Lucid Investor Day - March 12, 2026

[joec]

So, what's Lucid's take on "hands-on" versus "hands-off?"
For other OEMs, that has mean the difference between requiring the driver to apply some torque to the steering while while the system is engaged versus using an in-cabin camera to monitor driver attention.

But, this seems to be differentiating between city and highway, with highway coming later, which is backwards to how GM Cruise, Ford BlueOrigin, and Tesla FSD were developed.

So, is the differentiating factor WHERE it can be engaged, or HOW driver monitoring? Or BOTH, I guess?

When Lucid has referred to hands-free, they tend to mean the camera tracks your eyes. No steering wheel torque needed.

My guess is highway, then city. Since they have highway for Air already. Match Air, then go beyond.

 

[joec]

Will they do hands-on for city before hands-off? Likely.

But I’d bet on hands off for highway before hands on for city.

 

[gaskiller]

EVs depreciate not because of software, which for many marques are applied to older vehices as well, but because of drivetrain improvements and concerns about battery life. New batteries better than old batteries, both in terms of original capacity as well as degradation.

But batteries don’t degrade much…..and even cars under warranty gave depreciated, maybe a combination if these things. The manufacturer incentives don’t help either.

 

[Smorgasbord]

But batteries don’t degrade much…..and even cars under warranty gave depreciated, maybe a combination if these things. The manufacturer incentives don’t help either.

I said "concerns about battery life," not that they actually had significant degradation.

Reuters or someone just reported that used EV sales are starting to ramp up with the Iran war and the price of gasoline increasing dramatically.

 

[hwy17er]

Did Lucid mention anything about when custom orders for the Gravity would open back up? Or anything about the 2027 Gravity at all?

Or are we still left in the dark?

in the dark...no LT to shine bright and light up our paths either

 

[hwy17er]

The cellular internet on the Gravity is AT&T 4G LTE. Just confirmed that this week, when the Lucid tech was here. I can imagine your connectivity experience depends a lot on how good AT&T cellular is in the places you live and drive. I know from our camping excursions that there are many smaller communities that are only served well by one carrier. I suppose Lucid could provide connectivity through multiple carriers, depending on signal strength (unlikely). As an alternative, perhaps they could let you designate your cell phone or another device as the default car internet connection. Just spitballing here.

This is totally true in my experience
AT& T works great in Silicon Valley but you're much better off coverage-wise with Verizon in Santa Cruz! (I have no experience with T-mobile)

 

[borski]

This is totally true in my experience
AT& T works great in Silicon Valley but you're much better off coverage-wise with Verizon in Santa Cruz! (I have no experience with T-mobile)

Some of the TCUs (depends on the version) have an eSIM so you could theoretically pretty easily swap that at some point. Older ones (like mine) are a physical sim.

 

[hwy17er]

Some of the TCUs (depends on the version) have an eSIM so you could theoretically pretty easily swap that at some point. Older ones (like mine) are a physical sim.

I'm not sure what most of that means but drive up hwy 9 and tell me how well your AT&T cellphone coverage is through Brookdale or Boulder Creek?
How does your Gravity do with connectivity in the mountains?

 

[tmichael]

Your friend is wrong, Tesla is not the best, Waymo is….go look at critical disengagement frequency . Best should mean safety as well-meaning having LIDAR which Musk doesn’t use because it’s cheaper to get rid of it and he can save time and compute power with no redundancies. That’s the real reason Musk got rid of it. His so called neural network wasn’t able to compute incorporating Lidar, so Musk conveniently called it a fools errand. More like fools listening to him.

I make a distinction between what is available to the public and what is only used at the commercial level. FSD was very functional for me to play with - but it still wasn't something I relied on. Waymo/Nuro are commercial services that have really ugly things on their roofs that cost a ton of money and are capable of being remote-controlled. Apples and Oranges, I think. The technology will trickle down, however, so the consumer will eventually be able to do L3 or L4 without the roof appliance and paying someone to monitor and remote control.

I love technology!!!

 

[borski]

I'm not sure what most of that means but drive up hwy 9 and tell me how well your AT&T cellphone coverage is through Brookdale or Boulder Creek?
How does your Gravity do with connectivity in the mountains?

Your car has a TCU (Telematics Control Unit) in it. There are multiple versions. Some (older) use a physical SIM card, the kind you would swap physically on a phone. Some (newer) use an eSIM, or an electronic SIM, meaning you should theoretically be able to update the SIM without physical access.

That’s all. I have no idea if Lucid will do that or let you do that, but it’s technically a feasible idea.

 

[dbsb3233]

Your car has a TCU (Telematics Control Unit) in it. There are multiple versions. Some (older) use a physical SIM card, the kind you would swap physically on a phone. Some (newer) use an eSIM, or an electronic SIM, meaning you should theoretically be able to update the SIM without physical access.

That’s all. I have no idea if Lucid will do that or let you do that, but it’s technically a feasible idea.

If Lucid were to do something (which I doubt they will), I wonder if using the phone's cell signal might be an easier solution and would only take a software change? Especially if Andriod Auto or Carplay is engaged?

I've never tried this, but I wonder if turning the phone's hotspot on and connecting the car wifi to it would work? I'd rather it just happen automatically thru AA though as it's more seamless. I assume the car's built-in streaming services would use the wifi instead of the internal cell signal.

 

[Saksak]

Do we really need another ____ measuring contest on this forum?

Agree to disagree and move on.

The levels of autonomy thing is pretty ill defined and poorly understood, anyway.

Your are right. We were starting to go from healthy debate to non-constructive territory. Sorry about that.

As you pointed out, there is a lot of confusion on the levels of autonomy. It’s worth getting rid of some of that confusion in this EV forum.

The levels of autonomy are well defined by the Society of Automotive Engineers and is fairly straightforward.

• L1: Partial control. Human partially in control. Car does some of acceleration, brake, lane centering, but not all. Example: Automatic cruise control.
• L2: Eyes-on. Car has full control. Human must monitor constantly and instantly override the car.
• L3: Eyes-off driver. Human does not need to pay attention. However, human must be in the driver’s seat and be able to take control when prompted by the system.
• L4: No driver, constrained. Car is fully autonomous in geofenced areas and under specific conditions. Human is a passenger.
• L5: No driver, everywhere. Car self-drives everywhere and in any environment.

There is huge variation within a category, especially in L2. Lucid Air DDPro, Lucid Gravity DDPro2, Ford BlueCruise,GM SuperCruise, Tesla FSD, etc. vary wildly in capability, yet are all eyes-on L2. This is why we are seeing vaguely defined and informal L2+ L2++ L2+++, and where most of the confusion lies.

Also, cars may have different levels under different conditions. For example, most systems are L2 on highways in good weather, but not in cities or poor weather. Tesla FSD one of the few that is L2 (however many + symbols you want to add to it) in cities. Waymo is L4 but only in select cities and conditions. The San Francisco blackout is where Waymo spectacularly failed. If Waymo was L3 with a remote human driver ready to take control, the human would have taken over when requested by the system and it wouldn’t have made the news.

Many companies are trying for eyes-off L3 on highway, where the driver is effectively a passenger and can watch videos. Those system will probably be L2 in the city. We’ll then be looking at cars with L2/L3 designation.

I hope this helps in getting to a common understanding and “language” as we talk about self-driving for Lucid.

 

[gaskiller]

From what I've seen in this thread, it seems that Lucid's message is "we'll do what Tesla will do". That's not a very smart, or innovative message. It doesn't demonstrate why customers or investors should choose Lucid instead of Tesla.

Tesla using only cameras, Lucid using LIDAR with NVidia chips, not the same

 

[nashvillelucid]

Your are right. We were starting to go from healthy debate to non-constructive territory. Sorry about that.

As you pointed out, there is a lot of confusion on the levels of autonomy. It’s worth getting rid of some of that confusion in this EV forum.

The levels of autonomy are well defined by the Society of Automotive Engineers and is fairly straightforward.

• L1: Partial control. Human partially in control. Car does some of acceleration, brake, lane centering, but not all. Example: Automatic cruise control.
• L2: Eyes-on. Car has full control. Human must monitor constantly and instantly override the car.
• L3: Eyes-off driver. Human does not need to pay attention. However, human must be in the driver’s seat and be able to take control when prompted by the system.
• L4: No driver, constrained. Car is fully autonomous in geofenced areas and under specific conditions. Human is a passenger.
• L5: No driver, everywhere. Car self-drives everywhere and in any environment.

There is huge variation within a category, especially in L2. Lucid Air DDPro, Lucid Gravity DDPro2, Ford BlueCruise,GM SuperCruise, Tesla FSD, etc. vary wildly in capability, yet are all eyes-on L2. This is why we are seeing vaguely defined and informal L2+ L2++ L2+++, and where most of the confusion lies.

Also, cars may have different levels under different conditions. For example, most systems are L2 on highways in good weather, but not in cities or poor weather. Tesla FSD one of the few that is L2 (however many + symbols you want to add to it) in cities. Waymo is L4 but only in select cities and conditions. The San Francisco blackout is where Waymo spectacularly failed. If Waymo was L3 with a remote human driver ready to take control, the human would have taken over when requested by the system and it wouldn’t have made the news.

Many companies are trying for eyes-off L3 on highway, where the driver is effectively a passenger and can watch videos. Those system will probably be L2 in the city. We’ll then be looking at cars with L2/L3 designation.

I hope this helps in getting to a common understanding and “language” as we talk about self-driving for Lucid.

This is a very useful and clear explanation. Thank you!

 

[tarator]

Tesla using only cameras, Lucid using LIDAR with NVidia chips, not the same

I am not talking about the software, but the whole product line. Including Lucid cybertaxi...

 

[joec]

Your are right. We were starting to go from healthy debate to non-constructive territory. Sorry about that.

As you pointed out, there is a lot of confusion on the levels of autonomy. It’s worth getting rid of some of that confusion in this EV forum.

The levels of autonomy are well defined by the Society of Automotive Engineers and is fairly straightforward.

• L1: Partial control. Human partially in control. Car does some of acceleration, brake, lane centering, but not all. Example: Automatic cruise control.
• L2: Eyes-on. Car has full control. Human must monitor constantly and instantly override the car.
• L3: Eyes-off driver. Human does not need to pay attention. However, human must be in the driver’s seat and be able to take control when prompted by the system.
• L4: No driver, constrained. Car is fully autonomous in geofenced areas and under specific conditions. Human is a passenger.
• L5: No driver, everywhere. Car self-drives everywhere and in any environment.

There is huge variation within a category, especially in L2. Lucid Air DDPro, Lucid Gravity DDPro2, Ford BlueCruise,GM SuperCruise, Tesla FSD, etc. vary wildly in capability, yet are all eyes-on L2. This is why we are seeing vaguely defined and informal L2+ L2++ L2+++, and where most of the confusion lies.

Also, cars may have different levels under different conditions. For example, most systems are L2 on highways in good weather, but not in cities or poor weather. Tesla FSD one of the few that is L2 (however many + symbols you want to add to it) in cities. Waymo is L4 but only in select cities and conditions. The San Francisco blackout is where Waymo spectacularly failed. If Waymo was L3 with a remote human driver ready to take control, the human would have taken over when requested by the system and it wouldn’t have made the news.

Many companies are trying for eyes-off L3 on highway, where the driver is effectively a passenger and can watch videos. Those system will probably be L2 in the city. We’ll then be looking at cars with L2/L3 designation.

I hope this helps in getting to a common understanding and “language” as we talk about self-driving for Lucid.

Thanks for this. It’s definitely worth putting the proper definitions back into the conversation.

To me, Level 3 is the part that never made any sense. And I’m guessing that’s why so many are stuck calling things Level 2++++ and such.

If I don’t need to pay attention at all, there’s no chance I’m going to be able to react in time in an emergency. You’re basically telling people to play video games or read a book, but still be ready to react to an oncoming semi in milliseconds?

Meanwhile, Level 2 is this massive variance of different skills that should have been broken into at least three separate levels.

Level 4 makes perfect sense for Robotaxis. But why Lucid is setting it as a goal for consumers buying a Lucid is strange to me. So I can sit in the back of my car, but only in certain places? What happens when I want to go somewhere just outside the geofence?

Anyway, thanks for the clarification.

 

[TahoeMichael]

Admittedly I didn’t read every page of this thread but has it been mentioned that there was no mention on the features slide of Halo/Sentry on the Air (yes on Gravity further down the road).

That’s kind of a bummer as I would’ve expected this by now with all the cameras in the car.

Keep in mind that this was an investor event, not a customer event. They didn't have a detailed feature roadmap presentation, just a high level overview, and doubtless the discussed features weren't comprehensive of everything.

 

[gaskiller]

I make a distinction between what is available to the public and what is only used at the commercial level. FSD was very functional for me to play with - but it still wasn't something I relied on. Waymo/Nuro are commercial services that have really ugly things on their roofs that cost a ton of money and are capable of being remote-controlled. Apples and Oranges, I think. The technology will trickle down, however, so the consumer will eventually be able to do L3 or L4 without the roof appliance and paying someone to monitor and remote control.

I love technology!!!

So big distinction between commercial robotaxis and consumer autonomy, makes sense. Tesla seems to merge both, an outlier as with using just cameras.

 

[dbsb3233]

So big distinction between commercial robotaxis and consumer autonomy, makes sense. Tesla seems to merge both, an outlier as with using just cameras.

Yeah, for years Tesla (or at least their fanatics) pushed the narrative that everyone should buy Teslas and rent them out as robotaxis. Which to me was always pretty crazy. No way in hell I'm renting my expensive new EV out for drunks to throw up in when the bars close, and for randos to trash. I always thought that was little more than a sales gimmick. And sadly, lots of Tesla owners seems to buy the hype by plunking over $10k for FSD "so the car will pay for itself!". Suckers.

Robotaxis make little sense as personal vehicles to me. They make sense as corporate fleets. Robotaxi companies that will buy thousands of them.

 

[Saksak]

[…]

To me, Level 3 is the part that never made any sense. And I’m guessing that’s why so many are stuck calling things Level 2++++ and such.

If I don’t need to pay attention at all, there’s no chance I’m going to be able to react in time in an emergency. You’re basically telling people to play video games or read a book, but still be ready to react to an oncoming semi in milliseconds?

Agree, there is no way we can go from reading a book to driving within milliseconds (or even seconds.) Anything requiring that quick a reaction time would be eyes-on L2, IMHO.

L3 is indeed complicated, littered with questions about how quickly we are expected to regain situational awareness after the system tells us to take over. I believe L3 on highways is within striking distance, though, with “hey human, start paying attention and be prepared to take control because I’m about to leave this well-controlled highway zone.”

Level 4 makes perfect sense for Robotaxis. But why Lucid is setting it as a goal for consumers buying a Lucid is strange to me. So I can sit in the back of my car, but only in certain places? What happens when I want to go somewhere just outside the geofence?
[…]

Look at the size of the Uber/Lift/Taxi industry. Waymo has shown L4 is a reality today and is slowly gaining market share. Someone has to supply those vehicles as the entire industry shifts to robo-taxis. From an investor viewpoint, Lucid being one of the key suppliers of L4 vehicles represents a huge growth opportunity. Very attractive for investors if Lucid can pull it off.

For consumers, it’s an indirect benefit. If Lucid can capture a big piece of the L4 market, we’ll stop wondering if Lucid will go out of business. Also, I may not want L4, but if Lucid can deliver L4, some of that technology will apply to consumer-level L3 (which I want for highway driving!)