Average mi/kwh

[Sam6062]

On charging speed, but not even close on range (nor on driving pleasure).

But at half the price though. That range thing still blows me away being a noob. I doubt I have noticed more than a 10% drop in mileage on a ICE Car despite all the weather conditions. 60% drop is a bit much by any standard In my head (500 to 200) as hydbob suggested given the conditions he identified. But then Inwould never drive anywhere in those conditions but 115 degrees and 40-60 MPH Wind gusts, sure that is par for course here in North Texas. I have my 50 AMP NEMA Plug though

 

[hydbob]

But at half the price though. That range thing still blows me away being a noob. I doubt I have noticed more than a 10% drop in mileage on a ICE Car despite all the weather conditions. 60% drop is a bit much by any standard In my head (500 to 200) as hydbob suggested given the conditions he identified. But then Inwould never drive anywhere in those conditions but 115 degrees and 40-60 MPH Wind gusts, sure that is par for course here in North Texas. I have my 50 AMP NEMA Plug though

According to the U.S. Department of Energy, fuel economy tests show, in short-trip city driving, a conventional gasoline car's gas mileage is about 12 percent lower at 20 degrees Fahrenheit than it would be at 77 degrees Fahrenheit. It can drop as much as 22 percent for very short trips

 

[Coltonw011]

Why in the world would anyone spend this kind of money on a car and drive it like a Buick? Just buy a Buick and drive slowly in the left lane like all the other Buick owners.

You have used this line like a parrot stuck on repeat for the entirety I’ve been on this forum. It’s almost as if a Buick stole your first born or something. I bought this car for one major reason. RANGE. If you bought this car to drive it like you stole it. Enjoy 70% of epa numbers, that’s on you. I will gladly choose to drive this car as slow as I need to to achieve close to those numbers. Otherwise, I will sound like some of the other folks on here complaining about not achieving close to epa numbers. I lost the need for speed years ago, and I’m only 30 years old. Sounds like you have an itch you need to scratch, which this car will do for you. But damn, some people bought this to go as far as they can, and as comfortably as they can. If that’s at “buick speeds” so be it.

 

[Bunnylebowski]

Because there is more to life than speed...

Haha I may have to report this post to the moderators as violating forum etiquette

 

[Bunnylebowski]

In all seriousness though, you can drive the car like a Buick or drive it like The Stig, and compared to any other EV you’ll still beat their range under the same conditions and driving style. THAT is why this car rocks.

 

[Sam6062]

In all seriousness though, you can drive the car like a Buick or drive it like The Stig, and compared to any other EV you’ll still beat their range under the same conditions and driving style. THAT is why this car rocks.

I think that is the best and most concise answer that will help NOOB’s like us decide. Thanks,

 

[GEWC]

Why in the world would anyone spend this kind of money on a car and drive it like a Buick? Just buy a Buick and drive slowly in the left lane like all the other Buick owners.

Because we like the car and want the range? I waited years for a luxury EV with long range. I don't give a damn how fast it can go. How people drive their own cars and how much they decide to pay for them is their own business.

 

[Bunnylebowski]

Because we like the car and want the range? I waited years for a luxury EV with long range. I don't give a damn how fast it can go. How people drive their own cars and how much they decide to pay for them is their own business.

What I absolutely love about this car is I can be cruising at 70 with people passing me and I don’t care, then if there’s some weaving driver or truck with poorly secured ladders on it nearby, well you just look for a gap up ahead, punch it, and you’ve passed all the trouble in 2 seconds flat and can then go back to being relaxed.

 

[MikeTz]

Interesting. The closest EA chargers to the airport showing on the Electrify America website were at 2500 W Broward Blvd. Googlemaps showed three routes to get there from the airport -- from 7.8 - 8.1 miles each way:

View attachment 2302

you are correct .. I was just measuring the out of your way distance which would be the distance from 595 to Broward. The stations are new so not sure if they came up on the map. EA has several 300kW chargers . I live near by and use the Broward EA stations often.

 

[Bill B]

I have over 2000 miles on my Dream P 21" and the best I've seen is 3.1 mi/kwh. Most of my driving is on the freeway but still I think it should be higher.

I agree it should be higher as an average. I have 7000 miles on mine mostly highway driving. My experience is unless it is a flat road with a tail wind you can not ever get close to 4.2 mi/kwh 4.2 X 112 is 470. My best ever is 3.4 mi/kwh and my average since delivery is 3.0 up from 2.9.

 

[Bill B]

I haven't done a road trip yet but I guess i'm averaging around 3.5. I went from Santa Clarita to Anaheim on Saturday and got 4.1 \ 4.2 and on the way back 3.5 \ 3.7. I'm not watching the consumption like a hawk but was happy with the numbers when checking. I'm on 21" wheels and have had AC set to 68/70 most times.

Can I have your car?

 

[Bill B]

I always try to keep my tires 2 lbs over cold recommended (44 in this case). I’ve been driving without ACC and I’m actually doing better on mi/kWh. I’m now not at all certain ACC helps increase mi/kWh on this car!!

I also seem to get better range with out using the AAC

 

[Sam6062]

I agree it should be higher as an average. I have 7000 miles on mine mostly highway driving. My experience is unless it is a flat road with a tail wind you can not ever get close to 4.2 mi/kwh 4.2 X 112 is 470. My best ever is 3.4 mi/kwh and my average since delivery is 3.0 up from 2.9.

I think it is the way they had the EPA do the testing that got them this rating legal but it was the easier test than some others. Something like twice vs 5 times for Audi and I believe MB. I read about it somewhere so do not know if there is real truth to it. Again it was a perfectly legal test allowed by the EPA.
Also this mystery of some people being able to consistently get over 3.5 KWH vs others barely getting 3.2

 

[hmp10]

The Lucid is our third EV since 2015. One thing I've learned is that EPA ratings are good only for comparing one vehicle to another -- and then only if the two vehicles you're comparing used the same EPA testing method (2-cycle or 5-cycle). The EPA ratings are virtually meaningless for predicting what an individual's real-world mileage will be.

Range and EPA ratings are no concern for me for local driving, which probably constitutes 95% of our use. The longest day I've ever spent in the past seven years running hours of errands has brought me nowhere close to running out of battery juice.

In figuring out whether an EV will have enough range for any long distance trips we anticipate, I use half the EPA-rated range from a 5-cycle test (such as Lucid uses). If I can find recharging stations at intervals no longer than that on the trip, I'll be fine. That figure allows me to protect the battery by charging to no higher than 90% and not drop below 20% (which both protects the battery and leaves a margin for unexpected weather or traffic obstacles along the route), and allows me to drive at interstate speeds around 80 mph to align closely with the flow of traffic.

Currently there is no EV that I would take on a haul across the Rockies or through the Dakotas unless I was sticking entirely to interstates. But outside of that, only the Lucid and our Tesla Model S fit our criteria for road tripping. While the Tesla has less range, that is offset by the ubiquity of Tesla Superchargers. The Lucid's additional range counters the lesser availability of Electrify America charging stations -- and that situation is improving monthly.

 

[Sam6062]

The Lucid is our third EV since 2015. One thing I've learned is that EPA ratings are good only for comparing one vehicle to another -- and then only if the two vehicles you're comparing used the same EPA testing method (2-cycle or 5-cycle). The EPA ratings are virtually meaningless for predicting what an individual's real-world mileage will be.

Range and EPA ratings are no concern for me for local driving, which probably constitutes 95% of our use. The longest day I've ever spent in the past seven years running hours of errands has brought me nowhere close to running out of battery juice.

In figuring out whether an EV will have enough range for any long distance trips we anticipate, I use half the EPA-rated range from a 5-cycle test (such as Lucid uses). If I can find recharging stations at intervals no longer than that on the trip, I'll be fine. That figure allows me to protect the battery by charging to no higher than 90% and not drop below 20% (which both protects the battery and leaves a margin for unexpected weather or traffic obstacles along the route), and allows me to drive at interstate speeds around 80 mph to align closely with the flow of traffic.

Currently there is no EV that I would take on a haul across the Rockies or through Dakotas unless I was sticking entirely to interstates. But outside of that, only the Lucid and our Tesla Model S fit our criteria for road tripping. While the Tesla has less range, that is offset by the ubiquity of Tesla Superchargers. The Lucid's additional range counters the lesser availability of Electrify America charging stations -- and that situation is improving monthly.

I believe lucid used the 2 Cycle test and not 5 Cycle. Is there a place where we can verify this. From the article I had read it appears that the 2 Cycle is the easier test and they used it and perhaps so did Tesla. They truly imitate Tesla whenever they can. That is all Rawlinson knows.

 

[Coltonw011]

I believe lucid used the 2 Cycle test and not 5 Cycle. Is there a place where we can verify this. From the article I had read it appears that the 2 Cycle is the easier test and they used it and perhaps so did Tesla. They truly imitate Tesla whenever they can. That is all Rawlinson knows.

Other way around. They 5-cycle and so does Tesla.

 

[Crdgk]

Honest question: has ANYONE on this forum driven an Air GT or DER on 19” wheels non-stop on a pre-conditioned/just charged battery from 100% to 0% SOC? A lot of the range “disappointment” on here just sounds like making guess-work of your 80% - 20% drive. We have enough users getting above 4 mi/kWh to make these whole “Lucid doesn’t come anywhere close to EPA” claims not accurate.

I just finished a test like this but not perfect to what you want. Charged to 80% and driven down to 9%. Temps over 5 days range 50-68deg. About 70-30 city, highway, real world. Definitely some fast acceleration but mostly reasonable driving. All Smooth, high regen. Air GT, 19" wheels. Used ACC on highways. I did not charge nightly and this was over 6 days. So it has to account for some loss during the nights.
So at the end, extrapolating to 100-0% it is 471 miles range. I am happy. I think the mi/kWh are pretty flaky. They seem to go up and down almost at random. I did do a trip reset and the avg for trip was higher than the 'since last charge' by a significant amount so there is something strange there. Mine said 3.4 on Trip A. I almost never see 4.0 since last charge and never above that so strange for me to hear these numbers. Yet I got a pretty decent mileage in the real test which is miles travelled over a large change in SOC. If I got 4.0 or above I'd be well above EPA range so something not right at least in my car.
Caveat: recent arrival of car, at 3,100 ft altitude, low mileage at now 500miles.

 

[MikeTz]

Approaching 5000 miles with an average of 3.2 m/kWh. Yesterday, for some reason the average over 50 miles was just 1.8m/kWh. I suspect the battery a large amount of energy went to cool the battery pack? 87 degree day in South Florida. I will repeat the trip later today and try to get a sense as to why yesterday's numbers deviated so much from the "Norm"

 

[hmp10]

I believe lucid used the 2 Cycle test and not 5 Cycle. Is there a place where we can verify this. From the article I had read it appears that the 2 Cycle is the easier test and they used it and perhaps so did Tesla. They truly imitate Tesla whenever they can. That is all Rawlinson knows.

The 5-cycle test produces higher EPA numbers, as the 2-cycle test has a mandatory 0.7 reduction factor applied to the results. This article helps explain it:

Tesla Model Y vs. Porsche Taycan: Testing EPA Range in the Real World | Edmunds

Does the Tesla Model Y really have more driving range than the Porsche Taycan? Edmunds explains why the EPA numbers can vary widely from your actual experience, especially with electric vehicles. The phrase "your mileage may vary" has never been more apt.

www.edmunds.com

Relevant language is:

"Many factors come into play. The EPA has five test or drive cycles that simulate road routes and determine how efficiently a car will perform in different scenarios. But the EPA only requires automakers use two. Porsche, like many other manufacturers, opts for the two-cycle test because of the added prep time and costs involved in completing the others. Going this route automatically reduces the Porsche's potential range by 30%, a larger penalty than if the automaker had chosen the five-cycle test as Tesla did."

 

[DaveyBoyGT]

I agree it should be higher as an average. I have 7000 miles on mine mostly highway driving. My experience is unless it is a flat road with a tail wind you can not ever get close to 4.2 mi/kwh 4.2 X 112 is 470. My best ever is 3.4 mi/kwh and my average since delivery is 3.0 up from 2.9.

Well, I think it is about time to clear the air on the mileage issue once and for all. The EPA mileage ratings is based on the standard testing for all cars. It is done with a professional driver on dynamometer with no outside environmental influence. The wind resistance, rolling resistance and weight for each car is factored into the test. The highway portion of the test is done going no faster than 60 MPH and no slower than 30 MPH and never stopping. The average speed of the highway test is 48 MPH. After the test values are achieved, they multiply that number by 0.70 to get "real driving" values. So, for all you whiners out there, unless you never go faster than 60 MPH and average no more than 48 MPH, you will NEVER, EVER, at ANY Time achieve the EPA mileage rating for the Lucid of your choice. You really need to accept this reality. And if you go faster than the testing standard your mileage will reduce by the square of the increase in velocity (VXV). The faster you go, the greater the impact of wind resistance. Keep that in mind when you are going 90 MPH on the Interstate. The wind resistance at 90MPH is more than 3X that of going 50 MPH and becomes the overriding factor in the resistance to forward motion.