Engineering Explained. This is bad.
- Thread starter MGRMLN
- Start date
FWIW, I watch YouTube videos on 1.5x-2X speed. Saves a lot of time and long videos are not a worry. And if you have premium, you can watch on 3x which helps on Out of Spec reviews videos.
Agreed. There is a ton of potential for both vehicles, especially the Gravity. But potential isn’t going to be enough. Some people out here on forums and Facebook groups don’t get it, you need more than just automotive enthusiasts to buy your car to succeed. The average person isn’t going to want to deal with these issues. One, two or a couple of people that have never had issues don’t define the average. Not sure how people don’t get that. If the average Air or Gravity has a multitude of issues, the average person won’t want to buy it, no matter how attractive the price incentives may be. I’m in my 30’s and I can deal with these problems now but man, if I’m older, have a large family, I sure as hell don’t want to be dealing with key fob issues. I could not imagine being 60+ and having to take the key fob out of my key to get my car to start.
Switching from a Rivian, I definitely downgraded my software experience. And it doesn’t help my wife has a Tesla MY Juniper, which just works 100% of the time.
I took delivery of my GGT on August 12. It’s in the shop for its fourth time. When I pick up on Monday it’ll of been in the shop for 40 days, over 30% of its life. I’ll be on my third steering wheel for dream drive issues, a 2nd windshield since the visor fell off, 2nd and 3rd replacements of door handles since they have all malfunctioned at different times, a new key card tray since my key cards stopped working. And many software issues the SC cannot fix that I’ve already reported to software feedback. Not a good experience for my first Lucid. All these issues could potentially be forgiven and I could tell myself that “oh these bugs will be worked out within 12 months or so” but in my loaner, an Air GT, I have issues as well. The Air has been out for four years going on five years. Every time I get in the Air it takes 15 seconds to boot up and I’ve had similar issues Fenske had with it. To have this many software bugs on a car that’s been out for four years is mind boggling. Whenever my wife and I go out, I find her saying “are you sure we can take your car?” (Regardless if it’s the gravity or air loaner) because reliability concern.
I hope they can get their software act together as soon as possible.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2020
- Messages
- 8,695
- Reaction score
- 14,389
- Location
- Naples, FL
- Cars
- Air DE-P, 2 Gravity DEs
- Air DE Number
- 395
- Gravity DE Number
- 067
238
- Referral Code
- 033M4EXG
He ended by saying only what most of us here know in our heart of hearts: Lucid products are an engineering tour-de-force when it comes to driving dynamics, space utilization, efficiency, and style (and I would add structural solidity).
But their software can make them a torment to own some days.
I think we (older, successful people) greatly underestimate how difficult this task is with current generation of workforce. The world seems to be full of talented programmers until you need to hire a few for your company. Best ones are already locked in with stock options by the likes of Elon, so a newer player like Lucid might have a real struggle to create a robust software team with appropriate skills.
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2025
- Messages
- 897
- Reaction score
- 1,618
- Cars
- GGT, Merc E450 Conv
Agreed. This is the conundrum that Lucid is in. I like to compare Lucid to Porsche to show advantage an established auto company has. With Porsche they could use the Tycan as their Lucid Air equivalent. Use it to test their ideas, implement engineering exercises, etc. but the Tycan did not have to be a major success. They still had the high selling ICE Cayenne and Macan, and of course high profit margin 911. Meanwhile they were developing the Cayenne EV for many years and not under pressure to release it soon. They could take their time. Modify their software to correct Tycan issues, improve packaging, charging, etc. Yes, there is the issue with how they adapted to Tesla opening up chargers and having to add NACS in a less than elegant way (one disadvantage to being old school company - changes are harder). But you can bet that when the Cayenne is release next summer, it will be much better sorted with solid stable software. They have had the luxury of not being rushed to market to keep money coming in. Yes I know that the Cayenne is over priced compared to Gravity but there are a lot of people out there willing to pay that premium for a solid, well sorted vehicle. Hopefully Lucid can have the Gravity software fully stable by next summer in time to compete with the Porsche as well as GM, Genesis and other EVs with stable software. Currently Lucid is fortunate that Tesla has ignored significant updates of Model S and Model X.
- Joined
- May 20, 2024
- Messages
- 599
- Reaction score
- 665
- Location
- Northern NJ
- Cars
- 22 Air GT, Honda S2K AP1
- Referral Code
- TGR2P9J7
This was a toughie....just saw the video and came here to see what people thought. I don't have much to add other than to sigh deeply. They've bitten off a lot, but it really feels like they need an all hands commitment to go through the software issues and absolutely own them. As a professional software developer with decades of experience, there is a tangible difference between putting software together and getting it out there after "some testing," vs building an absolutely comprehensive test plan coupled with a compulsion for squashing bugs completely when they become known. It's easier said than done with a project of this complexity...but this is a software-driven car. It seems like they need to ensure they have the right people in all the right spots, with a team of the right size, suitably motivated to truly own the software and make it sing. Anything short of that will be a disaster given the number of configurations and variables.
The perception that it's a "great car, but too many bugs," is an absolute problems for a platform (EV) that already sees people being hesitant to get in the pool.
I can only imagine, at this point, they they're aware of the seriousness of the issue, but aren't sure how to solve it. I'm 100% open to being wrong on that one, though, if anyone has any information about what's going on. Everyone here wants them to succeed, me included. We all know what this car delivers when it's working well...there's nothing like it.
The perception that it's a "great car, but too many bugs," is an absolute problems for a platform (EV) that already sees people being hesitant to get in the pool.
I can only imagine, at this point, they they're aware of the seriousness of the issue, but aren't sure how to solve it. I'm 100% open to being wrong on that one, though, if anyone has any information about what's going on. Everyone here wants them to succeed, me included. We all know what this car delivers when it's working well...there's nothing like it.
You definitely can't attract talented programmers with stock options of a rapidly falling stock.
though retired, I'm still connected to the engineering world here in SV. i won't name any names, but they have hired some people from these companies over the years. so far it hasn't helped.
- Joined
- May 20, 2024
- Messages
- 599
- Reaction score
- 665
- Location
- Northern NJ
- Cars
- 22 Air GT, Honda S2K AP1
- Referral Code
- TGR2P9J7
For sure. They need to open the wallet and bring a small group of seriously talented people. Not for nothin', but AI-driven coding tools such as Claude Code could peruse their code base, build an understanding from top down, then go to work on finding the root cause of so many of the issues that are being reported, especially if different teams are responsible for different parts of the architecture. I say that as someone who spent 10+ years building out a software architecture and have recently made the transition to incorporating the use of tools such as Claude Code. They're not perfect, but in the hands of an experienced developer, they can do great things and ABSOLUTELY help debug complex issues.
The software issue is twofold. Yes, it’s bad. But what makes it worse as that they chose to release it, to advertise and sell it, in this condition. Which means Lucid on some level considers it good enough.
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2024
- Messages
- 76
- Reaction score
- 173
Per Bob Lutz in his recently posted interview, U.S. automakers need to catch up to China’s ability to develop new models within 24 months; in the U.S., the process typically takes about 36 months.
Yet, with far fewer resources—and as a startup—Lucid will have launched three entirely new models built on distinct platforms within just six years of its founding. Both the Air and Gravity have earned significant industry recognition and numerous awards.
In my view, what Lucid has accomplished is truly remarkable.
Yet, with far fewer resources—and as a startup—Lucid will have launched three entirely new models built on distinct platforms within just six years of its founding. Both the Air and Gravity have earned significant industry recognition and numerous awards.
In my view, what Lucid has accomplished is truly remarkable.
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2020
- Messages
- 8,695
- Reaction score
- 14,389
- Location
- Naples, FL
- Cars
- Air DE-P, 2 Gravity DEs
- Air DE Number
- 395
- Gravity DE Number
- 067
238
- Referral Code
- 033M4EXG
Which is what so frightens me about the Earth release.
I sold a large tranche of Lucid stock yesterday to offset some capital gains for the year. I was considering buying back in early next year at the current low price, but I'm first going to have to regain my confidence that the company can make it. And that's going to come down to where they seem to be going with the Earth release . . . something I won't know until much later.
When I started buying Lucid stock several years ago, I was doing it on the strength of their engineering team as I dug into the backgrounds of Rawlinson, Bach, Jenkins. and Hochholdinger. It never occurred to me at the time that the company's longevity might end up hinging on its software team.
his job is to inerface with investors not forum nerds
Yeah, but the software to made sure all they achieved is forgotten easily.
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2023
- Messages
- 1,937
- Reaction score
- 2,548
- Location
- Arizona & Washington
- Cars
- Pure AWD 19"/ Lexus SC
I wonder how many Lucid software engineers actually drive Lucids. I would suggest that every software engineer be provided with access to a fleet of company cars, and that the fleet should represent a mix of Lucid's platforms, trims, options and model years. These should be treated as company cars, in that they are to be used for both business and personal use. The reason I mention a fleet approach is that the engineers should be able to easily swap cars so that the car they are driving should be able to demonstrate/test whatever software feature or bug fix they are working on, as well as to better experience and understand why the installed base grows tired with the mix of minor daily annoyances.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2020
- Messages
- 8,695
- Reaction score
- 14,389
- Location
- Naples, FL
- Cars
- Air DE-P, 2 Gravity DEs
- Air DE Number
- 395
- Gravity DE Number
- 067
238
- Referral Code
- 033M4EXG
The short list of relatively minor awards the Gravity has won pales in comparison to the long and impressive list of Air awards. Yet, having owned Airs and Gravities, I would say the Gravity is a considerably more-evolved product than the Air on every front other than software (which was terrible at launch in both products).
The Air walked away with the Car of the Year Award. The Gravity couldn't even make the finalist list of the SUV of the Year Award.
The forbearance for software issues with an automaker's first model doesn't appear to carry over into its second model . . . and will even less so with its third. In part, this is because Lucid's strategy is to move into increasingly-wider markets with each model. This means Lucid is moving away from well-heeled, multi-car owners with early-adopter tolerance for immature features toward more financially-constrained customers who put greater premiums on dependable usability.
the Gravity locked the Consumer Reports guy out of his car
For an amazing car that I love, I would have thought that I would love it more over time as the software gets better and minor quirks get worked out. It’s been the opposite as I still deal with daily and weekly software-related and minor hardware quirks that leads to aggravation and frustration at the 3rd year of my ownership. First time in my life owning a car that I love at the beginning of purchase and loving it less the longer I own it. 
- Joined
- May 9, 2024
- Messages
- 493
- Reaction score
- 628
- Location
- Oceanside, San Diego
- Cars
- S560, Panamera, Palisade
I think that's because when the Air came out, it was so mind blowing compared to the competition, that almost everyone decided to ignore the software issues. In the meantime tho, the competition has caught up consistently, and there are a lot more options. While the Gravity is arguably an engineering feat, overall, the difference between it and the latest competition is not that exceptional, to woo people the way the Air has, to the point where they ignore the software issues and sprinkle it with awards.
Also people figured out that Lucid has a chronic problem with their software, it wasn't just a one off with the Air.
Reading the comments in the YouTube video tells me that Lucid is doomed if they don’t fix software very soon. Wake up Marc!
Lucid official, please make sure CEO sees these comments, he owes his customers and investors some answers.
Lucid official, please make sure CEO sees these comments, he owes his customers and investors some answers.