News
Rivian R1S: 7-seat, 410-mile SUV is taking on Land Rover in the luxury off-road game
Rivian CEO and founder RJ Scaringe is adopting a bold and strategic play to enter the auto industry. With the recently unveiled R1T electric pickup truck, Rivian is attempting to breach a market dominated by America’s best-selling vehicles like the Ford F-150. With the R1S SUV, which is set to be unveiled today at the 2018 LA Auto Show, the company is taking on pedigreed carmakers such as Land Rover in the luxury SUV segment.
The Rivian R1S, just like its pickup truck sibling, could be described as a luxury adventure vehicle. The SUV is fitted with the same four 147 kW electric motors that power the R1T, as well as the same 2170 battery cells. Similar to the startup’s pickup truck, the R1S is available in three battery configurations — a 105 kWh entry-level variant, a 135 kWh mid-level version, and a 180 kWh top-tier variant. Compared to the R1T, though, the R1S has slightly more range, with the 105 kWh trim having an estimated range of 240+ miles per charge, the 135 kWh version having 310+ miles of range, and the 180 kWh variant having 410+ miles of range in one charge.
Performance between the R1T and the R1S is identical, with 135 kWh SUV capable of traveling from 0-60 mph in 3 seconds flat. Keeping the company’s character, the R1S could go through up to 1 meter of water. That said, the two vehicles also have their differences.
-
- The Rivian R1S. [Credit: Rivian]
-
- The interior of the Rivian R1S. [Credit: Rivian]
-
- The Rivian R1S dashboard. [Credit: Rivian]
The Rivian R1S SUV. [Credit: Rivian]
The R1S, for one, has a slightly shorter wheelbase at 3,075 mm, which is less than the R1T’s 3,450 mm. Due to the absence of a bed, the R1S’s 5,040 mm overall length is also shorter than the R1T’s 5,475 mm length. Being a three-row SUV capable of seating seven, the R1S does not have as much storage as the R1T as well, with flourishes such as the pickup truck’s “gear tunnel” being absent on the vehicle. That said, the R1S is still capable of hauling a generous amount of cargo, thanks to its 330-liter frunk and its foldable third-row seats.
We asked the company why it opted to release an SUV together with its flagship pickup truck, considering that the SUV market is equally as dominated by big-name, veteran carmakers. Rivian noted that the risk for the R1S is actually quite low, considering that it shares 93% of the R1T pickup truck’s components. The company further pointed out that the SUV market has already been established, and the success of vehicles like the Tesla Model X, which is built on the Model S platform, has proven that cross-pollination is a viable strategy.
-
- The Rivian R1T and R1S take center stage at the 2018 LA Autoshow
-
- The Rivian RT1 and the R1S compared. [Credit: Rivian]
Teslarati‘s Christian Prenzler was able to get an early preview of the Rivian R1S prior to its unveiling, and he notes that the vehicle’s overall form and size seem to be similar to the Chevrolet Tahoe and the GMC Yukon. He also stated that the SUV has a liftgate at the rear, which gives passengers a place to sit on. The R1S’ third-row seats, which are usually cramped in conventional SUVs, are also adjustable, allowing passengers to gain more legroom in exchange for less luggage space.
Rivian CEO and founder RJ Scaringe stated that he wants the company’s vehicles to focus on the adventure niche. In this light, the R1S SUV and the R1T electric pickup truck complement each other well, allowing the company to enter two hyper-competitive segments with vehicles that have a serious punch.
“They may have different form factors, they may be different sizes, but every single one of [our products] has to have this Patagonia-like feel of enabling adventure. We want to keep that very sharp. We want to focus only on the adventure space, so customers understand what we stand for,” he said.
Reservations for the R1S SUV are now open. Interested customers can place a refundable $1,000 deposit for the vehicle here. Production is expected to begin in 2021.
With assistance from Christian Prenzler.
Investor's Corner
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
Tesla and SpaceX sue a small Illinois firm after cease and desist letters over Terafab.
Tesla and SpaceX are asking a federal judge to rule that their planned Terafab chip factory does not infringe a small Illinois company’s trademark, a request that arrives only after months of quiet negotiation broke down this summer.
The dispute traces to May 18, when Tesla filed three U.S. trademark applications for “Terafab” and “Tesla Terafab,” covering semiconductor chips and related chip making services. TERA-print LLC, a nanotechnology company that has held a federal trademark for “Tera-Fab” since 2021, responded five days later with a cease and desist letter. According to the lawsuit, first reported by Reuters, TERA-print argued that Tesla and SpaceX’s use of “Terafab” would confuse consumers familiar with its own trademark, which covers a desktop photolithography printer sold to researchers for sensor and bioengineering work.
What stands out in the filing is the timing of TERA-print’s own paperwork. One day before sending that cease and desist letter, on May 22, TERA-print applied to expand its existing registration to cover semiconductor materials, silicon chips, nanoelectronic devices and AI design services, categories it had not previously claimed. Tesla and SpaceX call that filing opportunistic in their complaint, noting it arrived two months after Tesla’s public Terafab announcement and just days after Tesla’s own trademark applications went in.
Elon Musk launches TERAFAB: The $25B Tesla-SpaceXAI chip factory that will rewire the AI industry
By June 10, TERA-print was threatening to sue for federal trademark infringement, false designation of origin and unfair competition, the complaint states. Rather than wait to be sued, Tesla, SpaceX and SpaceXAI met with TERA-print six separate times between June and August trying to resolve the dispute directly. Those talks collapsed, and the companies filed for declaratory judgment this week in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, asking a judge to find that “Terafab” does not infringe TERA-print’s mark before TERA-print can file a claim of its own.
TERA-print isn’t backing down. The company told PCMag it discussed a settlement with Tesla as recently as September 2 and feels misled by what it called Tesla’s professed interest in settling. Its CTO, Andrey Ivankin, said TERA-print holds a Defense Department contract to fabricate semiconductors and partially owns Mattiq Inc., an AI company built on TERA-print’s products, and that the company will vigorously defend its rights.
Tesla and SpaceX argue the overlap is superficial. Terafab is planned as a $16.8 billion complex spanning roughly 100 million square feet at the Grimes County site SpaceX confirmed last month, built to produce chips for Optimus robots, Tesla’s AI computing needs and SpaceX’s orbital data center ambitions, a scale and purpose the companies say no reasonable consumer would confuse with a tabletop lab printer. TERA-print’s product line has stayed focused on lithography tools for biological and sensor research since it registered its mark in 2021.
The trademark fight is the second legal dispute tied to the Terafab project in the past week, following a separate SpaceX suit aimed at keeping company records about the facility out of public view, as KBTX reported. Whether construction proceeds under the Terafab name now depends on a federal judge in Austin.
News
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
NHTSA escalated its Cybercab audit into a sworn Special Order with a September 30 deadline.
Federal regulators have moved from asking Tesla questions about its Cybercab to demanding sworn answers. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued a Special Order that requires a Tesla officer to sign an affidavit attesting to the completeness of the company’s responses, with a deadline of September 30.
The order builds on Audit Query AQ26002, which NHTSA opened on September 3, the same day Tesla began commercial Cybercab service in Austin. Teslarati covered that initial inquiry when it surfaced, noting the agency wanted to understand how Tesla certified a vehicle with no permanently attached steering wheel, pedals, or mirrors as compliant with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. A Special Order is a different tool and converts a fact finding review into a legally enforceable demand, the same mechanism NHTSA used against Tesla in 2023 during its Autopilot investigation.
Several of the 21 requests target a specific gap in Cybercab’s design. One asks whether Tesla used temporarily attached human controls at any point to help certify the vehicle, and if so, which standards depended on that equipment being present. Another quotes an existing rule directly: “The service brakes shall be activated by means of a foot control.” Cybercab has no foot pedal. NHTSA wants a detailed explanation of how the vehicle satisfies that requirement, and how it complies without the kind of exemption granted to Zoox in July under Part 555, the regulatory pathway built for steering wheel free vehicles.
The order does not claim Cybercab is unsafe or that Tesla broke a rule. It requires Tesla to explain, under oath, the reasoning behind decisions the company already made when it self-certified the vehicle. That distinction matters, but so does the exposure. Motor1’s reporting, summarized here, put potential civil penalty exposure as high as $139 million if NHTSA later finds the certification was flawed, on top of whatever criminal risk comes with a false sworn statement.
Tesla has not said publicly how it plans to respond. Cybercab is still carrying passengers in Austin through the Robotaxi app while the September 30 deadline approaches, and the company has continued expanding the vehicle’s footprint even as the regulatory question remains open. The Special Order does not pause any of that and just sets a date by which Tesla has to put its certification logic on the record, with a company officer’s name attached to it.
In a new interview on Wednesday, Tesla uber bull Ron Baron said that anyone looking to buy the company’s stock should do so as soon as they can.
Baron, founder and CEO of Baron Capital and one of Tesla’s most persistent institutional bulls, used a CNBC Squawk Box appearance on Wednesday to deliver a familiar message with fresh urgency: In his opinion, Tesla stock is a buy:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.”
The Baron Capital frontman’s case is built around Full Self-Driving. Tesla reported 1.48 million active FSD subscriptions in the second quarter, up 56 percent year over year, and company officials have said roughly 55 percent of new North American deliveries left with a subscription enabled.
Baron framed that attach rate as proof the product is moving from enthusiast extra to default expectation, and as a reason software, not just vehicle volume, should drive the next phase of value.
His conviction on Tesla shares is not theoretical, as Baron Capital made its first Tesla investment in 2014, after years of meetings that began around the 2010 IPO roadshow. The firm later built a large SpaceX position starting in 2017.
Ron Baron today in new interview on Tesla:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.” pic.twitter.com/Rv5PB0bVZ2
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) September 16, 2026
Baron said those Musk-led bets have generated about $30 billion of the $71 billion in profits Baron Capital has produced for clients. He put the firm’s current exposure at roughly $25 billion in SpaceX and $5 billion in Tesla. Personally, he described SpaceX as his largest holding, at about $5 billion, with about $1.5 billion in Tesla and additional Tesla exposure through the firm’s funds.
That concentration is also a statement of loyalty. Asked about talk of a SpaceX-Tesla combination, Baron said he had already walked Elon Musk through arguments for and against a deal, then declined to repeat them on air. His public position was simpler: “Whatever you decide is better is what I’m going to support,” he said to Musk.
Baron also said that he picked up the farewell edition of the Model S after Tesla decided to sunset the vehicle earlier this year, calling it his favorite car he’s ever driven.
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
