What's new
By:

$100K Lucid Air – 3 Years Later, Still Waiting on Promises

bikeriderbryan said:
- range is below what I expect. On road trips I stop ever 2 hours so range isn't that big of an issue. But it should be better IMO.
- never tried auto park, but given it's part of the car, I would expect it to work.
- the key fob/phone/card is a disaster.
- SiriusXM/Spotify/etc. is a disaster. Hopefully the person who came up with the idea of using cellular for SiriusXM isn't around anymore.

The car is fun to drive, but in no way the best car I have owned as others say. If my lease was up today, I would be hard pressed to go with another Lucid.
Click to expand...
Don’t you use CarPlay or Android? Why even use Lucid in built software?
 
I have a '23 AT that is now over three years old. I have never gotten better than 280 miles on a full charge. When I originally questioned Lucid about this, they told me it's because I live in Texas with high speed limits. They told me if I keep my highway speed to 60 mph, I could get the advertised range. Only once I tried that and the range improved but not enough to make a meaningful difference. I do have the reverse problem but have seen it on other cars as well so I believe it isn't germane to Lucid. The only other issue I share is Android Auto. It works great only some of the time. I can never be sure it will work and for how long. It can be frustrating so I just deal with it. The simple truth for me is that I really like my car. I can live with its limits. I just wish I knew them before I spend $130K.
 
esmurrell said:
I have a '23 AT that is now over three years old. I have never gotten better than 280 miles on a full charge. When I originally questioned Lucid about this, they told me it's because I live in Texas with high speed limits. They told me if I keep my highway speed to 60 mph, I could get the advertised range. Only once I tried that and the range improved but not enough to make a meaningful difference. I do have the reverse problem but have seen it on other cars as well so I believe it isn't germane to Lucid. The only other issue I share is Android Auto. It works great only some of the time. I can never be sure it will work and for how long. It can be frustrating so I just deal with it. The simple truth for me is that I really like my car. I can live with its limits. I just wish I knew them before I spend $130K.
Click to expand...
The problem with Lucid's mileage claim has been discussed many times on this forum. Short version is:
> Lucid uses a 5-cycle EPA testing and "adjustment factors" to generate their claim of a rating for the range. On my 2022 AGT, it is rated at 516 miles. The average speed for the EPA test was 48mph. Therefore, if you drove at 48mph, perhaps you would get the range Lucid claims.
> In contrast, many other EV manufacturers use the 2 -cycle EPA test. These results are much closer to real-life driving on US highways (say 70-74 mph). And some manufacturers (Gerams in particular) even further adjust their mileage rating to generate a more conservative claim. Rivian does this as well. As a result, these EVs often meet/ exceed their range claims.
> In summary, you are unlikely to get the range Lucid claims unless you drive much slower. This is a well-known fact.

It is unfortunate Lucid chose this approach.
 
gaskiller said:
Don’t you use CarPlay or Android? Why even use Lucid in built software?
Click to expand...
Because I like the look of the Lucid map integration and the Tidal app?

CarPlay is running in the background, primarily for phone and Siri requests, but I don't like the add-on look of CarPlay. Maybe because Detroit is a major city, but Lucid/Here map is just as bad as any of the other mapping apps. Heavy right-turn biases and, if you know the area, none choose the route a local resident would.
 
Streaming media quality can be much better using the car's native apps, compared to what you get listening though your phone and Android Auto or CarPlay.
 
BS8899 said:
The problem with Lucid's mileage claim has been discussed many times on this forum. Short version is:
> Lucid uses a 5-cycle EPA testing and "adjustment factors" to generate their claim of a rating for the range. On my 2022 AGT, it is rated at 516 miles. The average speed for the EPA test was 48mph. Therefore, if you drove at 48mph, perhaps you would get the range Lucid claims.
> In contrast, many other EV manufacturers use the 2 -cycle EPA test. These results are much closer to real-life driving on US highways (say 70-74 mph). And some manufacturers (Gerams in particular) even further adjust their mileage rating to generate a more conservative claim. Rivian does this as well. As a result, these EVs often meet/ exceed their range claims.
> In summary, you are unlikely to get the range Lucid claims unless you drive much slower. This is a well-known fact.

It is unfortunate Lucid chose this approach.
Click to expand...
You are absolutely correct. That's why I have just learned to live with it as I otherwise like the car.
 
esmurrell said:
You are absolutely correct. That's why I have just learned to live with it as I otherwise like the car.
Click to expand...
Lucid is an efficient car. Though in real-life, it is not as efficient as their claims. I wish Lucid were more forthcoming and adjusted their efficiency/range claims to reflect driving norms in the US market, which is the majority of their sales.

A more realistic claim would likely still put Lucid on top, though only by a single-digit advantage (say 5-6%) over the competition.
 
purumandla said:
  • Range issue: I’m consistently getting ~170–180 miles real-world on an 80% charge vs ~340 expected
  • Safety systems: Front/rear protection engages even when there’s no obstacle
Click to expand...
I agree that the front safety protection is overly conservative on highways, often braking (gently or moderately, ocassionally suddenly slowing by 5-10mph) when unnecessary, especially when a car ahead of me is exiting and I’m passing by in the right lane. Similarly, when backing up, the transition from the garage to the driveway consistently fools the system, and it’s likewise conservative when backing into a parking spot—but it’s easy enough just to keep going. (No issues with tire pressure system, it lines up with both pressure gauge and my pump)

As for range on my ‘25 AT with 19” tires, I’m very happy. I live in Maine, and in winters I consistently get 250 to 270 miles when I start at 100% and run it down to 10 or 15%—this Nov-Feb, I averaged 3.5 miles/kWh with heat running comfortably—and in summer I can count on 350 to 380 miles. (obviously, in short trips around town, efficiencies are lower, but still usually at least 2.5-3mi/kWh in winter). I’ve occasionally hit the EPA 4.45, but that’s unusual. My lifetime efficiency is within 10% of that rated value.

Probably about half my miles are highway, where I only occasionally exceed 75 mph, and generally set the cruise control at either 70 or 72 (so 68 or 70 actual). The other half are open rural roads with speed limits between 45 and 65– ideal conditions for efficiency. It does seem that recently efficiency has been higher, often hitting 4 or above on the highway. In the screenshot below, the “since last charge” was mostly highway.

IMG_0096.webp
 
Last edited:
jedwin said:
I agree that the front safety protection is overly conservative on highways, often braking (gently or moderately, ocassionally suddenly slowing by 5-10mph) when unnecessary, especially when a car ahead of me is exiting and I’m passing by in the right lane. Similarly, when backing up, the transition from the garage to the driveway consistently fools the system, and it’s likewise conservative when backing into a parking spot—but it’s easy enough just to keep going. (No issues with tire pressure system, it lines up with both pressure gauge and my pump)

As for range on my ‘25 AT with 19” tires, I’m very happy. I live in Maine, and in winters I consistently get 250 to 270 miles when I start at 100% and run it down to 10 or 15%—this Nov-Feb, I averaged 3.5 miles/kWh with heat running comfortably—and in summer I can count on 350 to 380 miles. (obviously, in short trips around town, efficiencies are lower, but still usually at least 2.5-3mi/kWh in winter). I’ve occasionally hit the EPA 4.45, but that’s unusual. My lifetime efficiency is within 10% of that rated value.

Probably about half my miles are highway, where I only occasionally exceed 75 mph, and generally set the cruise control at either 70 or 72 (so 68 or 70 actual). The other half are open rural roads with speed limits between 45 and 65– ideal conditions for efficiency. It does seem that recently efficiency has been higher, often hitting 4 or above on the highway. In the screenshot below, the “since last charge” was mostly highway.

View attachment 38552
Click to expand...
i'm getting similar numbers on efficiency...except it's km/kwh :(. Life efficiency for the vehicle (~73k kms, ~45k miles) is about 4.8km/kwh...or 3 miles/kwh. It's pretty brutal. Don't get me wrong...it's fine with similar cars, but I was expecting slightly better. Not similar to real world usage of others (or worse)
 
Truthlesshunter said:
i'm getting similar numbers on efficiency...except it's km/kwh :(. Life efficiency for the vehicle (~73k kms, ~45k miles) is about 4.8km/kwh...or 3 miles/kwh. It's pretty brutal. Don't get me wrong...it's fine with similar cars, but I was expecting slightly better. Not similar to real world usage of others (or worse)
Click to expand...
Disappointment = Expectations-not-met.

It is counterproductive for Lucids to set expectations based on metrics that don't reflect most-drivers' driving conditions.
 
BS8899 said:
It is counterproductive for Lucids to set expectations based on metrics that don't reflect most-drivers' driving conditions.
Click to expand...

I don't think you can fault Lucid for using EPA figures as their frame of reference. Besides them making that metric clear, what else could they possibly use when so much of EV efficiency is based on driving style and conditions? My 'relaxed' driving style and temperate conditions get my Pure AWD 3.75 miles/kWh, and I can meet or slightly beat the EPA figures when I approximate the conditions they test under.
 
Buffalo Bob said:
I don't think you can fault Lucid for using EPA figures as their frame of reference. Besides them making that metric clear, what else could they possibly use when so much of EV efficiency is based on driving style and conditions? My 'relaxed' driving style and temperate conditions get my Pure AWD 3.75 miles/kWh, and I can meet or slightly beat the EPA figures when I approximate the conditions they test under.
Click to expand...
Well, Lucid had a choice to use either the 5-Cycle or the 2-Cycle. Furthermore, even if they think the 5-Cycle is better, they have the discretion to apply the correction factor.

My 2022 AGT has a lifetime efficiency average of ~3.5-3.6 mi/kWh, which is quite good, but it is still far off the implied 4.5+ mi/kWh based on their claims.

You can come to any conclusion you wish.
 
BS8899 said:
Well, Lucid had a choice to use either the 5-Cycle or the 2-Cycle. Furthermore, even if they think the 5-Cycle is better, they have the discretion to apply the correction factor.

My 2022 AGT has a lifetime efficiency average of ~3.5-3.6 mi/kWh, which is quite good, but it is still far off the implied 4.5+ mi/kWh based on their claims.

You can come to any conclusion you wish.
Click to expand...

I'm in no position to weigh in on the nuances of various EPS testing protocols, nor which ones Lucid used when my 2023 Pure AWD was tested. I'm just saying that my personal experience leads me to believe that my car's efficiency was not misrepresented.
 
Buffalo Bob said:
I'm in no position to weigh in on the nuances of various EPS testing protocols, nor which ones Lucid used when my 2023 Pure AWD was tested. I'm just saying that my personal experience leads me to believe that my car's efficiency was not misrepresented.
Click to expand...
It’s just like MPG, it’s “up to” for sure.
 
gaskiller said:
Looks like you need your sensor suite recalibrated.
Click to expand...
Did you have your sensor suite recalibrated? Did it resolve the false rear protection warning when backing out of your garage?
 
BS8899 said:
Well, Lucid had a choice to use either the 5-Cycle or the 2-Cycle. Furthermore, even if they think the 5-Cycle is better, they have the discretion to apply the correction factor.
Click to expand...
The horse is dead. Please stop beating it.
 
purumandla said:
...
  • Range issue: I’m consistently getting ~170–180 miles real-world on an 80% charge vs ~340 expected
  • ...
On top of that, I paid $9K for DreamDrive Pro, expecting timely updates. It’s been almost 3 years, and I still don’t see meaningful improvements—while newer models like the Gravity seem to be getting better features.
...
Click to expand...

Range - 80% to how low?

DreamDrive Pro - I'm very pleased with the current hands-free driving mode from an OTA last year. Very usable. The regular Drive Assist has also improved over the years and it no longer tries to dart off some highway exits.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top