Was it a cost reason to avoid different battery chemistry for all other vehicles than the dream?
I wonder if battery degradation will be different for AGT versus dream for that reason?
Lucid has said very little about the difference in the Samsung batteries in the 118-kWh pack and the LG Chem batteries in the 112-kWh pack. The only clues lie in the press releases at the times the two battery sourcing deals were announced.
In the December 2016 announcement about the sourcing deal with Samsung, Lucid said:
"Samsung SDI combined their in-house chemistry expertise with massive real-world datasets and state-of-the-art battery models provided by Lucid to develop a cell that is both energy dense and resistant to damage associated with fast-charging . . . The breakthrough battery life demonstrated by the new cell from Samsung SDI will be of tangible benefit to our customers, particularly companies with ride-sharing services operating around the clock."
The February 2020 announcement about the deal to source batteries from LG Chem indicated that the priority was on securing a reliable source for the required production volumes. Lucid added:
"Lucid selects the best battery cell for each version of the Lucid Air based on data collected during comprehensive and proprietary performance tests, with the cells from LG Chem selected because they provide the ideal level of efficiency for standard versions of the Lucid Air. In conjunction with its proprietary battery architecture and flexible manufacturing technique, Lucid will optimize the LG Chem cells to meet or exceed all target goals for range, energy density, recharge/discharge rates, and more. In this way, Lucid will leverage the specific cell chemistry of LG Chem's batteries to develop the most compact, yet energy dense, battery pack form possible."
The announcement about the LG Chem batteries lacks the specific references of the Samsung announcement to resistance to fast-charging damage or breakthrough battery life. Also, Lucid mentioned that the Samsung batteries used a propriety chemistry specifically developed using battery models provided by Lucid. By contrast, the LG Chem announcement spoke of LG Chem's proprietary battery architecture instead of chemistry and of selecting the battery from existing product lines that best matched Lucid's requirements.
However, note that these announcements came over three years apart, and a lot changed about battery chemistries across the industry in that timespan. It could be that the proprietary, cutting edge chemistry of the 2016 Samsung batteries had found equivalents across the industry three years later.