Another tease / Another surprise: "Screen Time. Lucid's exclusive 34" Floating Glass Cockpit Display gently curves in front of the driver of #LucidAir. It's the most advanced 5K display ever for an EV"
Does that mean “California, established 9/9 1850”?I'm going back and forth with my Sales Associate right now. She's not seeing anything that shows "Est. 9.9.1850". So I sent her the link to the Twitter post under the Lucid account and also to a YouTube video that showed up last evening also referring to "Est. 9.9.1850".
I'm not only confused about "1850". What does "Est." mean? If it means Eastern Standard Time, we're on Daylight Saving Time right now.
Bingo! I just looked it up after you posted.Does that mean “California, established 9/9 1850”?
It makes little sense to me.The more I think about this, the odder it seems.
For one thing, the admission of California to the Union doesn't hold much significance for potential customers outside the U.S. or, frankly, to many in the U.S.
For another, the constant hyping of the association of the car to a California sensibility will not necessarily be a point of appeal to many customers in the U.S. or elsewhere. (I used to live in Los Angeles and like California, but . . . . )
And, third, there's been a lot of enthusiasm, financial support, and publicity from local politicians and press in Casa Grande as the site where Lucid will be building its vehicles. I wonder what they think about the constant harkening to California roots and California design ethic in Lucid's advertising.
It's an interesting question. The stated target market for the Air is buyers who would otherwise be looking at large German luxury sedans, but these are not usually "technology-first" or even "performance-first" buyers. That is more the Tesla fanboy base, most of whom will be priced out of considering an Air, at least until Lucid gets the base car into production.. . . the need for them to make certain the world knows they too are a Silicon Valley Tech startup . . .
Even without the history of Rawlinson being at Tesla, there should be competitiveness between the two companies. I think consumers will benefit. I personally find Rawlinson to be more of the auto guy, somewhat pushed aside by Musk at Tesla, and now interested in perfecting the EV without constraints.It's an interesting question. The stated target market for the Air is buyers who would otherwise be looking at large German luxury sedans, but these are not usually "technology-first" or even "performance-first" buyers. That is more the Tesla fanboy base, most of whom will be priced out of considering an Air, at least until Lucid gets the base car into production.
Lucid really does seem to be almost obsessed with the California ethos. Naming interior color packages for California locales is already enough to drive the point home, but engraving the globe coordinates of those four California locations onto the door sills of the cars seems going a bit overboard.
Coming at a time when Musk is doing everything he can publicly to demonstrate his distaste for California, I find it interesting that Lucid is turning up the volume on its association with the state. Something tells me there's more going on behind the scenes between Musk and Rawlinson than we know. It showed up in things such as pausing the range teaser at 402 miles a few weeks back and more recently pausing the timer at Tesla's quarter-mile time in the Sonoma teaser. Despite saying that he doesn't want or intend to compete with Tesla, Rawlinson keeps rather unsubtly poking a stick in Musk's eye . . . and it probably didn't help that Lucid got Saudi money right after the Saudis turned their backs on Musk's pursuit of Saudi funds to take Tesla private.
I just get the uneasy feeling that something nasty might break into the open between those two, rendering reasoned discussion into what they're both driving on the technology front much harder.
Well said.When I bought my Tesla in 2015, I was so intent on trying an EV and so intrigued by the Tesla's performance that I paid scant attention to many aspects of the car as a utilitarian piece of transportation. There was no alternative with comparable performance on the market at the time, anyway.
The Tesla has never disappointed me as a driver's car, and I've had a string of high-end performance cars to give me context. But its shortcomings as transportation for more than two adults has grated as time has passed.
Granted, the issues with rear headroom and foot room could not be resolved without a major body redesign, and Musk had other things on his mind with product expansion. But the fact that, eight years into production, his halo $100+k sedan still doesn't have door storage pockets or a rear seat center fold-down armrest actually indicates contempt for the needs of older buyers who might have been tempted to wade into EVs earlier. Heck, even the Model X, which was claimed to be more focused on passengers, to this day still doesn't have something as basic as a center armrest in the second-row seat.
Even when I bought my car in 2015, three years after the Model S launch, it still didn't have a center console for storage between the front bucket seats. I bought an aftermarket component from EVannex so that I would have a place to put a cell phone and sunglasses.
If Musk had put a fraction of the resources into making the Model S a more commodious sedan that he put into gimmicky falcon wing doors for the X, he would have narrowed the market opening he left for the likes of Lucid.