[Edmunds] TESTED: 2022 Lucid Air Grand Touring Misses EPA Range by Nearly 80 Miles

[hmp10]

Do you notice in GT or touring that much difference if there is 1 person vs 2? 3.2 mi / kWh vs 3.8 I got?

I don't monitor power usage closely enough to track this. Weight differences become a significant factor more in driving with a lot of stopping and starting or hilly terrain. At sustained high speeds on flat surfaces, aerodynamics is a much bigger factor.

 

[Shuasha]

It has nothing to do with Edmunds' test method, but keep in mind that the "since last charge" trip meter measures different things than the two that you manually reset. Things like pre-warming the car and sitting in park will be measured on "since last charge" and not affect Trip 1 and 2.

 

[Lucken]

I only just read the Edmunds review and it was really kind of brutal. In the context of all the reviews out there, I'd call this an outlier. I would hope prospective buyers falling on this review first, would be diligent enough to see out other reviews for comparison.

 

[PeterL]

FWIW: Kyle Conner from Out of Spec Reviews got nearly the exact same mileage as Edmunds on my Lucid Air GT with the 19" wheels: 435.5 miles at 70mph:

 

[Shuasha]

FWIW: Kyle Conner from Out of Spec Reviews got nearly the exact same mileage as Edmunds on my Lucid Air GT with the 19" wheels: 435.5 miles at 70mph:

Do you know if he set the tire pressures correctly in his test? It almost seems like there's a weird difference on some cars where they're not as efficient.

 

[hydbob]

Do you know if he set the tire pressures correctly in his test? It almost seems like there's a weird difference on some cars where they're not as efficient.

My guess is the wind

 

[hmp10]

FWIW: Kyle Conner from Out of Spec Reviews got nearly the exact same mileage as Edmunds on my Lucid Air GT with the 19" wheels: 435.5 miles at 70mph . . . .

Conner tests at a sustained 70mph of highway driving. Edmunds testing comes closer to duplicating EPA test methods. Per the Edmunds website:

"Edmunds drives on specific road routes that cover both highway and city driving around the greater Los Angeles area. We aim for a mix of 60% city driving and 40% highway, assuming that most electric vehicle owners will likely spend more time in stop-and-go traffic than they will on the open highway . . . and we maximize regenerative braking during stops."

(https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/electric-car-range-and-consumption-epa-vs-edmunds.html)

Thus the Edmunds testing is very different from the method that reviewers such as Kyle Conner and Tom Moloughney use to test range. The 84% of EPA range that Conner obtained in his test at sustained highway speeds is actually quite good.

For Edmunds to have landed on the same range as Conner did with such differing test methods indicates something seriously out of whack with the Edmunds test -- either with that particular car or with something Edmunds did.

 

[Bunnylebowski]

Kyle’s test did a few things different from the Edmunds. There were some elevation changes which regen cannot completely offset, and he also had to exit the highway and get on some side roads on a few occasions to avoid construction/weather so while you gain range on the regen slowdown, you lose more than you gain by accelerating this heavy car from a stop to 70mph even if you speed up slowly. He also had to slowly pass many trucks which adds turbulence in front of the car until you get past them. The Edmunds test meanwhile is relatively flat, with few slow down/speed ups. I really don’t think they had the correct tire pressures. It doesn’t make any sense that I’ve gotten better mi/kWh than they did in worse conditions.

 

[Babyrocko1908]

I also get about 3.2 mi/kWh (in my Touring), but I got the car early February and make absolutely no effort to be efficient.

Same, Same!!

 

[Shuasha]

Also, Edmunds uses the default regen setting, which might affect things if that’s low regen.

 

[Clyde2575]

I have a GT with a bit over 11k miles. I have 19” tires and live in Phoenix. I bought the car used with 5k miles in November. I didn’t pay attention to their efficiency when I bought it. I do mostly drive conservatively but drive freeway and surface streets that very greatly in elevations daily and my husband does not drive conservatively at all. I didn’t use the heat much this winter and winter is over here. I am at 4.0 m/kWh for the life of the car. I think the EPA can definitely be achieved, but so many things factor into it…driving habits, car settings, elevation changes, ambient temperature, etc.

 

[HariK]

MY Air GT, on 21" tires, after 5500 miles is averaging 3.0 miles/Kw.
I drive in Sprint mode as often as possible, when speed limit is 45 or higher, with a mix of city and highway driving. The best I have achieved is 3.2 mile/Kw after a 70 mile highway trip at 80 mph. I carry some extra weight, an EZ spare tire and a DC powered jack/tire change kit, at all times.

Yes. I carry the same extra weight

 

[apollo1403]

Seriously? Cannot change driver profile while driving is a ding on the car? I used to rely on their reviews...

5000 mile review

 

[chinesejpl]

I asked this question in my other thread and am still not sure I have an answer...How did previous reviews of DE by motortrend, edmunds and Tom Moloughney achieve 500-505 miles real world range (be it 70mph or proprietary testing) with 118 kwh battery but reviews of GT by motortrend, edmunds, kyle, etc are achieving 435 miles with 112 kwh battery. 13.9% difference in range but only 5% difference in battery size and with the GT having less HP and performance! This is especially peculiar for the Edmunds results which is supposed to use the "exact" same testing parameters

 

[Bill55]

I am not disappointed by the range I get in the Lucid even though it is less than the rating. I get less MPG in my GMC truck then the EPA rating.
Gas vehicles have MPG. The sooner we get to EVs being MP kWh and charging in kWh per minute the better. EV charging being in miles per minute is ridiculous.
A 10,000 lbs Hummer EV or a 4500 lbs id4 or a 5200 lbs Air. Miles per minute are all different at the same kWh per minute. It's confusing to the general public because a gas pump delivers the same GPM all the time. An EV charging rate has variables of outside temp, battery temp, state of charge, battery voltage, max amps station can deliver. It's complicated.

 

[nevadagame]

Yes. I carry the same extra weight

Can you send me links for the ez spare and jack and whatever other tools needed?

 

[HariK]

Can you send me links for the ez spare and jack and whatever other tools needed?

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07VFH5DX2/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1

20

PRODUCT OVERVIEW The 20” x 5” spare tire and alloy wheel for 5 lug vehicles was engineered to be used as a temporary spare for many types of vehicles. Our tires meet or exceed all the latest DOT highway safety standards. This 20” tire and wheel will allow for traveling at normal speed limits and...

ez-sparewheel.com

 

[hmp10]

I asked this question in my other thread and am still not sure I have an answer...How did previous reviews of DE by motortrend, edmunds and Tom Moloughney achieve 500-505 miles real world range (be it 70mph or proprietary testing) with 118 kwh battery but reviews of GT by motortrend, edmunds, kyle, etc are achieving 435 miles with 112 kwh battery. 13.9% difference in range but only 5% difference in battery size and with the GT having less HP and performance! This is especially peculiar for the Edmunds results which is supposed to use the "exact" same testing parameters

This answer is speculative, so take it with a large grain of salt . . .

Lucid said in an interview that the 118-kWh battery pack has no buffers, as the Samsung batteries can tolerate full charging. No such statement has been made about the LG Chem batteries in the 112-kWh pack. In fact, Lucid's press release announcing the LG Chem deal notably omitted mention of tolerance of full charing, whereas their earlier announcement about the Samsung deal made a specific point about it.

Is is possible that the 112-kWh pack has buffers that the 118-kWh pack doesn't, thereby making the real difference in usable capacity between the two packs greater than 5%?

On the other hand, if each model was tested using the same EPA protocols, that difference should have shown up in their respective range ratings.

I doubt if the difference in horsepower and performance would have made any difference in EPA ratings as the test methods would not call for anywhere near full power from either car. Unlike with ICE cars where bigger displacements and other means of creating power output exact a mileage penalty at all levels of output, EVs are almost the opposite. The larger a battery pack gets for range, the more power the motors can generate within their output capability. In a sense, the added power of an EV comes "for free" as a consequence of larger battery packs. Peter Rawlinson has talked about this on several occasions when explaining that the Lucid's power was less an engineering goal than a side effect of the main goals which were range and system efficiency.

 

[chinesejpl]

This answer is speculative, so take it with a large grain of salt . . .

Lucid said in an interview that the 118-kWh battery pack has no buffers, as the Samsung batteries can tolerate full charging. No such statement has been made about the LG Chem batteries in the 112-kWh pack. In fact, Lucid's press release announcing the LG Chem deal notably omitted mention of tolerance of full charing, whereas their earlier announcement about the Samsung deal made a specific point about it.

Is is possible that the 112-kWh pack has buffers that the 118-kWh pack doesn't, thereby making the real difference in usable capacity between the two packs greater than 5%?

On the other hand, if each model was tested using the same EPA protocols, that difference should have shown up in their respective range ratings.

I doubt if the difference in horsepower and performance would have made any difference in EPA ratings as the test methods would not call for anywhere near full power from either car. Unlike with ICE cars where bigger displacements and other means of creating power output exact a mileage penalty at all levels of output, EVs are almost the opposite. The larger a battery pack gets for range, the more power the motors can generate within their output capability. In a sense, the added power of an EV comes "for free" as a consequence of larger battery packs. Peter Rawlinson has talked about this on several occasions when explaining that the Lucid's power was less an engineering goal than a side effect of the main goals which were range and system efficiency.

This is interesting...DE cars use Samsung batteries but all others such as GT uses LG? It certainly is a plausible explanation!

As for the comment in HP - why does Lucid claim a lower overall range with GT-P vs GT when they both use same tires and have same battery pack? I assumed that meant that the GT-P motors were slightly different than non-P cars.

 

[Bill55]

This is interesting...DE cars use Samsung batteries but all others such as GT uses LG? It certainly is a plausible explanation!

As for the comment in HP - why does Lucid claim a lower overall range with GT-P vs GT when they both use same tires and have same battery pack? I assumed that meant that the GT-P motors were slightly different than non-P cars.

I asked when I took delivery of DE-Performance and was told the motors are different. I have never found anything published by Lucid that confirms this. However, it does make sense there is some component difference as if it were only in software then there would be no reason to have the 2 versions with different EPA numbers. DE-Performance / DE-Range.