Real World Hwy efficiency numbers

[electric]

Welcome to the forum!!

I don’t have 20/21, I have 21/22, but I get 3+ as long as it’s a consistent speed and not a lot of acceleration. Effectively, I get it if I try to be efficient. That said, if there’s no regen because it’s traffic free, it’s closer to 2.7. Also, if I drive however I want, it’s well under 3.

Trying to say the 20/21 is unlikely to be above 3 unless you’re trying to get above 3…

My efficiency has been trending down, as low as 2.54 with mixed town/freeway driving.
In order to keep it above 2.7 I'd have to drive like my grandma, which defeats the purpose of buying Gravity.
I really like the honest reporting and intuitive UI in Lucid's dynamic range estimator, not like my Model Y showing 300+ miles after every full charge when in reality I'd be lucky to get 200.

 

[Ron_Burgundy]

My efficiency has been trending down, as low as 2.54 with mixed town/freeway driving.
In order to keep it above 2.7 I'd have to drive like my grandma, which defeats the purpose of buying Gravity.
I really like the honest reporting and intuitive UI in Lucid's dynamic range estimator, not like my Model Y showing 300+ miles after every full charge when in reality I'd be lucky to get 200.

I DO wish there were a way to manually reset dynamic range. I know I can see efficiency from last charge and trips, but it feels like I will never get above 3 on dynamic again because of some of the spirited driving I did early on. dynamic has reset accidentally twice since I took delivery, but those were bugs. So how I drove the first 3,200 miles isn’t necessarily indicative of how I will drive the next 3,000 miles…

I don’t really care what my dynamic range is from the beginning of ownership. I keep one trip set for that.

 

[JoeSchmo]

Interesting, i would have assumed that the dynamic rating reset in line with trip settings reset.
Further i would have thought that the dynamic would be able to be associated in the trip screen to whatever trip you want to.

Yes, i understand that my assumptions are my own and not associated (LOL) to any specific data, just more spitballin on how it could be done for the UIX.

i wonder for the api that is available, (since i dont have mine quite yet) what endpoints are available and parameters for queries/POST/GET is documented? A quick look didnt yield anything.

 

[Ron_Burgundy]

Interesting, i would have assumed that the dynamic rating reset in line with trip settings reset.
Further i would have thought that the dynamic would be able to be associated in the trip screen to whatever trip you want to.

Yes, i understand that my assumptions are my own and not associated (LOL) to any specific data, just more spitballin on how it could be done for the UIX.

i wonder for the api that is available, (since i dont have mine quite yet) what endpoints are available and parameters for queries/POST/GET is documented? A quick look didnt yield anything.

For a specific trip, as long as it’s in the car nav, you can get an idea of range and efficiency through the energy app and usage. You can also use on of the two trip meters and see info since most recent charge - so I guess that’s what they expect you to do.

But, for the dynamic range that appears on left side of glass cockpit, there’s no obvious way to reset it.

 

[flarbear]

Is there any kind of long-term tracking available, similar to TeslaFi for Teslas?

 

[TahoeMichael]

Kyle Conner says the Gravity has 123 kWh usable, with about 126 kWh total.

Either way, I agree the Gravity range is satisfactory. For me, the access to Superchargers and the charging speed actually moots any concern about range and efficiency. Our Air mostly succeeded in giving what I most want in an EV: a high-performance car that will get me from one bathroom break to another driving the way I please. The only limitation the Air left us with was the mostly crappy CCS charging infrastructure in the southeast. The addition of Supercharger access with the Gravity overcame even that limitation.

Remember that three hours of driving at 80mph means 240 miles. Very few people can or care to drive more than three hours without a break, and the Gravity can do that with a yawn under almost any conditions and with margin to spare.

I agree, charging speed goes a long way to make overall range less important. I still like the Gravity's great range, as it enables one to have a heavy foot, take a road trip without worrying about trip planning, or perhaps tow a teardrop trailer.

Interestingly, the Notch EV highway range test we've been discussing seems to have him using 115.4 kWh going from 100% to 0% charge.

I believe Out of Spec's Sapphire drive 'til dead test showed a bit more than 7 kWh available after the car said 0%. If the buffer is the same on the Gravity, that would add up to a 123 kWh total battery size.

 

[hmp10]

I agree, charging speed goes a long way to make overall range less important. I still like the Gravity's great range, as it enables one to have a heavy foot, take a road trip without worrying about trip planning, or perhaps tow a teardrop trailer.

Interestingly, the Notch EV highway range test we've been discussing seems to have him using 115.4 kWh going from 100% to 0% charge.

Was that 115.4 kWh charge a reading from the car or from the charging station? There can be a discrepancy in what the two are actually measuring.

 

[RandomDesign]

Was that 115.4 kWh charge a reading from the car or from the charging station? There can be a discrepancy in what the two are actually measuring.

Also he only has about 1200 miles on the car and Lucid says the efficiency will be worse in the first 2000 miles, likely as the battery management system is learning how each of the cells perform and adjusting for them. I had pointed this out to him on the video and saw he added it to the text of the video's description.

 

[Ron_Burgundy]

It’s 116.96969 per the car’s calculation. Rated is 386 (for me) rated = dynamic at 3.30 - so 386 / 3.3 =116.96969. I expect if you have a five seater with 20/21” tires at a rated 450, dynamic shows 3.47…when it equals rated. Somewhat more efficient given less weight from seats and tires…someone with that configuration can chime in.

Getting to truly 0% is not realistic as you don’t want to actually drain all of the power. The display will show 0% before it’s really drained if it’s anything like a Tesla or Rivian. It’s not an iPhone…if you want to test it by draining it fully until there’s no power and you run out of “gas”, good luck…I’d be too afraid it would be bricked and need to get towed. None of these 0% tests (that I’ve seen) end up with the car inoperable - which is what you’d really need to do to get to “true zero”.

 

[Elfin]

None of these 0% tests (that I’ve seen) end up with the car inoperable - which is what you’d really need to do to get to “true zero”.

Out of Spec drives the car until it no longer moves. The Air hit 0% at 482mi 113kwh but didn't stop moving until 523mi 118kwh. Not a good idea to count on that extra 5kwh though since the battery monitoring system can have significant error.

 

[Ron_Burgundy]

Out of Spec drives the car until it no longer moves. The Air hit 0% at 482mi 113kwh but didn't stop moving until 523mi 118kwh. Not a good idea to count on that extra 5kwh though since the battery monitoring system can have significant error.

Super helpful. Thanks for pointing that out.
Sorry, I don’t have the patience to watch Kyle so I don’t watch OOS. Though I do appreciate he seems to know his stuff.

 

[eelpout]

huh. as a comparison i recently had a Chevy Equinox by chance as a rental and over the week was getting 3.5-4.5 mile/kWh with that. (45-65 F, 60-65 MPH hwy speeds with some mountain roads mixed in). car/battery had 5500 miles on it already and charging to 100% it would say 360 miles range. was pretty impressed actually.

(FWD, ~84 kWh capacity but buffering goes to the mid 90's, which supposedly they've opened more of via OTA just recently)

 

[Xminus6]

My experience in my quad R1S is different. I routinely get about 2.15m/kwh. I am hoping Gravity is 3+. This is around town, normal temps, no major elevation, etc. If I go to the mountains in winter with my family, I am at 1.6.

I don’t drive like my mom either. I don’t launch at every light, but it’s enough to get my kids gripping the “oh sh-t” handles from time to time.

My 7-seater GT with 20/21s is averaged 3.1 over 471 miles so far. Mixed driving. It was around 3.3 earlier but I started getting on the throttle bit recently.

 

[OC Gravity]

There's another youtube video of a guy using a Gravity press car, driving from Orange County, CA to Mammoth Lakes, CA (~330 miles one way). He first stopped in Lone Pine after driving 224 miles, consuming 79% of the battery. Of that 79% usage, 65.5% was used on driving, and 10.5% was used on elevation. Charging to 80% in 25 minutes got him 310 miles of range.

His Mammoth trip was 645 miles round trip, averaging 2.68kw/h, driving 75-80mph (his words). He had another 160 mile trip, driving ~80mph that averaged 3.04kw/h. For those of you not in CA, there are a few pretty decent climbs around San Bernadino then through the desert, before basically flattening out along the mountain range. If he wanted to push it, he probably could've gotten at least another 70 miles.

 

[Ron_Burgundy]

There's another youtube video of a guy using a Gravity press car, driving from Orange County, CA to Mammoth Lakes, CA (~330 miles one way). He first stopped in Lone Pine after driving 224 miles, consuming 79% of the battery. Of that 79% usage, 65.5% was used on driving, and 10.5% was used on elevation. Charging to 80% in 25 minutes got him 310 miles of range.

His Mammoth trip was 645 miles round trip, averaging 2.68kw/h, driving 75-80mph (his words). He had another 160 mile trip, driving ~80mph that averaged 3.04kw/h. For those of you not in CA, there are a few pretty decent climbs around San Bernadino then through the desert, before basically flattening out along the mountain range. If he wanted to push it, he probably could've gotten at least another 70 miles.

It’s no secret that no matter the EV, elevation is a range killer, as are speed and super cold temps. He probably could’ve gotten more, but it’s not a shock that elevation would eat into range. It kills MPG too, people just don’t pay attention in ICE cars.

 

[TahoeMichael]

It’s no secret that no matter the EV, elevation is a range killer, as are speed and super cold temps. He probably could’ve gotten more, but it’s not a shock that elevation would eat into range. It kills MPG too, people just don’t pay attention in ICE cars.

I regularly drive a 6400' elevation change between the Cakifornia mountains and the San Francisco area in my Highlander. The gas mileage is quite starkly better on the downhill side of that trip.

 

[Elfin]

It’s no secret that no matter the EV, elevation is a range killer, as are speed and super cold temps. He probably could’ve gotten more, but it’s not a shock that elevation would eat into range. It kills MPG too, people just don’t pay attention in ICE cars.

I bet driving at a constant speed uphill and then back downhill would not degrade range much at all. As long as the hill isn't steep enough to use regen. Going up also gives the advantage of thinner air.

 

[Ron_Burgundy]

I bet driving at a constant speed uphill and then back downhill would not degrade range much at all. As long as the hill isn't steep enough to use regen. Going up also gives the advantage of thinner air.

I may have been unclear. Going uphill kills range. Down hill has, in my experience, has either been additive or neutral. Obviously depending on slope.

 

[hmp10]

As long as the hill isn't steep enough to use regen.

Huh? Using regen for downhill braking would increase range. When Teslas first came out, several reviewers drove them up and back down Mount Washington. The cars picked up significant battery charge going back down the mountain by using regen.

 

[Elfin]

Huh? Using regen for downhill braking would increase range. When Teslas first came out, several reviewers drove them up and back down Mount Washington. The cars picked up significant battery charge going back down the mountain by using regen.

My point was that if you go up a gentle slope for 100mi and return to your starting point the efficiency is almost exactly the same as driving on a flat road 100 miles and back. The elevation makes almost no difference to your total trip efficiency. If the trip were hilly enough to need regen then it would be less efficient than a flat road (but more efficient than not having regen!)
That drive up to Mammoth doesn't use much regen.