4-Cylinder Harvester EREV engine confirmed by CEO Scott! + 0-60mph, range, payload, towing specs discussions

[blmtnc]

Dang well thanks for updating

There's supposed to be a 240v outlet capable of 7.2kw output on the Terra at least. Could use that. Keep the truck "on", everything else on it powered off, and keep it fueled up and it should cycle the engine on and off to keep a minimal charge on the battery once you run that down to a certain point. At least that how I anticipate it working. Maybe the "camp" mode discussed elsewhere here too would work.

 

[Schubie]

CEO Q&A Key Takeaways from @Chuckles:

6). Scott said the engine will be a "good, high-output 4-cylinder small engine that packages well".

Surprised this hasn't been the focus of much discussion...

Personally, I'm curious what he has in mind--that packages well.

 

[astricklin]

Well, that validates my BEV choice. My threshold for getting my first BEV (2023 Rivian R1S quad motor) was a max range at least 300 miles; I have ZERO desire to have a battery pack that gets less than that.

Also, 0-60 in 4.5s is glacial coming from a Rivian R1S quad that does 0-60 in 3s. I'd have to give up my trash talking of my wife's Cayenne's performance.

Personally, I feel like 4.5 seconds is extremely quick for a large truck like this. It's way faster than people need to be driving on public roads. Most drivers lack the skill to handle a vehicle with that speed. Just look at all the videos of the chuckleheads leaving cars and coffee meets.

3 seconds is sports car territory. Vehicles actually built for this speed, that people typically aren't driving as everyday commuter vehicles.

 

[blmtnc]

Surprised this hasn't been the focus of much discussion...

Personally, I'm curious what he has in mind--that packages well.

Starting to wonder if the 4 cylinder boxer engine from a related brand. One can only hope. Unless that's already implied in this post with the clinking beers

 

[astricklin]

Well shoot! While 0-60 times are often dismissed as not important, it is a measuring stick to comparing vehicles. Scout said sub 3 second, right? Now it’s 3.5 and a second more in Harvester? Larger Rivian R1 and smaller R2 are better and already out or coming next year so even more disappointing to wait two more years for something that will be even less stellar. So what do we have left to hope for? That it’ll look like and have the quality of these prototypes? If not, then Rivian will be the Acura to this Honda, Xfinity to this Nissan, you get it.

Seriously bummed.

It doesn't really matter because in a vehicle that quick, how often are you going to be using it on the road? Sure in my Prius with 100 HP and a 0-60 of around 11 seconds, I'm often petal to the metal when I'm trying to merge into the freeway, but something 3x quicker, you're going to be blasting into the vehicle in front of you if you're going all out very often.

 

[OlyScout]

I get the

Dual-motor Rivian 0-60 is 3.4 seconds. That's comparable with a dual-motor Scout. The Tri-motor Rivian is $20k more and starts around 100k. The quad-motor is over $110K. Performance comes at a price. `Scout will not be a boring vehicle.

But the R2 will have a Tri motor and sub 3 second? Personally, not as excited and will check in closer to production.

 

[OlyScout]

It doesn't really matter because in a vehicle that quick, how often are you going to be using it on the road? Sure in my Prius with 100 HP and a 0-60 of around 11 seconds, I'm often petal to the metal when I'm trying to merge into the freeway, but something 3x quicker, you're going to be blasting into the vehicle in front of you if you're going all out very often.

I use the quick acceleration often in my Tesla Model Y Performance merging, lane changing and also because I can and enjoy it. When you’re used to it and get into a 4.5 second you notice. We have a 455 hp, 4.5 second XC60 Recharge and it feels sluggish. You acclimate to its capability so 3x quicker is just the norm.

 

[Mousehunter]

Over my life, I guess I have had a decent amount of driving in 6 of them (1/2 ton Chevy single cab, Z71 extend Cab, Dodge 4x4 single cab, 1/2 ton Chevy extend cab, 1/2 ton Ford Crew cab, 3/4 ton Ford Crew Cab, and a gen 1 4X4 Tacoma. With the exception of the Tacoma, all have had enough power for day to day work - the 13 second 0-60 of the Tacoma is terrible (which is sad, as I went on a long trip in a similar 2x4 and it was great even heavily loaded - and I thought it was the same 4 banger engine).

Now there were differences. The axle choice on the 1/2 ton Chevy extend cab was so bad I sold it under warranty. I hated driving it. Again, sad as it was essentially my 3rd Chevy and the 2 earlier ones were both great. But the 3rd was a huge mistake. It was pre-traction control, and did not have anything to help with rear traction. It spun a tire virtually every time I had to turn after stopping at an intersection.

The other difference was torque. Without a load, removing the last Chevy and the Taco - they were all fine. With a load, OMG the 3/4 ton diesel is king. Honestly, I can be pulling 8k lbs behind it and it still accelerates compatibly with those other gas trucks. I can notice 8k lbs, but it just is not bad. 18k lbs, that is very noticeable - but still completely usable. But I don't do 18k often (it is probably just over what I should ever tow with that truck).

Anyway. Loosing a second with an unloaded 0-60 is not a huge deal. But I would love to know how much you loose once a trailer is added. That said, it will almost certainly be less important than the range you loose.

 

[Flyinglow]

BEV isn't going to get 350 mile range with a 120-130 kWh battery.

 

[scottsil]

Keep in mind that non-LFP battery BEVs are best operated between 80-20% charge. The occasional 100% charge for roadtrips and the like when you really need the extra range is of course possible. But this means that for the Harvester version you’re really looking at more like a 90mi daily usable range. Not good.

 

[seageo]

BEV isn't going to get 350 mile range with a 120-130 kWh battery.

Nope. The numbers don't add up. With the size and shape of these and the tire options, they need to be in the 180kwh range for 350 miles. Unless they are magically efficient, that's a concerning number.

 

[chopsui]

Keep in mind that non-LFP battery BEVs are best operated between 80-20% charge. The occasional 100% charge for roadtrips and the like when you really need the extra range is of course possible. But this means that for the Harvester version you’re really looking at more like a 90mi daily usable range. Not good.

Did you not read the summary or watch the video? He said the harvester will use a different chemistry - likely LFP.

 

[dleepnw]

I don't see why the Harvester would cost more. If the battery in the EREV is half the size of the BEV battery and uses a less expensive chemistry then it should be equivalent or cheaper than the BEV version. A 4 cylinder engine is surely cheaper or equivalent in cost to a 60-70 kWh battery even with the added mechanical complexity of the engine?

 

[Timmdodge60]

I don't see why the Harvester would cost more. If the battery in the EREV is half the size of the BEV battery and uses a less expensive chemistry then it should be equivalent or cheaper than the BEV version. A 4 cylinder engine is surely cheaper or equivalent in cost to a 60-70 kWh battery?

I think it is more about supply and demand economics. Something like 83% of the reservation holders have selected the Harvester option.

 

[rivianwho]

Personally, I feel like 4.5 seconds is extremely quick for a large truck like this. It's way faster than people need to be driving on public roads. Most drivers lack the skill to handle a vehicle with that speed. Just look at all the videos of the chuckleheads leaving cars and coffee meets.

3 seconds is sports car territory. Vehicles actually built for this speed, that people typically aren't driving as everyday commuter vehicles.

Spoken like someone who has never driven a vehicle that does 0-60 in 3s. It's a big difference than 4.5s which is what my wife's Cayenne can do; it's literally 50% slower.

Not sure which public roads you drive but 60 mph is not out of the norm on my daily commute.

And sure, most drivers suck including the one that rear-ended my R1S, but why should the rest of us be limited by their incompetence?

Besides it's the ability to merge into traffic and change lanes*at will* especially on interstates that is really the big advantage of 908 ft-lbs of instant torque.