Emad Dlala out

[gaskiller]

With all due respect, I don’t think you’ve ever run a company.

What you are saying is simply untrue. You cannot arbitrarily “hold back on R&D/innovation for a year or two.” That is not how it works.

It will take you a year or two just to put a team back together and start producing real innovation again, if you happened to hire well.

Companies that “turn off R&D for a while” end up like GE. Went well until it didn’t.

No, I haven’t ever run a company….maybe stop not R and D completely but reduce funding?

 

[gaskiller]

Hey, if Silvio shows up somewhere and says something interesting/credible/positive/concrete about how Lucid is going to face the challenge of growing sales, launching vehicles, and meeting the needs of customers, I expect we'll all be paying rapt attention. Until then, what's there to do besides wailing and gnashing our teeth?

Mmm…I don’t think he needs to come out and say anything unless he has news to deliver. Hunker down and get the job done. Stock will climb if he executes, meaning increasing sales and reducing cash burn.

 

[hmp10]

that said, Lucid's survival is on the line. Aside from production and sourcing you cited, service is also a huge problem. All of these are ahead of a "more efficient power train".

This is not a zero sum game. The presence of someone such as Emad Dlala and his powertrain team in the organization in no way bears on what needs to be done in the production, sourcing, and service parts of the business, unless the presence of one draws critical resources away from the other. And I have seen nothing to suggest that the issues in sourcing, production, and service have anything to do with powertrain engineering starving them of personnel and other resources.

I know Lucid prides itself with its power train efficiencies. But in real life situations (e.g., OoS I-90 and Maine to Key West races), Lucid's (claimed) efficiencies didn't amount to a significant difference against MUCH lesser ranked competitors.

It was these powertrain efficiencies -- manifested as range -- that first put Lucid on the map with the automotive press and the consequent attention from the EV-buying population. If Lucid had not landed with a significant range advantage over an established player such as Tesla, or the established brands breaking into EVs such as MB, BMW, and Porsche it would likely not be a name most of us on this forum today would even remember ever hearing about for a few days or weeks back in 2016 when they promised the then-unheard-of figure of 400 miles of range. It is probably one of the primary reasons that today, despite its business woes, the Air still outsells the Model S, the EQS, the Taycan, and the i7.

 

[BS8899]

This is not a zero sum game. The presence of someone such as Emad Dlala and his powertrain team in the organization in no way bears on what needs to be done in the production, sourcing, and service parts of the business, unless the presence of one draws critical resources away from the other. And I have seen nothing to suggest that the issues in sourcing, production, and service have anything to do with powertrain engineering starving them of personnel and other resources.




It was these powertrain efficiencies -- manifested as range -- that first put Lucid on the map with the automotive press and the consequent attention from the EV-buying population. If Lucid had not landed with a significant range advantage over an established player such as Tesla, or the established brands breaking into EVs such as MB, BMW, and Porsche it would likely not be a name most of us on this forum today would even remember ever hearing about for a few days or weeks back in 2016 when they promised the then-unheard-of figure of 400 miles of range. It is probably one of the primary reasons that today, despite its business woes, the Air still outsells the Model S, the EQS, the Taycan, and the i7.

I get all the above what you are saying. As I noted before, the reason why I bought my 2022 AGT was its claimed range and efficiency. I DO believe that Lucid's power train is well engineered and most efficient. But my personal experience shows that Lucid's claimed range and efficiency is over-stated. As I referenced above, in real-life situation (e.g., the OoS races and my own roadtrips) Lucid's efficiencies are better than competition, but only just!

Should Lucid continue to improve and toute its efficiency and range? Of course! However, Lucid must fix its other deficits vs the competition vis-a-vis, SW, Service, bug-free product launches, breadth of product offerings (e.g., mid-size) etc.. I don't think you disagree.

Again, I don't know why Emad left Lucid. And losing Emad is a big loss to Lucid. For better and for worse, Lucid has to move on under the new CEO and right the ship!

 

[billy]

the new ceo has only two things to do right now
build the cosmo...
build a service network.


he's thinking about it right now
must be fun

 

[tmichael]

the new ceo has only two things to do right now
build the cosmo...
build a service network.


he's thinking about it right now
must be fun

It's a little more complicated than that...

 

[RajD]

I have nothing against geeky power train. I love that stuff. For your reference, I bought my 2022 Lucid AGT because of efficiency and power train.

that said, Lucid's survival is on the line. Aside from production and sourcing you cited, service is also a huge problem. All of these are ahead of a "more efficient power train".

I know Lucid prides itself with its power train efficiencies. But in real life situations (e.g., OoS I-90 and Maine to Key West races), Lucid's (claimed) efficiencies didn't amount to a significant difference against MUCH lesser ranked competitors.

If you’re referring to the Out of Spec Eastern Edge ‘race’, that was in no way a ‘real life situation’ in any way shape or form. No one road trips like that and the OoS team repeatedly emphasized that.

Are you saying the Model X was much lesser ranked? I didn’t think it was at all going into the competition. Yes the Model C team was not that far behind the two Gravities, but how many more times did it stop to charge compared to the Lucid’s? It was a ridiculous circus for that team. I think Lucid was a supremely comfortable drive for a road trip that length. MX was not.

Gravity is king of road trip IMO having owned Model X and Escalade.

 

[RajD]

I get all the above what you are saying. As I noted before, the reason why I bought my 2022 AGT was its claimed range and efficiency. I DO believe that Lucid's power train is well engineered and most efficient. But my personal experience shows that Lucid's claimed range and efficiency is over-stated. As I referenced above, in real-life situation (e.g., the OoS races and my own roadtrips) Lucid's efficiencies are better than competition, but only just!

Should Lucid continue to improve and toute its efficiency and range? Of course! However, Lucid must fix its other deficits vs the competition vis-a-vis, SW, Service, bug-free product launches, breadth of product offerings (e.g., mid-size) etc.. I don't think you disagree.

Again, I don't know why Emad left Lucid. And losing Emad is a big loss to Lucid. For better and for worse, Lucid has to move on under the new CEO and right the ship!

You need to rewatch that OoS race video:

‘During Out of Spec's 2,100-mile Eastern Edge extreme EV race, the Tesla Model X team charged 40 timescompared to just 11 times for the winning Lucid Gravity GT’

Yeah, sign me up for a Model X road trip - it’s so efficient

The truth is, the Model x WAS technically more efficient than Gravity on that trip in terms of mi/KWh, it just sucked at charging speed (huge road trip red flag) and was a very unpleasant ride for those in back. That team had maybe the least efficient road trip of any car given how many charging stops they needed to make. It was absurd.

 

[BS8899]

You need to rewatch that OoS race video:

‘During Out of Spec's 2,100-mile Eastern Edge extreme EV race, the Tesla Model X team charged 40 timescompared to just 11 times for the winning Lucid Gravity GT’

Yeah, sign me up for a Model X road trip - it’s so efficient

The truth is, the Model x WAS technically more efficient than Gravity on that trip in terms of mi/KWh, it just sucked at charging speed (huge road trip red flag) and was a very unpleasant ride for those in back. That team had maybe the least efficient road trip of any car given how many charging stops they needed to make. It was absurd.

I agree the Gravity (2 of them) are the most efficient EVs on that (Maine to Key West) race. The Gravity had the best spec in terms of mi/kWh and charging speed. Yet, the margin of victory was only about 6% (time to finish) amongst the top 6 finishers (including the Rivian). On the I-90 race, the Taycan was way ahead of the Air! Yes, the Air screwed up and ran out of charge. But even if they hadn't screwed up, the Air would have finished 3rd or 4th!

Hence, my point that while I don't debate Lucid's efficiency and charging speed leadership, the actual realized advantage over the competition is much smaller than you think!

 

[RajD]

I agree the Gravity (2 of them) are the most efficient EVs on that (Maine to Key West) race. The Gravity had the best spec in terms of mi/kWh and charging speed. Yet, the margin of victory was only about 6% (time to finish) amongst the top 6 finishers (including the Rivian). On the I-90 race, the Taycan was way ahead of the Air! Yes, the Air screwed up and ran out of charge. But even if they hadn't screwed up, the Air would have finished 3rd or 4th!

Hence, my point that while I don't debate Lucid's efficiency and charging speed leadership, the actual realized advantage over the competition is much smaller than you think!

I still think you’re missing my point. Races aren’t real life, and what the Model X team had to do to finish competitively vs Gravity and Escalade was almost inhuman. Thats not what a real family would do or a real road trip.

Over the 4 years that we owned a Model X we took it on several road trips. We had to stop every 180-220 miles to charge and each charge was 30-45min. We would just sit in the car for 15-20min every session because we’d already used the facilities , got our food and we just needed to finish charging to get to our next supercharger or destination. That is real life for us and how we travel. But on a typical SF to San Diego trip, I estimate it cost us 1-1.5hrs of extra travel time each way because the charging was so slow. With two kids, this is real time lost that I wish we didn’t waste.

I agree with you that Lucid needs to fix all the other areas you mentioned earlier. But they’ve definitely nailed the combination of charge speed, efficiency, range and packaging for 7 passengers. For those metrics, there isn’t a better option right now and I don’t think it’s close.

 

[BS8899]

I still think you’re missing my point. Races aren’t real life, and what the Model X team had to do to finish competitively vs Gravity and Escalade was almost inhuman. Thats not what a real family would do or a real road trip.

Over the 4 years that we owned a Model X we took it on several road trips. We had to stop every 180-220 miles to charge and each charge was 30-45min. We would just sit in the car for 15-20min every session because we’d already used the facilities , got our food and we just needed to finish charging to get to our next supercharger or destination. That is real life for us and how we travel. But on a typical SF to San Diego trip, I estimate it cost us 1-1.5hrs of extra travel time each way because the charging was so slow. With two kids, this is real time lost that I wish we didn’t waste.

I agree with you that Lucid needs to fix all the other areas you mentioned earlier. But they’ve definitely nailed the combination of efficiency, range and packaging for 7 passengers. There isn’t a better option right now for that.

No disagreement on Lucid's range and efficiency being ahead of competition. My only caveat is that Lucid's "specs" are based on EPA 5-cycle testing and realizable range and efficiencies on US Interstate diving (70-75mph) are typically 15-20% lower on both the Gravity and Air. Gravity's fast charging is a plus.

Specs aside, when it comes to real life, most people make stops on long road trips every 2-3 hours for stretching and bio breaks. Hence, fast charging might be a more important attribute than just efficiency. Yes, efficiency gives you lower cost, I give you that.

My own experience in 4 different vehicles (Lexus RX450 hybrid, Honda Clarity Plug-in hybrid, 2020 AGT, Rivian R1S Quad, large pack in "Conserve" mode) on my 780-mile trips (more than 20 trips) between CA and AZ is as follows: The Lexus took the least travel time. My record was 10.5hrs, typical is more like 11.5hr. The Rivian took the most time, approx.14.5 hours. The AGT was about13.5 hours. The number of stops and the duration of the stops are dictated by bio-breaks and charging time.

Yes, efficiency and range are good selling points; as long as you also deliver reliability, ease-of-se, and service!

 

[illopp00]

You need to rewatch that OoS race video:

‘During Out of Spec's 2,100-mile Eastern Edge extreme EV race, the Tesla Model X team charged 40 timescompared to just 11 times for the winning Lucid Gravity GT’

Yeah, sign me up for a Model X road trip - it’s so efficient

The truth is, the Model x WAS technically more efficient than Gravity on that trip in terms of mi/KWh, it just sucked at charging speed (huge road trip red flag) and was a very unpleasant ride for those in back. That team had maybe the least efficient road trip of any car given how many charging stops they needed to make. It was absurd.

They tend to never add up charging costs and inefficiencies of the charging into the results....just looking at the trip computer Kwhr.

 

[borski]

No disagreement on Lucid's range and efficiency being ahead of competition. My only caveat is that Lucid's "specs" are based on EPA 5-cycle testing and realizable range and efficiencies on US Interstate diving (70-75mph) are typically 15-20% lower on both the Gravity and Air. Gravity's fast charging is a plus.

Specs aside, when it comes to real life, most people make stops on long road trips every 2-3 hours for stretching and bio breaks. Hence, fast charging might be a more important attribute than just efficiency. Yes, efficiency gives you lower cost, I give you that.

My own experience in 4 different vehicles (Lexus RX450 hybrid, Honda Clarity Plug-in hybrid, 2020 AGT, Rivian R1S Quad, large pack in "Conserve" mode) on my 780-mile trips (more than 20 trips) between CA and AZ is as follows: The Lexus took the least travel time. My record was 10.5hrs, typical is more like 11.5hr. The Rivian took the most time, approx.14.5 hours. The AGT was about13.5 hours. The number of stops and the duration of the stops are dictated by bio-breaks and charging time.

Yes, efficiency and range are good selling points; as long as you also deliver reliability, ease-of-se, and service!

There are other threads to discuss efficiency in great detail, as I know you know. Please keep this thread on topic (goes for everyone, not picking on any specific individual).

 

[hmp10]

Since 3.6.0 has arrived, both our Gravities now seem to be functioning largely as intended. The only problem that has recurred since the update is the errant LED accent strip, and Dlala had told me that might not be a software problem.

This only heightens my perplexity at his sudden departure. We lived through 11 months of software hell with our older Gravity, and it wasn't until Emad Dlala's role was expanded to put him in charge of software that we saw any real progress on that front.

So the man largely behind one of the most powerful and efficient powertrains on the market, but also the fastest-charging EV on the planet, who then went on to sort out a software mess that no one else had managed to do is out the door with no explanation from Lucid or anyone else.

Really, now. WHAT is going on at Lucid?

 

[9point81]

No disagreement on Lucid's range and efficiency being ahead of competition. My only caveat is that Lucid's "specs" are based on EPA 5-cycle testing and realizable range and efficiencies on US Interstate diving (70-75mph) are typically 15-20% lower on both the Gravity and Air. Gravity's fast charging is a plus.

Specs aside, when it comes to real life, most people make stops on long road trips every 2-3 hours for stretching and bio breaks. Hence, fast charging might be a more important attribute than just efficiency. Yes, efficiency gives you lower cost, I give you that.

My own experience in 4 different vehicles (Lexus RX450 hybrid, Honda Clarity Plug-in hybrid, 2020 AGT, Rivian R1S Quad, large pack in "Conserve" mode) on my 780-mile trips (more than 20 trips) between CA and AZ is as follows: The Lexus took the least travel time. My record was 10.5hrs, typical is more like 11.5hr. The Rivian took the most time, approx.14.5 hours. The AGT was about13.5 hours. The number of stops and the duration of the stops are dictated by bio-breaks and charging time.

Yes, efficiency and range are good selling points; as long as you also deliver reliability, ease-of-se, and service!

Those Gravities in the OoS Also both experienced issues, one with key fob and the other with charging, that wounded up costing them 30-60 mins on their finish times and they still came in ahead of all the other vehicles.

Real world, I’ve got some of the most road trip miles probably, with over 20k miles on my Gravity, and we recently took a common road trip to Orlando in my wife’s EV9 and compared that to how much better the range and charging speed in the Gravity was, to the point where we estimated it could have done the trip about 45 mins quicker. EV9 is not a Model X but it does have a much better charging curve.

 

[BS8899]

Those Gravities in the OoS Also both experienced issues, one with key fob and the other with charging, that wounded up costing them 30-60 mins on their finish times and they still came in ahead of all the other vehicles.

Real world, I’ve got some of the most road trip miles probably, with over 20k miles on my Gravity, and we recently took a common road trip to Orlando in my wife’s EV9 and compared that to how much better the range and charging speed in the Gravity was, to the point where we estimated it could have done the trip about 45 mins quicker. EV9 is not a Model X but it does have a much better charging curve.

Thanks for sharing your data. What was the elapsed time and miles travelled for your EV9 trip to Orlando?

 

[Lycra]

Real world, I’ve got some of the most road trip miles probably, with over 20k miles on my Gravity

https://lucidtracker.app/leaderboards

 

[9point81]

https://lucidtracker.app/leaderboards
View attachment 39395

I am Gravitron sir.

 

[9point81]

Thanks for sharing your data. What was the elapsed time and miles travelled for your EV9 trip to Orlando?

Approximately 700 miles each way. About 11.5 hours in the EV9. We get closer to 10.5 hrs in the Gravity. Take into account we are NOT rushing and trying to stop for short efficient charging stops and breaks and us real world folks need bathroom breaks more often than the vehicles need to stop

 

[BS8899]

Approximately 700 miles each way. About 11.5 hours in the EV9. We get closer to 10.5 hrs in the Gravity. Take into account we are NOT rushing and trying to stop for short efficient charging stops and breaks and us real world folks need bathroom breaks more often than the vehicles need to stop

Thanks....

To your points, on my own road trips (780 mi from Marin County CA to Phoenix AZ), my AGT took ~13.5hr while my R1S took~14.5hr. I have a habit of charging to 80% on my stops, which is probably not the best practice in terms of time. I think I can probably shave 30-45min off if I charge more frequently, synchronized to bio-breaks, and only charge to 60-65%.