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.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.
The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.
The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”
Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Napoli said:
“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.
As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.
We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.
My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.
I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”
🚨 Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli calls rumors of financial issues “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Read his full remarks here: https://t.co/t3Pg1NHvzy pic.twitter.com/LvHUPhO4Qf
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 15, 2026
It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.
Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.
Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.
Tesla has once again demonstrated strong customer focus by swiftly addressing and fully refunding a bizarre Supercharger pricing glitch that affected drivers in Atlantic Canada.
The issue surfaced earlier this month when the Tesla app began displaying dramatically inflated per-minute charging rates at stations in Prince Edward Island and parts of New Brunswick.
One widely shared screenshot from a Charlottetown, PEI Supercharger showed rates reaching ridiculous levels: $6.00 per minute for the 180-250 kW tier, along with $3.57/min for 100-180 kW and $2.29/min for 60-100 kW.
Correct pricing will be going live at midnight tonight. All fees since July 2nd 2026 will be waived.
— Tesla Charging (@TeslaCharging) July 13, 2026
These figures were several times higher than normal Supercharger pricing in the region.
To put the error in perspective, charging at the highest incorrect rate would have been shockingly expensive.
At 250 kW, a common charging speed at Superchargers, a vehicle pulls roughly 4.17 kWh per minute. Under the glitch, a driver spending just 10 minutes at peak power would face a $60 bill. A typical 20- to 30-minute session to add meaningful range could have cost $120 to $180 or more, before any congestion fees.
Tesla gets another layer of gamification with Free Supercharging on the line
By comparison, standard Canadian Supercharger rates usually fall between $0.25 and $0.60 per kWh, making a similar session cost roughly $15–$40. The erroneous per-minute structure, combined with the inflated numbers, turned what should be a convenient stop into a potential financial shock.
The glitch appears to have started sometime around early July, and quickly drew attention on social media as owners questioned whether Tesla had implemented steep hidden increases. Some drivers even reported seeing $0 charges in their history, indicating broader billing confusion.
Tesla’s official Charging account on X stated that correct pricing would roll out at midnight on July 13, so the fix is already in effect. More importantly, the company announced it would waive all fees for every Supercharger session since July 2. This blanket waiver covers the entire affected period without requiring users to file individual claims, with automated refunds expected soon. The decision affects stations in PEI and nearby areas in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.
It’s a classy move, and rather than issuing partial credits or forcing owners to submit support tickets, Tesla simply absorbed the cost of the system error and made drivers whole. In an industry where hidden fees and bill disputes are common, Tesla’s proactive, no-questions-asked approach reinforces owner trust and highlights the company’s commitment to service excellence.
The incident, while disruptive for a short time, ultimately showcases Tesla’s ability to own mistakes and prioritize customer satisfaction. Atlantic Canada Tesla owners can now charge with confidence again, knowing the company has their back when technology glitches occur.
In an era of complex EV billing, such transparency and generosity are refreshing and set a positive example for the industry.
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
Elon Musk’s Texas ranch to showcase the lifelong work that changed the world
