Range on Gravity

[Ron_Burgundy]

More love for highway driving. Seven seat GGT, 21/22, 65 degrees and rain. Road trip (fairly short) with kids and dog and a bunch of crap.

Easily got 3.38kWh going anywhere from 50-70. Again, conditions were good, but folks who say it’s not possible, and certainly not on a roadtrip - that’s bunk. I drove 142.3 miles and used 136.7 miles worth of battery.

 

[dbsb3233]

More love for highway driving. Seven seat GGT, 21/22, 65 degrees and rain. Road trip (fairly short) with kids and dog and a bunch of crap.

Easily got 3.38kWh going anywhere from 50-70. Again, conditions were good, but folks who say it’s not possible, and certainly not on a roadtrip - that’s bunk. I drove 142.3 miles and used 136.7 miles worth of battery.

We've been road-tripping our EVs (Mach-E, and recently a Macan) for 5 years and 75,000 miles. Absolutely possible in most places in the US as long as you have at least somewhere decent range (our Mach-E is 270 EPA and the Macan 315).

Still hoping the Gravity has way more than just "decent" real world highway range. Hoping for 400 at 70+ MPH. That's one of the biggest reasons I'm willing to pop for a whopping $108k.

3.38 MPK is better than I've been hearing, but 50-70 MPH is on the slow side for interstate driving. I'll be looking at 75-80 for most of our drives. Would like to get at least 3.2 at those speeds (375 miles), but doesn't sound like it.

 

[hmp10]

. . . 50-70 MPH is on the slow side for interstate driving.

It's downright dangerous where I live.

USDOT data say that average interstate speeds are near 80 mph. In Florida most police jurisdictions don't even stop you anywhere under 85 on an interstate. Anywhere near those speeds you're not going to see 400 miles of range in any EV, no matter the road, terrain, and weather conditions, or tire/wheel choices.

With today's technology, the only real solution for felicitous road tripping is an abundance of well-maintained DC fast charging stations and a car with a high, flat charging curve. The Lucid / Supercharger combo (soon to be joined by the Porsche Cayenne) are today's best current answers.

 

[dbsb3233]

It's downright dangerous where I live.

USDOT data say that average interstate speeds are near 80 mph. In Florida most police jurisdictions don't even stop you anywhere under 85 on an interstate. Anywhere near those speeds you're not going to see 400 miles of range in any EV, no matter the road, terrain, and weather conditions, or tire/wheel choices.

With today's technology, the only real solution for felicitous road tripping is an abundance of well-maintained DC fast charging stations and a car with a high, flat charging curve. The Lucid / Supercharger combo (soon to be joined by the Porsche Cayenne) are today's best current answers.

I'm assuming he meant he did a mix of driving (some highway at 70, some slower roads at 50, or in between). Which explains much of the 3.38.

Never gonna get 400 miles at 85 MPH, of course, but some EVs range test at 400+ at 75 MPH.

https://www.caranddriver.com/features/g32634624/ev-longest-driving-range/

400 at 70 wasn't an unreasonable hope for the 450 Gravity (lower at 75-80, of course). Assuming it would really hit 450 combined. Sadly, Edmunds' tests for combined range are coming in worse than most high-range EVs (relative to their EPA). With combined already starting out 11% below EPA, well, little hope now for highway getting even close.

 

[dbsb3233]

It'll still be a great car in so many ways. And even 350 highway range (or whatever it ends up being) is certainly doable for road trips. But I probably would have thought longer and harder about making the choice for a $108k Gravity if it were rated at 400 EPA (which is sounding more real for combined). Pulls it closer to some of the competitors than 450. It'll still work, but super range was a big selling point to me. I probably should have waited 6 months for customer deliveries before ordering to know the real world range and weigh that accordingly.

 

[hmp10]

Sadly, Edmunds' tests for combined range are coming in worse than most high-range EVs (relative to their EPA). With combined already starting out 11% below EPA, well, little hope now for highway getting even close.

Lucids have always tested low against their EPA range when compared to German brands, mostly because Lucid and the German brands use different EPA testing protocols (2-cycle vs. 5-cycle). However, Lucid has consistently beaten Tesla, which uses the same cycle test as Lucid, on this score.

On the other hand, the EPA range of Lucid starts out so much higher than other brands that, even with missing the EPA mark more widely, the end result is that actual range in a Lucid still beats almost any other EV of similar size and weight.

Porsche's newest offerings are beginning to knock on Lucid's door in regard to actual range, but it's taken them several years to get where Lucid has been since the Air introduction over four years ago. And the Porsche offerings are still woefully short of Lucids in terms of interior passenger and cargo space which, no matter how you cut it, is going to cost some range in any EV.

 

[dbsb3233]

Lucids have always tested low against their EPA range when compared to German brands, mostly because Lucid and the German brands use different EPA testing protocols (2-cycle vs. 5-cycle). However, Lucid has consistently beaten Tesla, which uses the same cycle test as Lucid, on this score.

On the other hand, the EPA range of Lucid starts out so much higher than other brands that, even with missing the EPA mark more widely, the end result is that actual range in a Lucid still beats almost any other EV of similar size and weight.

Porsche's newest offerings are beginning to knock on Lucid's door in regard to actual range, but it's taken them several years to get where Lucid has been since the Air introduction over four years ago. And the Porsche offerings are still woefully short of Lucids in terms of interior passenger and cargo space which, no matter how you cut it, is going to cost some range in any EV.

Our Porsche Macan (RWD, 315 EPA) has been coming up modestly disappointing on range too. Completed one leg last month thru Idaho/Utah that came in at just 222 miles (211 using 95%). Granted, that's mostly 70-75 MPH in 25F-35F temps. Knew the loss would be bigger at those temps, but 30% below was more than expected (worse than our Mach-E vs EPA).

Summer legs are only running about 10% below EPA though, so more normal for highway speed loss. Nothing like the Taycan's significant overperformance vs EPA though when it first came out though. They clearly way under-promised on that one.

 

[Ron_Burgundy]

My 50-70 was, in fact, a mix of driving. Speed limit is 65mph.

Another piece of data today. I went 70 fairly consistently on a second leg of the trip this evening and got 3.31 mi/kWh. Again, pretty good conditions aside from rain. I should add I do have the aero inserts in my 21/22. I also have just under 6,000 miles on the car.

There is no way you’ll only have 10% range loss at 75+ on any EV, based on my experience with several. As I’ve mentioned before, at least on my Gravity, dynamic range equals EPA rated range at 3.30 mi/kWh. So getting anything higher would be BETTER and is not realistic (unless you’re hypermiling or something).

Here’s the shot of the 290 mile part of the road trip today. I charged just before we left. I didn’t do crazy acceleration, but there were times I had to pass and really speed up, etc. Again, everyone drives differently. The difference in arrival time if you average 68mph, 70mph or 75mph is negligible.

As @hmp10 said, if you want to really just pay zero attention to speed and efficiency, best solution is easy access to DC charging which, thankfully, is everywhere I generally drive.

 

[acependragon]

More love for highway driving. Seven seat GGT, 21/22, 65 degrees and rain. Road trip (fairly short) with kids and dog and a bunch of crap.

Easily got 3.38kWh going anywhere from 50-70. Again, conditions were good, but folks who say it’s not possible, and certainly not on a roadtrip - that’s bunk. I drove 142.3 miles and used 136.7 miles worth of battery.

This makes me think there’s something wrong with my car. I have the same config. With just normal suburban driving I ve never had better than 2.45 mi/kwh

 

[Knucklehead]

This makes me think there’s something wrong with my car. I have the same config. With just normal suburban driving I ve never had better than 2.45 mi/kwh

It's unlikely the cause but have you manually checked your tire pressure? Maybe there is something off with the TPMS.

I would put the pressure up to the highest allowed in the tire to improve efficiency.

 

[037]

It's unlikely the cause but have you manually checked your tire pressure? Maybe there is something off with the TPMS.

I would put the pressure up to the highest allowed in the tire to improve efficiency.

That would also speed up tire wear and decrease performance. The target should be whatever Lucid set it to.

 

[Ron_Burgundy]

This makes me think there’s something wrong with my car. I have the same config. With just normal suburban driving I ve never had better than 2.45 mi/kwh

Unless you’re driving around in swift or sprint and accelerating a ton - or if you’re in cold temps (sub 40 degrees), that seems super low. It gets better over 2.000 miles, but not THAT much better.

 

[TahoeMichael]

This makes me think there’s something wrong with my car. I have the same config. With just normal suburban driving I ve never had better than 2.45 mi/kwh

That's enough of a step down from what others are reporting that it seems to be worth having a Lucid mechanic take a look at it.

 

[dbsb3233]

Another piece of data today. I went 70 fairly consistently on a second leg of the trip this evening and got 3.31 mi/kWh. Again, pretty good conditions aside from rain. I should add I do have the aero inserts in my 21/22. I also have just under 6,000 miles on the car.

What regen level are you using?

 

[Ron_Burgundy]

What regen level are you using?

I usually use high as I prefer it. But, on that trip, I accidentally used “standard” as my wife had it set to that.

I find standard isn’t enough and high is a bit much but I got used to it.

 

[allenmhc]

That's enough of a step down from what others are reporting that it seems to be worth having a Lucid mechanic take a look at it.

I have 20/21" wheels (though I swapped them from 22/23"s after about 1k miles), and for a while I also averaged 2.4–2.5 mi/kWh even w/ the smaller wheels. After I hit 2k miles the dynamic range and indicator went up a bit, but it was after some longer road trips (i.e., highway and freeway speeds) where the efficiency jumped up to 2.7–2.8 mi/kWh. I do think that starting/stopping, even in the suburbs, makes a major difference in the calculated efficiencies, and apparently how it's calculated also shifts with time and usage.

 

[Ron_Burgundy]

I have 20/21" wheels (though I swapped them from 22/23"s after about 1k miles), and for a while I also averaged 2.4–2.5 mi/kWh even w/ the smaller wheels. After I hit 2k miles the dynamic range and indicator went up a bit, but it was after some longer road trips (i.e., highway and freeway speeds) where the efficiency jumped up to 2.7–2.8 mi/kWh. I do think that starting/stopping, even in the suburbs, makes a major difference in the calculated efficiencies, and apparently how it's calculated also shifts with time and usage.

It’s odd as I DO get better efficient on the highway which is counter to every other EV I’ve driven. I am not accelerating a ton with regular neighborhood drives, but using DDPro in good conditions get me 3.3+ on high way and I am much closer to 2.9 or 3.0 around town.

 

[mutant9]

We've been road-tripping our EVs (Mach-E, and recently a Macan) for 5 years and 75,000 miles. Absolutely possible in most places in the US as long as you have at least somewhere decent range (our Mach-E is 270 EPA and the Macan 315).

Still hoping the Gravity has way more than just "decent" real world highway range. Hoping for 400 at 70+ MPH. That's one of the biggest reasons I'm willing to pop for a whopping $108k.

3.38 MPK is better than I've been hearing, but 50-70 MPH is on the slow side for interstate driving. I'll be looking at 75-80 for most of our drives. Would like to get at least 3.2 at those speeds (375 miles), but doesn't sound like it.

 

[mutant9]

In the very cold that we have had recently in Chicago I am seeing high 1.9 m/kw. Not great also see a power reduced due to cold battery message in the charging screen. Anyone else seeing this?

 

[RD7]

Just completed a 1500 mi road trip from AZ to northern CA and back. Highway speed limits 70-75, typical speeds a bit above the speed limit. 2.60 mi/kwh, a bit lower than my expectations of 2.80. The Air hit an efficiency wall around 70 mph, and the Gravity seems to as well, but paying an even higher price given the higher cdA (cd x frontal area). The lower number is expected as the drag is proportional to the square of velocity.

However, charging was fantastic. Used all Tesla SCs, including the brand-new one in Lost Hills, CA, which the news said was open but a Tesla guy told us while charging that it was still closed. (They let us finish, but the entrance was coned off when we left.) Typically arrived at 20-30% SoC and left at 80%, never spending more than 20 minutes charging – just the right amount of time to get all the rest stop things done. 3 stops outbound, 4 stops on the return as we took a different route. It was wonderful not having to plan stops for food around charging stops! Plug-and-charge worked flawlessly.