Lucid CEO Says Gravity Hands-Free Driving Is ‘Few Weeks Away’ After Delay

[HC_79]

Hmm. You make more excuses for Lucid and the timelines. This certainly matters for customers who purchased these cars expecting it or new customers coming from other brands that already have this. Rivian is a small company too and they seem to be doing just fine with their promised features.

It is a competitive market, getting even more competitive with established car brands who have full featured software. Small is not a good excuse, at least for me and other people I know.

You nailed it. This isn’t about being impatient or wanting rushed software, it’s about accountability.

What @gaskiller seems to be missing is that customers didn’t just hope hands-free and other features would come… they were told they would. Those expectations were set by Lucid, not the community, and for early adopters, that matters even more.

When you take delivery at launch, you’re accepting the risk and paying a premium to get in early, that’s part of the deal. But the other side of that deal is that the company delivers on what it marketed and communicated. Otherwise, what exactly are people paying that premium for?

For those of us who leased, a lease isn’t open-ended, it’s a ticking clock. Those early adopters are already a significant way into that timeline, and features that were part of the value proposition still aren’t there. So saying “they should take all the time they need” completely ignores the reality that customers are actively paying for something they can’t fully use.

This isn’t about perfection vs. rushing, it’s about repeatedly setting expectations and missing them, while people defend it like there’s no real impact. There is, and it’s on the customer. Lucid did this with the Air and they repeatedly said that this wasn't going to happen with the Gravity and yet, look where we are.

 

[HC_79]

Absolutely buy for what it can do now, not what is promised.

That quote only works if the company didn’t actively market and price in future features or present things as actually available when they weren't. You can’t sell a product based on what’s “coming soon,” bake that into the value proposition, and then fall back to “buy it for what it does today” when those things don’t show up.

That’s not a buying philosophy, that’s just a convenient way to excuse missed commitments.

 

[borski]

That quote only works if the company didn’t actively market and price in future features or present things as actually available when they weren't. You can’t sell a product based on what’s “coming soon,” bake that into the value proposition, and then fall back to “buy it for what it does today” when those things don’t show up.

That’s not a buying philosophy, that’s just a convenient way to excuse missed commitments.

I agree with you; I tried to be clear about that. My post was not about whether it’s right or wrong, but to clarify that Rivian has similar issues and is not immune to this problem.

 

[BS8899]

You nailed it. This isn’t about being impatient or wanting rushed software, it’s about accountability.

What @gaskiller seems to be missing is that customers didn’t just hope hands-free and other features would come… they were told they would. Those expectations were set by Lucid, not the community, and for early adopters, that matters even more.

When you take delivery at launch, you’re accepting the risk and paying a premium to get in early, that’s part of the deal. But the other side of that deal is that the company delivers on what it marketed and communicated. Otherwise, what exactly are people paying that premium for?

For those of us who leased, a lease isn’t open-ended, it’s a ticking clock. Those early adopters are already a significant way into that timeline, and features that were part of the value proposition still aren’t there. So saying “they should take all the time they need” completely ignores the reality that customers are actively paying for something they can’t fully use.

This isn’t about perfection vs. rushing, it’s about repeatedly setting expectations and missing them, while people defend it like there’s no real impact. There is, and it’s on the customer. Lucid did this with the Air and they repeatedly said that this wasn't going to happen with the Gravity and yet, look where we are.

Well said!

The fact that Lucid has 7k employees and Rivian has 2X as many is not a legitimate excuse. That's Lucid's problem vis-a-vis, promised and charged for features they cannot deliver in the "lifetime" (read that as leased or owned) and repeating the same behavior from the Air to the Gravity.

I own both a Lucid (AGT) and a Rivian (R1S). Say whatever you will, the Rivian delivered and the Lucid was short!

 

[Ron_Burgundy]

You nailed it. This isn’t about being impatient or wanting rushed software, it’s about accountability.

What @gaskiller seems to be missing is that customers didn’t just hope hands-free and other features would come… they were told they would. Those expectations were set by Lucid, not the community, and for early adopters, that matters even more.

When you take delivery at launch, you’re accepting the risk and paying a premium to get in early, that’s part of the deal. But the other side of that deal is that the company delivers on what it marketed and communicated. Otherwise, what exactly are people paying that premium for?

For those of us who leased, a lease isn’t open-ended, it’s a ticking clock. Those early adopters are already a significant way into that timeline, and features that were part of the value proposition still aren’t there. So saying “they should take all the time they need” completely ignores the reality that customers are actively paying for something they can’t fully use.

This isn’t about perfection vs. rushing, it’s about repeatedly setting expectations and missing them, while people defend it like there’s no real impact. There is, and it’s on the customer. Lucid did this with the Air and they repeatedly said that this wasn't going to happen with the Gravity and yet, look where we are.

While I don’t disagree, the unfortunate/frustrating truth is this is reality. None of us should expect it to change given the track record. So the “recourse” is not to lease again when it comes up or sell the lease at a discount now if one is that dissatisfied or sell the car, right?

I don’t mean to be an apologist at all and I feel (just me for my lease), my Gravity is still far better than our X or R1S - so I would t change my decision now and, while frustrated, would rather an OTA with features be smooth like CarPlay vs rushed. Lucid just needs to stop giving any sort of timetable.

 

[borski]

Say whatever you will, the Rivian delivered

Did it? How’s your V2V and V2H?

 

[Ron_Burgundy]

Well said!

The fact that Lucid has 7k employees and Rivian has 2X as many is not a legitimate excuse. That's Lucid's problem vis-a-vis, promised and charged for features they cannot deliver in the "lifetime" (read that as leased or owned) and repeating the same behavior from the Air to the Gravity.

I own both a Lucid (AGT) and a Rivian (R1S). Say whatever you will, the Rivian delivered and the Lucid was short!

Rivian absolutely didn’t deliver during the first 6-12 months of the R1S. I have a G1 quad R1S and there were bugs (super aggressive air suspension adjustments, etc), failed promises (ADAS), etc. Not defending Lucid, but Rivian is not the example of promises kept and smooth deliveries.

I hear you @HC_79, I just think there’s really nothing that can be done or will change.

It’s maddening and not acceptable. Unfortunately for Lucid, reality will hit only when/if these issues persist with their midsize.

 

[prgarg]

That’s not quite fair; it is far, far, from a half-assed car. Yes, there are some features that need improvement and some that should be out that aren’t; I do not agree with @gaskiller’s take that any amount of time is fine.

That said, it is not a half-assed car. It is, by most metrics, still the best car in its class. It just also needs continuously improving software.

Technically you are correct. The problem is that when the "need improvement" features are related to being able to open the doors or use the cameras, it does feel like a half baked vehicle.

 

[BS8899]

Did it? How’s your V2V and V2H?

That wasn't I feature I was looking for. As such, it wasn't my expectation. Disappointment = Expectations-not-met!

I am not saying the Rivian is flawless. In 2023, after I owned my Lucid for 9 months, I had to make a decision whether I exercise my R1S reservation or wait for the Gravity. Based on my experience with my AGT, I exercised my Rivian option. And I am very satisfied with the outcome.

I am not a strong believer in vehicle-based V2V V2H. It might be useful if I live in a cabin in the wilderness and experience regular outages. Otherwise, it is an expensive solution to a "perceived problem" whilst, adding a battery to your house is a much simpler and less costly solution. I have solar on both of my houses. I have battery storage/backup on one of the two houses. I installed the entire solar system on my AZ house 18 years ago....installed every signle solar panel, wiring, roofing, etc.. I don't have battery back up on my AZ house (not common at that time Y2008). I could add that easily if I chose to.

 

[borski]

Technically you are correct. The problem is that when the "need improvement" features are related to being able to open the doors or use the cameras, it does feel like a half baked vehicle.

I hear you. I don’t have those same problems (even with my wife’s keyfob having an issue, it was fixed by removing and reinserting the battery and has been fine for a week now, and mine never had issues) but I can certainly understand why it can feel that way if you do!

 

[borski]

That wasn't I feature I was looking for. As such, it wasn't my expectation. Disappointment = Expectations-not-met!

I am not saying the Rivian is flawless. In 2023, after I owned my Lucid for 9 months, I had to make a decision whether I exercise my R1S reservation or wait for the Gravity. Based on my experience with my AGT, I exercised my Rivian option. And I am very satisfied with the outcome.

I am not a strong believer in vehicle-based V2V V2H. It might be useful if I live in a cabin in the wilderness and experience regular outages. Otherwise, it is an expensive solution to a "perceived problem" whilst, adding a battery to your house is a much simpler and less costly solution. I have solar on both of my houses. I have battery storage/backup on one of the two houses. I installed the entire solar system on my AZ house 18 years ago....installed every signle solar panel, wiring, roofing, etc.. I don't have battery back up on my AZ house (not common at that time Y2008). I could add that easily if I chose to.

That’s fine, but irrelevant. My point was that Rivian has also made promises that it has not delivered, as I said earlier; that’s it.

I also don’t care about V2H. And yet, it is a feature Lucid (and Rivian) both promised and neither has delivered yet. They are not as far apart in that regard as others want to make it seem.

That’s my only point. Whether you are happy with the car or not is only for you to judge.

 

[socktucker]

That’s fine, but irrelevant. My point was that Rivian has also made promises that it has not delivered, as I said earlier; that’s it.

Tesla will have hands off FSD by 2018 good sir

 

[prgarg]

I hear you. I don’t have those same problems (even with my wife’s keyfob having an issue, it was fixed by removing and reinserting the battery and has been fine for a week now, and mine never had issues) but I can certainly understand why it can feel that way if you do!

Thank you for saying that

 

[HC_79]

I agree with you; I tried to be clear about that. My post was not about whether it’s right or wrong, but to clarify that Rivian has similar issues and is not immune to this problem.

I get it, that line gets used repeatedly and it irks me because it just comes across like it's defending poor behavior whether intended that way or not.

It's definitely a bigger issue with the likes of Tesla, Rivian and Lucid over traditional automakers though. They make promises as part of a way to convince people to buy into the brand and take a risk on them and then once you're in its like "well.... we'll get around to it when we can" or outright backpedal. Personally, I think they should be held accountable when they don't deliver within a certain timeframe and compensate owners with monetary refunds. It's the only way it will stop them from making pie in the sky promise if it hits their bottom line. That's never going to happen though so as others have pointed out, it's a perfect way to alienate people and risk future sales because clearly, it's not going to change.

 

[borski]

I get it, that line gets used repeatedly and it irks me because it just comes across like it's defending poor behavior whether intended that way or not.

It's definitely a bigger issue with the likes of Tesla, Rivian and Lucid over traditional automakers though. They make promises as part of a way to convince people to buy into the brand and take a risk on them and then once you're in its like "well.... we'll get around to it when we can" or outright backpedal. Personally, I think they should be held accountable when they don't deliver within a certain timeframe and compensate owners with monetary refunds. It's the only way it will stop them from making pie in the sky promise if it hits their bottom line. That's never going to happen though so as others have pointed out, it's a perfect way to alienate people and risk future sales because clearly, it's not going to change.

All valid. It bothers me less than you, obviously, but nothing you said is incorrect.

 

[borski]

Tesla will have hands off FSD by 2018 good sir

I’m still waiting for my roadster

 

[HC_79]

I’m still waiting for my roadster

so is @Tesla2Lucid

 

[BS8899]

Rivian absolutely didn’t deliver during the first 6-12 months of the R1S. I have a G1 quad R1S and there were bugs (super aggressive air suspension adjustments, etc), failed promises (ADAS), etc. Not defending Lucid, but Rivian is not the example of promises kept and smooth deliveries.

I hear you @HC_79, I just think there’s really nothing that can be done or will change.

It’s maddening and not acceptable. Unfortunately for Lucid, reality will hit only when/if these issues persist with their midsize.

@Ron_Burgundy, you and I exchanged our respective experiences on our R1Ss before. We have the same vintage and equipment on our respective R1Ss. Yet, our experiences differ. For example, I drive long distances (780-mile tr one-way trips) between Sausalito and AZ. Most of the trips, I drove on "Conserve" Mode, about 75mph, and I get 2.5 mi/kWh. You don't.

Recently (last couple of months), I made about a dozen trips from Sausalito to Sonoma in my Rivian. ADAS worked perfectly fine. I can cruise the first 20 miles from Sausalito to Novato on 101 totally hands free.

I don't do off road with my R1S. I recently towed a UHaul 4X8 trailer with a heavy load from Sausalito to AZ (780 miles). Other than the reduced efficiency and no ADAS (Rivian does not enable ADAS while towing) the R1S performed flawless.

 

[borski]

@Ron_Burgundy, you and I exchanged our respective experiences on our R1Ss before. We have the same vintage and equipment on our respective R1Ss. Yet, our experiences differ. For example, I drive long distances (780-mile tr one-way trips) between Sausalito and AZ. Most of the trips, I drove on "Conserve" Mode, about 75mph, and I get 2.5 mi/kWh. You don't.

Recently (last couple of months), I made about a dozen trips from Sausalito to Sonoma in my Rivian. ADAS worked perfectly fine. I can cruise the first 20 miles from Sausalito to Novato on 101 totally hands free.

I don't do off road with my R1S. I recently towed a UHaul 4X8 trailer with a heavy load from Sausalito to AZ (780 miles). Other than the reduced efficiency and no ADAS (Rivian does not enable ADAS while towing) the R1S performed flawless.

You and I have exchanged our respective experiences on our Airs before. Yet, our experiences differ.

Funny, that.

 

[BS8899]

You and I have exchanged our respective experiences on our Airs before. Yet, our experiences differ.

Funny, that.

Maybe, but I think there are some tractable differences in how @Ron_Burgundy drove his R1S and how I drive mine that can explain most of the differences:

> I drive at/slight above the speed limit, in "Conserve" mode (i.e., FWD, using 2 out of the 4 motors). I got ~2.5mi/kWh., about 10% better than Rivian's claimed efficiency. I don't want to speak for Ron, but I think he drove faster and in 4WD. Ron got significantly less. He can elaborate.
> as for ADAS, I quoted my recent (last 2 months) experience with my Rivian. I think Ron's data was 1+ year ago.

I believe in Physics. I don't think our cars were that different. But the drivers/time frames were different.

As for my experience with my Lucid AGT, I never got better than 3.5-3.6mi/kWh, which is significantly lower than Lucid's claims. You and I had this debate multiple times. Your recent posting says Lucid's, using the 5-cycle test, is "slightly optimistic". But if you look at most Lucid AGT owners' experience, actual realizable efficiencies reported are in the low 3 mi/kWh range, hence, the credibility gap.

In a recent positing, I posted my AGT (~3.5 mi/kWh) and R1S's (~2.5 mi/kWh) efficiencies on the same (780 miles) road trips. @Adnillien says (and I agree) a more interesting comparison would be between the R1S and the Gravity. Since I don't have a Gravity, I can't made this comparison. Gravity should be more efficient than the R1S, perhaps not by as much as you think!

Ron can speak for himself.