I bought a new salad spinner recently, after having broken yet another one.
I’ve had fancy brands like Zyliss and OXO. I’ve had cheap store brand models and cheaper Amazon MYSSNGVWL type stuff as well. Knowing they would probably break didn’t make it feel better when they eventually broke.
Anyway the new salad spinner is large, heavy, with a steel pin into a brass bushing, has a metal handle and nylon gears in a sealed gearbox with exposed stainless screws for servicing. I opened it up and greased it on first use, mostly just to pretend to be servicing it, just to see what that felt like. It felt good!
The best part is it came with a catalogue that had order codes for spare parts. They wanted to help you maintain it. It was built to last and the manufacturer was on your side.
Can you cite a source for this? There's no question that they're vastly more complex, but I would think that modern car manufacturing is far more exacting (and efficient) than in the past.
If you're saying that older cars are more repairable, I'm happy to agree with you, even without a source to back up that claim.
An easily visible one is air intakes. Many manufacturers have shifted to plastic. Peteo-engineering has advanced a lot, but they will still get brittle and break.
Interior wise, you can look at things like fabric durability-- lower deniers can be cheaper, but will wear sooner. Springs/foam in seats are another example, but this will vary across manufacturers, models and trims.
This isn't exclusive to financial engineering manufacturers like Stellantis or Nissan, either. Toyota has had issues with simple things like rust proofing (whether intentional or not) on 1st generation Tacomas leading to massive recalls and things like plastic timing guides prone to wearing out. Ford with the wet clutches having belts submersed in oil.
German cars needing body off access for rear timing chain maintenance at 80k miles. Water cooled alternators (really, VW?). All types of "why?" if you follow cars once they are 3+ years old.
It seems like there are a lot of regressions that probably result from cost cutting, while others may exist to simply drive service revenue.
In the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency assumes the typical car is driven 15,000 miles (24,000 km) per year. According to the New York Times, in the 1960s and 1970s, the typical car reached its end of life around 100,000 miles (160,000 km). Due in part to manufacturing improvements, such as tighter tolerances and better anti-corrosion coatings, in 2012 the typical car was estimated to last for 200,000 miles (320,000 km) with the average car in 2024 lasting 160,545 miles according to the website Junk Car Reaper.
I think you're talking about apples and oranges, as parent appeared to be cataloguing recent design defects. Which are pretty common too.
That'll influence the average reliability minimally, unless you were unlucky enough to buy one of those models.
Personally, why I'd rather get something at 120k mileage w/ 250k+ max examples on the road by that calendar date. You'll know whether they designed a lemon.
Add: undersized Tacoma rear leaf springs, multiple manufacturers' head gaskets, a few early aluminum engines (? from memory)
There are many other considerations, too. Years ago I scraped Craigslist and Autotrader, grouping cars by generation/make/model/drivetrain to be able to predict longevity based on quantity for sale versus original sales figures. If a model sold 100k per year for 10 years and only 3 were for sale in year 13, that isn't a great sign. Cheap cars will tend to have cheap owners who are more likely to skimp on maintenance, typically leading to more accrued issues and a shorter lifespan for the vehicle. Some cars are just poorly engineered, and the markets are relatively efficient in pricing resale value. The definition of "high mileage" is going to vary by who you ask. Domestics 150k, German 80k, Japanese 200k, Korean 100k. These are subjective averages (some cars like Theta engines, Darts, even late model GM 6.2s have engine failures <40k), based on when they start disappearing due to repairs being more than the vehicle is worth, but based on what I saw then and kind of observe still.
Leaning on those prior mentioned product mixes, keep in mind that Japanese manufacturers weren't in the American market 60 years ago, so market mix would be wildly different. (Multiple 400k+ mi Toyotas in my family, along with 60 year old GMs, but with aftermarket or rebuilt engines.) The cost of vehicles (and repairs) relative to prevailing wages will impact the repair vs replace balance. Trade publications like Cox/NADA/Adesa/etc. are always cited by financial blogs when mentioning consumer spending/state of economy by average age of cars on the road. Why cars get junked or totaled has shifted drastically, too. Steel bumpers were easy to replace, modern bumper covers with styrofoam backing and aluminum crumple zones, not so much. Tolerances is a vague term in that veiled PR piece on that wiki article. Machining has improved. Tech like direct injection and improved lubrication (synthetics) have done much more in terms of efficiency and longevity. In a lot of cases, manufacturers try to get more and more horsepower from the same displacement by pushing tighter engine tolerances (crank/main bearings, pistons/rings, valvetrain) and things like higher compression ratios and revs, leading to more heat and earlier failure. So while you have better initial engineering, you are closer to the point of failure. For another example, interference engines will grenade themselves if you ignore timing belt maintenance, but in the meantime, you get more horsepower by getting more air into the cylinders.
A v6 Camry or Accord is going to be have more hp, be faster,more reliable at same age, be quieter and get 3x the mpg than nearly any muscle car of the past.
Unfortunately it seems that many Americans prefer giant vehicles that place more emphasis on their size (and status) than materially important factors like reliability engineering or fuel economy.
Obviously these are ancedotal examples, they can be confirmed by wasting hours reading about cars and watching mechanic review videos from people who work on them daily (I am partial to the CarCareNut on YT).
Efficient manufacturing means exactly building stuff as cheaply as you can get away with.
There's a reason why roman architecture is still standing: it is massively overbuilt, the very opposite of efficient (they also used to make the architect stand under his own arches as they removed the temporary support, that could have contributed to the overbuilding).
Is it? Every city in Roman empire had temples and forum. Where are they still standing? Maybe half a dozen survived, like pantheon in Rome or temple in Nimes, but it's extremely rare. Maybe they weren't overbuilt at all?
It seems like you both are looking at different definitions of built well. One pertaining to how well the car will perform over its lifetime. The other describing the build process. Not necessarily exclusionary, but different.
Don't they use the same IEC 62196 ports as other EVs, outside the US?
They made their own in the US, because the standard SAE J1772 combo port is an unweildy behemoth, then they released the patent into public domain, and the rest of the automotive industry adopted their port into the NACS port, which beats both IEC 62196 and SAE J1772 in available power, all in a much smaller and easier-to-use connector.
It's the status quo? Cars last longer than they ever have in history. In 2 decades average age of cars on the road increased from 9.5 to 14.5. They are a little more difficult to maintain for the home mechanic because they are packed with electronics, but what you want seems to exist perfectly. Many use timing chains instead of timing belts that last 20+ years. Radiators rarely crack whereas they used to all the time. Alternators last the life of the vehicle. Cars are often upgraded because the owner is bored or does not feel like paying for rust repair at the 15 year mark, more than unfixable problems.
While I can't help you with a car, I share your desire of wanting things with replaceable parts, so I leave you with this, the coffee maker version your salad spinner, https://us.moccamaster.com. All parts replaceable.
espresso machines are maybe in a different class of "coffee maker" but it seems like even the cheapest of those is pretty easy to service/repair/source parts.
or in some cases even upgrade to improve capabilities...
I did the gaggiauino mod to my gaggia classic and basically everything in there is just pipes and wires... the most complicated single part on the original is the vibratory pump. I'm pretty sure i could keep that same machine going indefinitely with access to parts.
The [Slate Truck](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slate_Truck) seems to be marketing itself with this in mind. But it's backed by Jeff Bezos, so proceed with caution.
Electronics and code ruined replaced pure mechanics. Components aren't physically maintainable or hot-swappable, because they aren't just physically connected.
Second is that maintenance is how dealerships make money, so there is a monetary incentive to make it seem esoteric.
Also if you’re dealing with sensitive information intelligence agencies can’t hack your car to go 100% on the throttle in a suburb. (Not sure if this is relevant in any way to salad spinners, though.)
That it should be possible for somebody with a reasonable understanding of car maintenance to actually fix or maintain their car instead of having a blob of proprietary nonsense only meant to lock you in and milk your wallet with mandatory dealer repairs and subscriptions.
Complexity is the reason your car doesn't drink fuel like people drink water and also the reason there's vastly less severe accidents than 60 years ago.
Looks like a great car. As Marques Brownlee puts it [1], this is Rivian's "Model Y fighter". And I personally find the R2 to be much more appealing than a Model Y in terms of size, shape, and interior.
But we have been misled so many times about EV prices prior to launch, I think it's important to wait until we see what it actually costs for different trim levels before making comparisons to the Model Y. That $45,000 price they are throwing around could very well be for a trim that isn't even available at launch.
And anyway if I were going to buy a new compact crossover today, I'd probably lean more toward the RAV4 PHEV. It's an EV most of the time, I can refill it up with gas during long trips, it's got tactile buttons, and it has carplay.
None of these car reviewers ever take into account build quality and customer issues. Example they all lashihly praised the EX90, but owners struggled for a year with software problems, then found out the LIDAR they paid for is never going to assist their driving and they need a new computer. Same with Rivian, all of today's reviews praise the R2, but ignore the troubles current owners have not just with the car but with getting service too.
Never buy a first year model and then keep an eye on owners forums before you buy.
> None of these car reviewers ever take into account build quality and customer issues.
Because most car reviewers' job is to explain new releases. Most issues arise after time, which reviewers generally don't get. MKBHD has gone into quality issues at times: see for example Cybertruck [1] and Fisker Ocean [2]. In their Q&A videos, the couple that does Motormouth [3] due mention reliability when asked for recommendations.
There are sources for reliability assessments, like J. D. Power and Consumer Reports.
Everyone commented on the battery life for my model 3 in winter (which is annoying but not a huge deal). The problems with the bushings, the easily cracked (2500$) roof glass, and the lack of spare parts (not as bad as Rivian) were drowned out.
Love the car, but wouldn't have bought it for the price I paid (used) if I had known.
The R2 looks great but like you said, never buy a first year model.
Day 1 reviews, the ones that drives sales of any product, are flawed by definition. They take a narrow and superficial view of the product, a snapshot when what you need is a timelapse.
The winter tires that score great on day 1 but put a bit of wear on them and they turn to crap. The motherboard that scores the highest in the benchmarks at launch but later on burns your CPU, or gets a BIOS update that caps the performance, or gets no updates whatsoever. The car that shines at acceleration and feature list but breaks down often and is slow and expensive to fix.
Day 1 reviews certainly have some value but it’s higher for the reviewer than for the potential buyer. By the time the reviewer follows up after battle testing in time, if they even want to risk looking like they got it wrong the first time, the damage was done. And people aren’t that interested in reading about old stuff, those reviews don’t get the views.
i have that rule and the same exception for the 0. it feels like its "cyber" look done actually right with proper design (i dont let other inferior designs steal the word cyber). i would also add any decently good* ev minivan that is actually available to buy in the us.
*vw buzz fails the good test for no one pedal driving and the price for what you get is outta wack. though lots of the 1st gen ones are still sitting on car lots so maybe that could cross the exception barrier if they go for cheaper.
Same here! American-made EVs ask for an incredibly heavy price tag and don’t deliver on the reliability of ICE or Hybrid cars a third of their price. It’s the primary thing stopping me from getting one as my next vehicle.
I’m trying to shop around to replace my wife’s aging crossover and I really can’t find anything more attractive than a Prius or another Kia Soul. If we could get electric cars from the CN market it’d be a no-brainer!
I’ve had software issues on an ID4 and iX, but I’ve never had reliability problems. The cars always have just worked with no maintenance. Same with my model Y, minus any issues!
Maybe it’s a “but when it happens you’re screwed” situation. I’m thinking of the story of BMW’s battery safety fuse (the one that trips in an accident to protect first responders and the people in the car) actually tripping when you hot the curb or a pothole harder. It requires a very expensive trip to the dealer. Some of my Tesla owning friends keep spending time in the shop getting something about the suspension fixed 2-3 times already.
I have no idea if Chinese EVs are consistently better, Volvo can be seen as one and I don’t think they excel at reliability lately.
P.S. Software issues are reliability issues. The software is a core part of the car and its value proposition, you can’t discount them as “just software issues, not reliability”.
> Some of my Tesla owning friends keep spending time in the shop getting something about the suspension fixed 2-3 times already.
They're pretty lucky from what I hear! A friend of mine just sold his Model S because he'd been waiting over 7 months for the shop to source a replacement part. Apparently he'd even resorted to begging Musk to look into it over X because Tesla wont even give him an ETA.
iD4 feels like they took every lesson of predictable UX design and then intentionally reversed it to make the most frustrating UI possible.
The window controls, touch buttons, screen, steering wheel controls, etc. They all seem designed to answer the question, "how could we make this unnecessarily difficult and distracting to use? How could we possibly cram in yet another State Machine for the user to keep (lose) track of?"
It also has the "try to kill the asthmatic by randomly switching off recirculate while driving through dense wood smoke" feature, naturally.
Considering how much money VW makes on EVs[0], I suppose I'm not surprised by this 'nudge' toward gas cars.
One of the good things in the UK is seeing how quickly my neighbours swapped out their Tesla's for BYD's.
I'm not in the market at the moment so don't know what the UK protectionism position is on Chinese EV's, but has been interesting to watch how quick it's happening.
I work in design and we're talking to two Chinese EV companies launching in the UK this year, so the wall can't be that high for them.
The UK has a local car manufacturing industry (Nissan, Jaguar/Landrover), but not large enough to be able to lobby for protectionism. And in any case the UK has basically given up on having a coherent trade policy since Brexit.
I've seen quite a few BYDs and MG4s, and there are Jaecoo and Leapmotor dealers near me. I've been told that some NHS boards were using MGs as "pool" cars, but the only example I can find a reference for is Shetland. https://www.nhsshetland.scot/news/article/43/nhs-shetland-ro...
I don't think I've ever seen a Rivian. The R2 is supposed to be coming to the UK in 2027.
The UK has a lot of "garage" brands too (the Morgans, Caterhams, BAC, etc.), but as you said they don't have a lot of lobbying power, and the lobbying they do is on behalf of lengthening THEIR transition to new EV requirements.
That said, the UK's history of small auto manufacturers would make it potentially ideal for a few domestic producers to make little EVs, similar to the Caterham 7, or the Ariel Atom for the domestic market, but they will never be the mass produced Tesla or BYD competitor.
Imo its not anti-China protectionism. Western models are cheaper in China, and Chinese models are more expensive in the EU & UK.
I think it's a combination of manufacturers wanting a higher profit, some adaptations & certification processes, dealer and service infrastructure necessary for selling in the West that just costs more.
I don't think Chinese manufacturers will be able to significantly undercut the competition while maintaining a desirable quality
I would have thought that to be the case too ... I know all about the exciting Xiaomi cars (e.g.) but I grew up in the era of the Chinese brand being "low quality". We're well beyond that now and have been for probably a decade. And don't get me wrong, I'm not a China cheerleader.
I give the example I mentioned. People local to me swapping out their model 3's for BYD. Maybe they just got to their end of their lease cycle and wanted to try something different, but I cannot believe they would have willingly chosen a significantly lower quality car (knowing some of them). And I believe the cost difference is marginal but the overall package just a bit better.
And you know people, they'll swap out anything for just a marginal saving. Doesn't have to be significant unless there's some network effects. And there really isn't with cars.
Anyway, I'm just yapping, but think the used Tesla market is going to get even more swamped than it already is. Not a bad thing because previously people looking for low cost cars were buying diesels - so I'm hopeful that'll transition to low cost EV's now ... but the game is up for Tesla automotive, but we've known that for some time.
I welcome the competition, but my two cents is that BYD or any other Chinese brand doesn't seem to be offering anything outside of the typicial price-performance calculus of existing brands.
I welcome competition, as it benefits everyone, even people who don't want to buy Chinese. It will also encourge building factories for EV components in Europe, which mean other suppliers might benefit from lower prices, and some of the savings will end up at the customer.
As for why your coworkers decided to go for non-Tesla EVs, you have to ask them, and ask them again a few years from now if it was worth it. In their defense, Tesla makes a very particular kind of car (in 2 slight variations), which many people might want to move away from.
Maybe they want a petrol range extender, maybe they want a more traditional SUV, or something smaller/bigger than Tesla.
I watched one of those Out Of Spec videos on an earlier Rivian and it was full of praise and raving. Then there was a later video where they almost on the side mentioned when it came out of the factory it felt legitimately unsafe to drive on the highway and had already spent days at service including a total powertrain shutdown, essentially a lemon. These things happened already in the time before their first video yet were never mentioned. That entire YouTube review industry is more rotten and bought than the same show on Cable TV ever was..
Yep. Consumer Reports' "Find a Car" page has sorting options for Overall Score, Road Test Score, Predicted Reliability, and Predicted Owner Satisfaction. I think they're a tremendous pro-consumer non-profit, and that a $39/year membership more than pays for itself by way of better major purchases.
Rivian, by the way, is the lowest-ranked of 26 covered auto manufacturers in terms of predicted reliability, below Ram and Jeep. The top 3 are Toyota, Subaru, and Lexus.
Also Doug Demuro raves about it [1]. Personally I can't stand Marques' reviews. Just inspiring and he looks bored. Doug on the other hand really seems to put some of his soul into his reviews.
Doug's problem is that he is never critical, he even calls flaws or omissions with the euphemism 'quirks'. It feels like he is too embedded in the automotive ecosystem to the point where he will not even be critical of Stellantis products.
Marques has no problem calling out inferior products.
Right you are Ken, but the format pretty much is his schtick. It’s not that entertaining at all anymore, but it’s also decent to know that a review will probably exist for most cars I’m ever considering.
For me his value remains mainly that he’s tall which I am too, so when he’s in a car I can guess what it’ll be like for me.
If even Doug falls out of favor.. then I don't know anymore. His voice doesn't bother me too much but he sure has a lot of energy just to keep talking. Never stops talking.
The RAV4 EV capacity is so small, the electric engine so weak (cuts to gas well before highway speed), and the charge speed so slow, that in practice its a 100% gas car. Only a small number of disciplined owners are going to be able to run it as an EV most of the time, as its actually impractical to do so.
This is completely false. I own one. It goes up to the low 80s mph before the gas engine kicks in. Acceleration from a stop is sub 6 second 0-60. Hardly weak. Charges from fully empty to full in about 2.5 hours.
Mine gets a 40-45 mile all electric range. I drive 10-12k miles per year, and ignoring extended multi-day vacation road trips once every couple years, I fill up the tank 2-3 times per year.
My experience with my Prius PHEV is the same. I don’t even have a level 2 charger. I just plug it in in the garage overnight, and most days I don’t use any gas.
The only time the ICE turns on before my EV range is up is if I hit the windshield defrost button when it’s cold. That’s presumably to prioritize getting heat out through the vents quickly. I’ve never accelerated fast enough, nor gone fast enough to trigger the ICE engine taking over. It’s straight up an EV for my first ~40 miles every day.
I rented a BYD M9 PHEV minivan while on vacation in Cancun, Mexico and other than the vehicle winning over my family in, like 2 days, the mileage was amazing. 1000km range, of which, 180km was battery (that's 520mi of gas + 100mi battery range).
PHEVs in the US are gimped by poor regulatory incentives - we should be forcing manufacturers to increase overall range + EV range. If this model were sold in the US by a US manufacturer, I bet the ranges would be halved (and still considered good/decent in comparison to existing alternatives).
That sounds like the real issue, vs. EVs. This sounds like you basically have to plug it in every time you park it. And there’s no way you could do any sort of (even small) road trip without using gas.
(For comparison, our EV6 has about 200-250 mile range, and we charge it about once a week or so, give or take, unless we take a road trip.)
Also, one of the main advantages with EVs is their insane low maintenance, but sounds like PHEVs still have to all the same maintenance issues of ICE vehicles.
> This sounds like you basically have to plug it in every time you park it. And there’s no way you could do any sort of (even small) road trip without using gas.
> Also, one of the main advantages with EVs is their insane low maintenance, but sounds like PHEVs still have to all the same maintenance issues of ICE vehicles.
I keep seeing this repeated, but I kept a detailed decade-plus spreadsheet of maintenace costs for my last ICE car, and ~2/3 of the costs were for components that are common to EVs.
1. Maintenance isn’t just about cost. It’s about the number of things that move and/or need fluids, and can fail/leak. It’s about dealing with service centers trying to upsell you on every little possible thing that could go wrong.
When I take my EV in, it’s for one of two things: I need my tires rotated, or I need new tires. That’s it. There’s no “curtsy inspection” that comes back with literally 40 different things that I could have done to it.
2. Our household has four vehicles: one EV, three ICE vehicles. There’s no way the occasional new tires (rotations are free where we bought our tires) amount to 2/3 the cost of the maintenance needed on our ICE vehicles. It’s probably closer to 1/10.
I think you’re overestimating what all needs maintenance on an EV.
> and am familiar with which items are common to an EV.
This is the overestimating I was referring to. I think you’re either mistaken in what items are common to EV, or you’re overestimating the cost of those items.
There is only one thing that needs maintenance on an EV: tires.
Unless you’re saying that tires amount to 2/3 of an ICE vehicles maintenance. In which case you may want to shop around for more reasonably priced tires.
Not the person you replied to, but I'm not sure how you arrived here. Brakes, coolant, washer fluid, diff oil, gearbox oil, cabin air filter, wiper blades. Did you know EV motors can also require oil changes (at hundreds of thousands of miles, in fairness)?
Nice Michelins for my ICE have been something resembling 1/3 of service costs. Not 2/3 but not negligible either.
Maybe at 1/10 the schedule of ICE vehicles, at least for me. I use regenerative braking almost exclusively (probably 95+% of the time).
> coolant
Yes, I did forget about that one. But frequency is about 50% less often than ICE vehicles. Maybe once every 5-10 years.
> washer fluid, cabin air filter, wiper blades
Agreed on these as well, but I bucketed these in the trivial category, totaling less than a tank of gas once every 6-12 months, and all DIY things that you don’t need to take to a service center for.
At the end of the day, I only care about things I need to take it to the shop for. Which means I only need to take it in for a no-questions-asked tire rotation 1-2 times a year, and new tires every 4-5 years. Everything else I can easily do at home.
> diff oil, gearbox oil
These are the same thing, but you’re correct. But it’s infrequent (maybe once or twice over the life, and around $150.
> Did you know EV motors can also require oil changes
> Maybe at 1/10 the schedule of ICE vehicles, at least for me. I use regenerative braking almost exclusively (probably 95+% of the time).
In practice, my brakes always corrode from road salt and fuel-efficient driving habits and need replacing long before I actually wear them down, so regen brakes are largely irrelevant to brake life.
> Which means I only need to take it in for a no-questions-asked tire rotation 1-2 times a year, and new tires every 4-5 years. Everything else I can easily do at home.
So that sounds... basically the same as my ICE. Two shop visits per year for tire changes, one oil change per year at the same time as one of the tire changes.
There are many things that break or need maintenance on my ICE vehicles that I don’t want to mess with myself: oil changes, transmissions, alternators, belts, engine issue (oil leaks). Engine air filters are about the only ICE-specific piece I don’t mind doing myself.
Re: brakes, where I live, I don’t think salt will play much a factor, and not sure what you mean by “fuel efficient driving” wearing your brakes, but I’m using regenerative braking 95+% of the time.
> There are many things that break or need maintenance on my ICE vehicles that I don’t want to mess with myself: oil changes, transmissions, alternators, belts, engine issue (oil leaks).
Of all those things you listed, they took a total of 3 garage visits (that weren't already scheduled for tire changes) over 14 years. Not what I'd call "many".
> Re: brakes, where I live, I don’t think salt will play much a factor, and not sure what you mean by “fuel efficient driving” wearing your brakes, but I’m using regenerative braking 95+% of the time.
I mean that if you drive in a fuel efficient way - i.e. by not constantly accelerating/braking unnecessarily, your brake life will be much extended. My current car has regen brakes, and I expect the brakes will require replacing just as often as they did on my old ICE car, due to corrosion.
Again, probably only relevant for extremely long term ownership, but someone will need to own and maintain all the high mileage decade-old EVs a decade from now.
My daughter one day told me that her Tesla said it needed oil maintenance. I scoffed and tried to mansplain to her how EVs don’t need oil. Then I checked the car, and sure enough, it was asking for oil. One of the contained oil systems had sprung a leak. That’s on a 6 year old Tesla Model X.
ICE maintenance is pretty cheap, with the exception of tires, which are a huge outlay (but also the most important safety item!). My Honda only needs $35 of oil/filter once a year, maybe $40 of brake pads once in 80,000 miles, and a burned out bulb for a few bucks. Top tires all around though, easily $600-$800. A few one time things around the 100k mile mark, maybe plugs/sparkys/belt or similar, but not regular in any sense, most cars will only have them ever done once.
> seatbelt receptacle, a cruise control buttons, roof exterior rubber trim, a headrest, a window switch, washer fluid spray nozzles, lug nuts, wiper blades, shocks, struts, door weather stripping, rivets holding the front plastic splashguard on, headlight bulbs, headlight buffing, washer fluid reservoir cap, replacement speaker, turn signal switch, windshield repair, backup light switch.
Other than washer fluid, wiper blades, and the occasional headlight bulb, many of these I’ve never had to replace on any of my vehicles (ICE or EV), and the few that I’ve had to replace was maybe once on one car.
I feel like you’re an unlucky sample of 1.
Most of my ICE vehicles needed none of these, and only things related to ICE vehicles (oil/fluid changes, brake pads/rotors oil leaks, transmissions, alternators, belts).
Maybe a bit, but overall my numbers line up with what most sources give for average TCO maintenance numbers. But really, the car was just getting old - having a couple random things to fix per year on a 10+ year-old car isn't unusual. (And my ICE component maintenance was quite low, so you could say I was lucky there, rather than unlucky.)
I think it's your maintenance numbers that are way off, "zero maintenance other than tires" doesn't line up with what any reputable source gives for TCO maintenance costs for EVs or non-ICE components.
I think you also might be overestimating what the average ICE owner has to take care of.
Most Americans don’t keep a car long enough to even pay it off - they’re in an endless loop of trade-ins, meaning that most non-accident damage is covered by warranty.
I’ve had my current ICE car for just over 5 years now and finally paid my first out of pocket repair cost: $40 for a new washable air filter. Other than that, my expenditures have been tires and a couple hundred bucks in oil changes that I didn’t want to do myself.
> I think you also might be overestimating what the average ICE owner has to take care of.
> Most Americans don’t keep a car long enough to even pay it off - they’re in an endless loop of trade-ins, meaning that most non-accident damage is covered by warranty.
No, I think you may be underestimating. According to this article [1] at least, it’s close to 13 years. That’s well into large/costly maintenance items.
Maybe on HN, people don’t keep their cars long enough to need new brakes or transmission flush, but that’s not typical.
Curious for the big examples. Some major things EVs don’t have: oil changes, belts/chains, transmissions, most things related to the engine & drive train are different… seems like the main similarities would be tires, brakes, body work, amenities.
No the GP, but in the 10 years of owning my ICE vehicle I've had these things serviced:
Oil change/Oil filter, Spark plugs, Alternator belt, Aircon belt, Brake pads, Brake fluid, Wiper blades, Wiper fluid, 12V battery, Tyres, an accessory fuse, a jammed seatbelt buckle. Two of the power locks are a bit sticky and probably need a touch-up of oil.
The first 4 are ICE-only, and brake pads are worn less if you mostly use regen. The rest are the same on EVs.
And by far the biggest cost of car ownership (for new cars at least) is depreciation. And EVs depreciate rapidly - enough to offset the costs of oil changes I imagine. And I actually like bringing my car into the dealer twice a year for service. I get to wander around and check out what's new, eat some free snacks, shoot the breeze with my dealer about what's happening in the industry, and then spend the rest of the time on my laptop. Maybe this is sad to admit, but I actually kind of look forward to it.
That being said, if you're in the market for a used EV right now, that depreciation actually works in your favor. I was looking at prices on used luxury EVs recently, and have to admit I was pretty tempted by some 2-3 year old cars selling at less than half MSRP.
Not that I'm disagreeing with your main point, but I will say that Toyota's hybrid design is one of the best ICE engines out there. The transmission is replaced with planetary gears and the starter and alternators are replaced with a pair of motors to control the throttle and continuously variable transmission, making it one of the gentlest engine designs out there.
But yes, there is engine oil to be replaced and whatnot.
And also, to your point, my experience with my PHEV is my short range driving is electric, but it turns out most of my miles is consumed by annual long range trips. If I commuted to work, things would tip more in favour of EV driving. All to say how much EV you get out of your PHEV will depend highly on the type of driving one does.
> Mine gets a 40-45 mile all electric range.
That sounds like the real issue, vs. EVs. This sounds like you basically have to plug it in every time you park it. And there’s no way you could do any sort of (even small) road trip without using gas.
> (For comparison, our EV6 has about 200-250 mile range, and we charge it about once a week or so, give or take, unless we take a road trip.)
its gasoline car. You use 45miles for every day commute while charging overnight, and use gas for roadtrips: 500 miles range + 3 mins put gas into car
Toyotas hybrid uses gas when you accelerate hard to get that 0-60, it’s a combined system horsepower. Unlike phevs, EREVs are only driven by the electric drive, and the gas system is a series generator, so the EV is fully capable & always doing 100% of the work. PHEVs fundamentally aren’t.
Anyway, the real world data from PHEV usage shows you are the outlier, most people don’t bother plugging them in regularly due to their limitations.
Again, false. You can clearly hear when the combustion engine kicks in and it's indicated in the dash. I can floor it in electric mode and it still gets up to 60 in around 6 seconds, no gas involved. Hybrid mode is probably slightly faster but it's a very marginal difference.
I don't believe your last statement because you've been wrong about everything else, and it doesn't make sense. Plugging it in is exactly as easy as literally any electric car, and it simply doesn't have the limitations you claim it does.
I don't know what you've been reading, but you should evaluate the veracity of it as a source and talk to actual owners. I know several others who have one and we're all quite happy with them and don't get gas often
“ The researchers attributed most of the gap to overestimates of the “utility factor” – the ratio of miles travelled in electric mode to the total miles travelled – finding that 27% of driving was done in electric mode even though official estimates assumed 84%. ”
Perhaps the rav4 prime @ 41ml max ev range is a better system than all the other low range PHEVs like it, and has better real world usage data than them. I doubt it though, but I don’t have the data on just the rav.
It's an interesting article - thanks for sharing! The original report is worth reading too. [1]
I agree with the premise. The "utility factor" used to estimate fuel efficiency for PHEVs does not line up with real-world data, which effectively creates a loophole to avoid emissions regulations and keep selling gas guzzlers. This is a problem, and should be fixed.
In regards to which cars are most to blame:
> Volkswagen, Mercedes-Benz and BMW account for the lion’s share of fines avoided over the past three years, together responsible for 89% of the total.
This is a recent trend where luxury carmakers are using PHEVs to circumvent emissions regulations. The latest BMW M5 [2], for example, is a PHEV with a monster 4.4L V8 engine. Car enthusiasts actually hate it compared to the old model because the hybrid system increased the weight by 1000 lbs. But making it a PHEV is probably the only way that BMW is still able to sell a V8. It seems kind of stupid all around.
The RAV4 PHEV is also a big, heavy (4,500 lb) car with a large (by European standards) 2.5L engine. But I would hesitate to lump it in with luxury cars from BMW, Mercedes, Land Rover, etc. I would also hesitate to apply findings from a European study to the US market, where large gasoline cars are currently very popular (not that every discussion needs to be about the US - but the RAV4 is the best selling car in the US so it's important to that market). Not saying you're wrong about RAV4 PHEV emissions relative to the gasoline RAV4, just that the study you linked doesn't really support making any specific claims about that model. The report only mentions Toyota once, where it is lumped into an "others" category on a chart along with Ford, Hyundai, JLR, Kia, Mazda, Mitsubishi, Nissan, and Suzuki.
If you build a product that most people don’t “use correctly” then you have not built a good product suitable for that use. Blaming the customer and expecting them to change is a losing strategy
There are reasons to buy a PHEV even if you never plug it in. Their electric motors tend to output more power than HEV versions of the same model, leading to more performance and a quieter drivetrain (even with the engine running, it doesn't have to work as hard). You can also run climate control and infotainment while parked without having to idle the engine, which is nice when waiting around on a hot day. Or you can remotely start the air conditioner with your phone.
Basically you can get EV quality-of-life features on a gasoline-powered vehicle.
I probably wouldn't recommend a PHEV to someone who doesn't have a place to plug it in every day. But there are reasons to buy a PHEV beyond just fuel efficiency.
The cars fine. It’s great it works for him. I wouldn’t personally buy one today when lots of options for real BEVs exist, but you do you.
What I do care about, and why I care that he’s an outlier, is that low range PHEVs mainly exist to get emissions credits for manufacturers so that they can sell more gas cars, and those emission savings aren’t real [1]. You could say everyone’s dumb for using them this way, but clearly the ergonomics of the electrical capabilities in this category are lacking in important ways.
And I can’t prove it but I bet the manufacturers have known this for a long time. But adding a plug to a hybrid with a tiny battery was an awfully cheap way to get your existing car counted as “green” for credits, so too tempting.
I watched MKBHD’s review versus Doug DeMuro’s and only one of them took the time to point out the tailgate window and wipers. One reviews cars the other reviews gadgets.
I watched both Marques' review and Doug's, and yeah Doug's was better. I linked the MKBHD review because mainly I wanted to make the Model Y comparison, and Marques called it a "Model Y fighter" in the video title.
And also, Doug feels a little out of touch to me these days. Less about "quirks and features" that appeal to me (although he still covers that), and more about "enthusiast cars" (like his million dollar Porsche and Lambo) that don't really interest me. Although to be fair MKBHD isn't much better in that regard.
I remember when Marques coined the word “squiricle” which is a portmanteau of square and circle, to describe the shape of the steering wheel of a Tesla. From then on every “car reviewer” YouTuber started describing any steering wheel with this shape using the stupid portmanteau. It’s infuriating to car enthusiasts who knew that this kind of steering wheel is called a quartic steering wheel, with history behind the design.
The only thing I'd miss about the MY is the 7-seat feature. I love the fact that you can technically cram two more people in the car on the occasional times when you need to, without needing to drive a giant 7-seat boat. I wish more mid-size electric SUVs did the same.
That's not surprising. The point isn't to use it to regularly drive tall adults around back there. It's for when your family of four needs to take two of your kids' friends somewhere, that kind of thing. We probably use it once every couple of months, but it's super handy at those times, and folds away out of sight and mind the rest of the time.
The RAV4 Prime is extremely hard to get if you live outside of SoCal and maybe a few other areas. I'm in the southeast and a few years ago the local dealer told me that this entire region is only allocated a few Prime's each quarter. Even today I've never seen one in the wild.
Not only that, but it sounds like dealerships are still hardcore ripping off people who want to buy a RAV4 Prime. $20k over MSRP, refusing to sell without add-ons / warranty, etc.
Toyota is claiming "up to 52 miles on a full charge" on the recently announced 2026 RAV4 PHEV [1]. For me that would be enough to cover the majority of my trips.
Looks like I was mistaken though and you can't actually buy the 2026 model yet (and the Toyota website still shows the older 2025 model). And as another commenter pointed out, it may not actually be possible to buy the older model either due to insufficient production.
The 23-25 RAV4 prime has a recall where the instrument cluster goes blank. AFAIK the whole thing needs to be replaced. Sounds just like the Ioniq ICCU issues.
Marques Brownlee is a kid who did shitty reviews of cell phones and is now a tech influencer, not an objective auto industry reviewer. He knows jack shit about the auto industry. Whatever comes out of his mouth is designed to make his clients - the companies who pay him to pimp their products - look as good as possible.
Rivians are wildly heavy and inefficient compared to the rest of the industry. The R1T weighs more than two of the heaviest version of the Ioniq 5, for example.
R1T owners seem to average about 2mi/kwhr, whereas the Ioniq 5 gets almost twice that...
Its fitting he would think the reference in EVs is the Model Y of all things, the technologically outdated, slow charging car whose sales are falling off a cliff while the manufacturer is trying to upsell you a monthly subscription for lane keeping.
Yet I was unable to find a better priced vehicle that does not charge monthly for remote start, access to the vehicle's camera recordings, phone key, and navigation.
And the monthly subscription is for a software feature that does quite a bit more than lane keeping, in my experience of the trial they offered during December. I did multiple 45 min drives across town, on urban and traffic light streets without intervention, and many other drives where intervention was only required 1 or 2 times. I could see real utility in it for someone with slower reflexes or poorer eyesight, such as the elderly.
I haven't seen anyone offer that capability at anywhere near Model Y's price.
here another review from my favorite car reviewer Mat Watson (carwow), from what I remember he complains about cleaning rear window wiper, but it feels all in all like paid ad
The fact that Rivan gave preview access to a UK car reviewer while ignoring Out Of Spec who literally have 3 Rivians in their 'fleet' shows that Rivian is not yet serious about building a quality, customer-centric EV even though I truly want them to be successful.
Former R1S Gen 2 owner. Love this brand and I want to love the car, but the quality and constant maintenance issues were unacceptable.
Rattles, a door mirror motor breaking, doors that wouldn't shut properly, door weather stripping that fell off, a door that just wouldn't open, panel alignment issues, some kind of screaching-to-a-halt-and-terrifying-my-family auto-brake that Rivian never figured out after reviewing log data.
Oh and did I mention the fans or heat pump that sound like a ROCKET LAUNCHING?! At a park one time someone asked me if something was wrong with the vehicle. Nope, that's just the terrible fans they chose!
Insult to injury: someone rear ended me. Insurance "covered" it, but the local collision center --- my only option within 6 hours --- charges a 2X rate for EVs that State Farm would not cover. So a $14,000 MINOR FENDER DENT turned into $7,000 out of pocket for me.
If you look at /r/rivian, it's a near constant stream of issues. While Rivian did expedite service center visits for critical issues, other times repairs were months out. And as the R2 scales, SC growth will probably trail for a while, and so I really fear for the experience early adopters are in for.
I am rooting for them but for me personally I would not consider another Rivian.
The R2 was the first time I seriously thought about spending up on a vehicle.
It looks good.
But $45k++ is just wild to me. It seems like the market is undervaluing used EV’s, so hopefully the depreciation curve will bring these down to $30k in a couple years for us old-school folks who prefer not to have a $1000/mo car loan.
I'm a little confused why you think that's wild; It's pricing is inline with other BEV's in the Canadian market at least; it's comparing with the Model Y, the Equinox, the Blazer, the Mach e, the Ioniq 5, the EV6, the BZ4, and the Aryia.
Typically speaking you're going to spend $10,000 to $13,000 more then an equivalent gas car for a BEV vs a comparable gas car in Canada.
It’s just surprising to me that this is surprising to anyone in 2026. New cars are no longer $20-30k in the US and haven’t been since 2021. Average transaction price is now $50k+, so if companies like Rivian that skip the dealership model charge $45k, it really isn’t that expensive. The only new cars under $30k are sedans and hatchbacks. And most of them start at almost $27-30k for base price not including all the bs dealership fees.
> The only new cars under $30k are sedans and hatchbacks. And most of them start at almost $27-30k for base price not including all the bs dealership fees.
I’m not sure if you’re agreeing to what I said or if this is meant as a counterpoint. But that’s kind of proving my point, new cars are pretty expensive these days. If you’re getting a base Nissan Leaf for $30k, SUVs costing $45k don’t sound that unreasonable.
The 45k is a myth for now. The vehicles that have been reviewed so far are going to be $60k+ performance models. We'll see if they actually get down to 45k.
From the analysis I've seen with that drag coefficient, the 45k vehicle is going to have to have a range of 220 to 260 miles. Hardly something that will fly off the shelves.
Average price of a new vehicle in the US is $50,000. This is priced appropriately considering total cost of ownership delta against a combustion vehicle. Rivian needs more volume for prices to decline from manufacturing efficiency at scale.
A cursory search of the web shows that TCO for EVs in the US is higher than ICE for all but high mileage commuters. Wish it wasn't the case, but insurance alone is a 30% premium.
Insurance is a bear for Teslas. They cost a lot to repair.
The Model 3 Highland is super fun to drive. Maybe other EVs have this too. It's a very different experience to a similarly priced ICE car, and worth factoring in to the value proposition.
I specify Highland because the previous version was rattly and noisy enough to seriously detract from the zippy driving experience. Highland is nice.
NYT recently did a fantastic calculator. It isn't simple flat one or the other is cheaper. It takes into account buy vs lease, milage, local energy cost, length of ownership etc
> While drafting the fact sheet, we checked two headline policy ideas that the One Big, Beautiful, Bill introduced: the early sunset of the consumer EV credit and a new $250 annual EV fee. While the annual fee was dropped from the final legislation, the $7,500 consumer credit now ends September 30th.
> For the Equinox EV, these changes would cut its seven-year savings over the gasoline Equinox from about $9,000 to under $200. The Model Y also showed savings compared to its gasoline comparison under that less favorable scenario for EVs.
That link also factors in fuel savings which depends on where you live. I'd personally never save on an EV if it costs more upfront.
How are insurers making any money insuring these things nowadays? 30% higher premiums are being mentioned elsewhere in the comments; that doesn't sound like enough!
>How are insurers making any money insuring these things nowadays?
Because insurance is fundamentally a "skim some" model.
They have a massive pool of money. Sure the pool is bleeding all the time because they're paying out, but it's also being replenished by premiums paid in. They invest this "constant" pool of money and the return on this covers overhead plus profit.
So when we're all getting screwed on our premiums because fenders cost tens of thousands and Karens file claims for parking scratches they're making more money, because the same ROI on a bigger pool of money is a bigger number.
People keep repeating this uncritically. There is a car-debt crisis, and wages haven't kept up with house/car costs.
We have one person saying "well in Californian wages..." and another saying essentially that 50K isn't a lot of money when the average SALARY is $66K/year.
I also believe this $50,000 stat is the mean car price which is likely to be pushed up by luxury car sales that cost 2-4x what a typical car costs, whereas a median price would give a better indication of what most people are actually spending. I did a quick Google search and wasn't able to find any data on median price, though.
$50000 stat is the mean transaction price, which includes the dealership stuff that gets added on. While it’s true that it is an average, companies are increasingly not making cheaper models. Sub $30k new cars are almost a myth at this point. You get sedans and hatchback models that start in the high 20s as the base price but we all know you’re not walking out of that dealership with a base model or just paying the advertised rate. SUVs on the other hand, which most people prefer these days are closer to $40k.
To what degree is this caused by car prices versus Americans' compulsion to keep buying new cars? Anecdotally, the folks I know struggling with car payments are almost exclusively in the latter bucket. But I'm open to having my mind changed with data.
Not entirely true; there are at least the lease, rental, and commercial fleet markets supplying predictable inventory of used cars to the public market.
I have 2014 Tesla S which which I recently had drive unit and battery replaced ($20k total). my friends all think I am nuts, but they all have $1k+ payments (some for 72m) while I haven’t had a car payment since 2017 and won’t have another one till 2036 :)
If your friends dumped $20K into paying off those loans they’d be a lot closer to paid off or maybe paid off completely, though. And that’s on a newer, lower mileage car.
I’m all for maintaining vehicles and keeping them on the road, but I don’t think you’re in a place to criticize your friends with $1K car payments after putting almost 2 years worth of those payments into a car that’s over a decade old.
I have spent exactly $0.00 on maintenance since 2014 when I bought the car (other than tires, 5G modem and internal battery). not sure what “paying for the car” means, it was paid off in 2017.
to simplify the math:
1. I spent total $90k
2. to have a car from 2014 through 2035-ish
for a $1k/month that would be $252k for my friends :)
nothing till 2035 and even then I might just replace the battery again. people look at EVs as like some disposable thing, when battery deteriorates you chuck it (shows in the pricing of 'used' EVs, my friend bought a 3-year old eTron that was originally purchased for $93k for $35k - 19k miles on it). my tesla is rock n roll now and will be good for the next decade
I wonder how much of this ridiculous car money was previously buy-a-house money. If you don't think you'll ever buy a house, you might as well spend it on a car.
Small, efficient gasoline vehicles are prohibited by CAFE standards in the US, but EVs are exempt. Generally new EV manufacturers have been starting with high-end vehicles, and working their way into mid-range, with hopes on eventual low-range vehicles.
Because EVs are exempt from CAFE standards, it does open up a niche at the very low end, and Slate and Telo are starting up production in that market, so one of their vehicles might appeal to you.
ya same, i can't see spending as much as i did on my first tesla 5+ years ago, the depreciations just too steep, hopefully that holds for rivian too and i'll pick one up in a couple years the R2 is really nice.
That said, china BEV's are 1/2 the cost even accounting for import costs to the USA lol so sort of points toward a issue with US companies at the moment
Most people in California don’t have PG&E. Most of the land area in the northern 2/3 of the State or so is covered by PG&E, but people and land area aren't the same thing. Southern California Edison alone serves almost as many people as PG&E, and other smaller utilities, including public utilities like LADWP, SMUD, Silicon Valley Power, etc., serve another big chunk of the population.
SCE will screw you nearly as hard. We are on a tiered usage which is the cheapest they offer and it's $0.32/kWh and even at that rate the EV isn't much cheaper than the non-hybrid I replaced. I'd need to switch to a ToU plan which would increase my other electricity costs.
Also for depreciation:
2020 Mazda 3 - sold $18k at dealer, originally $28k, 64% retained
2022 Kia EV6 - bought $25k, originally $55k-$7.5k federal, 53% retained
As a European: nice, but why is it so BIG? How is that monster called "mid-size"? Why would one want to haul so many tons of extra metal around just to transport one's behind?
As a European (dutch), why are our roads so small, that normal sized cars look like "monsters". I have often thought, that Europe will have a problem in the future with roads, as they are just too small, and expanding and making them more safe, is unlikely to ever happen and often times impossible. Not everyone can get by with a small little hatchback, some of us need a big pickup (I own a building company). And for the people that do not need it from a commercial point of view, have you ever considered that people have hobbies and some hobbies needs a fair amount of space in a car? Or families with multiple kids doing sport need the space for all the gear?
I am worried that in the future, more and more european cities will just address the problem with a disguised "we are making the cities car free, and thus greener and safer". What that means for the average citizen out there is, that any building related work, will just become more expensive, as people will just charge more to get over the hassle of getting into the cities then.
I'm glad the roads are small. Smaller roads cause slower driving (well researched). As for the cities, it is unsustainable to use cars as the primary mode of transportation within cities. We do want to make cities greener and largely car-free, because cars for individuals simply do not make any sense in a city. We still need roads for deliveries and occasional transportation of heavy or large goods, but transporting yourself within a city should rarely be done in a car. See Tokyo for an example of a large metropolis which functions well and which would completely break down if everybody tried to use a car to get somewhere.
I grew up in a family of 5, albeit a decade after my siblings.
When I visited London with my parents, we went by train. When I was in the cub scouts, one of my memories was a group trip by train. When I went to middle school (years 4-6), it was easy enough for me to walk alone at the end, though mum did go with me at the start; when I went to secondary school (7-11) there was a bus, though eventually I found I liked the (3 mile!) walk.
Today, I find that my local bus route within Berlin to a nearby mall takes me past 2 schools, and at certain times of day the bus will fill with kids and adult supervisors. Sometimes I see people taking Kinderwagen on the bus.
This argument does not work when society is build towards roads and using them. I live in the Netherlands in a village, and not using a car is impossible with a few kids. The city is different.
Can and want to or being efficient are different things. I "can" travel around in a city using public transport with 3 kids and all their sporting equipment, do I want to, no. Would any sane person want to? No.
see, this is the narrow minded view of so many europeans. Well just go to a closer sports club....is not an answer to the problem that thousands of people experience with small cars, and small roads.
Many more thousands have no issues with small cars or going to a closer sports club.
If the roads in cities are wide enough in cities for literal trucks, then they're wide enough for your car. Widening roads and making cars bigger makes pretty much everyone less safe.
Don't get me wrong, you're free to live in the boonies and drive 400km to your sports club, but don't call me narrow minded because I can load up 5 people in my VW passat and drive 500km for a 10 day vacation, or because I prefer not to get bulldozed by a car with a higher hood than me while walking to my local sports club.
That’s a bit of a strawman argument. Most journeys don’t consist of three children and all their sporting equipment.
As a practical example, in the UK, on average a young g child lives 1.7miles away from their school.
That is an easily walkable distance for most children, yet lots of parents choose to drive it because they feel the streets aren’t safe to walk on in rush hour.
If by redesigning streets to make active travel more appealing, you could reduce the number of cars on the school run by 10%; it would improve the traffic situation for the ones who still need to drive. Win-win
Some people need more space, but the road problem is something that can't be retrofitted without demolishing buildings.
As a Dutch person, surely you've seen that Amsterdam decided that the city's car problem in the 70s was unfixable and decided to switch to cycling. The building and delivery problem is real, but I don't think even a 10 euro/day charge for work vehicles would register given how expensive building work is already.
Land in cities is very expensive. Why should vehicles get to use more of it for free?
>As a European: nice, but why is it so BIG? How is that monster called "mid-size"?
Because it's a nominal size more than a descriptive one. Midsize is the second biggest size with only "full size" stuff being bigger.
It made more sense 30-40yr ago when people who remembered when the domestic auto makers mostly only made a full-size, a midsize and a compact car were still alive and of prime car buying age.
As a European, I’ve been gently looking forward to Rivian’s R3 for years now. I like the design and it looks much more like a machine that will suit Europe.
The R2 isn't even really a mid-size SUV. It is closer to a RAV4, which is considered a "compact SUV" or "crossover" [1]. Mid-size SUVs like the Honda Pilot tend to be even larger.
Because it's the middle size between the two reasonable car sizes that are being made today: gigantic and fucking enormous.
If you aren't buying at least the gigantic car, then you don't care about your kids safety and that's bad. How are you going to protect them from my gigantic SUV?
What? Walking?? No of course that's illegal! You want to navigate the street without a massive steel bubble? Are you nuts!
I think insiders would tell you off the record not to get an R1, but that the R2s should be much more robust. Of course it's untested at this point, but hopefully that's the case.
Can they fix that web page? That was so awful to try to get any info.. Just scroll, scroll, scroll and still just a bunch of big pictures and no meaningful info.
If you look at the R1 pages, you'll see those pages, though scroll-heavy, at least contain more useful info. I'm hoping that after R2 is actually available to order, that they'll update the page with more information. It's still early.
This was half the reason I posted to HN, honestly. I've seen several recent examples of modern product pages which render awfully because they're trying to be "quirky".
Edit: look at this, scrolling an entire screen only to have a photo zoom by <1.25x: https://imgur.com/a/G2Hfe3Q
I feel quite bad for people living in the United States. Despite the constant refrain about freedom y'all are actually pretty hindered when it comes to reasonably priced EVs.
On Saturday I put a down on a BYD Shark 6 truck. Hopefully I'll collect it Friday, if not early next week. I'm paying $41,200 USD for the thing brand new.
I saw a MotorTrend review of it last week, they flew down to Mexico City to test one out. The entry level pricing there is $50,060 USD.
Here in Australia they're called the "Raptor Killer" as they will take Ford Ranger Raptors off the line and cost a bit more than half the price of the Raptor.
It's a HEV, not a BEV. But it's an EV none the less. It has the ability to drive ~100km on battery only, and the engine doesn't drive the wheels, it's used to recharge the battery.
If it's going to have a gasoline engine anyway, I'd much rather just get the Raptor. By the way, the Ford Ranger Raptor is not to be confused with the Ford F-150 Raptor which is a total beast.
It's the best of both worlds as you can drive it EV only for short distances but still have the ability to drive longer distances.
As said above, the engine is only to charge the battery.
It's funny that the software engineers on this forum are all obsessed with building scalable systems that can provide a service at the lowest cost but when it comes to manufacturing all of a sudden it's "we must protect jerbs".
I learned very early in my career that being in hardware/software/tech does NOT mean you will be around people that LIKE hardware/software/tech. Then I eventually joined a FAANG, assuming I finally found the nerds! Oof...extreme disappointment.
If we can have open standards to allow my car to interoperate with my home batteries (Franklin, Enphase, Tesla Powerwall or others), we'll all be better off.
Boy it's ugly. While being a great fan of electric engines, I always wonder why electric cars by design must be ugly and have bad patterns (like retractable handles and a huge tablet in the middle)
This is their "bet the farm" moment that Elon took with the Model 3. If this doesn't become a best seller, stick a fork in them. If it does, the sky is the limit and we're very likely going to see half a million sold. There's not much in-between room for Rivian as they have no solar wildcard and their charging network is another also ran.
If it pull less current, you can use batteries which aren't specced for high amps.
If use use less amps, you can use thinner cabling and split the batteries up i various compartments. That means heat is more distributed. Less active cooling, if any, is needed, of both batteries and motors.
All of the above can translate to less weight, which mean better range.
That's interesting. It demonstrates that regenerative braking really works. The energy you expend going uphill, you mostly get back going downhill. The energy you expend speeding up, you mostly get back slowing down.
His tests were a round trip, so start and end altitude are the same.
And he kept a fixed speed on a freeway, so there wasn't much acceleration energy expenditure or energy loss into friction brakes.
You don't get drag or rolling resistance back, so that apparently dominates.
Those don't vary too much with load.
Looks like rolling resistance decreases with diameter [1]. So, is it from the increased drag from higher stance? Would lowering the car the same work better?
I think it's mostly from aerodynamics. Lowering the car could help but even just smaller rims, with the same overall diameter (rim + tire), can have a 15% impact on range. This Engineering Explained[1] video does an okay job with some of the math but he clarifies it well with a comment:
> CLARIFICATION! Why do bigger wheels mean worse efficiency, when the overall tire diameter remains the same? This comes down to aerodynamics. A 20" wheel will cause more of a disruption in airflow than an 18" wheel. That's why Tesla (and others) uses aero covers on their wheels (Car & Driver testing showed it gives about a 3% efficiency bonus at speed). The smaller the wheel, the more of the side profile of the wheel & tire is perfectly flat (the tire is flat, the wheel open: more tire = more flat area, less open area). Ideally, you'd have just a plain, solid sheet for the wheel, but obviously that's not idea for brake cooling. Wheel covers are today's common compromise as they have some airflow, but minimal.
I meant for normal highway driving, not drag racing.
Optimal highway driving is still lowest resistance and losses. Cold weather driving is what mostly results in a battery capable of the high performance, from what I understand.
Is a "small" motors more efficient than a large one? I suspect no, with the assumption that everything is sized so the "drag race" operating range would be well into the peak, rather than sustained, operating range.
In my observation the primary purpose of this performance seems to be to be able to round on-ramps at really slow speeds and then floor it and merge leaving slower vehicles behind you with a crap situation.
Having a massive heavy steel box that weighs thousands of kilos that can accelerate that quick, that you can operate in public with little to no useful training is not safer. I'm sorry, no car outside of a race track needs to accelerate that quick. It's absurd.
The analogy fits perfectly. A slow car is also unsafe, that's why low speed plates exist along with minimum speed limits. There's no such thing as a vehicle with too much acceleration and never will be.
Yeah what qualifies as a "slow car"? An Amish dude on a horse and buggy?
I have driven plenty of "slow" cars with less than 100 horsepower without issue. If you can't figure out how to merge that's a skill issue, another prime reason not to be giving people cars with former F1 car levels of acceleration. You don't need 0-60 in 3 seconds to fucking merge, get real!
Having driven a very slow acceleration car, yes, yes you do, trust me. Nothing worse than merging into dense traffic with high-speed trucks next to you and not being able to come up to speed before the ramp ceases.
AIUI this might not be as bigger problem as you’d imagine. Aerodynamics dominate most of the resistance at medium to highway speeds. This was discussed in the recent Rivian R1T cannonball run conversion videos where they doubled the battery capacity (and therefore drastically increased the weight of the vehicle) without substantially affecting efficiency.
Yes, weight alone is not that important for fuel economy at highway speeds. Aerodynamic efficiency of a vehicle is determined by the cross section area + drag coefficient. A 90s Honda Civic has a worse drag coefficient but a vastly smaller cross section than the Rivian, so it needs to move less air out of the way to drive forward. Smaller EVs can go farther with smaller batteries, but the American consumer has decided for one reason or another that cars must be tall, and therefore less aerodynamically efficient.
Haptic steering wheel thumb-wheels instead of actual buttons? Hell no. Full pass. And we're in the market for a vehicle like this in the next year or so, looking hard at Santa Fe Calligraphy, or Outback XT (similar size, similar price tag, AFAICT). No physical buttons = no sale.
I think you’re confusing “haptic” for “capacitive”. The wheels are real, physical controls with motors to give tactile feedback about the state of the UI. You can literally feel where the beginning and end of a list are, for example. It’s even better than traditional buttons.
The only problem is that there aren’t also physical controls for media and climate, which there should be. But for everything else, the thumb wheels are going to be awesome.
The haptic feedback on e.g. macbook trackpads is very convincing, so I'm not sure it's impossible to get right in a car, but I wouldn't bet on <random car manufacturer> to get it right.
My friend has the R1S, he likes it a lot, but he's also got a lemon law case open and is hoping that Rivian will have to take the vehicle back. I rode in it and it's nice, but it's way too big for me. The R2 sounds like a step in the right direction, but it still looks too large. I had to shop cars recently and I bought a Golf R. The Golf is "mid-size" to me. I moved across the country in a packed Golf GTI.
Page seems awful light on technical specifications. AWD like other Rivians? How many motors? How much horsepower? How big is it? How heavy is it? What trim levels are / will be available? Will there be the same standard v. large v. max battery options? What will be those battery options' ranges?
I really reality wish rivian create a better self-driving technology soon and make a proper competition to tesla. Rivian cars are so nice and well designed.
Personally I'm in no rush to have self-driving capabilities in my car for at least another decade or so. I'm pretty happy with the current ADAS systems found in most cars like adaptive cruise control, lane keeping, and collision avoidance - and happy to just see incremental refinements to those systems.
At some point I want a self-driving car, but I'm happy to let Waymo and Tesla users test those systems for another 10+ years before I personally start using them.
Of course everyone has different needs. This is the reason why there are so many different makers and models. I commute a lot (100 miles a day) and tesla self driving is hard requirement. But almost everything else in car sucks compared to other cars. And compared to rivian it sucks big time. The moment rivian gets what tesla have now with fsd I will switch immediately. And some comments suggest rivian is working on that.
The main thing I think about self-driving is if it truly were self-driving and you could sleep in the car while it drives to a destination overnight. Even if it were only highways. That would be really cool.
Sure except you have your car when you get there, packing is more convenient and it follows you schedule and goes directly between your desired endpoints.
Depending on the destination of course, I often find having a car in a city like having an albatross around my neck. The benefits or features get outweighed by traffic and parking. I'll take good public transit and a set of headphones.
Are you buying a car in the next 10 years? I’m in a similar boat. But I’m irrelevant to the car market because I’m not buying until I can buy a Level 4 car.
I just bought a new car, and will probably buy another 1-2 cars in the next 10 years. My ideal upgrade path for cars is:
* I wanted my most recent purchase to be a PHEV
* I want my next purchase in roughly 5 years to be an EV (hopefully solid state batteries are available by then)
* In about 10 years I am hoping that I can buy a car that can self-drive most of my trips door-to-door
One thing I'll add is that I live in an area that gets a ton of snow, and current ADAS features are basically worthless in snow. They all turn off once the sensors get covered in ice, or when lines in the road are no longer visible. So I expect that even in new cars 10 years from now, I'll still need to take the wheel to drive during winter. Basically the features are nice when they work, but I'm still going to want to car that is first and foremost designed to be driven by humans.
> I live in an area that gets a ton of snow, and current ADAS features are basically worthless in snow
I live in Western Wyoming. While my Subaru won't drive itself in a blizzard, the radar is still useful.
My plan is to wait until I have something that can drive itself unsupervised in clear weather. Given that's Waymo today and maybe Tesla in ~5 years, I'm figuring something should be on the market that fits that bill within 10, which is how long I'll try to hold onto my gas-burnig Subaru.
They're working on that. They're partnering with Nvidia and the R2 will get upgraded hardware for self driving in the fall. I couldn't tell from the website if making a reservation now lets you wait for that.
Self-driving seems like something where car companies shouldn’t all “reinvent the wheel.” A couple of the bigger car companies have projects on this, right? Maybe they could share.
> A couple of the bigger car companies have projects on this, right? Maybe they could share
Why should they? We're already approaching geopolitical competition at this problem, given self-driving cars and self-driving self-propelled guns and the like are basically technological twins.
Honestly just decent smart cruise and lane keeping is good enough. Concentrate on making a solid long range reliable EV is the best way to compete with Tesla in the short to medium term.
Yeah, but does it have CarPlay yet? It's a complete deal breaker despite Rivian being essentially the only company who offers a BEV pickup truck of a reasonable size.
I like the Rivians I've seen. They're actually, y'know, a truck as opposed to a k-hole hallucination. You can lift stuff up and over the bed near the cab.
This isn't a (totally) bad question, but it suffers from problem common to a lot of internet forum posts and comments. It lumps "people" into one shiny bucket, and then shouts at the bucket.
Over 16 million new cars were purchased in 2025 in the United States.
Meanwhile, there are about 242 million licensed drivers in that same country.
So that's than 7% of drivers buying a new car in a year's time.
But what is the point of your question, in response to a new car announcements? That new cars should not exist... ? You do realize how much harder that would eventually make it to buy a used one, right?
So yeah, sure. "People" would be well-advised to consider buying a 2-3 year old vehicle that has depreciated. Let someone else carry that depreciation cost. (But "someone" has to.)
(My used EV depreciated 57% before I bought it, 2 years old with 20,000 miles on it. It's a great way to go!)
"No CarPlay" is approximately where I stopped reading -- and I am literally their dream target audience - enough money to buy a second car, easily able to afford one of theirs, have solar on top of my house making my electricity cheap, like techy things.
They will either learn or ... not, I guess. I know I am not the only one. Nobody in my family would buy anything techy without my advice (and a modern EV is basically an iPad on wheels, so it qualifies as techy), and I will never ever give "yes" to a car without CarPlay
yeah, seems extremely weird to not have it, it is a must for newer cars, especially ones that are EVs. I wonder why they don't have it, maybe a beef with the phone makers...
No, sorry, I wouldn't buy EVs from any US company any more until they are matura enough that the model production surpasses at least Tesla Model S+X since released. Their reliability just suck. I don't want to waste my life again and again in those months-long waiting of service appointments, annoying issues every where and every day, hiring Lemon law lawyers and other BS.
Length and width wise, it's smaller than a Model Y. It's deceptively styled to look a big boy car, but it's a matchbox. That's why no reviewers will show themselves or anyone else towering over it. It's for those who want a big car, but without all that space. Rivian calls it a mid-size SUV, but that is straight up bullshit.
"Matchbox" is rather hyperbolic and would better match the upcoming R3/R3X which is around the size of a VW Golf (though that still isn't that small… Honda Fits, kei cars, and Fiat 500s are smaller still).
It's about a foot longer than my crossover, which is about the same size as a RAV4 or CR-V and there's no way I could call it tiny.
If you want to see a reviewer next to it for scale, Doug DeMuro is 6'4" and has what you're looking for, from various angles over the course of the review. Looks like a reasonable size to me.
> It's deceptively styled to look a big boy car, but it's a matchbox. That's why no reviewers will show themselves or anyone else towering over it. It's for those who want a big car, but without all that space.
I miss the days when men looking to compensate would buy sports cars. It wasn't any less ridiculous, but at least they (edit: the cars) were better looking and more fun to drive.
If only those ridiculous guys who wanted something fun to drive had realized how much more fun they could have by making fun of people and feeling superior.
I guess it depends on what they were compensating for. Up until the 80's and 90's at least there was more association of racing cars with road cars that you could buy.
So that would associate you with the (A man's manly-man maybe?) driver of that car.
But now race cars are not really much like a production road car. And those older men with money don't necessarily want to be like the ever younger drivers being employed to win races.
As you say, ridiculous, but at least the sports cars were cool.
"straight up bullshit" would be calling a 4runner-sized vehicle a "matchbox". Really highlights how ridiculous American's unnecessary lust is for massive vehicles.
I wish Rivian would stop trying to emulate Tesla on this front and add support for CarPlay. I don't want your UI.
I actually like the look of the Rivian and this is something I'm somewhat in the market for (or will be in the next few years) but I won't touch it without CarPlay.
as a tesla owner, all I can tell, carPlay is ugly child was born due to EU car makers, not capable of building proper infotainment system.
I want to drive, not constantly connect/accept privacy etc. Especially if that is a $100k+ car.
When i get into the car, the last thing I'd like to know how my car is getting connected to my phone, if there are any issues, especially if that is not my car.
I love how my car knows that in the morning i go to work, and wednesday evening i go to yoga, and put GPS, with best traffic options. 0 touch, all super seamless. No phones involved.
CarPlay has become somewhat of a standard. It's fine to say you personally don't need it, but many/most laymen will still expect their new car to support it.
If a PC was launched without Windows support, most people on HN might be able to live with it day-to-day, but it would still be a dealbreaker for the general population. Admittedly this isn't a fair comparison, but hopefully you understand my point.
As another Tesla owner, I've had this discussion with my brother one too many times. He'll insist he needs buttons, he needs Android Auto/CarPlay and whatnot. Every time I step into one of those cars I'm overwhelmed. Half of the times it doesn't connect, when it connects I get useless notifications for everything. It's not well integrated, and it'll randomly break during the trip.
I understand it has become a standard but it's not a particularly good one, and adding it "just because it's a standard" would detract from the car experience in my opinion. It's a separate device, with a separate OS, kernel, apps etc where you can install almost anything, that's supposed to take over a piece of equipment that belongs with the car and controls all its functions. I'd really rather not have that.
If the infotainment is the basic "show 2D maps and a couple settings", then Android Auto/CarPlay can serve as a viable replacement for low-end cars. But when the car costs >30k and the screen is also the central command console, no thanks. I'd rather have proper OTA updates, give feedback, and see it evolve over time for the better.
i have a rivian, and despite being a carplay fan before, i do not miss it. Carplay is a crutch for legacy autos who cant make software, so you just want to overlay a phone feed over their crap. But its very limited, its essentially a video overlay box and has terrible / non-existent integration with the cars smarts, like battery, range, HUD screens, advanced audio controls, etc etc. In my experience with carplay in other smart-ish cars (BMW X series) the carplay experience fights with the car OS constantly and is an awful incoherent experience.
A well made car software solution, like the rivians(mostly), is a better experience overall imho.
I say this as someone who still loves having carplay on my other car, a subaru, because their software is atrocious.
i would say, give one a try you might change your mind.
> the carplay experience fights with the car OS constantly and is an awful incoherent experience.
It seems to me like fixing this is the appropriate path forward. There are things that the car OS is better at (like you mention), but no car OS is ever going to support the various media apps I have on my phone that are automatically supported by Android/Android Auto media controls, and bluetooth playback is an even worse experience than cludging together the car OS + android auto media in one UI.
With FSD , that is a very very capable system in 2026, You need real multi media for driving (once it's solved), for camping , movies during charging, and not phone somehow ugly slapped by some plastic holder to your car.
I bought a new salad spinner recently, after having broken yet another one.
I’ve had fancy brands like Zyliss and OXO. I’ve had cheap store brand models and cheaper Amazon MYSSNGVWL type stuff as well. Knowing they would probably break didn’t make it feel better when they eventually broke.
Anyway the new salad spinner is large, heavy, with a steel pin into a brass bushing, has a metal handle and nylon gears in a sealed gearbox with exposed stainless screws for servicing. I opened it up and greased it on first use, mostly just to pretend to be servicing it, just to see what that felt like. It felt good!
The best part is it came with a catalogue that had order codes for spare parts. They wanted to help you maintain it. It was built to last and the manufacturer was on your side.
https://www.dynamicmixers.com/en/our-products/salad-spinner/...
I’m starting to feel silly writing all this about a salad spinner, but where is my car version of this?
The car version of this stopped being produced 15 years ago.
Old petrol Toyotas and Hondas met your criteria.
And the back catalogue of parts is huge and supported for a long time.
Modern cars aren't built as well.
Maybe the modern non-turbo petrol Mazdas are the best fallback.
Modern cars aren't built as well.
Can you cite a source for this? There's no question that they're vastly more complex, but I would think that modern car manufacturing is far more exacting (and efficient) than in the past.
If you're saying that older cars are more repairable, I'm happy to agree with you, even without a source to back up that claim.
10 year old article about Toyota realizing it was over engineering parts and making the cars too expensive and parts didn’t need to last as long.
https://web.archive.org/web/20150122235642/http://www.busine...
An easily visible one is air intakes. Many manufacturers have shifted to plastic. Peteo-engineering has advanced a lot, but they will still get brittle and break.
Interior wise, you can look at things like fabric durability-- lower deniers can be cheaper, but will wear sooner. Springs/foam in seats are another example, but this will vary across manufacturers, models and trims.
This isn't exclusive to financial engineering manufacturers like Stellantis or Nissan, either. Toyota has had issues with simple things like rust proofing (whether intentional or not) on 1st generation Tacomas leading to massive recalls and things like plastic timing guides prone to wearing out. Ford with the wet clutches having belts submersed in oil. German cars needing body off access for rear timing chain maintenance at 80k miles. Water cooled alternators (really, VW?). All types of "why?" if you follow cars once they are 3+ years old.
It seems like there are a lot of regressions that probably result from cost cutting, while others may exist to simply drive service revenue.
OK, I went looking for sources and found this[1]:
In the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency assumes the typical car is driven 15,000 miles (24,000 km) per year. According to the New York Times, in the 1960s and 1970s, the typical car reached its end of life around 100,000 miles (160,000 km). Due in part to manufacturing improvements, such as tighter tolerances and better anti-corrosion coatings, in 2012 the typical car was estimated to last for 200,000 miles (320,000 km) with the average car in 2024 lasting 160,545 miles according to the website Junk Car Reaper.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Car_longevity#Statistics
I think you're talking about apples and oranges, as parent appeared to be cataloguing recent design defects. Which are pretty common too.
That'll influence the average reliability minimally, unless you were unlucky enough to buy one of those models.
Personally, why I'd rather get something at 120k mileage w/ 250k+ max examples on the road by that calendar date. You'll know whether they designed a lemon.
Add: undersized Tacoma rear leaf springs, multiple manufacturers' head gaskets, a few early aluminum engines (? from memory)
There are many other considerations, too. Years ago I scraped Craigslist and Autotrader, grouping cars by generation/make/model/drivetrain to be able to predict longevity based on quantity for sale versus original sales figures. If a model sold 100k per year for 10 years and only 3 were for sale in year 13, that isn't a great sign. Cheap cars will tend to have cheap owners who are more likely to skimp on maintenance, typically leading to more accrued issues and a shorter lifespan for the vehicle. Some cars are just poorly engineered, and the markets are relatively efficient in pricing resale value. The definition of "high mileage" is going to vary by who you ask. Domestics 150k, German 80k, Japanese 200k, Korean 100k. These are subjective averages (some cars like Theta engines, Darts, even late model GM 6.2s have engine failures <40k), based on when they start disappearing due to repairs being more than the vehicle is worth, but based on what I saw then and kind of observe still.
Leaning on those prior mentioned product mixes, keep in mind that Japanese manufacturers weren't in the American market 60 years ago, so market mix would be wildly different. (Multiple 400k+ mi Toyotas in my family, along with 60 year old GMs, but with aftermarket or rebuilt engines.) The cost of vehicles (and repairs) relative to prevailing wages will impact the repair vs replace balance. Trade publications like Cox/NADA/Adesa/etc. are always cited by financial blogs when mentioning consumer spending/state of economy by average age of cars on the road. Why cars get junked or totaled has shifted drastically, too. Steel bumpers were easy to replace, modern bumper covers with styrofoam backing and aluminum crumple zones, not so much. Tolerances is a vague term in that veiled PR piece on that wiki article. Machining has improved. Tech like direct injection and improved lubrication (synthetics) have done much more in terms of efficiency and longevity. In a lot of cases, manufacturers try to get more and more horsepower from the same displacement by pushing tighter engine tolerances (crank/main bearings, pistons/rings, valvetrain) and things like higher compression ratios and revs, leading to more heat and earlier failure. So while you have better initial engineering, you are closer to the point of failure. For another example, interference engines will grenade themselves if you ignore timing belt maintenance, but in the meantime, you get more horsepower by getting more air into the cylinders.
A v6 Camry or Accord is going to be have more hp, be faster,more reliable at same age, be quieter and get 3x the mpg than nearly any muscle car of the past. Unfortunately it seems that many Americans prefer giant vehicles that place more emphasis on their size (and status) than materially important factors like reliability engineering or fuel economy.
Obviously these are ancedotal examples, they can be confirmed by wasting hours reading about cars and watching mechanic review videos from people who work on them daily (I am partial to the CarCareNut on YT).
Efficient manufacturing means exactly building stuff as cheaply as you can get away with.
There's a reason why roman architecture is still standing: it is massively overbuilt, the very opposite of efficient (they also used to make the architect stand under his own arches as they removed the temporary support, that could have contributed to the overbuilding).
>> roman architecture is still standing
Is it? Every city in Roman empire had temples and forum. Where are they still standing? Maybe half a dozen survived, like pantheon in Rome or temple in Nimes, but it's extremely rare. Maybe they weren't overbuilt at all?
It seems like you both are looking at different definitions of built well. One pertaining to how well the car will perform over its lifetime. The other describing the build process. Not necessarily exclusionary, but different.
This won’t fit the usual hate, but.. https://epc.tesla.com Vast majority of parts can be ordered directly from the catalogue.
I mean, the vast majority of parts for the vast majority of cars can be ordered from:
https://www.rockauto.com/
Ordering parts feels like less of the issue than the ability to fix and service it yourself.
Has tesla started supporting third party shops doing battery replacements for instance?
How can you replace the idiotic console and door handles with manageable parts? Is there a sane charging port yet?
You want to add a load of buttons? Should be easy enough, just get them to send codes to the computer via the network.
Door handles are harder, what do you want to change? Inner or outer?
What's insane about the charging port?
Great, who can I contact to get this done?
> What's insane about the charging port?
Well it doesn't work with most charging stations. Maybe it's different in the US.
Don't they use the same IEC 62196 ports as other EVs, outside the US?
They made their own in the US, because the standard SAE J1772 combo port is an unweildy behemoth, then they released the patent into public domain, and the rest of the automotive industry adopted their port into the NACS port, which beats both IEC 62196 and SAE J1772 in available power, all in a much smaller and easier-to-use connector.
Yeah the 62196-2 connector is standard in Europe. It's not legal to sell cars with a nacs connector and hasn't been for a long time.
> Great, who can I contact to get this done?
Here you go, add as many buttons, dials, knobs, and screens as you like for your Tesla...
https://www.enhauto.com/collections
That's a $125 salad spinner... I get the appeal, but it's definitely a premium product.
> but where is my car version of this?
It's the status quo? Cars last longer than they ever have in history. In 2 decades average age of cars on the road increased from 9.5 to 14.5. They are a little more difficult to maintain for the home mechanic because they are packed with electronics, but what you want seems to exist perfectly. Many use timing chains instead of timing belts that last 20+ years. Radiators rarely crack whereas they used to all the time. Alternators last the life of the vehicle. Cars are often upgraded because the owner is bored or does not feel like paying for rust repair at the 15 year mark, more than unfixable problems.
While I can't help you with a car, I share your desire of wanting things with replaceable parts, so I leave you with this, the coffee maker version your salad spinner, https://us.moccamaster.com. All parts replaceable.
espresso machines are maybe in a different class of "coffee maker" but it seems like even the cheapest of those is pretty easy to service/repair/source parts.
or in some cases even upgrade to improve capabilities...
I did the gaggiauino mod to my gaggia classic and basically everything in there is just pipes and wires... the most complicated single part on the original is the vibratory pump. I'm pretty sure i could keep that same machine going indefinitely with access to parts.
I ‘ave already got one!
The [Slate Truck](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slate_Truck) seems to be marketing itself with this in mind. But it's backed by Jeff Bezos, so proceed with caution.
>Fast and efficient, it respects the product’s fragility.
>Heavy duty construction for an intensive daily use.
Wait is it fragile or is it heavy duty? I guess they used "product" instead of "produce".
2 reasons
Electronics and code ruined replaced pure mechanics. Components aren't physically maintainable or hot-swappable, because they aren't just physically connected.
Second is that maintenance is how dealerships make money, so there is a monetary incentive to make it seem esoteric.
For your purposes, the upcoming slate truck is closest analogue - https://www.slate.auto/en
I’ve had a cheap (was $15) single salad spinner, for about 15 years. Decent amount of usage in that time, but not professional level.
So my question to you is: what the heck are you doing to your salad spinners?
If you spin low-grade uranium ore just right, the heavier particles will deposit on the edges, giving you high-grade uranium.
Please follow HN rules that forbid nuclear proliferation.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Also if you’re dealing with sensitive information intelligence agencies can’t hack your car to go 100% on the throttle in a suburb. (Not sure if this is relevant in any way to salad spinners, though.)
That's a salad spinner with a price of ~4x the cost of the OXO one. Would you buy a new car that cost 150,000 dollars?
Every car manufacturer has a catalog of spare parts you can order. I really don't understand what you're on about with your post.
That it should be possible for somebody with a reasonable understanding of car maintenance to actually fix or maintain their car instead of having a blob of proprietary nonsense only meant to lock you in and milk your wallet with mandatory dealer repairs and subscriptions.
Complexity is the reason your car doesn't drink fuel like people drink water and also the reason there's vastly less severe accidents than 60 years ago.
https://www.worldpac.com/
Say MYSSNGVWL 10 times fast
1980s Volvo
Looks like a great car. As Marques Brownlee puts it [1], this is Rivian's "Model Y fighter". And I personally find the R2 to be much more appealing than a Model Y in terms of size, shape, and interior.
But we have been misled so many times about EV prices prior to launch, I think it's important to wait until we see what it actually costs for different trim levels before making comparisons to the Model Y. That $45,000 price they are throwing around could very well be for a trim that isn't even available at launch.
And anyway if I were going to buy a new compact crossover today, I'd probably lean more toward the RAV4 PHEV. It's an EV most of the time, I can refill it up with gas during long trips, it's got tactile buttons, and it has carplay.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfReqcUJfBU
None of these car reviewers ever take into account build quality and customer issues. Example they all lashihly praised the EX90, but owners struggled for a year with software problems, then found out the LIDAR they paid for is never going to assist their driving and they need a new computer. Same with Rivian, all of today's reviews praise the R2, but ignore the troubles current owners have not just with the car but with getting service too.
Never buy a first year model and then keep an eye on owners forums before you buy.
> None of these car reviewers ever take into account build quality and customer issues.
Because most car reviewers' job is to explain new releases. Most issues arise after time, which reviewers generally don't get. MKBHD has gone into quality issues at times: see for example Cybertruck [1] and Fisker Ocean [2]. In their Q&A videos, the couple that does Motormouth [3] due mention reliability when asked for recommendations.
There are sources for reliability assessments, like J. D. Power and Consumer Reports.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0cs8aIXgkc&t=8m
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xWXRk3yaSw
[3] https://www.youtube.com/user/Motormouthcanada/videos
Underrated comment.
Everyone commented on the battery life for my model 3 in winter (which is annoying but not a huge deal). The problems with the bushings, the easily cracked (2500$) roof glass, and the lack of spare parts (not as bad as Rivian) were drowned out.
Love the car, but wouldn't have bought it for the price I paid (used) if I had known.
The R2 looks great but like you said, never buy a first year model.
(Unless it is the Honda 0 Saloon)
Day 1 reviews, the ones that drives sales of any product, are flawed by definition. They take a narrow and superficial view of the product, a snapshot when what you need is a timelapse.
The winter tires that score great on day 1 but put a bit of wear on them and they turn to crap. The motherboard that scores the highest in the benchmarks at launch but later on burns your CPU, or gets a BIOS update that caps the performance, or gets no updates whatsoever. The car that shines at acceleration and feature list but breaks down often and is slow and expensive to fix.
Day 1 reviews certainly have some value but it’s higher for the reviewer than for the potential buyer. By the time the reviewer follows up after battle testing in time, if they even want to risk looking like they got it wrong the first time, the damage was done. And people aren’t that interested in reading about old stuff, those reviews don’t get the views.
i have that rule and the same exception for the 0. it feels like its "cyber" look done actually right with proper design (i dont let other inferior designs steal the word cyber). i would also add any decently good* ev minivan that is actually available to buy in the us.
*vw buzz fails the good test for no one pedal driving and the price for what you get is outta wack. though lots of the 1st gen ones are still sitting on car lots so maybe that could cross the exception barrier if they go for cheaper.
I would love to come in and buy a BYD with the exact same design flaws, but for 1/3 of the price. Sadly protectionism disallows me from doing that
Same here! American-made EVs ask for an incredibly heavy price tag and don’t deliver on the reliability of ICE or Hybrid cars a third of their price. It’s the primary thing stopping me from getting one as my next vehicle.
I’m trying to shop around to replace my wife’s aging crossover and I really can’t find anything more attractive than a Prius or another Kia Soul. If we could get electric cars from the CN market it’d be a no-brainer!
I’ve had software issues on an ID4 and iX, but I’ve never had reliability problems. The cars always have just worked with no maintenance. Same with my model Y, minus any issues!
Maybe it’s a “but when it happens you’re screwed” situation. I’m thinking of the story of BMW’s battery safety fuse (the one that trips in an accident to protect first responders and the people in the car) actually tripping when you hot the curb or a pothole harder. It requires a very expensive trip to the dealer. Some of my Tesla owning friends keep spending time in the shop getting something about the suspension fixed 2-3 times already.
I have no idea if Chinese EVs are consistently better, Volvo can be seen as one and I don’t think they excel at reliability lately.
P.S. Software issues are reliability issues. The software is a core part of the car and its value proposition, you can’t discount them as “just software issues, not reliability”.
> Some of my Tesla owning friends keep spending time in the shop getting something about the suspension fixed 2-3 times already.
They're pretty lucky from what I hear! A friend of mine just sold his Model S because he'd been waiting over 7 months for the shop to source a replacement part. Apparently he'd even resorted to begging Musk to look into it over X because Tesla wont even give him an ETA.
I really wanted to like the iD4.
iD4 feels like they took every lesson of predictable UX design and then intentionally reversed it to make the most frustrating UI possible.
The window controls, touch buttons, screen, steering wheel controls, etc. They all seem designed to answer the question, "how could we make this unnecessarily difficult and distracting to use? How could we possibly cram in yet another State Machine for the user to keep (lose) track of?"
It also has the "try to kill the asthmatic by randomly switching off recirculate while driving through dense wood smoke" feature, naturally.
Considering how much money VW makes on EVs[0], I suppose I'm not surprised by this 'nudge' toward gas cars.
[0] https://www.motor1.com/news/758377/vw-making-less-money-sell...
One of the good things in the UK is seeing how quickly my neighbours swapped out their Tesla's for BYD's.
I'm not in the market at the moment so don't know what the UK protectionism position is on Chinese EV's, but has been interesting to watch how quick it's happening.
I work in design and we're talking to two Chinese EV companies launching in the UK this year, so the wall can't be that high for them.
The UK has a local car manufacturing industry (Nissan, Jaguar/Landrover), but not large enough to be able to lobby for protectionism. And in any case the UK has basically given up on having a coherent trade policy since Brexit.
I've seen quite a few BYDs and MG4s, and there are Jaecoo and Leapmotor dealers near me. I've been told that some NHS boards were using MGs as "pool" cars, but the only example I can find a reference for is Shetland. https://www.nhsshetland.scot/news/article/43/nhs-shetland-ro...
I don't think I've ever seen a Rivian. The R2 is supposed to be coming to the UK in 2027.
The UK has a lot of "garage" brands too (the Morgans, Caterhams, BAC, etc.), but as you said they don't have a lot of lobbying power, and the lobbying they do is on behalf of lengthening THEIR transition to new EV requirements.
That said, the UK's history of small auto manufacturers would make it potentially ideal for a few domestic producers to make little EVs, similar to the Caterham 7, or the Ariel Atom for the domestic market, but they will never be the mass produced Tesla or BYD competitor.
Imo its not anti-China protectionism. Western models are cheaper in China, and Chinese models are more expensive in the EU & UK.
I think it's a combination of manufacturers wanting a higher profit, some adaptations & certification processes, dealer and service infrastructure necessary for selling in the West that just costs more.
I don't think Chinese manufacturers will be able to significantly undercut the competition while maintaining a desirable quality
I would have thought that to be the case too ... I know all about the exciting Xiaomi cars (e.g.) but I grew up in the era of the Chinese brand being "low quality". We're well beyond that now and have been for probably a decade. And don't get me wrong, I'm not a China cheerleader.
I give the example I mentioned. People local to me swapping out their model 3's for BYD. Maybe they just got to their end of their lease cycle and wanted to try something different, but I cannot believe they would have willingly chosen a significantly lower quality car (knowing some of them). And I believe the cost difference is marginal but the overall package just a bit better.
And you know people, they'll swap out anything for just a marginal saving. Doesn't have to be significant unless there's some network effects. And there really isn't with cars.
Anyway, I'm just yapping, but think the used Tesla market is going to get even more swamped than it already is. Not a bad thing because previously people looking for low cost cars were buying diesels - so I'm hopeful that'll transition to low cost EV's now ... but the game is up for Tesla automotive, but we've known that for some time.
I welcome the competition, but my two cents is that BYD or any other Chinese brand doesn't seem to be offering anything outside of the typicial price-performance calculus of existing brands.
I welcome competition, as it benefits everyone, even people who don't want to buy Chinese. It will also encourge building factories for EV components in Europe, which mean other suppliers might benefit from lower prices, and some of the savings will end up at the customer.
As for why your coworkers decided to go for non-Tesla EVs, you have to ask them, and ask them again a few years from now if it was worth it. In their defense, Tesla makes a very particular kind of car (in 2 slight variations), which many people might want to move away from.
Maybe they want a petrol range extender, maybe they want a more traditional SUV, or something smaller/bigger than Tesla.
I watched one of those Out Of Spec videos on an earlier Rivian and it was full of praise and raving. Then there was a later video where they almost on the side mentioned when it came out of the factory it felt legitimately unsafe to drive on the highway and had already spent days at service including a total powertrain shutdown, essentially a lemon. These things happened already in the time before their first video yet were never mentioned. That entire YouTube review industry is more rotten and bought than the same show on Cable TV ever was..
That was the cyber truck. 4 motor replacements iirc.
I think Consumer Reports does large quality surveys of customers and includes that in their reviews.
Yep. Consumer Reports' "Find a Car" page has sorting options for Overall Score, Road Test Score, Predicted Reliability, and Predicted Owner Satisfaction. I think they're a tremendous pro-consumer non-profit, and that a $39/year membership more than pays for itself by way of better major purchases.
Rivian, by the way, is the lowest-ranked of 26 covered auto manufacturers in terms of predicted reliability, below Ram and Jeep. The top 3 are Toyota, Subaru, and Lexus.
Also Doug Demuro raves about it [1]. Personally I can't stand Marques' reviews. Just inspiring and he looks bored. Doug on the other hand really seems to put some of his soul into his reviews.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUl_0087dyM
Doug's problem is that he is never critical, he even calls flaws or omissions with the euphemism 'quirks'. It feels like he is too embedded in the automotive ecosystem to the point where he will not even be critical of Stellantis products.
Marques has no problem calling out inferior products.
Doug's format is beyond worn out and tiresome.
He hasn't innovated or improved upon anything in years.
Don't even get me started on his voice...
Right you are Ken, but the format pretty much is his schtick. It’s not that entertaining at all anymore, but it’s also decent to know that a review will probably exist for most cars I’m ever considering.
For me his value remains mainly that he’s tall which I am too, so when he’s in a car I can guess what it’ll be like for me.
I wanted to do something like that for motorcycles. Show how I fit on various bikes. I am 6'6" Knowing what to say is another matter though.
https://cycle-ergo.com/ here you go buddy, I'm on the taller side too and found this when choosing my last bike
Agreed, re: DeMuro.... I'm long past tired of hearing how "The ____ is the ____!"
I do like Tedward's videos, though. He seems a lot more honestly enthusiastic about it, and definitely has fun with the cars.
If even Doug falls out of favor.. then I don't know anymore. His voice doesn't bother me too much but he sure has a lot of energy just to keep talking. Never stops talking.
what do you think about Mat Watson?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3eepauvC5LU
The RAV4 EV capacity is so small, the electric engine so weak (cuts to gas well before highway speed), and the charge speed so slow, that in practice its a 100% gas car. Only a small number of disciplined owners are going to be able to run it as an EV most of the time, as its actually impractical to do so.
It’s a gas car, with greenwashing.
This is completely false. I own one. It goes up to the low 80s mph before the gas engine kicks in. Acceleration from a stop is sub 6 second 0-60. Hardly weak. Charges from fully empty to full in about 2.5 hours.
Mine gets a 40-45 mile all electric range. I drive 10-12k miles per year, and ignoring extended multi-day vacation road trips once every couple years, I fill up the tank 2-3 times per year.
My experience with my Prius PHEV is the same. I don’t even have a level 2 charger. I just plug it in in the garage overnight, and most days I don’t use any gas.
The only time the ICE turns on before my EV range is up is if I hit the windshield defrost button when it’s cold. That’s presumably to prioritize getting heat out through the vents quickly. I’ve never accelerated fast enough, nor gone fast enough to trigger the ICE engine taking over. It’s straight up an EV for my first ~40 miles every day.
I rented a BYD M9 PHEV minivan while on vacation in Cancun, Mexico and other than the vehicle winning over my family in, like 2 days, the mileage was amazing. 1000km range, of which, 180km was battery (that's 520mi of gas + 100mi battery range).
PHEVs in the US are gimped by poor regulatory incentives - we should be forcing manufacturers to increase overall range + EV range. If this model were sold in the US by a US manufacturer, I bet the ranges would be halved (and still considered good/decent in comparison to existing alternatives).
> Mine gets a 40-45 mile all electric range.
That sounds like the real issue, vs. EVs. This sounds like you basically have to plug it in every time you park it. And there’s no way you could do any sort of (even small) road trip without using gas.
(For comparison, our EV6 has about 200-250 mile range, and we charge it about once a week or so, give or take, unless we take a road trip.)
Also, one of the main advantages with EVs is their insane low maintenance, but sounds like PHEVs still have to all the same maintenance issues of ICE vehicles.
> This sounds like you basically have to plug it in every time you park it. And there’s no way you could do any sort of (even small) road trip without using gas.
Yep, so people (mostly) don’t , in aggregate:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/oct/16/plug-in-...
> Also, one of the main advantages with EVs is their insane low maintenance, but sounds like PHEVs still have to all the same maintenance issues of ICE vehicles.
I keep seeing this repeated, but I kept a detailed decade-plus spreadsheet of maintenace costs for my last ICE car, and ~2/3 of the costs were for components that are common to EVs.
1. Maintenance isn’t just about cost. It’s about the number of things that move and/or need fluids, and can fail/leak. It’s about dealing with service centers trying to upsell you on every little possible thing that could go wrong.
When I take my EV in, it’s for one of two things: I need my tires rotated, or I need new tires. That’s it. There’s no “curtsy inspection” that comes back with literally 40 different things that I could have done to it.
2. Our household has four vehicles: one EV, three ICE vehicles. There’s no way the occasional new tires (rotations are free where we bought our tires) amount to 2/3 the cost of the maintenance needed on our ICE vehicles. It’s probably closer to 1/10.
I think you’re overestimating what all needs maintenance on an EV.
> I think you’re overestimating what all needs maintenance on an EV.
I'm not doing any estimating, I kept a detailed spreadsheet of every dollar I put into the car, and am familiar with which items are common to an EV.
> and am familiar with which items are common to an EV.
This is the overestimating I was referring to. I think you’re either mistaken in what items are common to EV, or you’re overestimating the cost of those items.
There is only one thing that needs maintenance on an EV: tires.
Unless you’re saying that tires amount to 2/3 of an ICE vehicles maintenance. In which case you may want to shop around for more reasonably priced tires.
Not the person you replied to, but I'm not sure how you arrived here. Brakes, coolant, washer fluid, diff oil, gearbox oil, cabin air filter, wiper blades. Did you know EV motors can also require oil changes (at hundreds of thousands of miles, in fairness)?
Nice Michelins for my ICE have been something resembling 1/3 of service costs. Not 2/3 but not negligible either.
> Brakes
Maybe at 1/10 the schedule of ICE vehicles, at least for me. I use regenerative braking almost exclusively (probably 95+% of the time).
> coolant
Yes, I did forget about that one. But frequency is about 50% less often than ICE vehicles. Maybe once every 5-10 years.
> washer fluid, cabin air filter, wiper blades
Agreed on these as well, but I bucketed these in the trivial category, totaling less than a tank of gas once every 6-12 months, and all DIY things that you don’t need to take to a service center for.
At the end of the day, I only care about things I need to take it to the shop for. Which means I only need to take it in for a no-questions-asked tire rotation 1-2 times a year, and new tires every 4-5 years. Everything else I can easily do at home.
> diff oil, gearbox oil
These are the same thing, but you’re correct. But it’s infrequent (maybe once or twice over the life, and around $150.
> Did you know EV motors can also require oil changes
Ummm… what? Now you lost me. What EVs need oil?
> Maybe at 1/10 the schedule of ICE vehicles, at least for me. I use regenerative braking almost exclusively (probably 95+% of the time).
In practice, my brakes always corrode from road salt and fuel-efficient driving habits and need replacing long before I actually wear them down, so regen brakes are largely irrelevant to brake life.
> Which means I only need to take it in for a no-questions-asked tire rotation 1-2 times a year, and new tires every 4-5 years. Everything else I can easily do at home.
So that sounds... basically the same as my ICE. Two shop visits per year for tire changes, one oil change per year at the same time as one of the tire changes.
There are many things that break or need maintenance on my ICE vehicles that I don’t want to mess with myself: oil changes, transmissions, alternators, belts, engine issue (oil leaks). Engine air filters are about the only ICE-specific piece I don’t mind doing myself.
Re: brakes, where I live, I don’t think salt will play much a factor, and not sure what you mean by “fuel efficient driving” wearing your brakes, but I’m using regenerative braking 95+% of the time.
> There are many things that break or need maintenance on my ICE vehicles that I don’t want to mess with myself: oil changes, transmissions, alternators, belts, engine issue (oil leaks).
Of all those things you listed, they took a total of 3 garage visits (that weren't already scheduled for tire changes) over 14 years. Not what I'd call "many".
> Re: brakes, where I live, I don’t think salt will play much a factor, and not sure what you mean by “fuel efficient driving” wearing your brakes, but I’m using regenerative braking 95+% of the time.
I mean that if you drive in a fuel efficient way - i.e. by not constantly accelerating/braking unnecessarily, your brake life will be much extended. My current car has regen brakes, and I expect the brakes will require replacing just as often as they did on my old ICE car, due to corrosion.
> Did you know EV motors can also require oil changes
Please enjoy an excellent podcast I quite like: https://youtu.be/YvE164Ubgss?t=900 (wait for 15:45)
Again, probably only relevant for extremely long term ownership, but someone will need to own and maintain all the high mileage decade-old EVs a decade from now.
My daughter one day told me that her Tesla said it needed oil maintenance. I scoffed and tried to mansplain to her how EVs don’t need oil. Then I checked the car, and sure enough, it was asking for oil. One of the contained oil systems had sprung a leak. That’s on a 6 year old Tesla Model X.
ICE maintenance is pretty cheap, with the exception of tires, which are a huge outlay (but also the most important safety item!). My Honda only needs $35 of oil/filter once a year, maybe $40 of brake pads once in 80,000 miles, and a burned out bulb for a few bucks. Top tires all around though, easily $600-$800. A few one time things around the 100k mile mark, maybe plugs/sparkys/belt or similar, but not regular in any sense, most cars will only have them ever done once.
You can see my post from a few months ago where I list all the non-ICE-specific maintenance costs from my spreadsheet: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45629438
> seatbelt receptacle, a cruise control buttons, roof exterior rubber trim, a headrest, a window switch, washer fluid spray nozzles, lug nuts, wiper blades, shocks, struts, door weather stripping, rivets holding the front plastic splashguard on, headlight bulbs, headlight buffing, washer fluid reservoir cap, replacement speaker, turn signal switch, windshield repair, backup light switch.
Other than washer fluid, wiper blades, and the occasional headlight bulb, many of these I’ve never had to replace on any of my vehicles (ICE or EV), and the few that I’ve had to replace was maybe once on one car.
I feel like you’re an unlucky sample of 1.
Most of my ICE vehicles needed none of these, and only things related to ICE vehicles (oil/fluid changes, brake pads/rotors oil leaks, transmissions, alternators, belts).
> I feel like you’re an unlucky sample of 1.
Maybe a bit, but overall my numbers line up with what most sources give for average TCO maintenance numbers. But really, the car was just getting old - having a couple random things to fix per year on a 10+ year-old car isn't unusual. (And my ICE component maintenance was quite low, so you could say I was lucky there, rather than unlucky.)
I think it's your maintenance numbers that are way off, "zero maintenance other than tires" doesn't line up with what any reputable source gives for TCO maintenance costs for EVs or non-ICE components.
e.g.
Consumer Reports says EVs have 40% of the maintenance costs: https://advocacy.consumerreports.org/wp-content/uploads/2023...
US government says fleet EVs have 60% of the maintenance costs: https://www.motortrend.com/news/government-ev-ice-maintenanc...
AAA puts EV maintenance at something like 80% of ICE maintenance: https://newsroom.aaa.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/2020-You...
University of Michigan study puts EV maintenance costs at 50% of ICE vehicles: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jiec.13463
I think you also might be overestimating what the average ICE owner has to take care of.
Most Americans don’t keep a car long enough to even pay it off - they’re in an endless loop of trade-ins, meaning that most non-accident damage is covered by warranty.
I’ve had my current ICE car for just over 5 years now and finally paid my first out of pocket repair cost: $40 for a new washable air filter. Other than that, my expenditures have been tires and a couple hundred bucks in oil changes that I didn’t want to do myself.
> I think you also might be overestimating what the average ICE owner has to take care of.
> Most Americans don’t keep a car long enough to even pay it off - they’re in an endless loop of trade-ins, meaning that most non-accident damage is covered by warranty.
No, I think you may be underestimating. According to this article [1] at least, it’s close to 13 years. That’s well into large/costly maintenance items.
Maybe on HN, people don’t keep their cars long enough to need new brakes or transmission flush, but that’s not typical.
[1] https://www.spglobal.com/automotive-insights/en/blogs/2025/0...
> I’ve had my current ICE car for just over 5 years now and finally paid my first out of pocket repair cost: $40 for a new washable air filter.
Repairs are only a subset of maintenance. Maintenance includes oil changes, brakes, transmission flushes, etc.
All of this is part of the maintenance that ICE vehicles need that EVs don’t.
Vehicle age != ownership duration. The used car market is thriving and aftermarket warranties are a huge part of this.
I also clearly mentioned maintenance in my post - you chose to quote the sentence before it, leaving it out and then respond as if I hadn’t.
Please don’t engage me with this kind of dishonest conversation. It’s a waste of both our time.
Curious for the big examples. Some major things EVs don’t have: oil changes, belts/chains, transmissions, most things related to the engine & drive train are different… seems like the main similarities would be tires, brakes, body work, amenities.
No the GP, but in the 10 years of owning my ICE vehicle I've had these things serviced:
Oil change/Oil filter, Spark plugs, Alternator belt, Aircon belt, Brake pads, Brake fluid, Wiper blades, Wiper fluid, 12V battery, Tyres, an accessory fuse, a jammed seatbelt buckle. Two of the power locks are a bit sticky and probably need a touch-up of oil.
The first 4 are ICE-only, and brake pads are worn less if you mostly use regen. The rest are the same on EVs.
And by far the biggest cost of car ownership (for new cars at least) is depreciation. And EVs depreciate rapidly - enough to offset the costs of oil changes I imagine. And I actually like bringing my car into the dealer twice a year for service. I get to wander around and check out what's new, eat some free snacks, shoot the breeze with my dealer about what's happening in the industry, and then spend the rest of the time on my laptop. Maybe this is sad to admit, but I actually kind of look forward to it.
That being said, if you're in the market for a used EV right now, that depreciation actually works in your favor. I was looking at prices on used luxury EVs recently, and have to admit I was pretty tempted by some 2-3 year old cars selling at less than half MSRP.
That is the point of a PHEV. Just enough battery to cover the daily commute. Plug it in each night, and M-F you could use zero gas.
Not that I'm disagreeing with your main point, but I will say that Toyota's hybrid design is one of the best ICE engines out there. The transmission is replaced with planetary gears and the starter and alternators are replaced with a pair of motors to control the throttle and continuously variable transmission, making it one of the gentlest engine designs out there.
But yes, there is engine oil to be replaced and whatnot.
And also, to your point, my experience with my PHEV is my short range driving is electric, but it turns out most of my miles is consumed by annual long range trips. If I commuted to work, things would tip more in favour of EV driving. All to say how much EV you get out of your PHEV will depend highly on the type of driving one does.
> Mine gets a 40-45 mile all electric range. That sounds like the real issue, vs. EVs. This sounds like you basically have to plug it in every time you park it. And there’s no way you could do any sort of (even small) road trip without using gas.
> (For comparison, our EV6 has about 200-250 mile range, and we charge it about once a week or so, give or take, unless we take a road trip.)
its gasoline car. You use 45miles for every day commute while charging overnight, and use gas for roadtrips: 500 miles range + 3 mins put gas into car
Toyotas hybrid uses gas when you accelerate hard to get that 0-60, it’s a combined system horsepower. Unlike phevs, EREVs are only driven by the electric drive, and the gas system is a series generator, so the EV is fully capable & always doing 100% of the work. PHEVs fundamentally aren’t.
Anyway, the real world data from PHEV usage shows you are the outlier, most people don’t bother plugging them in regularly due to their limitations.
Again, false. You can clearly hear when the combustion engine kicks in and it's indicated in the dash. I can floor it in electric mode and it still gets up to 60 in around 6 seconds, no gas involved. Hybrid mode is probably slightly faster but it's a very marginal difference.
I don't believe your last statement because you've been wrong about everything else, and it doesn't make sense. Plugging it in is exactly as easy as literally any electric car, and it simply doesn't have the limitations you claim it does.
I don't know what you've been reading, but you should evaluate the veracity of it as a source and talk to actual owners. I know several others who have one and we're all quite happy with them and don't get gas often
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/oct/16/plug-in-...
“ The researchers attributed most of the gap to overestimates of the “utility factor” – the ratio of miles travelled in electric mode to the total miles travelled – finding that 27% of driving was done in electric mode even though official estimates assumed 84%. ”
Perhaps the rav4 prime @ 41ml max ev range is a better system than all the other low range PHEVs like it, and has better real world usage data than them. I doubt it though, but I don’t have the data on just the rav.
0 mention of rav4 in this article which seems to be about European cars.
European registered cars. The RAV4 PHEV is a popular car in Europe so is assuredly well represented in this data set of 800,000 phevs.
It's an interesting article - thanks for sharing! The original report is worth reading too. [1]
I agree with the premise. The "utility factor" used to estimate fuel efficiency for PHEVs does not line up with real-world data, which effectively creates a loophole to avoid emissions regulations and keep selling gas guzzlers. This is a problem, and should be fixed.
In regards to which cars are most to blame:
> Volkswagen, Mercedes-Benz and BMW account for the lion’s share of fines avoided over the past three years, together responsible for 89% of the total.
This is a recent trend where luxury carmakers are using PHEVs to circumvent emissions regulations. The latest BMW M5 [2], for example, is a PHEV with a monster 4.4L V8 engine. Car enthusiasts actually hate it compared to the old model because the hybrid system increased the weight by 1000 lbs. But making it a PHEV is probably the only way that BMW is still able to sell a V8. It seems kind of stupid all around.
The RAV4 PHEV is also a big, heavy (4,500 lb) car with a large (by European standards) 2.5L engine. But I would hesitate to lump it in with luxury cars from BMW, Mercedes, Land Rover, etc. I would also hesitate to apply findings from a European study to the US market, where large gasoline cars are currently very popular (not that every discussion needs to be about the US - but the RAV4 is the best selling car in the US so it's important to that market). Not saying you're wrong about RAV4 PHEV emissions relative to the gasoline RAV4, just that the study you linked doesn't really support making any specific claims about that model. The report only mentions Toyota once, where it is lumped into an "others" category on a chart along with Ford, Hyundai, JLR, Kia, Mazda, Mitsubishi, Nissan, and Suzuki.
[1] https://www.transportenvironment.org/articles/smoke-screen-t...
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4Q_dlfQFyg
_If used correctly_, they're pretty good. Most people don't use them correctly.
If you build a product that most people don’t “use correctly” then you have not built a good product suitable for that use. Blaming the customer and expecting them to change is a losing strategy
So if you are too lazy to plug it in every night or your day to day driving exceeds the battery range you shouldn't buy one.
One of my neighbours has one but nowhere to plug it in. I have no idea why they bought it.
This wouldn't stop me from buying one.
There are reasons to buy a PHEV even if you never plug it in. Their electric motors tend to output more power than HEV versions of the same model, leading to more performance and a quieter drivetrain (even with the engine running, it doesn't have to work as hard). You can also run climate control and infotainment while parked without having to idle the engine, which is nice when waiting around on a hot day. Or you can remotely start the air conditioner with your phone.
Basically you can get EV quality-of-life features on a gasoline-powered vehicle.
I probably wouldn't recommend a PHEV to someone who doesn't have a place to plug it in every day. But there are reasons to buy a PHEV beyond just fuel efficiency.
Not everyone is rich enough to live in a private house, where one could plug EVs daily.
Oh yeah, I forgot about the poor.
What limitations stop someone from plugging them in regularly? If you have a charger at home, what stops people from plugging them in at night?
And who cares if this guy is the outlier? You're going to bash on the car because people are dumb and don't know how to operate their cars?
The cars fine. It’s great it works for him. I wouldn’t personally buy one today when lots of options for real BEVs exist, but you do you.
What I do care about, and why I care that he’s an outlier, is that low range PHEVs mainly exist to get emissions credits for manufacturers so that they can sell more gas cars, and those emission savings aren’t real [1]. You could say everyone’s dumb for using them this way, but clearly the ergonomics of the electrical capabilities in this category are lacking in important ways.
And I can’t prove it but I bet the manufacturers have known this for a long time. But adding a plug to a hybrid with a tiny battery was an awfully cheap way to get your existing car counted as “green” for credits, so too tempting.
(1) https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/oct/16/plug-in-...
I watched MKBHD’s review versus Doug DeMuro’s and only one of them took the time to point out the tailgate window and wipers. One reviews cars the other reviews gadgets.
I watched both Marques' review and Doug's, and yeah Doug's was better. I linked the MKBHD review because mainly I wanted to make the Model Y comparison, and Marques called it a "Model Y fighter" in the video title.
And also, Doug feels a little out of touch to me these days. Less about "quirks and features" that appeal to me (although he still covers that), and more about "enthusiast cars" (like his million dollar Porsche and Lambo) that don't really interest me. Although to be fair MKBHD isn't much better in that regard.
I remember when Marques coined the word “squiricle” which is a portmanteau of square and circle, to describe the shape of the steering wheel of a Tesla. From then on every “car reviewer” YouTuber started describing any steering wheel with this shape using the stupid portmanteau. It’s infuriating to car enthusiasts who knew that this kind of steering wheel is called a quartic steering wheel, with history behind the design.
The only thing I'd miss about the MY is the 7-seat feature. I love the fact that you can technically cram two more people in the car on the occasional times when you need to, without needing to drive a giant 7-seat boat. I wish more mid-size electric SUVs did the same.
I sat in the back seat of a model Y with two other adults and it was extremely painful.
That's not surprising. The point isn't to use it to regularly drive tall adults around back there. It's for when your family of four needs to take two of your kids' friends somewhere, that kind of thing. We probably use it once every couple of months, but it's super handy at those times, and folds away out of sight and mind the rest of the time.
The RAV4 Prime is extremely hard to get if you live outside of SoCal and maybe a few other areas. I'm in the southeast and a few years ago the local dealer told me that this entire region is only allocated a few Prime's each quarter. Even today I've never seen one in the wild.
Not only that, but it sounds like dealerships are still hardcore ripping off people who want to buy a RAV4 Prime. $20k over MSRP, refusing to sell without add-ons / warranty, etc.
Yep, wanted one but it made zero sense at the prices they wanted. Got a fully electric EV and very happy with the choice.
I figure there's a lot more to break on the Prime too.
> It's an EV most of the time
Nowhere on the Toyota site did I see anything about range on battery only. Still, I wouldn't mind having one.
I settled for a refurbed Leaf and have only needed an ICE vehicle twice, because of cargo capacity, not range.
Toyota is claiming "up to 52 miles on a full charge" on the recently announced 2026 RAV4 PHEV [1]. For me that would be enough to cover the majority of my trips.
Looks like I was mistaken though and you can't actually buy the 2026 model yet (and the Toyota website still shows the older 2025 model). And as another commenter pointed out, it may not actually be possible to buy the older model either due to insufficient production.
[1] https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a69059379/2026-toyota-r...
A friend of mine bought one. It ended up being kind of awful. 53mi of range for a 40kwH battery? That's abysmal. Where's all the power going?
He traded it in for a used 2023 Model Y. Does 9-hr road trips all the time. I don't think he's going back.
My refurb had a fresh battery that says I'll get 150 miles if I avoid my normal "enthusiastic" pace.
53mi is weak sauce, but that sounds like the battery was near EOL. I charge mine at home which definitely keeps the wear and tear down.
The 23-25 RAV4 prime has a recall where the instrument cluster goes blank. AFAIK the whole thing needs to be replaced. Sounds just like the Ioniq ICCU issues.
Marques Brownlee is a kid who did shitty reviews of cell phones and is now a tech influencer, not an objective auto industry reviewer. He knows jack shit about the auto industry. Whatever comes out of his mouth is designed to make his clients - the companies who pay him to pimp their products - look as good as possible.
Rivians are wildly heavy and inefficient compared to the rest of the industry. The R1T weighs more than two of the heaviest version of the Ioniq 5, for example.
R1T owners seem to average about 2mi/kwhr, whereas the Ioniq 5 gets almost twice that...
Its fitting he would think the reference in EVs is the Model Y of all things, the technologically outdated, slow charging car whose sales are falling off a cliff while the manufacturer is trying to upsell you a monthly subscription for lane keeping.
Yet I was unable to find a better priced vehicle that does not charge monthly for remote start, access to the vehicle's camera recordings, phone key, and navigation.
And the monthly subscription is for a software feature that does quite a bit more than lane keeping, in my experience of the trial they offered during December. I did multiple 45 min drives across town, on urban and traffic light streets without intervention, and many other drives where intervention was only required 1 or 2 times. I could see real utility in it for someone with slower reflexes or poorer eyesight, such as the elderly.
I haven't seen anyone offer that capability at anywhere near Model Y's price.
here another review from my favorite car reviewer Mat Watson (carwow), from what I remember he complains about cleaning rear window wiper, but it feels all in all like paid ad
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3eepauvC5LU
The fact that Rivan gave preview access to a UK car reviewer while ignoring Out Of Spec who literally have 3 Rivians in their 'fleet' shows that Rivian is not yet serious about building a quality, customer-centric EV even though I truly want them to be successful.
I have no idea who that is.
Out of spec has 300K subscribers, carwow 10.8M, completely different league/reach
Is the RAV4 PHEV still seeing huge markups in the US?
Former R1S Gen 2 owner. Love this brand and I want to love the car, but the quality and constant maintenance issues were unacceptable.
Rattles, a door mirror motor breaking, doors that wouldn't shut properly, door weather stripping that fell off, a door that just wouldn't open, panel alignment issues, some kind of screaching-to-a-halt-and-terrifying-my-family auto-brake that Rivian never figured out after reviewing log data.
Oh and did I mention the fans or heat pump that sound like a ROCKET LAUNCHING?! At a park one time someone asked me if something was wrong with the vehicle. Nope, that's just the terrible fans they chose!
Insult to injury: someone rear ended me. Insurance "covered" it, but the local collision center --- my only option within 6 hours --- charges a 2X rate for EVs that State Farm would not cover. So a $14,000 MINOR FENDER DENT turned into $7,000 out of pocket for me.
If you look at /r/rivian, it's a near constant stream of issues. While Rivian did expedite service center visits for critical issues, other times repairs were months out. And as the R2 scales, SC growth will probably trail for a while, and so I really fear for the experience early adopters are in for.
I am rooting for them but for me personally I would not consider another Rivian.
The R2 was the first time I seriously thought about spending up on a vehicle.
It looks good.
But $45k++ is just wild to me. It seems like the market is undervaluing used EV’s, so hopefully the depreciation curve will bring these down to $30k in a couple years for us old-school folks who prefer not to have a $1000/mo car loan.
I'm a little confused why you think that's wild; It's pricing is inline with other BEV's in the Canadian market at least; it's comparing with the Model Y, the Equinox, the Blazer, the Mach e, the Ioniq 5, the EV6, the BZ4, and the Aryia.
Typically speaking you're going to spend $10,000 to $13,000 more then an equivalent gas car for a BEV vs a comparable gas car in Canada.
> But $45k++ is just wild to me
It’s just surprising to me that this is surprising to anyone in 2026. New cars are no longer $20-30k in the US and haven’t been since 2021. Average transaction price is now $50k+, so if companies like Rivian that skip the dealership model charge $45k, it really isn’t that expensive. The only new cars under $30k are sedans and hatchbacks. And most of them start at almost $27-30k for base price not including all the bs dealership fees.
> New cars are no longer $20-30k in the US and haven’t been since 2021.
there are plenty cars in this subrange, its just Americans prefer to spend more on extra features.
You ignored the second half of the statement:
> The only new cars under $30k are sedans and hatchbacks. And most of them start at almost $27-30k for base price not including all the bs dealership fees.
that statement is factually wrong too
New base Nissan Leaf is ~30k after delivery fee, and looks pretty darn great.
I’m not sure if you’re agreeing to what I said or if this is meant as a counterpoint. But that’s kind of proving my point, new cars are pretty expensive these days. If you’re getting a base Nissan Leaf for $30k, SUVs costing $45k don’t sound that unreasonable.
they from whatever reason made it much shorter and smaller than previous gen..
The 45k is a myth for now. The vehicles that have been reviewed so far are going to be $60k+ performance models. We'll see if they actually get down to 45k.
From the analysis I've seen with that drag coefficient, the 45k vehicle is going to have to have a range of 220 to 260 miles. Hardly something that will fly off the shelves.
Average price of a new vehicle in the US is $50,000. This is priced appropriately considering total cost of ownership delta against a combustion vehicle. Rivian needs more volume for prices to decline from manufacturing efficiency at scale.
https://www.axios.com/2024/12/19/cars-prices-inflation-suvs
A cursory search of the web shows that TCO for EVs in the US is higher than ICE for all but high mileage commuters. Wish it wasn't the case, but insurance alone is a 30% premium.
Model 3 TCO is very competitive for all sedans. But yes, there are a lot of luxury EVs and EVs with questionable reliability.
https://www.self.inc/info/expensive-cars-to-run/
https://www.consumerreports.org/cars/car-maintenance/the-cos...
Insurance is a bear for Teslas. They cost a lot to repair.
The Model 3 Highland is super fun to drive. Maybe other EVs have this too. It's a very different experience to a similarly priced ICE car, and worth factoring in to the value proposition.
I specify Highland because the previous version was rattly and noisy enough to seriously detract from the zippy driving experience. Highland is nice.
NYT recently did a fantastic calculator. It isn't simple flat one or the other is cheaper. It takes into account buy vs lease, milage, local energy cost, length of ownership etc
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/upshot/ev-vs-gas-ca...
https://www.atlasevhub.com/weekly-digest/new-2025-update-on-...
> While drafting the fact sheet, we checked two headline policy ideas that the One Big, Beautiful, Bill introduced: the early sunset of the consumer EV credit and a new $250 annual EV fee. While the annual fee was dropped from the final legislation, the $7,500 consumer credit now ends September 30th.
> For the Equinox EV, these changes would cut its seven-year savings over the gasoline Equinox from about $9,000 to under $200. The Model Y also showed savings compared to its gasoline comparison under that less favorable scenario for EVs.
That link also factors in fuel savings which depends on where you live. I'd personally never save on an EV if it costs more upfront.
Are you sure about that? The cost of repairing even minor collision damage on a Rivian is ridiculous.
Yup, R1S dented rear quarter, $55000 to repair, insurance totaled it out...
https://www.reddit.com/r/Rivian/comments/1r19jxb/vivian_is_o...
How are insurers making any money insuring these things nowadays? 30% higher premiums are being mentioned elsewhere in the comments; that doesn't sound like enough!
>How are insurers making any money insuring these things nowadays?
Because insurance is fundamentally a "skim some" model.
They have a massive pool of money. Sure the pool is bleeding all the time because they're paying out, but it's also being replenished by premiums paid in. They invest this "constant" pool of money and the return on this covers overhead plus profit.
So when we're all getting screwed on our premiums because fenders cost tens of thousands and Karens file claims for parking scratches they're making more money, because the same ROI on a bigger pool of money is a bigger number.
There are multiple other people in the comments saying they had quarter panels repaired for $15K. Which is still a lot, but it’s not $55K.
There’s definitely more to that story.
I'd love to see the itemized bill.
People keep repeating this uncritically. There is a car-debt crisis, and wages haven't kept up with house/car costs.
We have one person saying "well in Californian wages..." and another saying essentially that 50K isn't a lot of money when the average SALARY is $66K/year.
I also believe this $50,000 stat is the mean car price which is likely to be pushed up by luxury car sales that cost 2-4x what a typical car costs, whereas a median price would give a better indication of what most people are actually spending. I did a quick Google search and wasn't able to find any data on median price, though.
$50000 stat is the mean transaction price, which includes the dealership stuff that gets added on. While it’s true that it is an average, companies are increasingly not making cheaper models. Sub $30k new cars are almost a myth at this point. You get sedans and hatchback models that start in the high 20s as the base price but we all know you’re not walking out of that dealership with a base model or just paying the advertised rate. SUVs on the other hand, which most people prefer these days are closer to $40k.
> There is a car-debt crisis
To what degree is this caused by car prices versus Americans' compulsion to keep buying new cars? Anecdotally, the folks I know struggling with car payments are almost exclusively in the latter bucket. But I'm open to having my mind changed with data.
If people didn't buy new cars there would never be used cars.
Tell that to Cuba.
Not entirely true; there are at least the lease, rental, and commercial fleet markets supplying predictable inventory of used cars to the public market.
I have 2014 Tesla S which which I recently had drive unit and battery replaced ($20k total). my friends all think I am nuts, but they all have $1k+ payments (some for 72m) while I haven’t had a car payment since 2017 and won’t have another one till 2036 :)
If your friends dumped $20K into paying off those loans they’d be a lot closer to paid off or maybe paid off completely, though. And that’s on a newer, lower mileage car.
I’m all for maintaining vehicles and keeping them on the road, but I don’t think you’re in a place to criticize your friends with $1K car payments after putting almost 2 years worth of those payments into a car that’s over a decade old.
I put in two years worth of payments for 18 years driving the car (9 since my last payment and 9 more after the maintenance) :)
> I put in two years worth of payments for 18 years driving the car (9 since my last payment and 9 more after the maintenance) :)
Plus paying for the car itself
You can’t estimate your future repair bills to be $0
I get it that you like the car, but there are some major mental gymnastics happening with your math
I have spent exactly $0.00 on maintenance since 2014 when I bought the car (other than tires, 5G modem and internal battery). not sure what “paying for the car” means, it was paid off in 2017.
to simplify the math:
1. I spent total $90k
2. to have a car from 2014 through 2035-ish
for a $1k/month that would be $252k for my friends :)
What are you thinking about getting next?
nothing till 2035 and even then I might just replace the battery again. people look at EVs as like some disposable thing, when battery deteriorates you chuck it (shows in the pricing of 'used' EVs, my friend bought a 3-year old eTron that was originally purchased for $93k for $35k - 19k miles on it). my tesla is rock n roll now and will be good for the next decade
Who paid the $20k?
I did :)
How many miles?
67k
I wonder how much of this ridiculous car money was previously buy-a-house money. If you don't think you'll ever buy a house, you might as well spend it on a car.
Small, efficient gasoline vehicles are prohibited by CAFE standards in the US, but EVs are exempt. Generally new EV manufacturers have been starting with high-end vehicles, and working their way into mid-range, with hopes on eventual low-range vehicles.
Because EVs are exempt from CAFE standards, it does open up a niche at the very low end, and Slate and Telo are starting up production in that market, so one of their vehicles might appeal to you.
ya same, i can't see spending as much as i did on my first tesla 5+ years ago, the depreciations just too steep, hopefully that holds for rivian too and i'll pick one up in a couple years the R2 is really nice.
That said, china BEV's are 1/2 the cost even accounting for import costs to the USA lol so sort of points toward a issue with US companies at the moment
Do they depreciate any worse than their gas counterparts? You’re also saving money on gas and maintenance - that’s gotta count for something, no?
In California with PG&E which most people have, no you don't save much. It's different if you can charge for free at work.
And yes EVs depreciated worse than any other vehicle.
> In California with PG&E which most people have,
Most people in California don’t have PG&E. Most of the land area in the northern 2/3 of the State or so is covered by PG&E, but people and land area aren't the same thing. Southern California Edison alone serves almost as many people as PG&E, and other smaller utilities, including public utilities like LADWP, SMUD, Silicon Valley Power, etc., serve another big chunk of the population.
SCE will screw you nearly as hard. We are on a tiered usage which is the cheapest they offer and it's $0.32/kWh and even at that rate the EV isn't much cheaper than the non-hybrid I replaced. I'd need to switch to a ToU plan which would increase my other electricity costs.
Also for depreciation:
2020 Mazda 3 - sold $18k at dealer, originally $28k, 64% retained
2022 Kia EV6 - bought $25k, originally $55k-$7.5k federal, 53% retained
My mistake, thanks.
You can get a used EV for pretty cheap these days
As a European: nice, but why is it so BIG? How is that monster called "mid-size"? Why would one want to haul so many tons of extra metal around just to transport one's behind?
As a European (dutch), why are our roads so small, that normal sized cars look like "monsters". I have often thought, that Europe will have a problem in the future with roads, as they are just too small, and expanding and making them more safe, is unlikely to ever happen and often times impossible. Not everyone can get by with a small little hatchback, some of us need a big pickup (I own a building company). And for the people that do not need it from a commercial point of view, have you ever considered that people have hobbies and some hobbies needs a fair amount of space in a car? Or families with multiple kids doing sport need the space for all the gear? I am worried that in the future, more and more european cities will just address the problem with a disguised "we are making the cities car free, and thus greener and safer". What that means for the average citizen out there is, that any building related work, will just become more expensive, as people will just charge more to get over the hassle of getting into the cities then.
I'm glad the roads are small. Smaller roads cause slower driving (well researched). As for the cities, it is unsustainable to use cars as the primary mode of transportation within cities. We do want to make cities greener and largely car-free, because cars for individuals simply do not make any sense in a city. We still need roads for deliveries and occasional transportation of heavy or large goods, but transporting yourself within a city should rarely be done in a car. See Tokyo for an example of a large metropolis which functions well and which would completely break down if everybody tried to use a car to get somewhere.
an families with multiple kids? They should do what? Come now.
I grew up in a family of 5, albeit a decade after my siblings.
When I visited London with my parents, we went by train. When I was in the cub scouts, one of my memories was a group trip by train. When I went to middle school (years 4-6), it was easy enough for me to walk alone at the end, though mum did go with me at the start; when I went to secondary school (7-11) there was a bus, though eventually I found I liked the (3 mile!) walk.
Today, I find that my local bus route within Berlin to a nearby mall takes me past 2 schools, and at certain times of day the bus will fill with kids and adult supervisors. Sometimes I see people taking Kinderwagen on the bus.
A visit to Tokyo does wonders for broadening one's world views :-)
Walk? Bike? Take the bus? People had kids for years before cars were invented.
This argument does not work when society is build towards roads and using them. I live in the Netherlands in a village, and not using a car is impossible with a few kids. The city is different.
So is your specify built towards roads and using them, or are they too small? Which is it? They are mutually exclusive
What I've observed, is that 90% of journeys people make can be done without a car.
Designing a city that helps people make those journeys car free, makes it better for the 10% of journeys that do need to be made with a car.
Can and want to or being efficient are different things. I "can" travel around in a city using public transport with 3 kids and all their sporting equipment, do I want to, no. Would any sane person want to? No.
Maybe consider a sports club that's in walking -- or cycling -- distance. But I guess that's also insane.
Unless you're going surfing, 3 kids and their sporting equipment fit in a small hatchback, with room to spare.
see, this is the narrow minded view of so many europeans. Well just go to a closer sports club....is not an answer to the problem that thousands of people experience with small cars, and small roads.
Many more thousands have no issues with small cars or going to a closer sports club.
If the roads in cities are wide enough in cities for literal trucks, then they're wide enough for your car. Widening roads and making cars bigger makes pretty much everyone less safe.
Don't get me wrong, you're free to live in the boonies and drive 400km to your sports club, but don't call me narrow minded because I can load up 5 people in my VW passat and drive 500km for a 10 day vacation, or because I prefer not to get bulldozed by a car with a higher hood than me while walking to my local sports club.
Thank you
That’s a bit of a strawman argument. Most journeys don’t consist of three children and all their sporting equipment.
As a practical example, in the UK, on average a young g child lives 1.7miles away from their school.
That is an easily walkable distance for most children, yet lots of parents choose to drive it because they feel the streets aren’t safe to walk on in rush hour.
If by redesigning streets to make active travel more appealing, you could reduce the number of cars on the school run by 10%; it would improve the traffic situation for the ones who still need to drive. Win-win
Some people need more space, but the road problem is something that can't be retrofitted without demolishing buildings.
As a Dutch person, surely you've seen that Amsterdam decided that the city's car problem in the 70s was unfixable and decided to switch to cycling. The building and delivery problem is real, but I don't think even a 10 euro/day charge for work vehicles would register given how expensive building work is already.
Land in cities is very expensive. Why should vehicles get to use more of it for free?
>As a European: nice, but why is it so BIG? How is that monster called "mid-size"?
Because it's a nominal size more than a descriptive one. Midsize is the second biggest size with only "full size" stuff being bigger.
It made more sense 30-40yr ago when people who remembered when the domestic auto makers mostly only made a full-size, a midsize and a compact car were still alive and of prime car buying age.
As a European, I’ve been gently looking forward to Rivian’s R3 for years now. I like the design and it looks much more like a machine that will suit Europe.
The R2 isn't even really a mid-size SUV. It is closer to a RAV4, which is considered a "compact SUV" or "crossover" [1]. Mid-size SUVs like the Honda Pilot tend to be even larger.
[1] https://www.carmax.com/articles/suv-size-comparison-guide
when every car around you is even bigger than this, you’ll appreciate not driving a minuscule car in america.
it is terrifying
Because it's the middle size between the two reasonable car sizes that are being made today: gigantic and fucking enormous.
If you aren't buying at least the gigantic car, then you don't care about your kids safety and that's bad. How are you going to protect them from my gigantic SUV?
What? Walking?? No of course that's illegal! You want to navigate the street without a massive steel bubble? Are you nuts!
I want Rivian to succeed, more competition is a good thing, but reading about the all the buy backs on r/rivian is disheartening.
Tip: do not get Rivian unless a service center is close.
I think insiders would tell you off the record not to get an R1, but that the R2s should be much more robust. Of course it's untested at this point, but hopefully that's the case.
Can they fix that web page? That was so awful to try to get any info.. Just scroll, scroll, scroll and still just a bunch of big pictures and no meaningful info.
If you look at the R1 pages, you'll see those pages, though scroll-heavy, at least contain more useful info. I'm hoping that after R2 is actually available to order, that they'll update the page with more information. It's still early.
The scrolling was so bad I had to close the page when I was actually interested.
This was half the reason I posted to HN, honestly. I've seen several recent examples of modern product pages which render awfully because they're trying to be "quirky".
Edit: look at this, scrolling an entire screen only to have a photo zoom by <1.25x: https://imgur.com/a/G2Hfe3Q
I feel quite bad for people living in the United States. Despite the constant refrain about freedom y'all are actually pretty hindered when it comes to reasonably priced EVs. On Saturday I put a down on a BYD Shark 6 truck. Hopefully I'll collect it Friday, if not early next week. I'm paying $41,200 USD for the thing brand new. I saw a MotorTrend review of it last week, they flew down to Mexico City to test one out. The entry level pricing there is $50,060 USD. Here in Australia they're called the "Raptor Killer" as they will take Ford Ranger Raptors off the line and cost a bit more than half the price of the Raptor.
A BYD Shark 6 is not an EV?
It's a HEV, not a BEV. But it's an EV none the less. It has the ability to drive ~100km on battery only, and the engine doesn't drive the wheels, it's used to recharge the battery.
Yeah, I didn’t realize we were calling hybrids “EV”s now.
Also, the BYDs I’ve been in were chintzy garbage as far as fit and finish goes. Can’t speak to their reliability, or other aspects of them, though.
. chintzy garbage
This is a slur.
No. https://www.etymonline.com/word/chintzy
If it's going to have a gasoline engine anyway, I'd much rather just get the Raptor. By the way, the Ford Ranger Raptor is not to be confused with the Ford F-150 Raptor which is a total beast.
It's the best of both worlds as you can drive it EV only for short distances but still have the ability to drive longer distances. As said above, the engine is only to charge the battery.
It's funny that the software engineers on this forum are all obsessed with building scalable systems that can provide a service at the lowest cost but when it comes to manufacturing all of a sudden it's "we must protect jerbs".
It's about time people woke up to the fact China is not just after jerbs.
This carried more weight when the US wasn't trying to take Greenland.
HNers so grumpy you’d think this was an AI story submission…
I learned very early in my career that being in hardware/software/tech does NOT mean you will be around people that LIKE hardware/software/tech. Then I eventually joined a FAANG, assuming I finally found the nerds! Oof...extreme disappointment.
Anyone have insights on V2G or V2H capabilities?
If we can have open standards to allow my car to interoperate with my home batteries (Franklin, Enphase, Tesla Powerwall or others), we'll all be better off.
I saw on one of the review videos that you can get 2400W out of the R2
At 240v? Or thru a regular plug somehow?
Charger to load adapter.
Boy it's ugly. While being a great fan of electric engines, I always wonder why electric cars by design must be ugly and have bad patterns (like retractable handles and a huge tablet in the middle)
This is their "bet the farm" moment that Elon took with the Model 3. If this doesn't become a best seller, stick a fork in them. If it does, the sky is the limit and we're very likely going to see half a million sold. There's not much in-between room for Rivian as they have no solar wildcard and their charging network is another also ran.
Do you really need a 0-60mph time of 3.0 seconds in a mommymobile?
How much of that performance comes for free, from optimizing for range/efficiency?
What's the obvious "that could be less" in the system that wouldn't negatively impact efficiency?
None of it.
It the motor is smaller, it pulls less current.
If it pull less current, you can use batteries which aren't specced for high amps.
If use use less amps, you can use thinner cabling and split the batteries up i various compartments. That means heat is more distributed. Less active cooling, if any, is needed, of both batteries and motors.
All of the above can translate to less weight, which mean better range.
Weight has nearly no effect on range of an EV. The YouTube channel Aging Wheels has two good videos on this.
Here he talks about towing, and he demonstrates loading the truck to max capacity makes nearly no difference: https://youtu.be/UmKf8smvGsA
He also covered an attempted Cannonball run where they stuffed two extra battery packs into a Rivian R1T: https://youtu.be/yfgkh4Fgw98
Real differences makers are smaller wheels and aerodynamics
That's interesting. It demonstrates that regenerative braking really works. The energy you expend going uphill, you mostly get back going downhill. The energy you expend speeding up, you mostly get back slowing down. His tests were a round trip, so start and end altitude are the same. And he kept a fixed speed on a freeway, so there wasn't much acceleration energy expenditure or energy loss into friction brakes. You don't get drag or rolling resistance back, so that apparently dominates. Those don't vary too much with load.
Nice result.
> are smaller wheels
Looks like rolling resistance decreases with diameter [1]. So, is it from the increased drag from higher stance? Would lowering the car the same work better?
[1] https://www.tirereview.com/science-behind-rolling-resistance...
I think it's mostly from aerodynamics. Lowering the car could help but even just smaller rims, with the same overall diameter (rim + tire), can have a 15% impact on range. This Engineering Explained[1] video does an okay job with some of the math but he clarifies it well with a comment:
> CLARIFICATION! Why do bigger wheels mean worse efficiency, when the overall tire diameter remains the same? This comes down to aerodynamics. A 20" wheel will cause more of a disruption in airflow than an 18" wheel. That's why Tesla (and others) uses aero covers on their wheels (Car & Driver testing showed it gives about a 3% efficiency bonus at speed). The smaller the wheel, the more of the side profile of the wheel & tire is perfectly flat (the tire is flat, the wheel open: more tire = more flat area, less open area). Ideally, you'd have just a plain, solid sheet for the wheel, but obviously that's not idea for brake cooling. Wheel covers are today's common compromise as they have some airflow, but minimal.
[1] https://youtu.be/NYvKxsYFqO8
> solid sheet for the wheel, but obviously that's not idea for brake cooling
So, temperature driven radial louvers!? :D
It has an effect on the range of the tires.
> from optimizing for range/efficiency?
I meant for normal highway driving, not drag racing.
Optimal highway driving is still lowest resistance and losses. Cold weather driving is what mostly results in a battery capable of the high performance, from what I understand.
Is a "small" motors more efficient than a large one? I suspect no, with the assumption that everything is sized so the "drag race" operating range would be well into the peak, rather than sustained, operating range.
In my observation the primary purpose of this performance seems to be to be able to round on-ramps at really slow speeds and then floor it and merge leaving slower vehicles behind you with a crap situation.
That's like asking if mommy needs a razor sharp knife in the kitchen or if we should keep it dull for legacy reasons.
Uhhh, what? No it isn't.
Having a sharp knife is safer than a dull one.
Having a massive heavy steel box that weighs thousands of kilos that can accelerate that quick, that you can operate in public with little to no useful training is not safer. I'm sorry, no car outside of a race track needs to accelerate that quick. It's absurd.
The analogy fits perfectly. A slow car is also unsafe, that's why low speed plates exist along with minimum speed limits. There's no such thing as a vehicle with too much acceleration and never will be.
Yeah what qualifies as a "slow car"? An Amish dude on a horse and buggy?
I have driven plenty of "slow" cars with less than 100 horsepower without issue. If you can't figure out how to merge that's a skill issue, another prime reason not to be giving people cars with former F1 car levels of acceleration. You don't need 0-60 in 3 seconds to fucking merge, get real!
Having driven a very slow acceleration car, yes, yes you do, trust me. Nothing worse than merging into dense traffic with high-speed trucks next to you and not being able to come up to speed before the ramp ceases.
Still a massive vehicle! Bulky electric cars make so little sense, because then you need bigger batteries, which... further increase the weight.
The upcoming R3/R3x is likely to be a way more practical vehicle for most people, unless you have a large family to haul around. [0]
[0] https://www.caranddriver.com/rivian/r3
AIUI this might not be as bigger problem as you’d imagine. Aerodynamics dominate most of the resistance at medium to highway speeds. This was discussed in the recent Rivian R1T cannonball run conversion videos where they doubled the battery capacity (and therefore drastically increased the weight of the vehicle) without substantially affecting efficiency.
Yes, weight alone is not that important for fuel economy at highway speeds. Aerodynamic efficiency of a vehicle is determined by the cross section area + drag coefficient. A 90s Honda Civic has a worse drag coefficient but a vastly smaller cross section than the Rivian, so it needs to move less air out of the way to drive forward. Smaller EVs can go farther with smaller batteries, but the American consumer has decided for one reason or another that cars must be tall, and therefore less aerodynamically efficient.
Haptic steering wheel thumb-wheels instead of actual buttons? Hell no. Full pass. And we're in the market for a vehicle like this in the next year or so, looking hard at Santa Fe Calligraphy, or Outback XT (similar size, similar price tag, AFAICT). No physical buttons = no sale.
I think you’re confusing “haptic” for “capacitive”. The wheels are real, physical controls with motors to give tactile feedback about the state of the UI. You can literally feel where the beginning and end of a list are, for example. It’s even better than traditional buttons.
The only problem is that there aren’t also physical controls for media and climate, which there should be. But for everything else, the thumb wheels are going to be awesome.
Marques Brownlee seems to like the wheels in his latest video review, FWIW.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfReqcUJfBU
And unsafe electronic door handles so your kids an unable to get out of the car in an emergency. https://old.reddit.com/r/Rivian/comments/1r1etyr/zack_demons...
That video makes it look like a physical button for the rear door manual release (albeit in a very hidden location)?
The haptic feedback on e.g. macbook trackpads is very convincing, so I'm not sure it's impossible to get right in a car, but I wouldn't bet on <random car manufacturer> to get it right.
The Outback is an incredible car for the money
My BYD Sealion 7 has been an absolute joy.
My friend has the R1S, he likes it a lot, but he's also got a lemon law case open and is hoping that Rivian will have to take the vehicle back. I rode in it and it's nice, but it's way too big for me. The R2 sounds like a step in the right direction, but it still looks too large. I had to shop cars recently and I bought a Golf R. The Golf is "mid-size" to me. I moved across the country in a packed Golf GTI.
Car manufacturer websites are one of the worst things on the web.
Why do they think we want to look at snail-paced scrolling, stuttery animations?
have you ever visited an auto dealership website? 10x worse.
I want to throttle whoever decided that scroll driven animations should be added to CSS/browsers. Just a load of gee-whiz bullshit
Page seems awful light on technical specifications. AWD like other Rivians? How many motors? How much horsepower? How big is it? How heavy is it? What trim levels are / will be available? Will there be the same standard v. large v. max battery options? What will be those battery options' ranges?
I really reality wish rivian create a better self-driving technology soon and make a proper competition to tesla. Rivian cars are so nice and well designed.
Personally I'm in no rush to have self-driving capabilities in my car for at least another decade or so. I'm pretty happy with the current ADAS systems found in most cars like adaptive cruise control, lane keeping, and collision avoidance - and happy to just see incremental refinements to those systems.
At some point I want a self-driving car, but I'm happy to let Waymo and Tesla users test those systems for another 10+ years before I personally start using them.
Of course everyone has different needs. This is the reason why there are so many different makers and models. I commute a lot (100 miles a day) and tesla self driving is hard requirement. But almost everything else in car sucks compared to other cars. And compared to rivian it sucks big time. The moment rivian gets what tesla have now with fsd I will switch immediately. And some comments suggest rivian is working on that.
The main thing I think about self-driving is if it truly were self-driving and you could sleep in the car while it drives to a destination overnight. Even if it were only highways. That would be really cool.
I can't sleep in a moving car anyway so that's of no value to me. If I'm going to be awake anyway then I might as well drive.
You mean like a bus?
Sure except you have your car when you get there, packing is more convenient and it follows you schedule and goes directly between your desired endpoints.
> you have your car when you get there
Depending on the destination of course, I often find having a car in a city like having an albatross around my neck. The benefits or features get outweighed by traffic and parking. I'll take good public transit and a set of headphones.
Are you buying a car in the next 10 years? I’m in a similar boat. But I’m irrelevant to the car market because I’m not buying until I can buy a Level 4 car.
I just bought a new car, and will probably buy another 1-2 cars in the next 10 years. My ideal upgrade path for cars is:
* I wanted my most recent purchase to be a PHEV
* I want my next purchase in roughly 5 years to be an EV (hopefully solid state batteries are available by then)
* In about 10 years I am hoping that I can buy a car that can self-drive most of my trips door-to-door
One thing I'll add is that I live in an area that gets a ton of snow, and current ADAS features are basically worthless in snow. They all turn off once the sensors get covered in ice, or when lines in the road are no longer visible. So I expect that even in new cars 10 years from now, I'll still need to take the wheel to drive during winter. Basically the features are nice when they work, but I'm still going to want to car that is first and foremost designed to be driven by humans.
> I live in an area that gets a ton of snow, and current ADAS features are basically worthless in snow
I live in Western Wyoming. While my Subaru won't drive itself in a blizzard, the radar is still useful.
My plan is to wait until I have something that can drive itself unsupervised in clear weather. Given that's Waymo today and maybe Tesla in ~5 years, I'm figuring something should be on the market that fits that bill within 10, which is how long I'll try to hold onto my gas-burnig Subaru.
What radar? I'm pretty sure that Subaru uses only cameras, no radar.
https://www.subaru.com/eyesight.html
Subaru almost certainly uses radars for both cruise control and blind spot detection.
Your link isn't exactly a white paper, here's a Subaru link that mentions radar: https://www.subaru.com/vehicle-info/articles/what-is-adaptiv...
Agreed! But I have to say, lane centering and adaptive cruise control have been amazing, coming from a previous vehicle with neither.
They're working on that. They're partnering with Nvidia and the R2 will get upgraded hardware for self driving in the fall. I couldn't tell from the website if making a reservation now lets you wait for that.
Self-driving seems like something where car companies shouldn’t all “reinvent the wheel.” A couple of the bigger car companies have projects on this, right? Maybe they could share.
It will probably follow the same pattern as ADAS. Bosch or someone will develop a package, sell it to car manufacturers, and it will become widespread
Why aren't car manufacturers partnering with Comma when they're the closest competitor to Tesla's system? The Bosch systems are super basic.
> A couple of the bigger car companies have projects on this, right? Maybe they could share
Why should they? We're already approaching geopolitical competition at this problem, given self-driving cars and self-driving self-propelled guns and the like are basically technological twins.
Honestly just decent smart cruise and lane keeping is good enough. Concentrate on making a solid long range reliable EV is the best way to compete with Tesla in the short to medium term.
I'm tired of EVs using the electric usage to gut their interiors of $50k+ cars.
If I had an ounce of confidence that Rivian would be around in 15 years, I'd go for a R2. But I don't, sadly. I wish Toyota would buy and fund them.
Yeah, but does it have CarPlay yet? It's a complete deal breaker despite Rivian being essentially the only company who offers a BEV pickup truck of a reasonable size.
BYD's electric SUV is currently available here in Australia for the local equivalent of $40,000.
Selling well like all BYD models.
Cheaper models like the Atto are the equivalent of $20,000.
I like the Rivians I've seen. They're actually, y'know, a truck as opposed to a k-hole hallucination. You can lift stuff up and over the bed near the cab.
The R1 is a body on frame, so a traditional truck chassis.
This new R2 is a unibody- so more of a car, less so a truck
Genuine question: why are you interested in buying a brand new car as opposed to a used one given the massive markdown on even 2 year old cars?
This isn't a (totally) bad question, but it suffers from problem common to a lot of internet forum posts and comments. It lumps "people" into one shiny bucket, and then shouts at the bucket.
Over 16 million new cars were purchased in 2025 in the United States.
Meanwhile, there are about 242 million licensed drivers in that same country.
So that's than 7% of drivers buying a new car in a year's time.
But what is the point of your question, in response to a new car announcements? That new cars should not exist... ? You do realize how much harder that would eventually make it to buy a used one, right?
So yeah, sure. "People" would be well-advised to consider buying a 2-3 year old vehicle that has depreciated. Let someone else carry that depreciation cost. (But "someone" has to.)
(My used EV depreciated 57% before I bought it, 2 years old with 20,000 miles on it. It's a great way to go!)
It’s really hard to judge the size of the R2. It looks like I’m looking at an updated R1S.
Is this thing crossover sized like a Kia Soul or a Rav4? Or is it bigger?
R2's dimensions are 185.6" x 75" x 66.9". The 2026 RAV4 is 181" x 73" x 66.5". So the R2 is slightly bigger than a RAV4.
The R1S is significantly larger at 200" x 82" x 77.3".
Thanks! Still a bit bigger than what I'm looking for unfortunately, but maybe we will get a more compact offering eventually.
No CarPlay,UI with toxic translucent floating buttons, "evolving" steering wheel.
Have they learned nothing?
See also:
https://insideevs.com/reviews/786814/rivian-r2-prototype-fir...
https://www.motortrend.com/reviews/first-drive-2026-rivian-r...
Put some physical buttons in there and maybe I’ll consider it.
Still waiting for the even smaller, and cheaper, R3.
Deadly door handles, all around ugly. Why?
I prefer Lucid Air ~ https://youtu.be/JxuB4H6uCq8
"No CarPlay" is approximately where I stopped reading -- and I am literally their dream target audience - enough money to buy a second car, easily able to afford one of theirs, have solar on top of my house making my electricity cheap, like techy things.
They will either learn or ... not, I guess. I know I am not the only one. Nobody in my family would buy anything techy without my advice (and a modern EV is basically an iPad on wheels, so it qualifies as techy), and I will never ever give "yes" to a car without CarPlay
yeah, seems extremely weird to not have it, it is a must for newer cars, especially ones that are EVs. I wonder why they don't have it, maybe a beef with the phone makers...
deadly door handles, no thanks
This is a beautiful car.
That 300+ miles means nothing without more specs. What’s the size of the battery? The usual 130-140 kWh?
In addition, that's presumably not on the base model price point. Will be interesting to find out.
R1S looks better than R2
No, sorry, I wouldn't buy EVs from any US company any more until they are matura enough that the model production surpasses at least Tesla Model S+X since released. Their reliability just suck. I don't want to waste my life again and again in those months-long waiting of service appointments, annoying issues every where and every day, hiring Lemon law lawyers and other BS.
Data points:
- one Model X
- one R1s
- My neighbor: one Model X, one R1t
- My collegemate: one Model X
I'd rather have a slate.
https://www.slate.auto
Or perhaps even two Slates for the price of a high end R2
Length and width wise, it's smaller than a Model Y. It's deceptively styled to look a big boy car, but it's a matchbox. That's why no reviewers will show themselves or anyone else towering over it. It's for those who want a big car, but without all that space. Rivian calls it a mid-size SUV, but that is straight up bullshit.
Based on the published dimensions, it's almost the exact same size as a Toyota 4Runner - which I'd consider a midsize SUV.
Comparison image: https://www.reddit.com/r/RivianR2/comments/1inep90/r2_vs_4ru...
"Matchbox" is rather hyperbolic and would better match the upcoming R3/R3X which is around the size of a VW Golf (though that still isn't that small… Honda Fits, kei cars, and Fiat 500s are smaller still).
It's about a foot longer than my crossover, which is about the same size as a RAV4 or CR-V and there's no way I could call it tiny.
If you want to see a reviewer next to it for scale, Doug DeMuro is 6'4" and has what you're looking for, from various angles over the course of the review. Looks like a reasonable size to me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUl_0087dyM
it's 1" shorter but it's not teardrop shaped so volume wise should be good
I just looked up the dimensions and it's ridiculously big. You'd have trouble parking in it most places where I am from.
> It's deceptively styled to look a big boy car, but it's a matchbox. That's why no reviewers will show themselves or anyone else towering over it. It's for those who want a big car, but without all that space.
I miss the days when men looking to compensate would buy sports cars. It wasn't any less ridiculous, but at least they (edit: the cars) were better looking and more fun to drive.
If only those ridiculous guys who wanted something fun to drive had realized how much more fun they could have by making fun of people and feeling superior.
Yikes, someone's a bit oversensitive
I guess it depends on what they were compensating for. Up until the 80's and 90's at least there was more association of racing cars with road cars that you could buy.
So that would associate you with the (A man's manly-man maybe?) driver of that car.
But now race cars are not really much like a production road car. And those older men with money don't necessarily want to be like the ever younger drivers being employed to win races.
As you say, ridiculous, but at least the sports cars were cool.
Nice edit.
Wait … so you’re saying they want a small car but are in denial?
"straight up bullshit" would be calling a 4runner-sized vehicle a "matchbox". Really highlights how ridiculous American's unnecessary lust is for massive vehicles.
No CarPlay, not interested.
I wish Rivian would stop trying to emulate Tesla on this front and add support for CarPlay. I don't want your UI.
I actually like the look of the Rivian and this is something I'm somewhat in the market for (or will be in the next few years) but I won't touch it without CarPlay.
as a tesla owner, all I can tell, carPlay is ugly child was born due to EU car makers, not capable of building proper infotainment system.
I want to drive, not constantly connect/accept privacy etc. Especially if that is a $100k+ car.
When i get into the car, the last thing I'd like to know how my car is getting connected to my phone, if there are any issues, especially if that is not my car.
I love how my car knows that in the morning i go to work, and wednesday evening i go to yoga, and put GPS, with best traffic options. 0 touch, all super seamless. No phones involved.
CarPlay has become somewhat of a standard. It's fine to say you personally don't need it, but many/most laymen will still expect their new car to support it.
If a PC was launched without Windows support, most people on HN might be able to live with it day-to-day, but it would still be a dealbreaker for the general population. Admittedly this isn't a fair comparison, but hopefully you understand my point.
As another Tesla owner, I've had this discussion with my brother one too many times. He'll insist he needs buttons, he needs Android Auto/CarPlay and whatnot. Every time I step into one of those cars I'm overwhelmed. Half of the times it doesn't connect, when it connects I get useless notifications for everything. It's not well integrated, and it'll randomly break during the trip.
I understand it has become a standard but it's not a particularly good one, and adding it "just because it's a standard" would detract from the car experience in my opinion. It's a separate device, with a separate OS, kernel, apps etc where you can install almost anything, that's supposed to take over a piece of equipment that belongs with the car and controls all its functions. I'd really rather not have that.
If the infotainment is the basic "show 2D maps and a couple settings", then Android Auto/CarPlay can serve as a viable replacement for low-end cars. But when the car costs >30k and the screen is also the central command console, no thanks. I'd rather have proper OTA updates, give feedback, and see it evolve over time for the better.
[dead]
Apparently there's a aftermarket device that will add Android Auto / CarPlay support by selectively taking over the infotainment display:
https://evplay.io/shop/ev-play-for-rivian
(I can't vouch for it, just something I stumbled upon recently.)
I was on team CarPlay/AndroidAuto too. But I’m willing to give Rivian the benefit of the doubt
The challenge for them is can they integrate a better in-car experience
CarPlay needs to get battery level
CarPlay supports that, the car just needs to pass it through. I believe Ford and Toyota both do.
i have a rivian, and despite being a carplay fan before, i do not miss it. Carplay is a crutch for legacy autos who cant make software, so you just want to overlay a phone feed over their crap. But its very limited, its essentially a video overlay box and has terrible / non-existent integration with the cars smarts, like battery, range, HUD screens, advanced audio controls, etc etc. In my experience with carplay in other smart-ish cars (BMW X series) the carplay experience fights with the car OS constantly and is an awful incoherent experience. A well made car software solution, like the rivians(mostly), is a better experience overall imho.
I say this as someone who still loves having carplay on my other car, a subaru, because their software is atrocious.
i would say, give one a try you might change your mind.
> the carplay experience fights with the car OS constantly and is an awful incoherent experience.
It seems to me like fixing this is the appropriate path forward. There are things that the car OS is better at (like you mention), but no car OS is ever going to support the various media apps I have on my phone that are automatically supported by Android/Android Auto media controls, and bluetooth playback is an even worse experience than cludging together the car OS + android auto media in one UI.
Yes, copy FSD instead that no CarPlay cult.
> copy FSD instead
They are. It’s also subscription based, however.
(For what it’s worth, my friends with Rivian are fine with its phone interface. As are most people who own Tesla’s fine without CarPlay.)
With FSD , that is a very very capable system in 2026, You need real multi media for driving (once it's solved), for camping , movies during charging, and not phone somehow ugly slapped by some plastic holder to your car.