Car and Driver: Tested: 2026 Lucid Gravity Is a Successful Second Act

While I welcome this review for all the things it got right about the Gravity's phenomenal dynamics, style, and space utilization I still have some doubts about its complete candor. I simply don't believe they tested this car to any extent without running into its software gremlins.
 
While I welcome this review for all the things it got right about the Gravity's phenomenal dynamics, style, and space utilization I still have some doubts about its complete candor. I simply don't believe they tested this car to any extent without running into its software gremlins.
I don’t believe all cars have these gremlins…..or at least, most people have seen improvements
 
I don’t believe all cars have these gremlins…..or at least, most people have seen improvements

Then the question is why. Why do some cars experience numerous and constant software issues while other cars experience virtually none?

Are they not really software problems at their core?
 
Then the question is why. Why do some cars experience numerous and constant software issues while other cars experience virtually none?

Are they not really software problems at their core?
Yawn. 🥱
 
Then the question is why. Why do some cars experience numerous and constant software issues while other cars experience virtually none?

Are they not really software problems at their core?
I don't think all the problems are software related. By scrapping this forum, there have been a couple issues fixed by console and wheel replacement. I believe some of the earlier cars might some unsafely (meaning it can easily be damaged) wired or defective parts.
 
Then the question is why. Why do some cars experience numerous and constant software issues while other cars experience virtually none?

Are they not really software problems at their core?
There's a lot of variance that can happen on software, and variance in manufacturing further widen the scope of possibilities
 
>1/4-Mile: 10.9 sec @ 131 mph

As one who grew up in the era of muscle cars, to imagine a 6000lb SUV doing sub 11 sec 1/4 mi is just mind boggling. You need a roll cage and helmet on most 1/4 mi tracks to run those types of traps (NHRA standards).
 
Then the question is why. Why do some cars experience numerous and constant software issues while other cars experience virtually none?

Are they not really software problems at their core?
Maybe our software engineers can answer that. Does having certain settings make it more likely you may have bugs?
 
While I welcome this review for all the things it got right about the Gravity's phenomenal dynamics, style, and space utilization I still have some doubts about its complete candor. I simply don't believe they tested this car to any extent without running into its software gremlins.
If they had tested mine, they would’ve walked away with this review. There are many like mine.
 
Then the question is why. Why do some cars experience numerous and constant software issues while other cars experience virtually none?

Are they not really software problems at their core?
Lots of potential reasons. Multiple suppliers that build “the same” part, but that differ in some “seemingly unimportant” way. Think generic drugs vs brand drugs.

Software is what glues everything together, but the individual components may be different across cars; I don’t know. Or a component may not perform to spec. Or a wire is pinched or loose.

Lots of issues can present as “the screens are blank” or “my key doesn’t work” which would feel like software but might not be.

I’m guessing that hardware differences and/or physical issues may be just as likely a cause. Just a guess though.

To be clear: that doesn’t mean it isn’t software. At the end of the day, the “glue” can mitigate for most issues with communication or components; but they have to run into or find the bug before they mitigate for it. So the solution may still be software (except for a pinched wire or loose connection, etc), but the cause may be hardware.

I hope I made sense. It’s early :p
 
Maybe our software engineers can answer that. Does having certain settings make it more likely you may have bugs?
If a setting is buggy, absolutely. But I don’t know that any specific setting is buggy (except halo secure, which is in beta).

There may be some though! Each of those settings is a new code path to traverse, and so if there is an edge case, it’s possible to hit it only if that setting is turned on.

For example, you’d never know halo secure was buggy (beta) if you never turned it on.
 
The more carmakers make operating a car more like using a computer, the more they're going to be compared to the experience of buying and using a computer.

How many Mac's would Apple sell if buying one was a crap shoot in terms of how many of its features would operate reliably?

In an automaker decides to source a given component from multiple suppliers, it's on the automaker to make sure all those components perform the same from the customer's perspective.

The bottom line is that no car -- and especially not cars well into six figures -- should have the amount of variance in usability from one unit to another that these Lucids have.

Owning two Gravities, I have enough personal experience with how many problems one car has that the other doesn't -- and vice versa -- and which workarounds work on one car that don't work on the other to know whereof I speak. This variance between the operating experience of two Gravities of identical trims is both extraordinary and unacceptable.

When I decided many months ago to become an all-Lucid household, I posted what a relief it would be to have cars that had similar operating protocols and controls. I had no idea what I was in for.
 
Last edited:
The main take away from a dream and GT reviews is that up to 100mph they are close enough to be the same (half a second apart), by 150mph is close to 3 seconds.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_8856.webp
    IMG_8856.webp
    130.4 KB · Views: 167
  • IMG_8857.webp
    IMG_8857.webp
    109.9 KB · Views: 158
While I welcome this review for all the things it got right about the Gravity's phenomenal dynamics, style, and space utilization I still have some doubts about its complete candor. I simply don't believe they tested this car to any extent without running into its software gremlins.
This appears to be the exact same review they did based on the limited short drive at the launch event back in April. Only thing added was the testing numbers. No indication that they have lived with this car for numerous days to evaluate software stability, fob issues, etc.
 
Then the question is why. Why do some cars experience numerous and constant software issues while other cars experience virtually none?

Are they not really software problems at their core?
Obviously there's been a lot of speculation here, some from me, but the short answer is we don't really know. It's entirely possible that all your headaches are from non-deterministic software bugs biting you particularly hard. Possibly as karmic payback for the atrocities you committed in a prior life. :p But it's just as possible that you have a variety of hardware glitches that the software isn't coping with well. We know with 100% certainty that there are numerous software bugs, and that Lucid has been fixing a number of owner's vehicles with hardware replacements. But it's impossible to say what's going on with your specific vehicles. The only way to really know is to eventually get it fixed, and then look back and see what that took.
 
The more carmakers make operating a car more like using a computer, the more they're going to be compared to the experience of buying and using a computer.

How many Mac's would Apple sell if buying one was a crap shoot in terms of how many of its features would operate reliably?

In an automaker decides to source a given component from multiple suppliers, it's on the automaker to make sure all those components perform the same from the customer's perspective.

The bottom line is that no car -- and especially not cars well into six figures -- should have the amount of variance in usability from one unit to another that these Lucids have.

Owning two Gravities, I have enough personal experience with how many problems one car has that the other doesn't -- and vice versa -- and which workarounds work on one car that don't work on the other to know whereof I speak. This variance between the operating experience of two Gravities of identical trims is both extraordinary and unacceptable.

When I decided many months ago to become an all-Lucid household, I posted what a relief it would be to have cars that had similar operating protocols and controls. I had no idea what I was in for.
I’m not saying it’s excusable; I’m providing possible explanations, not excuses.

But, I’ll note that we are an all-Lucid household as well, and have had the opposite experience. Which goes to your point about variance.
 
I’m not saying it’s excusable; I’m providing possible explanations, not excuses.

But, I’ll note that we are an all-Lucid household as well, and have had the opposite experience. Which goes to your point about variance.

No worries. I know you were just providing possible explanations.

We've also seen some odd behavior creep back into our Air lately. For instance, I always display satellite maps when driving. In the Air I keep the upper display zoomed in and set to direction-of-travel, while I keep the lower display more zoomed out and set to compass orientation (north up). For the past couple of years the displays have reliably defaulted to those settings upon powering up the car.

However, recently the default has failed to hold on the lower screen. It now invariably reverts to direction of travel, and even when I hit the "north up" button, it stays in direction of travel. The only way to get it back to north up is to toggle between the 2D and 3D settings until the map goes to compass orientation. (It took me quite a while to stumble upon that workaround.)

I try to keep the Gravities' satellite displays set up the same way. Sometimes they hold, and sometimes they do what the Air is now doing.

Having all three of our Lucids on the same account seems to have done something weird. I've already posted about the music constantly pausing when any two of them are on the road at the same time, regardless of music source (streaming or USB). I'm now wondering if the satellite map settings are somehow caught up in this incestuous imbroglio.
 
No worries. I know you were just providing possible explanations.

We've also seen some odd behavior creep back into our Air lately. For instance, I always display satellite maps when driving. In the Air I keep the upper display zoomed in and set to direction-of-travel, while I keep the lower display more zoomed out and set to compass orientation (north up). For the past couple of years the displays have reliably defaulted to those settings upon powering up the car.

However, recently the default has failed to hold on the lower screen. It now invariably reverts to direction of travel, and even when I hit the "north up" button, it stays in direction of travel. The only way to get it back to north up is to toggle between the 2D and 3D settings until the map goes to compass orientation. (It took me quite a while to stumble upon that workaround.)

I try to keep the Gravities' satellite displays set up the same way. Sometimes they hold, and sometimes they do what the Air is now doing.

Having all three of our Lucids on the same account seems to have done something weird. I've already posted about the music constantly pausing when any two of them are on the road at the same time, regardless of music source (streaming or USB). I'm now wondering if the satellite map settings are somehow caught up in this incestuous imbroglio.
I don’t know. I still think you live on top of a bunch of magnets and we should mine them to solve the magnet supply crisis 🤷‍♂️
 
Back
Top