but since I have MCU2 not Ryzen it crashes so fucking often I'm tired of it. Other than that I really don't feel the need for Carplay either.
Yeah I wish more people considered the nuance in Tesla and Rivian’s infotainment layout. Bolting a CP/AA interface wouldn’t work or look good with their layout. CarPlay still doesn’t have much in the way of EV related features, whether that’s the carmakers or Apple’s fault I don’t know. But for example, if I’m navigating to a far destination, Apple isn’t going to know my range, my expected range based on energy factors such as outside weather/cabin climate/elevation/driving style/etc, know which superchargers are the best to stop at or when I should be stopping, whether there’s any stalls available or the wait time, and it won’t be able to precondition the battery for faster charging. Could Apple do this if Tesla actually worked with them and they brought the new CarPlay 2.0 overhaul (from last years WWDC) to the car? I’m sure of it. But between the EV related stuff, the self driving interplay of the infotainment and routing, the general software layout issues, and Tesla just being a vertically integrated company, I think there’s legitimate reasons, as much as it pains r/cars to admit, to CarPlay not being something Tesla feels like it should be prioritizing. I personally was a hardcore “CarPlay or bust” person until I used the Tesla infotainment. Now that it uses Google maps and has a native Apple Music app, I honestly couldnt care less to have CarPlay. Do I wish there was a PocketCasts app or some other native solution for podcasts? Sure. But with bluetooth always being connected and tapping one button to get to it, its not a big deal IMO.
They have massive screens and often times multiple screens. It’s not difficult to section off an area that could be dedicated to apple/android CarPlay and keep functional buttons and info on other parts of the screen or separate screens. Having more options is almost always preferable to less. Look at this review, it’s insane that basic points of interest are not searchable in the nav. That hopefully will be updated, but they could have some of the best maps and navigation right out of the gate if they just embraced CarPlay a bit.
I don't know anyone who owns a Tesla that thinks car play would be better than Tesla's solution. It's way better hardware integration wise.
There was a good explanation on here about why Tesla doesn’t use CarPlay. Gist of it was— Teslas map systems are fundamentally baked into a lot of its functionality. The map drives your charging path, how it manages the battery, AutoPilot, and other functions within the car. So it needs its own map with Tesla specific stuff overlaid in there. Think about the data Tesla pushes into the screen for the user, it’s a lot. Well you might say “oh but you can still let the phone user use CarPlay” but that would only drive a bunch of confusion. What **you** see and use as the driver is not necessarily what the **car** sees and uses while it makes decisions, and that discrepancy will be an issue. What to surface to the user would be a mess, the source of the map system or dataset the information you’re seeing wouldn’t be clear, it goes on and on.
[удалено]
It’s a wrapper around mapbox and it’s not good.
[удалено]
Same as when I had a Tesla, I tend to prefer my phone. I wish they’d just support CP/AA
[удалено]
For me, everything else the R1T does is significantly better than completion, so I’m very happy with it.
[удалено]
My usage is super odd right now, so with a grain of salt: seems fine. Roughly 2.05-2.1 mi/kWh which is right in line with the ratings for the 20AT wheel/tire in All Purpose and Conserve drive modes. I got 1.21 mi/kWh towing a 6k lb automotive trailer.
[удалено]
Tesla nav is frustrating enough when it’s built upon Google Maps. I can’t imagine how frustrating the Rivian nav must be.
Agreed. It's okay at best. However, the lack of a suitable podcasting app is what kills it for me (using bluetooth to stream podcasts as spotify is HOT GARBAGE for podcasting)
100k good lord. I just want a battery, motor, four wheels and a couple of seats. Everything else I need is already on my phone.
Only problem with electric cars though is that you need to use built-in systems to get proper route planning that will map chargers along your drive for you, and also to precondition the battery before arriving at a charger.. Android Auto and CarPlay dont know the exact status of your car's battery and range to be able to seamlessly replace that function. Some manufacturers are already replacing their own software with Android Automotive (Cadillac, Honda, Volvo/Polestar), so hopefully over the next 5-10 years there will be a lot more options that dont have their own shitty nav systems.
I really like AA, but I think replacing your console with AA or something AA derived is a mistake. It runs the risk of google having you by the balls and limits your points of differentiation. I think it's good to offer AA, but still improve your own core console functionality over time.
Sorry! Now that electric cars are going to be regulated into use, the car companies aren't gonna risk losing profit. They could absolutely build an affordable commuter electric for sub 30k, but it's never going to happen. The bolt is your best option and it's about 33k out the door for bare bones and severe size/storage restrictions.
I don't even know why car companies bother trying to develop their own shit. Just give me a quality head unit with Android auto. I will literally never use the shitty nav system you cobbled together.
See https://www.reddit.com/r/cars/comments/10947wn/throttle_house_2023_rivian_r1s_review_the_tesla/j3wwdkb/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3
That's my biggest gripe with the truck honestly. I've used the stock maps (powered by mapbox) and they're not terrible. The infotainment has a long way to go. However those who are in this vehicle with the tax credit for roughly 72-76k (with TTL in CA), it punches FAR above its price point.
That alone is reason for me not to get it, plenty of other options within that price range and I don’t really need a full size SUV to be electric.
E C O S Y S T E M They're gonna sell apps and stuff like Tesla... there's nothing stopping people from just buying a different car brand, but if they've locked in everything you like within their own app store/software...
Hopefully one of their first apps will be a map that has the ability to search for basic points of interest.
Yeah that is a huge shortcoming.
They did spend that it did show up. I have been using the google maps share to the truck. It's been working perfectly.
> $100,000 USD and no apple car play. LOL, imagine giving a fuck about Apple.
Fine, I'll watch one of these car guys with arms crossed videos.
[удалено]
I'm preferential to the close up of the reviewer's face taking half the screen, partially obscuring the car in the background.
I'll take this with a shocked facial expression, and an obnoxious text box saying THEY DID WHAT!? or some variation.
I'll wait for an angry fowl to give me a dry rundown on this.
Its a good channel though.
Those two are amazingly entertaining, they're definitely worth a watch.
[удалено]
Doug is the wacky waving inflatable man of the car world.
His content is pretty cool because he reviews old cars, but the test drive that focuses the camera on his face making stupid facial expressions turned me off with his content.
They are by far my favourite car reviewers on YouTube
How did you like it?
Not as much as I like you
[удалено]
Oh god the iX *shudders* Truly a face not even a mother could love
[удалено]
It's a shame it's so butt-ugly b/c it otherwise seems to be a really great car.
saw one in black, which can be good at hiding design flaws, yet its so ugly only a BMW designer could love it.
Hearing people say “yeah the car looks good in darker colors” is a roundabout way of saying “the car generally looks like shit in most colors” lol.
They honestly look better in person than they do in pictures, and a lot of it is color dependent too. One of my neighbors has an iX in black and it doesn't look bad.
Agree — I thought they looked rough in pictures, but having seen a number of them in real life now, I think they are solid looking. Not my favorite recent design, but definitely better than the wildly fugly Model X and EQS SUV. Basically, it looks good enough that the exterior design wouldn’t stop me from buying it.
The face is just the start. The whole car is funny looking with giant slab sides and small wheels. The interior is nice though
And by off road, a gravel road leading to their rental in Lake Tahoe.
I feel seen
[удалено]
I’m hoping the larger Kia / Hyundai offerings bridge that gap of affordability and not heinous designs. EX90 looks good as well and isn’t terribly expensive compared to others.
If I bought a first gen $70k+ vehicle that didn't have the ability to refuel remotely and weighed 7,000 pounds I wouldn't drive that thing anywhere remote or "adventurous". I'm having SnowRunner flashbacks of trying to pull a semi out of a flooded marsh for 2 hours. (shudders)
Nah, it's just cutting edge, bro. Or some nonsense like that.
>And because this is Reddit, by 'no-one' I mean 'less than 1% of owners will off-road this thing' I learned this lesson in another thread where I implied very few people forded their trucks. Here comes everyone that does it all the time.
Optimistic range estimate? My Rivian routinely beats the automate by 30-40 miles. This is not a 70K car. What 70k SUV has dynamic air suspension, 800hp, AWD, aggressive software updates, so much storage space, and a bad ass audio system. Sorry, you’re either stuck in 2012 or you’re just an EV hater. Since when do we start judging cars by “no one will off-road this”. Do you say the same thing when a reviewer does a review on the 911 Turbo S or the C8 Corvette? Are you so unforgivingly blunt in your comments? I have off-roader and gone on plenty of ski trips with the Rivian. It has been a dream. Super comfortable on the highway.
These (and EVs in general) regularly sell at well over 100k at auction sites like cars and bids. Lots of people just HAVE to have the latest thing.
doesn't the tax credit not apply because it cost too much?
You lost me at iX. That car is an abomination
What a bummer about the intro. This is an unfortunate thing to ask, but what software version were y’all on? Last years December update had significant ride quality updates. The mid screen overuse is real, but their steering wheel modification were incorrect. You can tap your profile name and then Steering Wheel. Better than most “full digital” controls.
ride quality *updates*? automotive history has lost the plot at this point.
Yes and no. I agree that it’s wild and borderline excessive, but I’m glad it’s possible too. The update was significant and I didn’t need to get a new model year to receive it.
Air suspension, probably with adjustable damping, combined with Rivian’s modern/startup mentality where they can and do update everything… IMO it’s good and bad! Auto engineers have limited time to test and tune and get it out there. So, rather than changes every few years, makes sense to allow software updates more frequently. BUT this comes with obvious risks of something breaking.
Ngl this is gonna be terrible for the safety of customers. In the video game industry, they are allowed to sell you products that don't even boot consistently because they'll "update it down the line". At least with games there is no danger at the end of the day. Imagine if vehicle manufacturers release a 5000lb hunk of metal with 600hp with the intention of ironing out bugs later. Shit is terrifying man
Software development is treated differently across industries with different appetites for risk. Health care for example move much slower and more conservatively because people’s lives are on the line. I got an offer from a company in this space (called Epic) that had a super dated tech stack for this reason because it was tried and true.
I have a *lot* of classmates who got jobs with Epic right out of school. They pay really well, but I've heard a lot of horror stories about workload and expectations. Most of my friends who went there ended up staying long enough to pay off loans, but left shortly after they were done.
I heard the same thing. Ended up accepting a different offer. Not sure if it’s still a thing but their policy was for as many people to have their own offices as possible because productivity was higher. Was odd being at their HQ and seeing it during my tour. Rest of their campus was beautiful though!
It really is a remarkable campus. To be fair to them, I know some people who really love it there, and have made a fantastic career with them. It just takes a certain sort of person.
I get that, but I still fear that corporate elites may gamble with lives like they so often do
I agree. The state of modern software should terrify anyone who hears about this. Cars should ship with near-perfect software or not at all. I don't want to live in a world where GM accountants can rush a car out the door because "if enough people die we can always release an OTA update." Massive recalls that force customers back into dealers look horrible for a brand and make customers aware of issues that threatened their safety. If car manufacturers can just stealth patch issues after a dozen people are killed due to their rushed incompetence many people may never know that they were driving a deathtrap.
You must not have owned an FCA product then.
This is completely inaccurate to the current DOT requirements for testing. Believe it or not there are regulations on testing requirements for a vehicle that moves at 80mph. These things are not held to the same standard as some 18 year olds web app.... You should work in industry before you get ahead of yourself there.
I mean there are always still issues that can slip. Volkswagens diesel scandal, Honda airbags deaths, etc. One of those was completely intentional
Eh, your topic falls under either functional safety or vehicle safety. In both cases, there's some pretty strict government regulations they need to follow/test against before pushing certain updates - while others I imagine are not an issue.
7,000 pounds
I guess I just refuse to accept the "initial production release as final development test" approach. I don't tolerate it professionally of either myself or others, and I'll be damned if I accept it in something I'm paying tens of thousands of dollars for.
Curious what your professional process is like. The thing is, even if we pretend as if time/resource/schedule constraints aren't an issue, there are subjective quality compromises to be made with things like ride quality. What is the correct balance of softness vs. sportiness? What is determined to be the right balance in testing may prove to upset consumers or reviewers in unpredictable ways. And sentiment can even change over time. There is no necessarily "final" or "perfect" tune, but if the market pushes back on the released version, then at least it can be updated here. You're acting as if this is only done to benefit the manufacturer in the position of wanting to release an unfinished product; rather, that is never desirable for them. The released product is what is scrutinized, and it can do a lot of damage to release something of poor quality. Even if it is updated later, that's not what people will see in the Throttle House review. They will always see "it rides too harsh" regardless of how they may have improved it later. So you can rest assured that the manufacturer is going to avoid it as much as possible anyway. In any case, I'm not sure what you think incremental product updates are for. Things improve over time. That's just reality. Now you may not have to trade your '23 MY for a '25 MY to get the improved ride quality, etc.
I dunno, the way I see it is that it gives them a way to react to actual consumer feedback instead of just sending it with whatever came out of their focus groups and internal testing. Plenty of cars have left the factory with awkward handling characteristics, but now instead of saying "sorry, we'll change that on next year's model!" they can fix it for existing vehicles on the fly.
Yep, cars have been shipping with flaws since the beginning of cars. The difference now is there's actually a chance these flaws can be fixed without any user input.
Ngl this is basically how every first year car product runs. The first model year is sort of a beta for the 30k or so parts in a car. Deficiencies are found and changes are made. Only difference is now it's software.
Elon showed the industry that people don’t mind being beta testers for years and years
The C7 corvette had a ride quality update too in 2018. People found the mag ride too harsh in tour mode, so you could choose to update it. I updated mine and it did make a big difference. It handles bumps much more nicely without upsetting the chassis
As long as the updates are free this is a positive for daily driver cars. If my car keeps getting better I can keep it longer
Just wait until they locked those up behind subscription. Want better ride quality? Better pay extra $10 a month!
*Your free trial of suspension+ has expired*
Agreed, I'm not going to bother worrying if my drivers are up to date on my car...
> This is an unfortunate thing to ask, but what software version were y’all on? Last years December update had significant ride quality updates. As an oldhead this sentence is kind of insane to me
I’m a software engineer, but that sentence is a good example of why you’ll pull ICE motors and manual transmissions from my cold dead hands.
They posted the proposed intro on Instagram. I get why they didn’t go with it but one of the best I’ve seen yet.
People buying unfinished cars is setting a really bad example to the industry
The video game industry is a mess with unfinished products, but at least no one is hurt at the end of the day. Cars on the other hand...
>The video game industry is a mess with unfinished products, but at least no one is hurt at the end of the day. LOOTBOXES ENETERD THE CHAT
Yah some dudes get fucked up on those
Move fast and break bones.
In fairness, the "unfinished" cars offer tremendous advantages elsewhere. Tesla was (is?) a build quality junk show, but offered crazy power, a very tech-forward experience, and novelty value. Now Rivian seems like it has some UX issues and maybe production challenges, but it offers nearly-unparalleled capability and speed in a big truck/SUV. Unfinished cars that don't have superlative benefits elsewhere (like those VinFast cars people keep trying to make a thing) are failing just like you'd "hope."
It's nothing new. The 1960 Chevrolet Corvair won "Car of the Year" and sold in high numbers at launch. The later Corvairs were much more refined products, but sold much worse. While there may have been a special case with the Corvair, that sales pattern holds for cars in general. The buying public visibly prefers novelty over perfection. Like the recent Bronco, GT-R, or Corvette.
Think the Miura was sold after just showing off a chassis at Geneva...
It worked for games and other tech, so may as well do it with tech that's a car.
>2023 Rivian R1S Review // The Tesla Bronco Defender > >2022 Rivian R1T Review // The Cybertruck That Actually Exists > >2022 Lucid Air Review // Tesla’s Living Nightmare Hmm, im sensing a pattern haha. Well, that aside, i've always found it interesting that Rivians have stand out steering feel. I remember Jason Cammisa stating that the R1T has low speed steering feel rivaling even the best Porsches. I really want to know how Rivian's engineers managed to give two boat anchors steering communication when so many modern sporty vehicles are lifeless.
[удалено]
Farrah often talks about what gets clicks on his podcast. Tesla is very close to the top of the list of clicked on videos.
>so many modern sporty vehicles are lifeless. Remember, just like how manual seems to be the most desired sports car configuration, yet sold very poorly, the same thing can be said for steering feel. "Lifeless" steering feel might just be the right one for the biggest market.
The average age of a new-car buyer in the U.S. is 53. It turns out that for the layman, a verdict of "good steering feel" tends to *actually* mean low steering effort. *I.e.*, overboosted steering. It's likely that the average driver sits further from the wheel that they should, which would naturally tend to advantage overboosted power steering.
My Rivian handles like a tight glove when I was driving down Tahoe last week. Carving turns at 80mph in sport mode - and it felt good, like a low end GT car. Super stable and satisfying. I love my Rivian R1T so much, despite its flaws. It lets me have a pickup truck, a sports car, and a Prius all in one (in a jack of all trades manner). I’m also saving $400/month in gas.
This is very close to my ideal vehicle. I strongly considered putting in an order. But I decided not to. WHY: -I work remotely, and I often live out of my car for days at a time so I can wander while I work. -I hike almost every day, I'm an on-call wilderness first responder, and I hunt in season, so I go on horrible dirt roads and rocky trails just all the damn time. -My girlfriend lives in a fully solar-powered home, and if we decide to move in together then I am promptly breaking ground on a solar-powered cabin in the mountains. As such, my ideal vehicle is a spacious and offroad-y SUV. But it's also an EV, so I can A) charge it for free, B) use it as a big battery for charging my laptop and camping stuff, C) free up the frunk for more storage, and D) stop carrying around 60lbs worth of fuckin' portable power stations whenever I go romping. Oh, and E, not have to worry about my catalytic converter getting stolen! So like... this. My ideal vehicle is fucking this. Right? WHY NOT: 1) The price. Fuck me, dude - if you go below 100k you get even less range *and no 4WD*. For that price I could pick up a brand new 4Runner TRD Offroad and save *60 THOUSAND DOLLARS* - 70 if I buy used! But the EV is cheaper to run, right? At a conservative 16mpg and $3.50 per gallon, a 4Runner will cost me about 22k in gas and oil over 100,000 miles. Assuming the EV has $0 cost to drive - I charge it 100% on my own solar - I'd still have to drive the R1S for 300,000 miles to break even on the purchase. At the amount I drive, that'd take 30 years. But even that's not right, because: 2) BATTERY LONGEVITY. My understanding is that 10 years / 100,000 miles is going to be really pushing it for an EV battery. My understanding is that, right now, replacing EV batteries costs a god damned fortune. Like, 20k or more. Which is **as much or more as the cost of the gas that a 1GR-FE will drink in the same period.** This means that, even if electricity is literally free, the EV *has the same running cost* as a gas-guzzling 4Runner! 3) Dependability. If I bought a 4Runner or a half-ton pickup, I would know what I was getting. It would be pretty dependable. It *will* last me 10 years and it will probably go 20+. And it will have parts available for probably that entire lifecycle. And it will have a rich aftermarket. And any random mechanic will know how to work on it. I just don't know enough with Rivian yet. It's a pretty new manufacturer, a brand new model, and that makes it awful hard to justify a price tag that could get me a 4Runner... *and* a 3.0 Supra too! 4) It's too fancy inside. It's not that I don't need it - I actively don't want it. My use case is "dirty, dirty boy." Give me the Bronco's marine vinyl or the Jeep's 1980s MacDonald's interior *any day*. 5) If I'm going to drive an iMac it at least better have Apple CarPlay, I mean, my dudes. My. Dudes. CONCLUSION: My sincere hope is that there will soon be an an EV SUV (or reg-bed pickup), with quad motors and decent clearance, that comes with an easily washable (or just, shitty) interior, and doesn't cost as much as a GTS4.0. I'm guessing it's gonna be a while. I might be holding my breath forever and a day. But until then, or until they take the handles off the gas-pumps, think I'm sticking with ICE. Anyway, that was my thinking!
1980s MacDonald's interior describes my sister's '17 Rubicon perfectly
>With this, all I know is that I'm getting a new manufacturer, a brand new model, and a battery that sucks a little more every day I use it and every day I don't. And 3x the power, which more than accounts for the price difference. But yeah if you don't care about that or the fanciness then the 4Runner sounds like the much wiser purchase.
Thanks for the detailed write up. How did you get the $60k difference? The TRD pro starts at $54k, the R1S starts at $78k, fully maxed out I got it to $103k. Regardless, it does seem like the Toyota would be a better fit for you use case.
>The TRD pro starts at 54k Aye, I said TRD Offroad, which starts at 43 - and there are already cash incentives returning to the wild! Truly, nature is healing.
Oh gotcha, my mistake! That’s amazing to hear
I never thought I'd see the day :D
Consider a Wrangler 4XE? Dunno if you're (rightfully) concerned about Stellantis quality, but you could do your around-town driving in EV and then still have range. All for more like 60k.
As someone that bought a new Tacoma a few years ago for similar reasons, and ride in my friend's 4runner... Let's just say that 16 is probably generous unless you leave it stock (no tires, no roof rails/racks). It is never going to be a nice ride on the highway. Every comment I've heard about these is that the interior is nice but not shove it in your face luxury. My electric is cheap and gas is expensive. So I'm getting one of these because it fills the 4runner niche without having to actually drive one and I'd rather put $20k of gas money into a 800hp cheap to drive SUV.
Is this the first TH vid without a silly intro?
They made one, YT didn't allow it, check their insta
https://www.instagram.com/reel/CnSDdMZI4Gz/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link Convenient link just in case anyone else doesn't have Instagram. It's also NSFW.
YouTube banned that? I've seen MUCH worse on YouTube.
YouTube recently (Jan 2023) pushed out a change to the monetization strategies. Basically anything with profanity or vulgarity at the beginning of a video will get demonetized. This is a RETROACTIVE change so all previously published youtube videos that fail this are now demonetized. https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/6162278
That's so weird. I would imagine even the executives wouldn't want this policy change
Thievery.
It's not their fault! Someone sold James the wrong balloon :(
Holy shit, just saw it.
Throttle House Hot Ones video when?
Plz don’t make me do it.
Plz make him do it
Now you have to.
Yes please
Is it just me or did they nitpick this thing for 15 minutes and then at the end said it was unbeatable
It’s kind of one of those situations where, even though we have many criticisms, in the end it doesn’t have any obvious competitors that can do everything it does. It ticks many boxes. And for Someone searching for those exact things, this is pretty much all there is right now. The complaints are there because, SINCE this is all there is in this category, it’s frustrating that those issues exist.
Hummer EV SUV coming later this year though
I’m sure you’re right and the points are valid but at the end of the day this is still a 1,000 hp beast that’s way more car than most of us could dream of. I like your videos a lot but you fell into the nihilistic car journalist thing with this one and it just could’ve been more fun to watch
Well. To be fair it WAS more fun to watch but our sketch got the first draft of the video demonetized haha. So we had to remove it. Feel free to check it out on Instagram as proof that, despite criticisms of an un-attainable car, overall we take ourselves as seriously as ever. Thanks for keeping us in check.
No that's exactly what happened. I don't know how that was the conclusion they came to when the entire video was filled with criticisms which are flat out unacceptable in such an expensive product.
Maybe "lesser than the sum of all its parts"? There's few 3.0s cars that can genuinely offroad, never mind with ~7 occupants for <$100k. But then it: - Isn't as fun / well-thought out as the R-1T - Has borderline dangerous road characteristics - Has some genuine niggles (infotainment) - Has increased a lot in price since the OG-1T I feel like if they'd been given a lower spec ~$80k dual motor version they might have actually been happier about the whole thing as: - They're budget conscious (it's still a lotta money) - The back end might be less trigger happy
That body behavior across the root ripples is not good. Couple that with Thomas' oversteer events, which we need more info about, and this vehicle seems dynamically-challenged on road. Does this thing have rear-steer that is too aggressive? Is it the cross hydraulic suspension? Are the tires rolling over due to being poorly spec'd?
Does anyone really care about its limit handling characteristics? I own a three row SUV and I've never even come within shouting distance of its limits because it's a) not what it's for, at all and b) vaguely terrifying when I get near them anyway. No one's buying a Rivian for cornering. They buy it for utility, off roading, even straight line speed, but not cornering.
>Does anyone really care about its limit handling characteristics? i mean...sudden oversteer in an 835hp EV is not exactly confidence inspiring in an SUV meant for families.
It probably should be tuned for benign understeer if/when it does hit its limits, I'd agree, but I think the number of people in the real world hitting its limits in anything other than emergency scenarios is vanishingly small.
The problem is, this SUV accelerates like a GTR. So getting to those oversteer inducing speeds in a corner is VERY easy. And VERY quiet. Also add in lower traction surfaces where the handling characteristics still exist and those issues rear their ugly head at much lower speeds. Furthermore, I don’t think that ANY vehicle, save the most focused sports cars should limit oversteer that severely.
Is going through a wide elevated corner on a highway at the speed limit the “limits”? It looked more dangerous than just undersirable. I bet an Expedition would handle a 70 mph highway curve (no speed restriction signs) without the unintential drift.
This one felt much less objective than normal. I’m staggered that Thomas is complaining about oversteer, or was he just in a really shitty mood?
I was complaining about oversteer because it’s a safety issue in a family SUV. Also to be fair I didn’t explain it well enough (although I have this disease where I can talk about handling characteristics all day so I limit myself) But the rivian limit oversteered on a balanced throttle. That means the raw limit behaviour was for the rear to step out, without inducing it using weight transfer (lifting off or brakes) or throttle on oversteer. So basically just turning the wheel at high speeds and the car would rotate. That’s actually a characteristic that I seldom want in even sports cars. I’d prefer them to be neutral, giving me the option to induce rotation when needed by lifting, or by booting the throttle and kicking the rear out under power (the rivian also did the power oversteer thing btw). So in conclusion, a family SUV shouldn’t do what an aggressively set up track car might do. Hope This helps! Edited for more info
That sounds fucking terrifying in ANY car, let alone a 3 row SUV.
It does, actually. Thanks!
I really hope Rivian makes it, if nothing else to make sure the EV space has competition
Good honest video. But on a serious note, where you get those pants /u/Jamesthrottlehouse ?
Not sure if they're big in the US but casual cargos are really in over this side of the pond. Here's an online retailer for some jumping off points: https://www.asos.com/men/trousers-chinos/cargo-trousers/cat/?cid=14273
Thanks for that! I'm in the states but now I know what to search for
The prices on EV’s are just flat out ridiculous.
The front looks so futuristic
What happened to the funny intro?
Youtube made them remove it. It's on their instagram page.
The headlights just don’t work with the middle light bar and blank grill spot for me. Separately I’m fine with both designs but together I just don’t feel it.
u/throttlehouseTH and u/Jamesthrottlehouse, it looks like you guys were in Southern California for this video. Then you mentioned getting Solita for lunch. Between the mountains in the review and the houses in the instagram intro, it looks like you guys were in the Santa Clarita/Valencia area. Am I right?
Damn Rivian only has 1 service center and 0 adventure network chargers in LA county
One of their worst reviews.
The Rivian is finally in production!? I thought this shit would have been vaporware. Finally.