What's new
By:

Doug DeMuro's Lucid Gravity Review

He didn't realize that the cupholders and trays slide away and complained that things under them would get trapped, and he missed that the outlets are an option on the Gravity GT (to be fair it should be standard IMO) and the one he had was not optioned to have them.

I disagree with his scoring, he gives the R1S a 10 in practicality but gives the Gravity an 8. The Gravity holds more than the R1S and is lower to the ground making it far more practical for loading gear or pets.
 
minivanasatruck said:
He didn't realize that the cupholders and trays slide away and complained that things under them would get trapped, and he missed that the outlets are an option on the Gravity GT (to be fair it should be standard IMO) and the one he had was not optioned to have them.

I disagree with his scoring, he gives the R1S a 10 in practicality but gives the Gravity an 8. The Gravity holds more than the R1S and is lower to the ground making it far more practical for loading gear or pets.
Click to expand...
Hahaha I literally posted the same thing on YouTube
 
How did he rate the Gravity's comfort below the Air Dream Edition's comfort (7 vs. 8)?

We own both and, yes, the Air Dream is extremely comfortable for a sedan. But the Gravity has more room, easier ingress/egress, a wider range of seat adjustments, a more compliant ride, and is considerably quieter.
 
hmp10 said:
How did he rate the Gravity's comfort below the Air Dream Edition's comfort (7 vs. 8)?

We own both and, yes, the Air Dream is extremely comfortable for a sedan. But the Gravity has more room, easier ingress/egress, a wider range of seat adjustments, a more compliant ride, and is considerably quieter.
Click to expand...
Maybe he's conflating the Gravity's "high bus like" steering wheel with the Air's lower steering wheel. He felt the Gravity steering wheel hight reduced the fun handling factor. And maybe that is comfort for him.
 
hmp10 said:
How did he rate the Gravity's comfort below the Air Dream Edition's comfort (7 vs. 8)?

We own both and, yes, the Air Dream is extremely comfortable for a sedan. But the Gravity has more room, easier ingress/egress, a wider range of seat adjustments, a more compliant ride, and is considerably quieter.
Click to expand...
The steering wheel. He commented he thought it was odd. I disagree after using it for a bit, but that’s likely what it was.
 
He didn't know some things about the car, but he did know a few things that the Lucid rep who sat with me during a test drive last week did not know. Lucid really needs better training for their team.
 
I'm surprised at how much he bashed the steering wheel, and felt it detracted from the driving experience. My immediate reaction from a test drive is that the steering wheel felt natural and intuitive, and the improved visibility of the display was great.
 
borski said:
The steering wheel. He commented he thought it was odd. I disagree after using it for a bit, but that’s likely what it was.
Click to expand...

That occurred to me, but he discussed the steering wheel more in the context of handling dynamics. He did not say the position was uncomfortable but that it imparted more the feel of driving a bus or a van, thus reducing driving "engagement".

And even if the steering wheel was a factor in his thinking, it seems odd that the squircle alone would have more than offset the other significant comfort improvements over the Air.

In any case, the squircle can be raised if it's that big a deal. It'll cut into the clean view of the cockpit screen, but a regular wheel that he so misses does that, too.
 
borski said:
Hahaha I literally posted the same thing on YouTube
Click to expand...

yep, that was my reaction as well... sure we can disagree on subjective things like comfort and looks... but practicality?
I have a Rivian and a model X in my driveway right now, but we're in line for a Gravity precisely because the R1S and model X are not practical.
The model X scored 9 and the R1S 10 for practical. yet my scoring system would be
model XR1SGravity
seats 7 comfortably112
interior cargo space123
exterior dimensions (small better)212
Skis or other cargo on roof011
range123
power outlets011
total5812

Anyway, according to Doug's official scoring... it is mainly based on cargo volume, along with extra bits of storage, as well as fuel economy.
The R1S is worse than the Gravity as far as I can tell in cargo volume, in little bits of storage (no glove box) and much worse in fuel economy.
Wasn't there some video where Lucid brought out a bunch of large SUVs and made reviewers try to stack as much junk as they could in each?
So even by Doug's scoring I just don't understand it.
 
XTesla said:
yep, that was my reaction as well... sure we can disagree on subjective things like comfort and looks... but practicality?
I have a Rivian and a model X in my driveway right now, but we're in line for a Gravity precisely because the R1S and model X are not practical.
The model X scored 9 and the R1S 10 for practical. yet my scoring system would be
model XR1SGravity
seats 7 comfortably112
interior cargo space123
exterior dimensions (small better)212
Skis or other cargo on roof011
range123
power outlets011
total5812

Anyway, according to Doug's official scoring... it is mainly based on cargo volume, along with extra bits of storage, as well as fuel economy.
The R1S is worse than the Gravity as far as I can tell in cargo volume, in little bits of storage (no glove box) and much worse in fuel economy.
Wasn't there some video where Lucid brought out a bunch of large SUVs and made reviewers try to stack as much junk as they could in each?
So even by Doug's scoring I just don't understand it.
Click to expand...

I break it down like this:

Off-roading is very important to me - Rivian R1S
Road driving is more important and also prioritize interior space, luxury - Gravity
Don’t care about driving dynamics, luxury or space and will just trust FSD with my life - Model X
 
https://www.dougdemuro.com/dougscore

Practicality

Like acceleration, practicality will mainly be based on an objective standard that primarily considers cubic feet of cargo volume. It’ll go like this:

  • 0 to 3 cubic feet: 1
  • 3.1 to 6.5 cubic feet: 2
  • 6.6 to 11 cubic feet: 3
  • 11.1 to 16 cubic feet: 4
  • 16.1 to 24 cubic feet: 5
  • 24.1 to 34 cubic feet: 6
  • 34.1 to 48 cubic feet: 7
  • 48.1 to 64 cubic feet: 8
  • 64.1 to 72 cubic feet: 9
  • 72.1 cubic feet and up: 10
With that said, some cars may jump ahead of their “cubic feet” class with a few tricks. For example, the Porsche 911 only has 4.7 cubic feet of cargo space, which would give it a “2” — but it has back seats and a lot of little interior storage pockets. That’s probably enough to get it up to the “3” category, even if it doesn’t have the storage volume of some of its “3” peers.

Additionally, “practicality” will be the category that considers fuel economy. While the Mercedes GL63 AMG’s massive 93.8 cubic feet of cargo space easily earn it a “10” in this category, its combined 14 miles per gallon would drop that figure right down to a “9” — especially since many other vehicles offer similar cargo space without the massive penalty in fuel economy.

Finally, this category considers how practical a car is to actually use. For example, the Rolls Royce Phantom has good cargo room, but wouldn’t be something you’d drive everywhere — it’s huge and attracts massive amounts of attention.
Click to expand...

By his own rating explanation, it should be a 10 on the Dougscore instead of an 8. Looks like he forgot to tally it up correctly, unless he's giving it -2 points for the bad launch software and key fob issues (half joking here)
 
I, too, have an R1S quad and an X and would 100% rate my Gravity much higher except for off-roading. The X would be a distant third. Sometimes, these folks look for issues - especially when consensus is so positive. Doug needs clicks like every other “reviewer”…

This just adds to my thinking that Doug, and most online reviewers, are buffoons. How on Earth could he enjoy the ride in an R1S?

Also, know the car if you’re going to review it. Missing things like storage, etc is crazy.
 
XTesla said:
Wasn't there some video where Lucid brought out a bunch of large SUVs and made reviewers try to stack as much junk as they could in each?
Click to expand...
I think the Gravity is the best vehicle in its class for storage, but….. that video with the boxes was a rigged experiment. You can shape the boxes in such a way that they fit perfectly in one car but leave awkward voids in another. You could have made any car win that comparison by shaping and sizing the boxes however you needed to.
 
WeighingGravity said:
I think the Gravity is the best vehicle in its class for storage, but….. that video with the boxes was a rigged experiment. You can shape the boxes in such a way that they fit perfectly in one car but leave awkward voids in another. You could have made any car win that comparison by shaping and sizing the boxes however you needed to.
Click to expand...
Ehh. I don't know. Cubic feet are cubit feet.

Sure, you can manipulate the boxes, etc. But you can't make a set of boxes that will fit in a Honda Civic but won't fit in Gravity.
 
I put zero weight into Doug’s review when he reviewed the R1S (which he loved) and I already had a reservation. I put no weight into this review either - for the reasons I already mention. Doug’s in the entertainment business, not a serious reviewer of cars. He likes to drive cool cars. I get it.

Onto storage:
I pack the same stuff, almost every week, into my Gravity that I used to put in my R1S and can definitely say it is much easier to fit in the Gravity - mainly because of the extra depth with the third row down. No more playing Tetris trying to pack in the Gravity.

The stuff doesn’t even fit in the X, so that’s why I am not comparing it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top