EPA ratings supposedly released

[hmp10]

I hope Tidal will be loaded into the UX system. The information tab for the UX feature in the order configurator mentions that "several music services" can be controlled directly from the dashboard, but then it mentions specifically only Spotify and iHeartRadio. Spotify doesn't yet stream Dolby Atmos, although iHeartRadio does. I wonder why Lucid didn't specifically list Tidal if they are going to include its app in the UX system?

Also, in the information tab for the Surreal Sound System on the configurator, there is no mention of Dolby Atmos. In fact, I can find no mention of Dolby Atmos anywhere on the Lucid website except in the old article from last year about Dolby Atmos that is still in the "Stories" section of the website. I hope Dobly Atmos hasn't joined the list of features the car once touted but then quietly were laid to rest.

 

[SDHacker]

Dolby Atmos listed under "Explore Connectivity" where they describe surreal sound

Lucid Air | Connectivity

So advanced, it feels completely natural. Connect and interact with Lucid Air through the Lucid App on your mobile device.

www.lucidmotors.com

 

[hmp10]

Thanks, that's a relief.

 

[Lucken]

Dolby Atmos listed under "Explore Connectivity" where they describe surreal sound

Lucid Air | Connectivity

So advanced, it feels completely natural. Connect and interact with Lucid Air through the Lucid App on your mobile device.

www.lucidmotors.com

If you take Lucid’s connectivity blurb on Atmos literally, they only mention it in conjunction with alerts, ‘…so even functional and safety cues like seat belt alerts sound amazing’. An attorney might say, “Well, they never mentioned anything about it being used in conjunction with music”.

They may be using Atmos’ ability to provide height cues to simply provide more directional precision to in-car alerts.

Do I think there‘s any logic in using Dolby Atmos only for that? Of course not, but that’s the only function that’s discussed.

 

[dawktah LucidGT]

I had mentioned the absence of Dolby Atmos from site as well on another forum. I wonder which forum will get the most traction. Surround definitely requires a codec that can't be over Bluetooth. I wonder if they'll be offering free one year subscriptions?

 

[dawktah LucidGT]

I just downloaded Pat Metheny "From This Place" 96kHz - 24 bit.

 

[hmp10]

Regarding range, what's remarkable to me is that the EPA range difference between the Dream "Performance" and the Grand Touring with 21" wheels is only 18 miles.

The Dream "P" cuts power back to 804 hp when in "Smooth" or "Swift" drive settings -- about the same as the GT 800 hp. It seems likely one of those settings was used in the EPA test of the Dream "P".

The Dream "R" cuts the power back to 670 hp in its two lower drive settings. Perhaps that is how the "R" edged out the range rating of the GT?

 

[Adnillien]

The Dream "R" cuts the power back to 670 hp in its two lower drive settings. Perhaps that is how the "R" edged out the range rating of the GT?

I assume that the GT will also have multiple performance settings like the Dream and a lower perfomrance setting was also used for the GT EPA test. The Dream R beats the GT because it has a larger usable battery, not because it is more efficient. A very fine point that I cannot explain is that the GT beats the Dream R on the highway range but not on the City range.

I do like that the Dream and the GT get very close to the same range on the highway as the city. Maybe this bodes well for real world driving at 75-80 mph getting good range.

 

[hmp10]

I assume that the GT will also have multiple performance settings like the Dream and a lower perfomrance setting was also used for the GT EPA test. The Dream R beats the GT because it has a large usable battery, not because it is more efficient. A very fine point that I cannot explain is that the GT beats the Dream R on the highway range but not on the City range.

There are three possible variables in play between the GT and the two Dream variants: battery capacity (and weight), drive settings, and a rear motor unique to the Dream. I doubt if we'll ever be able to decode which affects what unless and until Lucid reveals more about he cars and the test procedures.

I do like that the Dream and the GT get very close to the same range on the highway as the city. Maybe this bodes well for real world driving at 75-80 mph getting good range.

I'm really hoping so. I've been discounting Lucid's highway range down to 80% of the EPA range, based on the 70% of EPA range we're seeing on the highway with the Tesla Plaid we recently got. Bettering that 80% figure would be a huge dollop of icing on the cake.

 

[WildRide47]

" And according to EPA results the Grand Touring has better efficiency. The initial Dream Edition gets Samsung cells, while other models will get cells from LG."

 

[hmp10]

That's interesting. I know that several years ago Lucid said it was developing a proprietary battery jointly with Samsung, and then a couple of years ago they started talking about doing the same thing with LG Chem and dropped all mention of Samsung.

What is the source of this information about the Dream using Samsung batteries? Any discussion about battery chemistry?

 

[WildRide47]

Got it from Green Car Reports. Last sentence caught my eye.

Lucid Air Grand Touring
EPA range: 516 miles
Road-trip fast-charging: 300 EPA miles back in 20 minutes, on 350-kw CCS hardware
Price: $139,000 (plus destination not yet disclosed)

The Lucid Air is the new range champ, offering more than 100 miles more range than the longest-range Tesla. Although the $169,000 Dream Edition Range, at 520 rated miles, is a limited-edition model that’s already sold out, the Grand Touring model earns 516 miles—at $30,000 less. And according to EPA results the Grand Touring has better efficiency. The initial Dream Edition gets Samsung cells, while other models will get cells from LG.

 

[WildRide47]

Author of Green Car Reports was Bengt Halvorson posted today on 9/19/21. Considering what is going on with the Chevy Bolt's LG battery catastrophe, it makes me somewhat uneasy as I have Lucid GT on order which comes with the LG battery cells.

 

[Adnillien]

This could easily explain why we see different usable battery capacities between the Dream and the GT.

 

[hmp10]

With 19" wheels on both cars, the EPA gives the efficiency of the GT as 26 kWh/100 miles and the Dream R as 27 kWh/100 miles. I suspect both these numbers were rounded to the nearest whole number, as odds are very low that both numbers landed exactly on the nose. Depending on how the rounding worked out, this could mean the actual difference was approaching 2 kWh / 100 miles . . . OR was almost negligible. It would really help to see more granular data.

As I understand it, the fire issues have been with LG's pouch cells, not with their cylindrical cells which Lucid is using.

 

[hmp10]

This could easily explain why we see different usable battery capacities between the Dream and the GT.

But have we really seen different usable battery capacities, or has this just been inferred by the discrepancies in EPA efficiency ratings?

Is there not a possibility that the different, more powerful rear motor used in the Dream contributes to the efficiency difference?

I'm not trying to be argumentative. I really don't know the answer. I just can't escape the suspicion that a different motor has to have some effect on efficiency.

 

[Adnillien]

With 19" wheels on both cars, the EPA gives the efficiency of the GT as 26 kWh/100 miles and the Dream R as 27 kWh/100 miles. I suspect both these numbers were rounded to the nearest whole number, as odds are very low that both numbers landed exactly on the nose. Depending on how the rounding worked out, this could mean the actual difference was approaching 2 kWh / 100 miles . . . OR was almost negligible. It would really help to see more granular data.

As I understand it, the fire issues have been with LG's pouch cells, not with their cylindrical cells which Lucid is using.

You can get one more digit by using the EPA MPGe. The DreamR is 27.0 kWh/100 miles, the GT is 25.7 kWh/100 miles. Net difference is 1.3kWh/100 miles. There may be enough noise in EPA tests that this still insignificant.

 

[Adnillien]

But have we really seen different usable battery capacities, or has this just been inferred by the discrepancies in EPA efficiency ratings?

Is there not a possibility that the different, more powerful rear motor used in the Dream contributes to the efficiency difference?

I'm not trying to be argumentative. I really don't know the answer. I just can't escape the suspicion that a different motor has to have some effect on efficiency.

I complety agree that the motor plays into the efficiency differences between the Dream and the GT. I also agree that I am estimating the the usable battery based on the EPA range and efficiency numbers. EPA efficiency is measured by total energy in (including charging losses) divided by range. We do not know the charging losses. Hence, we can only estimate usable battery capacity. We do know that more energy went into the Dream than into the GT. It could be that the charging losses are different between the Dream and GT because of a different battery supplier. However, I suspect that the charging loss is dominated by losses in the onboard charger which is likely the same for the Dream and GT. It may only be a software limit, but I do believe that there is is different usable battery capacity in the Dream and GT.

 

[Lucken]

Conjecture, conjecture, conjecture. The void created by a near informational blackout causes just that, conjecture. At this late date we should not have pages and pages of conjecture.

 

[hmp10]

But then how would we entertain ourselves while we wait for our Airs?

And wait . . . and wait . . . .