[Cr-R1T]

I'm looking at a couple slide-in camper possibilities as an alternative to towing. Weight is an issue, but I may be able to work with providers on that. Custom Build | Scout Campers has expressed an interest in working with me on an R1T solution. There is some information that I need and have asked for more than once via chat and e-mail and have not gotten an answer to, however: the distance between the back of the cab and the center of the rear axel and, separately, the width of the 'lip' that hangs off the back of the cab.

Hopefully, someone here can help that that...a little frustrated.

 

[Yossarian]

I'm looking at a couple slide-in camper possibilities as an alternative to towing. Weight is an issue, but I may be able to work with providers on that. Custom Build | Scout Campers has expressed an interest in working with me on an R1T solution. There is some information that I need and have asked for more than once via chat and e-mail and have not gotten an answer to, however: the distance between the back of the cab and the center of the rear axel and, separately, the width of the 'lip' that hangs off the back of the cab.

Hopefully, someone here can help that that...a little frustrated.

I'd too have been considering the possibility of a slide-in rather than hauling (in my case, a [email protected] Boondock) and like you, looked spcifically at the Scout. You've identified the two issues: weight and overhang. The Scout Yoho is nomimally 960 lbs and will be over 1,200 outfitted with a heater and other options that I need. The R1T has a payload capacity of 1,760 lbs, leaving about 560 lbs for passengers and gear once the Yoho is in place. That's marginally acceptable.

As you've already identified, the bed is the real issue and specifically how much the Yoho overhand changes the CG of the R1T. I'd be curious to see if you can get the data for the rear axle positioning so that you can accurately determine if the Yoho would work. My guess is that it won't, which is why I opted to pre-order the R1S and stick with hauling a teardrop.

In the interest of full disclosure, I'll reveal that I also put a pre-order on the CyberTruck, which, with a longer bed and payload double that of the R1T, will easily will work for the Scount Yoho and possibly even the Olympic (length is the only potential issue). The tri-motor CT also has sigificantly more range han the R1T (500+ vs 400+ miles). There are other issues with the CT that I need to overcome however, not the least of which is spousal oppostion to what is admitedly a pretty ugly design. Still, since it looks increasingly likely that the 180 kWh battery package will not be available on the R1S for upwards of two years or more, the CT may yet win out.

 

[drhnbtx]

I'd too have been considering the possibility of a slide-in rather than hauling (in my case, a [email protected] Boondock) and like you, looked spcifically at the Scout. You've identified the two issues: weight and overhang. The Scout Yoho is nomimally 960 lbs and will be over 1,200 outfitted with a heater and other options that I need. The R1T has a payload capacity of 1,760 lbs, leaving about 560 lbs for passengers and gear once the Yoho is in place. That's marginally acceptable.

As you've already identified, the bed is the real issue and specifically how much the Yoho overhand changes the CG of the R1T. I'd be curious to see if you can get the data for the rear axle positioning so that you can accurately determine if the Yoho would work. My guess is that it won't, which is why I opted to pre-order the R1S and stick with hauling a teardrop.

In the interest of full disclosure, I'll reveal that I also put a pre-order on the CyberTruck, which, with a longer bed and payload double that of the R1T, will easily will work for the Scount Yoho and possibly even the Olympic (length is the only potential issue). The tri-motor CT also has sigificantly more range han the R1T (500+ vs 400+ miles). There are other issues with the CT that I need to overcome however, not the least of which is spousal oppostion to what is admitedly a pretty ugly design. Still, since it looks increasingly likely that the 180 kWh battery package will not be available on the R1S for upwards of two years or more, the CT may yet win out.

With the angled bed walls from cab to tailgate, I don't see how any of the truck campers mentioned would work for the cybertruck.

 

[Cr-R1T]

I will post any information I get from Rivian and the slide-in folks about compatibility and weight issues. For the curious, the issue with the rear axle has to do with how the weight is distributed. There is one vendor who has confirmed that they can do a custom slide-in for the Rivian, but they are booked up for over a year: Custom Truck Campers built to fit your Vehicles Make & Model (phoenixpopup.com) . Home | Kimbo Campers (kimboliving.com) has also indicated that they can work with the R1T.

About the weight issue, if I can confirm basic compatibility, I'll have some discussion about stripping some items out, but probably will go the tow route as well. I will do that with the R1T rather than the R1S for one key reason: spare tire. I once had to do 100+ interstate highway miles with down hill on a 'donut'...emergency blinkers going...restricted speed in the slow lane with semi's honking and blowing by me. If you don't need the extra seats and you've got the frunk, bed, and gear tunnel for stuff, the full size spare tire is a good reason to go R1T rather than R1S.

 

[drhnbtx]

I will post any information I get from Rivian and the slide-in folks about compatibility and weight issues. For the curious, the issue with the rear axle has to do with how the weight is distributed. There is one vendor who has confirmed that they can do a custom slide-in for the Rivian, but they are booked up for over a year: Custom Truck Campers built to fit your Vehicles Make & Model (phoenixpopup.com) . Home | Kimbo Campers (kimboliving.com) has also indicated that they can work with the R1T.

About the weight issue, if I can confirm basic compatibility, I'll have some discussion about stripping some items out, but probably will go the tow route as well. I will do that with the R1T rather than the R1S for one key reason: spare tire. I once had to do 100+ interstate highway miles with down hill on a 'donut'...emergency blinkers going...restricted speed in the slow lane with semi's honking and blowing by me. If you don't need the extra seats and you've got the frunk, bed, and gear tunnel for stuff, the full size spare tire is a good reason to go R1T rather than R1S.

Regarding the payload capacity, most of the other midsized trucks out there have a similar payload rating.

 

[Cr-R1T]

Stiffer suspension =s worse ride for more payload...I get it, but too bad that some adjustable air suspension options aren't available...assuming that the axles could take extra, which I don't really know.

 

[Yossarian]

. . .
About the weight issue, if I can confirm basic compatibility, I'll have some discussion about stripping some items out, but probably will go the tow route as well. I will do that with the R1T rather than the R1S for one key reason: spare tire. I once had to do 100+ interstate highway miles with down hill on a 'donut'...emergency blinkers going...restricted speed in the slow lane with semi's honking and blowing by me. If you don't need the extra seats and you've got the frunk, bed, and gear tunnel for stuff, the full size spare tire is a good reason to go R1T rather than R1S.

While I've already made the decision to go with a camper trailer, I configured an R1S on the assumption that the 180kvh battery pack would be available as it is for the R1T (Jan 2022). I hadn't thought about the issue of a full-size spare but it's a genuine concern, particularly if you are in a more remote location.

Given that the R1S Max battery package is only going to be "announced" in Jan 2022, and given the full-size spare issue for the SUV, I think I am going to change my order to the R1T. Towing a classic teardrop behind a state of the art pickup should be a nice combination.