First pre-production Gravity reviews are coming in

...I was a little taken aback when a moderator on this forum and a huge and deeply-informed Lucid fan had to take a pass on a Gravity he wanted because his wife insisted it was too much like a minivan. That worries me.
The Gravity's similarity to a minivan, and the prospect of owning a vehicle even larger than our Air, are the two main reasons I haven't already placed an order. I'm holding off on making a decision until Android Auto is available and I have a chance to see Gravity again in person, in bulk-reducing body colors.
 
I get the efficiency part but tbh I don’t think efficiency is at the top of considerations for anyone spending this kind of money.
Efficiency is range and people are "spending this kind of money" for range. I also think the whole minivan/SUV arguments are rather silly.
 
The Gravity's similarity to a minivan, and the prospect of owning a vehicle even larger than our Air, are the two main reasons I haven't already placed an order. I'm holding off on making a decision until Android Auto is available and I have a chance to see Gravity again in person, in bulk-reducing body colors.

I can't deny even some Lucid fans feel this way or the legitimacy of their feelings, as feelings are what they are. But my worry only deepens about the market reception of the Gravity to hear this.

The "even larger than our Air" remark is interesting. Given how incredibly space efficient it is, it suggests that anything you need to carry that won't fit in the Air is going to require a larger vehicle, anyway.
 
Efficiency is range and people are "spending this kind of money" for range. I also think the whole minivan/SUV arguments are rather silly.

You may feel it silly, but we're in the midst of a discussion about two avid Lucid owners and supporters not buying a Gravity because it seems too minivan-like.
 
The "even larger than our Air" remark is interesting. Given how incredibly space efficient it is, it suggests that anything you need to carry that won't fit in the Air is going to require a larger vehicle, anyway.
We don't need all that room, just ground clearance and range. I hope that Lucid's midsized lineup includes a vehicle that looks more athletic, not just maximally efficient. For one of the three vehicles anyway.
 
There were the first three comments on the "Motor Trend" Facebook post about the Gravity:

Screenshot 2024-12-12 at 10.38.59 AM.webp
 
Here is the photo "Motor Trend" posted on its Facebook page:

Screenshot 2024-12-12 at 10.43.39 AM.webp


Please tell me how that looks any less like an SUV than these photos of what no-one contests are SUVs:

Screenshot 2024-12-12 at 10.44.45 AM.webp
Screenshot 2024-12-12 at 10.45.00 AM.webp
Screenshot 2024-12-12 at 10.45.32 AM.webp
Screenshot 2024-12-12 at 10.45.19 AM.webp


This whole "the Gravity is a minivan, not an SUV" thing is developing completely divorced from any reference to what many SUV's actually look like.
 
Last edited:
I agree with the majority of the views on here that it is impossible to get the kind of intended interior packaging without using the overall proportions that only a minivan-ish design can provide. It’s difficult to predict how the market would receive this design but from what I have seen and heard, anyone looking to spend ~ $130k on a vehicle definitely expects it to look a certain way and I’m not sure this design was the best way to cater to that relatively narrow clientele.

I would love to be proven wrong because I love my Air but I the think a design language along the lines of the Range Rover, G wagon, Cayenne, Cullinan or Urus (albeit those last 2 are a stretch!) would have been a better approach. The R1S is a good example, going by the numbers (relatively) in which it’s selling. I just don’t like the frog eyes o the R1S. And I don’t know when or even if the Range Rover EV would make it to the North American market.

We don't need all that room, just ground clearance and range.
If one looks at Gravity vs its two closest competitors (Rivian R1S and EV9), Gravity has the best spec'ed range (EPA 450mi), best efficiency, best space utilization. Gravity and EV9 has about the same rated tow capacity. R1S has significantly more towing capacity.

Bear in mind that no independent parties have tested a production Gravity with respect to its actual range, efficiency, and SW. I don't know what EPA cycles the Gravity was tested/rated at. If it is the same as the Air, the real-life Gravity range and efficiency might be significantly lower than specs in real-life. The EV9's (top trim) rated range is 280mi (there is a lower trim @305mi). EV9's reported real-life range is ~250mi. My R1S (quad motor, Large pack) can get close to 300mi in real life with moderate weather. The R1S consistently meets/exceeds its spec'ed efficiency; though it is significantly less efficient than my Lucid Air. The R1S Max Pack is rated at 400mi range. I have no experience with it.

So, on specs., Gravity wins, except on towing. If the Gravity range/efficiency is also pivoted on the same test cycle as the Air, its realizable range will likely be significantly less than spec. That said, Gravity will still be the efficiency champ, though not as much as its spec suggests.

When it comes to "roominess", Kyle's (6ft 1in) comment was (paraphrasing) "I fit comfortably in the 3rd row, but there isn't a lot of room". On my R1S, both my son (both 5ft 11in) and I fit comfortably in the 3rd row seats. But I won't want to ride in the 3rd row for a 500 mile trip. Remember, Gravity is measurably shorter/less tall (i.e., height) than EV9 and R1S. My take is, the 3rd row seats are comparable in comfort between these 3 vehicles, though Gravity's is more clever in providing reasonable 3rd row accommodation in a smaller envelop. I am not sure Gravity's 3rd row is that much better than the R1S/EV9 when it comes to ridding in it for hours on a road trip.


Now, the cost of these 3 choices are rather different. Top trims for the 3 vehicles range from ~$79,000 (EV9) to over $120,000 (Gravity). Lucid charges for many more options (2rd row seats, tow kit, DDPro, etc.) while most of these capabilities are already in the other EVs sticker price.


I think Lucid did a fine job on the power train, cabin, efficiency etc.. But the software in maddening! I don't mind if Gravity looks like a minivan, it does. I just wish it had sliding doors. Sliding doors makes the3rd row access much less of a contortionist endeavor.

So, I'd wait to see how a production Gravity fare on its actual range/efficiency and the robustness of the software.

Separately, I don't get the impression that Gravity's production ramp is going to be that fast. They are talking about Gravity in selected studios in Spring '25! I could be mistaken. If the Gravity ramp is slow and focus on getting things right, that's good. But, would a slow Gravity ramp temporarily stall Lucid's overall revenue if the demand for the Air drops while customers wait for the Gravity? Another way to look at it is....early Gravity is exclusively GT trim, Air's volume going forward will be mostly Pure and Touting.
 
You may feel it silly, but we're in the midst of a discussion about two avid Lucid owners and supporters not buying a Gravity because it seems too minivan-like.
What's silly is that people will allow labels and perceptions to limit their choice of vehicle.
 
I think these two posts taken together very aptly describe the situation Lucid is up against and what they have to try to do to address it.

Can you imagine what Lucid drivetrain and chassis engineers and Derek Jenkins and his design team must think of all this "it's a minivan" talk?

They have built a vehicle with almost three times the power of the most powerful minivan and almost 100 horsepower more than the most powerful SUV (the BMW XM).

They have built a vehicle that even Jason Cammisa says can render the sports car category obsolete in terms of road dynamics.

They have built a vehicle with more passenger room than a Chevy Suburban, GM's largest SUV, and packed it into a vehicle shorter than an Explorer, the smallest of Ford's triad of full-size SUVs.

They forewent the very convenience feature that almost universally defines a minivan: sliding rear doors.

They have targeted the vehicle category with the largest U.S. market -- the SUV . . . but they have wound up with a crescendo of claims that it has landed in the smallest vehicle category in the U.S. market -- the minivan.

Why? Because of the tendency of people to latch onto a single trait or two that catches their attention and, on that basis, consign an entire complex thing into the simplest familiar slot that comes to mind.

Let's took at the term "SUV".

First comes "Sport".

The "S" stands for sport. But I don't really know what "sport" means for most conventional SUVs. They often handle like pigs, so it's not about the sport of driving. Except for a very few (Rivian, some Range Rovers, the Mercedes G class), most never see heavy off-road duty, so they're not all that much about the sport of outdoor adventure. What they are often used for is hauling a bunch kids to events and places, but that's not actually a sport. Ironically, the vehicle best suited for the kids is a minivan, which is why they became associated with the term "soccer moms".

In fact, if you consider the sport of driving, the Gravity is one of the "sportiest" vehicles of the SUV category.

Next comes "Utility".

With a cargo capacity exceeded only by the behemoths of the GM Suburban class and the Ford Excursion class, it is clearly a utility vehicle.

Finally comes "Vehicle".

I think everyone can agree that the Gravity is a vehicle.

Yet where are we? Amidst a growing cacophony of claims here and elsewhere that the Gravity is not an SUV, but a minivan.

As @AirQuality says, the situation Lucid is up against is very much like what Apple was up against with its early groundbreaking products. I can only hope the posts on this forum -- which often get picked up in wider social media -- assist with Lucid's task instead of hinder it.
From an execution of the term Sport Utility Vehicle, the Gravity IS the most complete and accurate and honest literal definition of what that would do.
 
Great post!

This insanity about naming what Gravity is, however, is a tempest in a teapot IMHO. If for some reason the minivan thing does start to take hold in a negative way, one lifestyle commercial of someone in the target audience saying to their spouse, “honey, I’ll take the minivan today,” with a mischievous look on their face and then flashing to them absolutely screaming through some mountain roads with pictures of the Gravity looking gorgeous, fast and like it’s having the heck driven out of it should dispel that nonsense. Final taglines of the ad could flash on screen sequentially…

Minivan? Hah!
SUV? Nope.
Something entirely different.
Lucid.
Compromise Nothing
Maybe smoking some sports cars too, not dropping to the 'I can fake tow a 911 and drag race a 911 level', but just properly drifting around some German wagons...
 
If one looks at Gravity vs its two closest competitors (Rivian R1S and EV9), Gravity has the best spec'ed range (EPA 450mi), best efficiency, best space utilization. Gravity and EV9 has about the same rated tow capacity. R1S has significantly more towing capacity.

Bear in mind that no independent parties have tested a production Gravity with respect to its actual range, efficiency, and SW. I don't know what EPA cycles the Gravity was tested/rated at. If it is the same as the Air, the real-life Gravity range and efficiency might be significantly lower than specs in real-life. The EV9's (top trim) rated range is 280mi (there is a lower trim @305mi). EV9's reported real-life range is ~250mi. My R1S (quad motor, Large pack) can get close to 300mi in real life with moderate weather. The R1S consistently meets/exceeds its spec'ed efficiency; though it is significantly less efficient than my Lucid Air. The R1S Max Pack is rated at 400mi range. I have no experience with it.

So, on specs., Gravity wins, except on towing. If the Gravity range/efficiency is also pivoted on the same test cycle as the Air, its realizable range will likely be significantly less than spec. That said, Gravity will still be the efficiency champ, though not as much as its spec suggests.

When it comes to "roominess", Kyle's (6ft 1in) comment was (paraphrasing) "I fit comfortably in the 3rd row, but there isn't a lot of room". On my R1S, both my son (both 5ft 11in) and I fit comfortably in the 3rd row seats. But I won't want to ride in the 3rd row for a 500 mile trip. Remember, Gravity is measurably shorter/less tall (i.e., height) than EV9 and R1S. My take is, the 3rd row seats are comparable in comfort between these 3 vehicles, though Gravity's is more clever in providing reasonable 3rd row accommodation in a smaller envelop. I am not sure Gravity's 3rd row is that much better than the R1S/EV9 when it comes to ridding in it for hours on a road trip.


Now, the cost of these 3 choices are rather different. Top trims for the 3 vehicles range from ~$79,000 (EV9) to over $120,000 (Gravity). Lucid charges for many more options (2rd row seats, tow kit, DDPro, etc.) while most of these capabilities are already in the other EVs sticker price.


I think Lucid did a fine job on the power train, cabin, efficiency etc.. But the software in maddening! I don't mind if Gravity looks like a minivan, it does. I just wish it had sliding doors. Sliding doors makes the3rd row access much less of a contortionist endeavor.

So, I'd wait to see how a production Gravity fare on its actual range/efficiency and the robustness of the software.

Separately, I don't get the impression that Gravity's production ramp is going to be that fast. They are talking about Gravity in selected studios in Spring '25! I could be mistaken. If the Gravity ramp is slow and focus on getting things right, that's good. But, would a slow Gravity ramp temporarily stall Lucid's overall revenue if the demand for the Air drops while customers wait for the Gravity? Another way to look at it is....early Gravity is exclusively GT trim, Air's volume going forward will be mostly Pure and Touting.
I actually was looking seriously at the Volvo EX90, its objectively worse at all the Sport and performance and EV aspects, but the Gravity could be considered excess for most people's daily commuting and errands needs. EX90 has similar sophistication, and presence, plus I like the captains chairs and Wool interior. And its way cheaper at least until the Touring trim.
 
I actually was looking seriously at the Volvo EX90, its objectively worse at all the Sport and performance and EV aspects, but the Gravity could be considered excess for most people's daily commuting and errands needs. EX90 has similar sophistication, and presence, plus I like the captains chairs and Wool interior. And its way cheaper at least until the Touring trim.
Don't know much about the EX90. I love Volvos! Drove one (242DL) for 35 years!

What is the real-life range? 3rd row comfort? Towing capacity?
 
I too, rent a pickup truck when I need it.

I recall a winter day driving up the NE extension of the PA turnpike to go skiing. It was storming. We were just behind a plow-train (6 PennDot trucks plowing / salting across entire lanes and both shoulders) when they all exited to a service depot to get more salt. Immediately a large SUV with skis on the roof passed us.
A few miles later we caught up to the SUV. It was on its roof. The skis were under it. The passengers standing looking at the carnage. There were no other vehicles around us. They didn't hit anything, or were hit. The vehicles are just unsafe. For everyone. I waved, smiled, and kept going = the point is first tracks. They did not get any that day.

Here's how you get first tracks: Dig out.
1734023377877.webp

wait for township to plow neighborhood
1734023323145.webp

have a great day with low center of gravity / high visibility / great handling CAR
1734022774895.webp

2006 V70R . My sport utility vehicle.

I just don't get SUVs.
 
Last edited:
It’s interesting, as climate change has made me anti-SUV, but now pro EV SUV, or at least pro-Gravity as it’s reportedly way more efficient than all other EV SUBs, has the low center of gravity and phenomenal ESP controls and ride height adjustment you need for the situations you described above. So if you’re gonna make an efficiency compromise, seems like Gravity is the way to go as compared to all others. Emissions control is key to reducing the severity of climate change, but climate change is already here so I’m getting more nervous about low ground clearance cars given extreme weather everywhere lately.
 
How about this pivot?

Fridge vs Minivan?

It was a less bizarre comparison than I thought it might be. Note, however, that Erickson consistently referred to the Gravity as an SUV, not once saying that it looked like a minivan. In fact, he focused on the SUV traits that are found in the Gravity and missing in the Cybertruck.
 
We don't need all that room, just ground clearance and range. I hope that Lucid's midsized lineup includes a vehicle that looks more athletic, not just maximally efficient. For one of the three vehicles anyway.
I am sure you know this already:

Gravity's max ground clearance is 8.7". R1S is 15". Toyota Sienna is 7 ". Lucid Air is 5".
 
I am sure you know this already:

Gravity's max ground clearance is 8.7". R1S is 15". Toyota Sienna is 7 ". Lucid Air is 5".
“…the Gravity Grand Touring comes standard with an air suspension that has 4.2 inches of height adjustment, maxing out at 9.6 inches of ground clearance.”

A RAV4 has 8.4-8.6 in.
Model Y? 6.6in
Nissan Rogue? 8.2 in
Chevy Equinox? 7.6 in

And that’s just the four most popular “SUVs” lol
 
Back
Top