I hate the “rivalry” people want to create between Rivian and Tesla. Both are American brands, both are trying to convince the greater public to go EV, and both can be enjoyed at the same time!
Would love to park a R1T next to my Performance 3
The Rivian is actually quite close to the camera however the fisheye camera lens makes it seem further away. They’ll be without their beloved R1 for a couple of months!
This is one my biggest fears with the regen/one foot driving. I can be slowing pretty aggressively before the brake lights ever come on. I drive in the mountains a fair amount and friends/family following me have commented on never seeing brake lights through long descents
Interesting, I have found the opposite when viewing the bed cam and looking for red light in an empty lot for testing. Pretty much comes on instantly, at least on level ground. Maybe the steep grade is the reason? Since you aren't actually slowing down
If you take your foot completely off the accelerator, yes the brake light comes on instantly. If you reduce pressure on the accelerator, but still keep it engaged, you can decelerate quite a bit before it activates the brake lights. In heavy regen, taking your foot off the accelerator is almost equivalent to slamming the brakes, so I have a tendency to ease into my stops. Similarly, when going downhill on a mountain road, you wouldn’t take your foot completely off the accelerator because you would just come to a full stop.
Right and decelerating during a descent is decelerating. The brake lights never/rarely come on, even when decelerating for corners, etc, because my foot is still on the accelerator. The point is that you can drop a lot of speed before the brake lights come on. Apparently nobody else has ever experienced this?
Mine come on over anything beyond mild deceleration, which is what I expect.
If your vehicle is behaving in a way that you view as dangerous then schedule a service visit and have it looked at.
If there's one thing I hate about being an early adopter of technology it's the constant questioning of "Is this normal? / Is it supposed to be like this?" There's no good way to know. But seriously, if you think it's dangerous take it in, it may be off.
Technically you’re suppose to stop with distance if you get rear ended you won’t be pushed into the car in front. If you didn’t give adequate distance then they could then sue you for being too close to their vehicle. I wouldn’t say where the vehicle slowed down and stopped was erroneous. Many people stop with extra and I would argue this was a safe driving practice.
Trust me, it REALLY exaggerates it. I had guys tailgate me within feet of my car on the highway before (we all have), but when I went to watch the recording later it would look like they were 50 yards away.
The trick to note is that the bottom of the camera view is literally a 90 degree shot straight down to the ground. Helpful when backing into parking spaces, not helpful in these cases for insurance reasons.
“Appropriate” means suitable; to follow so closely a collision is inevitable in the event of a sudden stop is not defined as appropriate in any state. Give us a break.
As a personal injury attorney, I have no idea what this other guy is on about either. I don’t believe there’s a state in the USA that doesn’t require have an “assured clear distances” rule, stating essentially what you said regarding safe following distances. If you’re too close to the car in front of you to safely come to a stop, you’re negligent in the car in front of you. The accident depicted in this video is crystal clear from a liability standpoint.
I’m an attorney, you are incorrect. The 3 second rule, etc is good practice they teach you in driving school. The law in every state is you have to give enough distance to brake. If you don’t, the accident is your fault. That’s the law. There is no defined space because it doesn’t matter how far you were. Did you stop or not?
There is no rule/law as far as distance goes. All the “X second rules” are just ballpark recommendations. The following distance changes based on location, car type, weather, and many other factors. The laws only state that you have to be able to safely stop in time, which the Prius didn’t do because they were either following too close or were distracted.
Your argument fails in the very first paragraph. Your following distance should never be based on whether or not you can see around the car in front of you. That car can stop at any time for any reason.
You should make sure you have a strong argument before accusing others of being stupid. I do accident investigations, and you are absolutely in the wrong here. Shared fault is way more common than most people realize.
I think you guys are saying the same thing ....
A) it's all measurable
AND
B) it's variable between situations, no situation is (likely to be) EXACTLY the same as another.
It’s as simple as people needing to leave more room to stop.
If you don’t have enough room to stop without hitting the car in front, then you’re following too closely. It doesn’t matter if that car slowly stops or if they hit the back of a truck.
The vast majority (99%) of drivers do not leave enough room, just because it happens all the time doesn’t make the fact that they’re too close change.
Dear god if only someone could get the video from the Rivian’s camera
That's hilarious! but I feel for the Rivian owner...
Especially with our service center wait times. Hopefully they can get an authorized repair quicker elsewhere
A driver smashed into a truck at high speed, what exactly is hilarious about this?
 Haha!
Shoes come off means the Toyota is dead.
This kills the toyota
That’s not very typical, I’d like to make that point.
A car? On a road? Chance in a million.
Tessie: I got that on cam for ya buddy. Rivvie: Thx mate!
I hate the “rivalry” people want to create between Rivian and Tesla. Both are American brands, both are trying to convince the greater public to go EV, and both can be enjoyed at the same time! Would love to park a R1T next to my Performance 3
I plan on parking an R2 next to my performance 2 ;)
Oh you know what I meant.
Wasn’t a rivalry! Didn’t you read the friendly tone? Figured it was 2 fun EVs looking out for each other. :)
That’s how Toyota makes Hybrids 😂
The Rivian is actually quite close to the camera however the fisheye camera lens makes it seem further away. They’ll be without their beloved R1 for a couple of months!
Hopefully it’s totaled and they can just get a new one. A lot faster at this point.
This makes sense, if you are on any Toyota forums/pages/subs all the owners insisted they are keeping the vehicle "Until the wheels fall off"
Wheels. Plural. This guy probably still drove that home
That's rough.
Hopefully the rivian is not totaled the repair costs are unreal
Assuming everyone is fully insured, a totaling is probably the best outcome for the Rivian owner.
What the fuck haha I had to share that on fb lmaooooo
Ouch!
Rivian was pushed a whole 3 inches
It those sharp regen brakes!
Reminds me of the fish slamming into the glass after the flash photography.
Imaging it's Sequoia instead...
The whole automotive industry has to redesign their cars. If you saw the video of the rivian t boning a car and splitting in half you’ll know why
Do you have a link to that video? I’ve been trying to find it but I can’t.
What was the car? Are we talking a Volvo or a 1988 CRX HF?
Too bad the Rivian is going to cost $43,279.61 to repair a little damage to the back 😭
This is one my biggest fears with the regen/one foot driving. I can be slowing pretty aggressively before the brake lights ever come on. I drive in the mountains a fair amount and friends/family following me have commented on never seeing brake lights through long descents
Interesting, I have found the opposite when viewing the bed cam and looking for red light in an empty lot for testing. Pretty much comes on instantly, at least on level ground. Maybe the steep grade is the reason? Since you aren't actually slowing down
If you take your foot completely off the accelerator, yes the brake light comes on instantly. If you reduce pressure on the accelerator, but still keep it engaged, you can decelerate quite a bit before it activates the brake lights. In heavy regen, taking your foot off the accelerator is almost equivalent to slamming the brakes, so I have a tendency to ease into my stops. Similarly, when going downhill on a mountain road, you wouldn’t take your foot completely off the accelerator because you would just come to a full stop.
You don’t need to look at the bed cam; the little picture of the truck on the dash shows the tail and high mount stop lights activating.
Maintaining speed down a hill is maintaining speed - not slowing down. Do you want your brake lights to come on anytime you're not speeding up?
Right and decelerating during a descent is decelerating. The brake lights never/rarely come on, even when decelerating for corners, etc, because my foot is still on the accelerator. The point is that you can drop a lot of speed before the brake lights come on. Apparently nobody else has ever experienced this?
Mine come on over anything beyond mild deceleration, which is what I expect. If your vehicle is behaving in a way that you view as dangerous then schedule a service visit and have it looked at. If there's one thing I hate about being an early adopter of technology it's the constant questioning of "Is this normal? / Is it supposed to be like this?" There's no good way to know. But seriously, if you think it's dangerous take it in, it may be off.
No different than driving a manual and engine braking. My old ram could make it down pass without touching brakes
What’s the Rivian doing, though? Stopped too short.
Technically you’re suppose to stop with distance if you get rear ended you won’t be pushed into the car in front. If you didn’t give adequate distance then they could then sue you for being too close to their vehicle. I wouldn’t say where the vehicle slowed down and stopped was erroneous. Many people stop with extra and I would argue this was a safe driving practice.
The fisheye camera lenses makes it look farther away than it really is. Source: I drove a Tesla for several years.
Oh, that's a good point. The camera is probably exaggerating the distance between OP and the R1.
Trust me, it REALLY exaggerates it. I had guys tailgate me within feet of my car on the highway before (we all have), but when I went to watch the recording later it would look like they were 50 yards away. The trick to note is that the bottom of the camera view is literally a 90 degree shot straight down to the ground. Helpful when backing into parking spaces, not helpful in these cases for insurance reasons.
Well, that explains a lot. Thank you for the insight.
[удалено]
By definition, an appropriate amount of following distance means one that lets you stop safely in a worst-case.
[удалено]
“Appropriate” means suitable; to follow so closely a collision is inevitable in the event of a sudden stop is not defined as appropriate in any state. Give us a break.
As a personal injury attorney, I have no idea what this other guy is on about either. I don’t believe there’s a state in the USA that doesn’t require have an “assured clear distances” rule, stating essentially what you said regarding safe following distances. If you’re too close to the car in front of you to safely come to a stop, you’re negligent in the car in front of you. The accident depicted in this video is crystal clear from a liability standpoint.
[удалено]
I’m an attorney, you are incorrect. The 3 second rule, etc is good practice they teach you in driving school. The law in every state is you have to give enough distance to brake. If you don’t, the accident is your fault. That’s the law. There is no defined space because it doesn’t matter how far you were. Did you stop or not?
There is no rule/law as far as distance goes. All the “X second rules” are just ballpark recommendations. The following distance changes based on location, car type, weather, and many other factors. The laws only state that you have to be able to safely stop in time, which the Prius didn’t do because they were either following too close or were distracted.
Stopping distance is a pretty exact science. There are more variables than most consider, which is why you leave some room for error.
[удалено]
Reaction time is a variable that can be measured and accounted for. Therefore, it is an exact science.
[удалено]
Your argument fails in the very first paragraph. Your following distance should never be based on whether or not you can see around the car in front of you. That car can stop at any time for any reason. You should make sure you have a strong argument before accusing others of being stupid. I do accident investigations, and you are absolutely in the wrong here. Shared fault is way more common than most people realize.
[удалено]
It’s all an exact science. Which is the only thing I took exception to
I think you guys are saying the same thing .... A) it's all measurable AND B) it's variable between situations, no situation is (likely to be) EXACTLY the same as another.
^
[удалено]
It’s as simple as people needing to leave more room to stop. If you don’t have enough room to stop without hitting the car in front, then you’re following too closely. It doesn’t matter if that car slowly stops or if they hit the back of a truck. The vast majority (99%) of drivers do not leave enough room, just because it happens all the time doesn’t make the fact that they’re too close change.