What's new
By:

Lucid Cosmos Specifications

That camouflage works better for zebras than for Lucids.
 
Yeah I don't think Lucid is going to make miracles happen here. They can only do so much with the Cosmos design if they're trying to make it the most efficient midsize SUV.

It'll probably look a little better than the Model Y, while being more capable and offering more luxury.

While Cosmos is a more ideal vehicle for me, I'm more interested in seeing how they've designed the Earth and their rugged SUV (R2 competitor).
 
I hope they don't skimp on two things, with the Cosmos:
- Package it with a killer sound system from the start
- Design the tow hitch to carry several hundreds of pounds - 2 e-bikes / 4 mtn bikes / whatever

A car having the best packaging and most efficient drivetrain doesn't appeal to too many people. If it's also amazing to drive, extremely utilitarian for folks who camp or bike or tow, and is like a symphony on wheels, it will reach a broader audience (and maybe I'll buy one).
 
The_Don said:
...I'm more interested in seeing how they've designed the Earth and their rugged SUV (R2 competitor).
Click to expand...
Me to, though I doubt that Lucid's brand would include a vehicle with the R2's fixed ground clearance of nearly ten inches.
 
This slide seems to imply it'll be more purpose-built for off roading than the R2, so I'd hope it at least matches on ground clearance!
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20260730_142216_My Files.webp
    Screenshot_20260730_142216_My Files.webp
    42 KB · Views: 100
Need4Sleep said:
Because the EPA standard of testing is the standardized testing methodology used in the United States and required by regulation.

Same application to the WLTP and CLTC testing methodologies. None of the EVs that ever go through the EPA, CLTC, and/or WLTP testing methodology ever get close to those rated ranges. And yet those are what you see when those vehicles are published on their websites.

Again, the underlying issue is a systemic problem, not an individual
Click to expand...
I’m not concerned with the epa rating system. It’s flawed as we all know, and yes, it is a systemic issue.

I’m saying RJ and Rivian appear to have taken full advantage of the flawed system to falsely claim greater efficiency than Model Y. If they had simply published the EPA range, that would be one thing, but to then explicitly and publicly state that it was superior to Model Y, in any way, is a step further to the bottom of false advertising and deception. RJ knows those EPA flaws and exploited them to mislead buyers. The average buyer will definitely NOT know these nuances, and will buy the R2 believing they have 330 miles of range. They will get to the highway (see the newest OOS video range test, Model Y vs R2), and see it only gets 253 miles at 70mph, and that's 100 to 0%. A normal buyer will never go that low, and will charge at 15%. And they will find a range of 200-220mi at highway speeds (70-75mph or more). That's pathetic.

 
RajD said:
I’m not concerned with the epa rating system. It’s flawed as we all know, and yes, it is a systemic issue.

I’m saying RJ and Rivian appear to have taken full advantage of the flawed system to falsely claim greater efficiency than Model Y. If they had simply published the EPA range, that would be one thing, but to then explicitly and publicly state that it was superior to Model Y, in any way, is a step further to the bottom of false advertising and deception. RJ knows those EPA flaws and exploited them to mislead buyers. The average buyer will definitely NOT know these nuances, and will buy the R2 believing they have 330 miles of range. They will get to the highway (see the newest OOS video range test, Model Y vs R2), and see it only gets 253 miles at 70mph, and that's 100 to 0%. A normal buyer will never go that low, and will charge at 15%. And they will find a range of 200-220mi at highway speeds (70-75mph or more). That's pathetic.

Click to expand...
Expect even lower range in winter...
 
RajD said:
I’m not concerned with the epa rating system. It’s flawed as we all know, and yes, it is a systemic issue.

I’m saying RJ and Rivian appear to have taken full advantage of the flawed system to falsely claim greater efficiency than Model Y. If they had simply published the EPA range, that would be one thing, but to then explicitly and publicly state that it was superior to Model Y, in any way, is a step further to the bottom of false advertising and deception. RJ knows those EPA flaws and exploited them to mislead buyers. The average buyer will definitely NOT know these nuances, and will buy the R2 believing they have 330 miles of range. They will get to the highway (see the newest OOS video range test, Model Y vs R2), and see it only gets 253 miles at 70mph, and that's 100 to 0%. A normal buyer will never go that low, and will charge at 15%. And they will find a range of 200-220mi at highway speeds (70-75mph or more). That's pathetic.

Click to expand...
As a side note... I was disappointed to see OOS do their first, long-anticipated R2 70 MPH range test as a comparison video to a Model Y. It deserved it own range test video like every other model. But moreover, doing it this way made it a pissing match for all the Tesla fanatics to pile on and dump on it. 😒
 
RajD said:
I’m not concerned with the epa rating system. It’s flawed as we all know, and yes, it is a systemic issue.

I’m saying RJ and Rivian appear to have taken full advantage of the flawed system to falsely claim greater efficiency than Model Y. If they had simply published the EPA range, that would be one thing, but to then explicitly and publicly state that it was superior to Model Y, in any way, is a step further to the bottom of false advertising and deception. RJ knows those EPA flaws and exploited them to mislead buyers. The average buyer will definitely NOT know these nuances, and will buy the R2 believing they have 330 miles of range. They will get to the highway (see the newest OOS video range test, Model Y vs R2), and see it only gets 253 miles at 70mph, and that's 100 to 0%. A normal buyer will never go that low, and will charge at 15%. And they will find a range of 200-220mi at highway speeds (70-75mph or more). That's pathetic.

Click to expand...
If you're getting so worked up over a company that followed the word of the law, then get involved and engage with initiatives that want to improve the rules and regulations like public consultation or local organizations
 
dbsb3233 said:
I'm disappointed to see the low slope rear. Looks like a Model Y egg shape. :confused:
Click to expand...
I don't mind the aesthetics of how it looks. To me, the only problem is that it does seem likely to have rotten rear visibility. But when it comes to driver visibility, I probably care about the sight-lines around the A pillar improving from Air and Gravity more than I care about rear visibility. Particularly since camera views can compensate for a lot of the rear visibility concerns.
 
I've said this before, but US buyers aren't ready for broad EV adoption until 400+ mile range comes to the masses.
 
TahoeMichael said:
I don't mind the aesthetics of how it looks. To me, the only problem is that it does seem likely to have rotten rear visibility. But when it comes to driver visibility, I probably care about the sight-lines around the A pillar improving from Air and Gravity more than I care about rear visibility. Particularly since camera views can compensate for a lot of the rear visibility concerns.
Click to expand...
I agree, the sloping rear has me worried about rear visibility. I'm willing to wait until the official reveal because I've listened to Cory Steuben talk about how they've worked on improving the vision cones for the Cosmos, so perhaps they've gone created sculpting the rear glass and rear c-pillars
 
all these smaller suvs all look pretty much alike so whats going to make me buy one?
its electric
it looks handsome
it has 400 mile range
its fast..under 4 seconds
it has some knobs
its has luxe interior
it has hud
it works..all of it
 
The_Don said:
I've said this before, but US buyers aren't ready for broad EV adoption until 400+ mile range comes to the masses.
Click to expand...
That would nudge it closer but I don't think there is any singular hinge point. And I don't think there's going to be a dramatic tipping point either. More just a gradual increase.

The expansion of charging networks like Ionna and Walmart may do as much as range. Walmart could end up having big impact because that's so visible to so many Americans.

But more than that, it's just gonna take broader understanding of the pros and cons of EVs, and the virtue of home charging (for those that can get it). That's the #1 selling point for EVs IMO. That's mostly gonna happen through word of mouth. Neighbors, family, friends that mention it to people in their circle, testifying first-hand about how great it is to just plug in at home overnight in their garage. At cheap residential rates.
 
dbsb3233 said:
As a side note... I was disappointed to see OOS do their first, long-anticipated R2 70 MPH range test as a comparison video to a Model Y. It deserved it own range test video like every other model. But moreover, doing it this way made it a pissing match for all the Tesla fanatics to pile on and dump on it. 😒
Click to expand...
Fair point. But I think Kyle did that specifically because Rivian called out the model Y in their marketing. Reap what you sow.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top