What's new
By:

Lucid Gravity GT 70MPH Range Test State of Charge Video - 345 Miles


Notch EV tries attempting another test and is getting worse range after breaking it in after 2000 miles - but he says it's likely due to elevation gains on the stretch of road he drove on is hurting the range. Hopefully him and Tom can do a collab range test to redo Tom's test with Notch's Gravity, this time without rear drive unit issues.
 
At this point, probably worth linking to how the EPA determines its ratings:
www.epa.gov

Fuel Economy and EV Range Testing | US EPA

EPA's National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory (NVFEL) tests new cars and trucks sold in the U.S. to ensure that they comply with federal emissions and fuel economy standards.
www.epa.gov www.epa.gov
  1. A vehicle with a fully charged battery is driven continuously over the EPA city cycle until the battery is depleted and the vehicle can drive no further. The distance driven is recorded. This is repeated, again starting with a full charge, over the EPA highway cycle, again recording the distance driven when the battery is depleted. This “single cycle” test consists of multiple repeat drives of the city or highway cycle.
  2. Automakers also have the option of doing a multi-cycle test, which consists of four city cycles, two highway cycles, and two constant speed cycles.*
  3. All testing is done in a laboratory on a dynamometer.
  4. The city and highway driving ranges determined from this testing are adjusted to account for real-world factors that are not represented on the laboratory test procedures. These factors include such things the impact of air conditioning, of cold temperatures, and of high speed and aggressive driving behavior. Although the regulations allow some optional approaches, the most common approach is to use a factor of 0.7 to adjust all the test parameters, including range. For example:
    • An EV achieves 200 miles on the highway laboratory test. Real-world highway driving range → 200 x 0.7 = 140 miles to account for aggressive driving and HVAC use.
  5. The adjusted city and highway range values are weighted together by 55% and 45%, respectively, to determine the combined city and highway driving range that appears on the EPA fuel economy label. For example:
    • Assume an adjusted city range of 168 miles and an adjusted highway range of 140 (from example above). The official combined range value → (0.55 x 168) + (0.45 x 140) = 155 miles (values are rounded to the nearest whole number).
Click to expand...
So, first note item #3: all testing is done in a lab on a dyno. Makes one wonder how vehicle weight and aerodynamics are accounted for, right? The answer is one of two:
• Apply a 70% factor (multiply by 0.7).
• Do something else. Which is documented here:

Federal Register :: Request Access

www.ecfr.gov www.ecfr.gov

Which, frankly, I can't figure out, but appears it may be used only to reduce the MPGe, not raise it.

So, I wonder if the Gravity, being so heavy, returns higher values in a lab on a dyno than in real life, especially with elevation changes (which affect heavier vehicles more than lighter vehicles). I assume Gravity's cD being so low would help, but how is that factored into the in-lab testing?
 
Seems that the tester is making the common mistake of assuming epa rating= highway driving, pretty sure that’s not the case - especially in ev - pretty sure my best range is actually driving around city! Wish he would speak to that misconception
 
dwfallin said:
Seems that the tester is making the common mistake of assuming epa rating= highway driving, pretty sure that’s not the case - especially in ev - pretty sure my best range is actually driving around city! Wish he would speak to that misconception
Click to expand...

It's not that he thinks the Gravity can get the EPA rating, I think he and others are just hoping it's not getting ~20% off from the the EPA rating on the smallest tires spec, minimal HVAC, and 5 seats, driving at a tame 70mph. The real world range testing seems unusually short when compared to the EPA. I can't recall any other modern EV being near 20% off the EPA estimate with real world driving.
 
There are a lot of drive unit issues bubbling up for Lucid. This is a new flavor of it - not the major failure that limits speed and warns you that you need service, but a sneakier one that a lot of people who aren't paying close attention to range might just shrug off as disappointing but per some of the comments here just "normal" and to be expected from an EV. This would be even more damning in the long term for a company that is trying to stake a claim as the efficiency king. If all that investment in efficiency just leads to ho-hum middle-of-the-pack range, then nothing has really been gained.

I do acknowledge that the charging performance is a huge advantage for Lucid, but not everyone appreciates that in the larger marketplace. And the ability to go a long way without recharging is a use case for some people.
 
It may be worth noting that the original Tesla Roadster also used its induction motor to help with charging. I think they changed the design for the V2 and V2.5 versions just a few years later, but I'm not sure and don't have references to share.
 
I'm not going to add anything very useful here, just anecdotal observations from an expected, eventual Gravity owner.

After three years and 66,000 miles of mostly trouble-free Air GT ownership, I've calculated my real world range to be 350 miles. This number takes into account my weekly 280 mile commute, half a dozen 1600 plus mile road trips, up to 5000 ft elevation changes two or three different driving styles, and driving on freeways at speeds anywhere between 75 mph and 85 mph. Taking all of this into my calculations I'm getting 68% of my car's EPA rated range of 516 miles (Sep. 2022-build).

If I extrapolate all the above to my as-configured GGT - 7-seater, smallest sized wheels - I'm anticipating that I'll get 297 miles of real world range (68% of 437 miles).
That's...mildly disappointing. It'll also mean that if I choose to use the GGT as my weekly commuter car, I'll arrive back home with 4% to 5% charge remaining. And that's when the car is brand new.

Not ideal by any means.
 
240 said:
I’m really curious what a 386 mile spec is actually getting. If the 450 mile spec is only achieving 77% of what is advertised, would that mean the 386 would only get 298 miles?
Click to expand...
I’ve been doing a lot of highway driving. Climate on, not babying the throttle, 75 mph on dream drive most of the way and am getting 350 miles of range. This is with 7 seat configuration and mid-size wheels. I drive this car everywhere and already have 3,100 miles on it. EPA on mine is 386. When city only driving I’m getting in the 390-405 range.
 
asneed06 said:
I’ve been doing a lot of highway driving. Climate on, not babying the throttle, 75 mph on dream drive most of the way and am getting 350 miles of range. This is with 7 seat configuration and mid-size wheels. I drive this car everywhere and already have 3,100 miles on it. EPA on mine is 386. When city only driving I’m getting in the 390-405 range.
Click to expand...

Oh! That's good news indeed, given the rather pessimistic assessment I was just making in my post, above yours.
 
Bus Driver said:
Oh! That's good news indeed, given the rather pessimistic assessment I was just making in my post, above yours.
Click to expand...
It’s definitely been fairly efficient for me. I’m in SC currently (driving from FL) so not a ton of elevation but good efficiency nonetheless. I’m averaging anywhere from 2.88-3.05 mi/kwh on the highway.
 
minivanasatruck said:
It's not that he thinks the Gravity can get the EPA rating, I think he and others are just hoping it's not getting ~20% off from the the EPA rating on the smallest tires spec, minimal HVAC, and 5 seats, driving at a tame 70mph. The real world range testing seems unusually short when compared to the EPA. I can't recall any other modern EV being near 20% off the EPA estimate with real world driving.
Click to expand...
my point is - thats NOT what the epa estimate is claiming! people just assume that driving consistent at 70mph (or some highway speed) will give the best mileage, because thats the case with ice vehicles, not with ev's. so if you want to 'validate' the epa rating - you should do 'real world driving' - drive the city loop a few times, drive the highway loop a few times. thats all i'm saying - i dont hear folks mention that in these 70mph tests (though i've not watched the 2nd one above yet).
maybe there should be city/hwy for ev as well? (they'd likely be pretty close)
 
WeighingGravity said:
There are a lot of drive unit issues bubbling up for Lucid. This is a new flavor of it - not the major failure that limits speed and warns you that you need service, but a sneakier one that a lot of people who aren't paying close attention to range might just shrug off as disappointing but per some of the comments here just "normal" and to be expected from an EV. This would be even more damning in the long term for a company that is trying to stake a claim as the efficiency king. If all that investment in efficiency just leads to ho-hum middle-of-the-pack range, then nothing has really been gained.

I do acknowledge that the charging performance is a huge advantage for Lucid, but not everyone appreciates that in the larger marketplace. And the ability to go a long way without recharging is a use case for some people.
Click to expand...
Yes, good point. Lucid's biggest selling point is range (at least that's how I became aware of it when the Air was launched with 500 EPA miles), so getting way less than what's advertised will lead to disappointment. The testing done by Consumer Reports found Lucid to be one of the worst offenders, with Mercedes and BMW surpassing the EPA rating (ie +60 m for the iX) https://www.consumerreports.org/car...s-models-that-beat-epa-estimates-a1103288135/
 
asneed06 said:
I’ve been doing a lot of highway driving. Climate on, not babying the throttle, 75 mph on dream drive most of the way and am getting 350 miles of range. This is with 7 seat configuration and mid-size wheels. I drive this car everywhere and already have 3,100 miles on it. EPA on mine is 386. When city only driving I’m getting in the 390-405 range.
Click to expand...
I am seeing pretty much the same. I am going to try next week to start Monday at 100% and run to near 0 and see what kind of daily living range I get.
 
prgarg said:
Mercedes and BMW surpassing the EPA rating (ie +60 m for the iX)
Click to expand...
Mercedes & BMW do the 2-Cycle EPA testing so it always comes in higher than stated. Most EV's that do the 2-Cycle outperform the EPA rating because it's a simpler but less realistic standard. Lucid and Tesla do the 5-Cycle EPA rating which can often lead to coming in 10%-20% bellow EPA when the car is being driven under normal conditions. The EPA Lucid and Tesla state are definitely achievable but you really need the clouds and stars to align in order to achieve it. 70/75mph range tests on a 5-Cycle EPA will never get close to what is stated.

The EPA should've just implemented one standard as in its current state you're not comparing apples to apples on all EV's, could be apples to oranges etc.
 
HC_79 said:
Mercedes & BMW do the 2-Cycle EPA testing so it always comes in higher than stated. Most EV's that do the 2-Cycle outperform the EPA rating because it's a simpler but less realistic standard. Lucid and Tesla do the 5-Cycle EPA rating which can often lead to coming in 10%-20% bellow EPA when the car is being driven under normal conditions. The EPA Lucid and Tesla state are definitely achievable but you really need the clouds and stars to align in order to achieve it. 70/75mph range tests on a 5-Cycle EPA will never get close to what is stated.

The EPA should've just implemented one standard as in its current state you're not comparing apples to apples on all EV's, could be apples to oranges etc.
Click to expand...
Didn't know that... thanks for clarifying it!
 
DeaneG said:
Many fall 20-30% short of their EPA rating when tested at a steady 75mph. It's expected and reasonable.
Click to expand...

That's aggregate for all EVs since 2016. I'm talking about recent cars circa 2024-2026 models where tire and efficiency tech has gotten significantly better. If you go with Out of Spec Tested videos and compare the EPAs vs the results they get, it falls within 8-10% off the EPA @ 70MPH. That's true for the 2026 Model Y, the ID.4 Buzz, Ford Silverado, Chevy Blazer, and 2025 Rivian Tri Motor. The BMW i5 and Polestar 2024 exceed their EPA. The only one close to -21% off is the Ionic 5 in 40 degree F temps.
 
asneed06 said:
It’s definitely been fairly efficient for me. I’m in SC currently (driving from FL) so not a ton of elevation but good efficiency nonetheless. I’m averaging anywhere from 2.88-3.05 mi/kwh on the highway.
Click to expand...
Same for me re: band of mi/kwh. I am getting about 340 miles of real range in my 7 seat, 21/22 tire config.

As I’ve mentioned before, just having the car in “swift” or “sprint” makes it less efficient no matter how you drive.
 
minivanasatruck said:
That's aggregate for all EVs since 2016. I'm talking about recent cars circa 2024-2026 models where tire and efficiency tech has gotten significantly better. If you go with Out of Spec Tested videos and compare the EPAs vs the results they get, it falls within 8-10% off the EPA @ 70MPH. That's true for the 2026 Model Y, the ID.4 Buzz, Ford Silverado, Chevy Blazer, and 2025 Rivian Tri Motor. The BMW i5 and Polestar 2024 exceed their EPA. The only one close to -21% off is the Ionic 5 in 40 degree F temps.
Click to expand...
Not at all true for my 2023 R1S. I am super lucky to only lose 20% on a full charge…usually closer to 30%. Granted, it’s a quad, but still. Quite inefficient even with aero covers etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top