What's new
By:

Engineering Explained. This is bad.

Bus Driver said:
Your handsomely expressed paean to a car that has given you so many problems, fills me with confidence. Maybe I should take delivery of my GGT after all.
Click to expand...

If I thought Lucid wouldn't at some point set the software to rights I would not have just bought a third one to replace the wrecked one, because the software in the current state in both our Gravities truly is bad enough to make the car too aggravating to operate over the long haul.

But having lived through the first ten months of software hell with our early-production Air and now still enjoying it four years later every time I get into it, I'm going to cut Lucid the same slack with the Gravity.

It's inexcusable to me that Lucid did this to customers (and to their own reputation) with the Gravity, but I'm not going to cut off my nose to spite my face and forgo a car of this utility and with design and engineering bones of this extraordinary caliber.

Even if Lucid were to destroy itself by pulling the same stunt with the Earth, seeing that obscene 9,000-pound excrescence that is the Cadillac Escalade IQ walk away with the SUV of the Year Award tells me enough about where EVs for the American market might be going to make me want to procure a Gravity while its like is still to be had.
 
Buffalo Bob said:
Seems to that we are beating a dead horse here. Also seems that the initial topic has devolved in several subtopics. At over 300 posts, is it time to let this thread fade into the background?
Click to expand...

What was this thread about again?
 
HC_79 said:
I just did a road trip to SF and back. Driving and charging I don't think anything else competes on the market, the charging experience (I use solely Tesla now) has been flawless. The software is just a hot mess of weird and random errors \ bugs but nothing is a dealbreaker, it's just beyond frustrating with how long Lucid is taking to get these little bugs under control. Comes down to your patience levels I guess.
Click to expand...
Good to hear about your great road trip experience!
My (perhaps naive) hope is that the recent string of high profile reviews criticizing the current state of the software will force Lucid to bring an additional sense of urgency to addressing the situation quickly.
The OOS towing review yesterday lays it out clearly, as Savagegeese and EE already had.
 
hmp10 said:
Even if Lucid were to destroy itself by pulling the same stunt with the Earth, seeing that obscene 9,000-pound excrescence that is the Cadillac Escalade IQ walk away with the SUV of the Year Award tells me enough about where EVs for the American market might be going to make me want to procure a Gravity while its like is still to be had.
Click to expand...
It's possible that trade prohibited, but desireable products like Xiaomi EVs will take a role of Cuban cigars in US's upscale car market :p
 
tarator said:
And I am asking again, did that work when they did it for Gravity?
Click to expand...
I think there's a misunderstanding here. Both Gravity and Air have significantly higher BOMs than midsize. Higher BOMs mean more ECUs, wiring, chips, etc., that have to communicate with each other. Each one means more failure points.

With midsize, Marc Winterhoff has confirmed that their BOM is lower than their should-costs. This means reduced part counts, less ECUs, less chips, less components, etc. This will allow for the software team to focus on less varying systems and instead build strong foundations from the ground up. And the learnings from here can hopefully be translated into Air and Gravity for better user software experience.

And before you try and come to say I'm talking out of my ass, I come from working R&D in heavy industry steelmaking, then transitioned into a data science role having to develop complete end-to-end data pipelines for production. I know how much of a nightmare complex BOMs can be, and at the same time, I know how much a nightmare it is to develop software when the project owner is trying to add too much at the same time. By cutting back and focusing on less complexity, you can establish a more robust foundation for your software to grow.
 
Need4Sleep said:
I think there's a misunderstanding here. Both Gravity and Air have significantly higher BOMs than midsize. Higher BOMs mean more ECUs, wiring, chips, etc., that have to communicate with each other. Each one means more failure points.

With midsize, Marc Winterhoff has confirmed that their BOM is lower than their should-costs. This means reduced part counts, less ECUs, less chips, less components, etc. This will allow for the software team to focus on less varying systems and instead build strong foundations from the ground up. And the learnings from here can hopefully be translated into Air and Gravity for better user software experience.

And before you try and come to say I'm talking out of my ass, I come from working R&D in heavy industry steelmaking, then transitioned into a data science role having to develop complete end-to-end data pipelines for production. I know how much of a nightmare complex BOMs can be, and at the same time, I know how much a nightmare it is to develop software when the project owner is trying to add too much at the same time. By cutting back and focusing on less complexity, you can establish a more robust foundation for your software to grow.
Click to expand...
Amen. 🙏
 
Need4Sleep said:
I think there's a misunderstanding here. Both Gravity and Air have significantly higher BOMs than midsize. Higher BOMs mean more ECUs, wiring, chips, etc., that have to communicate with each other. Each one means more failure points.

With midsize, Marc Winterhoff has confirmed that their BOM is lower than their should-costs. This means reduced part counts, less ECUs, less chips, less components, etc. This will allow for the software team to focus on less varying systems and instead build strong foundations from the ground up. And the learnings from here can hopefully be translated into Air and Gravity for better user software experience.

And before you try and come to say I'm talking out of my ass, I come from working R&D in heavy industry steelmaking, then transitioned into a data science role having to develop complete end-to-end data pipelines for production. I know how much of a nightmare complex BOMs can be, and at the same time, I know how much a nightmare it is to develop software when the project owner is trying to add too much at the same time. By cutting back and focusing on less complexity, you can establish a more robust foundation for your software to grow.
Click to expand...
OK, how many less ECUs and "chips" are there going to be in the midsize to affect significantly the complexity? Give me your estimate, since you have so much experience in the field.

The software team hasn't demonstrated that the can produce ANY (mostly) bug-free code yet. Starting from scratch over and over is not going to teach them how to do that.
 
tarator said:
OK, how many less ECUs and "chips" are there going to be in the midsize to affect significantly the complexity? Give me your estimate, since you have so much experience in the field.

The software team hasn't demonstrated that the can produce ANY (mostly) bug-free code yet. Starting from scratch over and over is not going to teach them how to do that.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure why you're convinced that the software team will be starting from scratch for the next vehicle. The 3rd gen software stack that powers the Gravity is intended to be the basis for their next car. That's no guarantee that Lucid will get it right. But it's probably much better odds than if they decided to start over again.
 
tarator said:
Luckily (for you), EE didn't write a review about your wife. And luckily (for you again), there is only one copy of your wife and no company's future depends on her software quality.
Click to expand...
This was a metaphorical story :) gentle allusions to lucid ownership that owners could relate to.
 
tarator said:
OK, how many less ECUs and "chips" are there going to be in the midsize to affect significantly the complexity? Give me your estimate, since you have so much experience in the field.

The software team hasn't demonstrated that the can produce ANY (mostly) bug-free code yet. Starting from scratch over and over is not going to teach them how to do that.
Click to expand...
I'm not an engineer at Lucid, but I will tell you from experience writing data pipelines as my job. Even one less component on a data pipeline has exponential effects in terms of data management down the line. That's one less downstream encoding headache and data augmentation the data team would deal with. And that's why I'm so focused on the BOM.
 
I wasn't happy with one of my theme colors, so I did a full Factory Reset this morning. Now, everything is screwed up! Guess I finally know how EE feels.
 
Last edited:
Fewer.
 
Bus Driver said:
Marques Brownlee, with his 20 million plus subscribers certainly did his bit to kill off Fisker. His review of the Fisker Ocean and its hot mess of software problems went a long way to turning off potential buyers. I worry that Jason Fenske's video here will have the same effect. Lucid should see Marques Brownlee's Fisker Ocean video as a cautionary tale. They MUST do something.

Peter Rawlinson gone, Eric Bach leaving, no real CEO named, more people in management leaving than entering, Lucid asking to borrow more money at a higher interest rate to pay off debts that carry a lower interest rate (at least that's how my Wall Streeter brother explained it to me), quality control problems, UI software problems, it's not looking good.

My Gravity GT entered production last week. I'm entertaining thoughts of cancelling my order, and unfortunately for me those thoughts aren't going away. Forfeiting my deposit seems like a small price to pay, so as not to be stuck with a car and car brand that is no longer wanted.
Click to expand...
Any chance that yours is a Fully-Loaded Grand Touring with Stealth, Stellar White, 20/21" Wheels, Tahoe Leather and 7 Seats (I am impartial to Towing Package)?

If so, I'll gladly assume ownership. My scheduled production date is 12/28/2025. Who knows when delivery will be.
 
Many auto companies have software problems. Cariad, VW/Audi's software division has been a complete disaster, to the point where they had to hire outside resources to develop software for their cars. It's not like Lucid is the only one with software challenges.
 
TahoeMichael said:
I'm not sure why you're convinced that the software team will be starting from scratch for the next vehicle. The 3rd gen software stack that powers the Gravity is intended to be the basis for their next car. That's no guarantee that Lucid will get it right. But it's probably much better odds than if they decided to start over again.
Click to expand...
I am not convinced of that and I am arguing against it. The person that I am responding to is convinced that they should start from scratch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top