Why did Rivian go with short in the shorts small truck Ford Ranger styling?

Its a little bit puzzling why Rivian took Ford's small Truck styling from the 90's and then offered a mid sized truck with that styling? Was it jonesing tha hard to get partly purchased by Ford. Was that so it wouldn't appear too intimidating? So they have a short bed at 4.5 ft. And small weenie styling. Why? I am not saying the vehicle looks bad. It looks great but it ends up sending signals that will alienate full size spenders. A lot of truck people are compensating and small weenie is not the signal they are trying to send. They want to communicate that they can ring the bell and reach the hoop and pull through and persevere, get the job done with stamina that they are the right kind of tool for satisfaction.

Also I'd like to point out that Tesla showed pictures during the presentation of the frunk open and of the sail pillars open. There is no mystery there! So lets not pretend the Rivian sideways log storage compensates for anything. Not when even the base Cyber truck has almost 2x the payload capacity and the room to practically carry all that and is still much more efficient with much better options standard.

Also noticed some really low number estimates for torque and hp of the Tri-motor Cybertruck from sources that should know better like Motor Trend- which always makes me think when sources volunteer numbers at strategic times that are obviously stupid when they should know better that a bribe was involved from the usual suspects (and again that should be a permanent hit to their credibility- you see ICE maker pick up sales start to really get damaged instantly over more accurate torque and hp numbers here- this is bothersome because the entire fossil fuel industry is the biggest unnecessary rent seeking scam fraud in history and these people say we can't afford the safetynet or have to live in insecurity why they lie their arses off like all lies in history put together) And in particular people should know not to lie about Tesla because the community is getting quicker and quicker at finding out.

So if we think this through a P100D weighs about at he mid point of the F150 range- credit to Ford it uses a lot of aluminum alloy (more than I realized- thought they were holding back)! And we know that the Cybertruck weighs about what a F150 weighs. And we've learned the Cybertruck actually has excellent aero-dynamics (only improved when it squats) and far greater tire patches than a P100D. And we presume the batteries will be lighter (elimination of frame and lighter batteries made the F150 weight possible) but even with all this we can't simply take a P100D and scale the power down to 2.9 seconds worth of torque/hp. No, its a plaid platform in the top spec version of the truck and the drag is higher.

Lets take Musk at his word about the ability to pull 300klbs for real with tires on the ground (where 3x that on steel wheels on rails ala Ford only takes about 150hp.)- a Model X did that so presumably Musk meant do it for real but not in safe practice. Of course it doesn't have the weight or the tire patch or the brakes (even with magnetic supplements) to handle that 300lbs- you have to be able to stop and steer that much weigh. But remember the Tesla semi has 4 actual model 3 motors and that can apparently pull 600klbs even if the practical rating is presumably about 300klbs or about what the largest class 8 road train can handle and the ordinary load is 80klbs. My guess is the tri motor Cybertruck will be over 1000ftlbs and 1000hp at the very minimum for practical use (but that is fraction of what the motors are actually capable of,) but they spin on that because it destroys Ford/GM/FCA ICE- so possibly more bribe taking and would sure suspect that even from Motor Trend.

When Musk said the roadster would have 7376lbs ft or 10,000nm he wasn't exaggerating it wasn't wheel output etc. Because Musk also said the Roadster presumably with the SpaceX version would shoot for the absolute record at Nurburgring way way faster than the Plaid Model S times. And its not just the SpaceX package adding 3gs in any direction at work. So what gives?

The record held at the track is held by what amounts to a hybrid electric motor cycle with a motor cycle's worth of gas and 4 wheels and a motor cycles worth of displacement. It doesn't carry round a full tank of gas it carries around a couple gallons. The roadster won't be able to cut its battery because it would lose power but it can just like the Semi send more power than normal to its Model 3 motors (without issue) and eat through battery quicker just as the semi presumably does. This is presumably why Tesla doesn't put out torque and hp numbers and the theoretical numbers which are quite practical in acute situations are just massive but would be misleading for most end consumer applications. Also explains the price of the Roadster its 2 Model 3 Performance cars worth of parts and 60K for other tech and cool factor and it outperforms cars that cost 25x more. Motortrend put out some stupid numbers about 1000 torque/hp but it won't be that light and we've seen much higher numbers for Battista and the Rimac- and they are a fraction of the performance Tesla is aiming for with the Roadster so auto press is lying as usual. We've seen it over and over again with Tesla, the cars get more powerful with better batteries but the motors don't have to change change. The nm on the Semi could be 12000nm or more and a single Model 3 motor might be able to do 3000nm but its not the normal use case.

When you think about what caused Ford to abandon its ICE scam so quickly and apparently start to license Tesla like crazy this is a big part of it. Better economics and price and green than a Prius and no matter what Ford ICE introduces Tesla specs just keep growing on already released fielded vehicles with software updates. Try to market against that? Go look up the nm on a locomotive- no transmission (because what Porsche is doing is stupid and backwards and trying to tell its dealers they will break more often) just electric motors- a situation that only gets better when the locomotive's obsolete diesel stack is replaced by batteries- even lead acid batteries in a 2009 locomotive so retrofitted ran 24hrs on a charge (2hrs charge time) - way better than current fueling practices.

Also suspect the trimotor Cybertruck could do a tank turn. And lets not forget Tesla had the first quad motor product in the semi. Could a Tank turn be done in the semi?

So why will a Roadster with SpaceX package shave about 2 minutes off the Plaid S time at Nurburgring. Because inverter and wiring and all that will be set to the platforms acute potential. A lot of that batteries 600 mile range will get dumped to motors (still better efficiency than that disguised hybrid ICE motor cycle Porsche used) and all of the Space X package will be needed. Because this otherwise streetable 4 seater with a space X option and a track mode (that may really reduce the life of the vehicle when driven that hard) is that much better. Porsche probably needed a new engine after 1 nine mile lap. Roadster will have real reputability.