What's new
By:

Lucid Cosmos Specifications

In a year I need to lease another vehicle. I appreciate the discussion here as on my own I have researched many of the vehicles mentioned just in case Lucid in a year is having more issues than now in the marketplace. For sure keeping an eye out for Cosmos but BMW iX3 is looking decent with features and price plus if 435 miles of range (according to car and driver and Build a BMW) is correct, it is something to look at. Volvo EX60 is also in the same conversation. I do like my 24 Lucid Air Pure but wouldn't mind a higher clearance vehicle and one that had more 100% range new.
 
drb3333 said:
I believe you are missing the point.

Driving 80mph is legal in only 5 states, yet you would ask a federal agency to offer range estimates for drivers who elect to break the law? It is immaterial that people do it, just that the Agency cannot publish data condoning it.

How does that make any sense at all?
Click to expand...
Apparently I wasn’t as clear as I thought
I was replying to the comment that no one drives 80, or at least the poster hangs with very strictly law abiding citizens.
I’m afraid I may know folks who might adapt to traffic conditions.
And nothing in my comment is related to any government entities.
 
chork said:
In a year I need to lease another vehicle. I appreciate the discussion here as on my own I have researched many of the vehicles mentioned just in case Lucid in a year is having more issues than now in the marketplace. For sure keeping an eye out for Cosmos but BMW iX3 is looking decent with features and price plus if 435 miles of range (according to car and driver and Build a BMW) is correct, it is something to look at. Volvo EX60 is also in the same conversation. I do like my 24 Lucid Air Pure but wouldn't mind a higher clearance vehicle and one that had more 100% range new.
Click to expand...
One thing to note
The reason some cars are lower than others is because they want to minimize the airflow under the car where it causes turbulence
 
gaskiller said:
R

R2 is a minime of R1S. Lazy designing and not great at EV tech vs competition. Software can be improved, hardware can’t. And they still use 400V architecture. Poor aerodynamics.
Click to expand...
Much like an E-Class is a mini-me of an S-Class or an X3 is a mini-me of an X5. In some vehicle segments buyers are absolutely ok with that.
 
martinjlm said:
Much like an E-Class is a mini-me of an S-Class or an X3 is a mini-me of an X5. In some vehicle segments buyers are absolutely ok with that.
Click to expand...
Jeep buyers come to mind. And Rivian seems to be leaning heavily into being a lifestyle brand like Jeep. And similar to Jeep buyers quite a few will never take the vehicle off road. But they like the vibe.
 
Northpointe said:
Jeep buyers come to mind. And Rivian seems to be leaning heavily into being a lifestyle brand like Jeep. And similar to Jeep buyers quite a few will never take the vehicle off road. But they like the vibe.
Click to expand...
And this is what I like about the Cosmos / Earth strategy. Really gonna take it off-road? We got ya covered. Just interested in the look and high seating position? We got ya covered.
 
DeaneG said:
And they'll sell a ton of them. Three friends have ordered an R2 already, out of the four I knew who were looking for a new vehicle.
It's a capable-looking SUV at a reasonable price from a company with a great brand identity, and not a Tesla.
Click to expand...
Agree. They have a cult like following that doesn’t care that RJ lied about its efficiency.

I am seeing increasing numbers of videos and posts that the R2 software is not in good shape. Many glitches, light-show arrays of dashboard warnings , air bag faults etc. one video - the owner had his r2 back in the shop for the 3rd time in 3 weeks and they aren’t sure what the issue is yet.

It’s possible Rivian may have pushed R2 out early - Sounds familiar!
 
RajD said:
Agree. They have a cult like following that doesn’t care that RJ lied about its efficiency.

I am seeing increasing numbers of videos and posts that the R2 software is not in good shape. Many glitches, light-show arrays of dashboard warnings , air bag faults etc. one video - the owner had his r2 back in the shop for the 3rd time in 3 weeks and they aren’t sure what the issue is yet.

It’s possible Rivian may have pushed R2 out early - Sounds familiar!
Click to expand...
Again maybe another benefit to Lucid waiting and watching and observing things to avoid...
 
RajD said:
Agree. They have a cult like following that doesn’t care that RJ lied about its efficiency.

I am seeing increasing numbers of videos and posts that the R2 software is not in good shape. Many glitches, light-show arrays of dashboard warnings , air bag faults etc. one video - the owner had his r2 back in the shop for the 3rd time in 3 weeks and they aren’t sure what the issue is yet.

It’s possible Rivian may have pushed R2 out early - Sounds familiar!
Click to expand...
RJ didn't lie about efficiency. They followed the EPA testing requirements.
This discrepancy is an underlying issue of the testing methodology itself. If you want efficiency numbers more accurate to real-world driving, you should push and vote for policy that will reflect that, and that's a whole different conversation altogether that's outside the scope of this thread.
 
martinjlm said:
And this is what I like about the Cosmos / Earth strategy. Really gonna take it off-road? We got ya covered. Just interested in the look and high seating position? We got ya covered.
Click to expand...
Adding to this, the goal of the midsize program is to standardize and share parts as much as possible, so Lucid should be ready for whichever end customer preferences will sway
 
DeaneG said:
And they'll sell a ton of them. Three friends have ordered an R2 already, out of the four I knew who were looking for a new vehicle.
It's a capable-looking SUV at a reasonable price from a company with a great brand identity, and not a Tesla.
Click to expand...
Still not cutting edge. The novelty will wear off. Making a mini me of a R1S is cheaper and easier but not good for sakes long term.
 
gaskiller said:
Still not cutting edge. The novelty will wear off. Making a mini me of a R1S is cheaper and easier but not good for sakes long term.
Click to expand...
Different buyers have different priorities. Some buyers like the most advanced tech. Some buyers like history and pedigree. Some like lifestyle and the image they convey. Some like driving dynamics.

Doesn't have to be a black-and-white / all-or-nothing approach
 
Need4Sleep said:
RJ didn't lie about efficiency. They followed the EPA testing requirements.
This discrepancy is an underlying issue of the testing methodology itself. If you want efficiency numbers more accurate to real-world driving, you should push and vote for policy that will reflect that, and that's a whole different conversation altogether that's outside the scope of this thread.
Click to expand...
Disagree. If RJ KNEW it was a totally different test Rivian used vs Tesla, why would he and many others tout how they matched or exceeded MY efficiency? It’s disingenuous at best when you know it’s apples and oranges. Regardless of epa rules you are exploiting your own customers who don’t know any better. That’s a lie IMO.
 
RajD said:
Disagree. If RJ KNEW it was a totally different test Rivian used vs Tesla, why would he and many others tout how they matched or exceeded MY efficiency? It’s disingenuous at best when you know it’s apples and oranges. Regardless of epa rules you are exploiting your own customers who don’t know any better. That’s a lie IMO.
Click to expand...
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
 
RajD said:
Agree. They have a cult like following that doesn’t care that RJ lied about its efficiency.

I am seeing increasing numbers of videos and posts that the R2 software is not in good shape. Many glitches, light-show arrays of dashboard warnings , air bag faults etc. one video - the owner had his r2 back in the shop for the 3rd time in 3 weeks and they aren’t sure what the issue is yet.

It’s possible Rivian may have pushed R2 out early - Sounds familiar!
Click to expand...
Yeah, they did a “ Gravity” on the R2. Lots of issues being mentioned in Reddit.
 
I feel a good strategy would be one battery pack design with Base Option = LFP or NaI cells and Upgrade Option = NMC. Common packaging saves a ton of cost in engineering, tooling, inventory control and maximizes purchasing scale. The packaging represents about 25% of the pack cost.
 
Need4Sleep said:
Different buyers have different priorities. Some buyers like the most advanced tech. Some buyers like history and pedigree. Some like lifestyle and the image they convey. Some like driving dynamics.

Doesn't have to be a black-and-white / all-or-nothing approach
Click to expand...
Exactly
Otherwise why would a typical “man” car be a pu or dog forbid a jeep. I can pretty much tell you who has a need to feel manly based on how many scratches and dings don’t exist on the vehicle.
I chastised a guy at the race track who proudly talked about his Ferrari that he drove 5 miles back and forth to work but never took it out and you know actually drive it. I said I thought Enzo would not be pleased with such treatment of one of his babies.
And while I’d love a sapphire I know that I’d get in far too much trouble so, just the GT to keep me slow.
 
Aka-none said:
Exactly
Otherwise why would a typical “man” car be a pu or dog forbid a jeep. I can pretty much tell you who has a need to feel manly based on how many scratches and dings don’t exist on the vehicle.
I chastised a guy at the race track who proudly talked about his Ferrari that he drove 5 miles back and forth to work but never took it out and you know actually drive it. I said I thought Enzo would not be pleased with such treatment of one of his babies.
And while I’d love a sapphire I know that I’d get in far too much trouble so, just the GT to keep me slow.
Click to expand...
A Ferrari babied for only 5 miles? Madness!

If Lucid were to make a Cosmos Sapphire with tri-motors, you can bet I'd be mapping out a bucket list of mountain passes and twisty roads
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top