First test drive- First impressions

[xponents]

Great... now I'm hungry

Just make sure to drive your lucid there..

 

[Lucken]

Sunshades. Leather vs cloth. Soft close doors. 200+ more horses. Power frunk.

I feel pretty special already.

Yes, there are some things that for some of us are worth every penny. I'm like that with electronics, TVs, DSLRs etc. I spend on the best of that breed while most others scratch their heads thinking it's an utter waste of money when you get something 'almost as good' for a $1,000 less. To me, in this area, that last 10% is something I appreciate. I'm not sure these things make me 'feel special', but I do appreciate what the top of the line of most areas of electronics bring. With cars my attitude is somewhat different. The extra HP for me is a yawn. Once I'm at sub 5 seconds 0-60 times, it's all a big yawn for me. I'm too old to play mine is faster than yours games. Sunshades, yeah they're nice, but never used them on any of our Lexus vehicles. My wife's Sonata Hybrid has them on the side windows and I've yet to see any of our friends bother to raise them. Soft close doors are nice, but perhaps once a month I don't fully close my door. For me, not enough to get me excited.

When I bought my Tesla MS, I wanted it fast, I had the real itch for a nice EV. The only one that was available in my area back then was a RWD with 'textile' (or whatever Tesla called it) seats. Damn, the most comfortable seats I had ever had up to that point. Comfortable if the car was baking in the summer sun for hours and comfortable in the freezing cold. Yes, I still order leather when I have the opportunity, but purely for looks and to this day I think those textile seats were the most practical in terms of comfort.

The bottom line is everyone has their own 'hot buttons', things that turn them on and things that make them feel special. Each to his/her own.

At any rate we've diverged from the topic at hand, efficiency. I hope we can get some objective remarks regarding this subject. Perhaps the only thing that will answer this question is another test drive where this time the trip meter is reset. Then I can compare with my current daily driver along the same route on the same day. Of course this still won't definitively answer the efficiency question as it pertains to the Pure RWD, but I'll be closer to an answer.

 

[Adnillien]

I'm not sure what version they tested, the e40 or M50, but that's their test. My 'test' is my real world experience, which is the only 'test' that counts. So depicted below is my actual experience after 4,000 miles. So what can I say? As for your idea that each manufacturer includes 'different things' in their calculations, at least in the case of BMW, that 4.0 calculation matches the actual range I receive...unless you want to believe my odometer is also screwed up.

According to the article that I referenced, Inside EVs tested M50 and observed 2.9 mi/kWhr. A similar test on the Lucid DE range observed 4.3 mi/kWhr.

I hope we're not starting a round of 'excuses' for Lucid's stated efficiency numbers that might not mesh with reality. Please guys, let's keep this objective. I am simply trying to find out the truth and I'm not here to denigrate any car or promote any other.

Using a standard comparison like InsideEVs is about as objective as we can get. We know that there are two different EPA test methods that confuse those results. I do not doubt your your Thanksgiving report. however, there is just no way to compare your anecdote to anecdotes from Lucid owners. They are all different and only evidence of anecdotes.

 

[joec]

Yes, there are some things that for some of us are worth every penny. I'm like that with electronics, TVs, DSLRs etc. I spend on the best of that breed while most others scratch their heads thinking it's an utter waste of money when you get something 'almost as good' for a $1,000 less. To me, in this area, that last 10% is something I appreciate. I'm not sure these things make me 'feel special', but I do appreciate what the top of the line of most areas of electronics bring. With cars my attitude is somewhat different. The extra HP for me is a yawn. Once I'm at sub 5 seconds 0-60 times, it's all a big yawn for me. I'm too old to play mine is faster than yours games. Sunshades, yeah they're nice, but never used them on any of our Lexus vehicles. My wife's Sonata Hybrid has them on the side windows and I've yet to see any of our friends bother to raise them. Soft close doors are nice, but perhaps once a month I don't fully close my door. For me, not enough to get me excited.

When I bought my Tesla MS, I wanted it fast, I had the real itch for a nice EV. The only one that was available in my area back then was a RWD with 'textile' (or whatever Tesla called it) seats. Damn, the most comfortable seats I had ever had up to that point. Comfortable if the car was baking in the summer sun for hours and comfortable in the freezing cold. Yes, I still order leather when I have the opportunity, but purely for looks and to this day I think those textile seats were the most practical in terms of comfort.

The bottom line is everyone has their own 'hot buttons', things that turn them on and things that make them feel special. Each to his/her own.

At any rate we've diverged from the topic at hand, efficiency. I hope we can get some objective remarks regarding this subject. Perhaps the only thing that will answer this question is another test drive where this time the trip meter is reset. Then I can compare with my current daily driver along the same route on the same day. Of course this still won't definitively answer the efficiency question as it pertains to the Pure RWD, but I'll be closer to an answer.

The problem is you keep saying “objective” but all any one person can offer is anecdotal.

To truly get these numbers right, you need laboratory conditions. Which, like you said, are not reflective of the real world, anyway.

We have forum members here who get anywhere from 2.1 to 4.2 efficiency. If that doesn’t tell you all you need that there’s somewhat of a fudge factor between these numbers, I don’t know what else to say. Two different Airs can’t actually be that disparate in efficiency. There have to be external factors at play.

There are so many variables involved in efficiency for a EV that even trying to track it on one car, let alone comparing two different cars, is folly. All it would take is for one day to be slightly windier than the next, and your data is tainted.

The way I see it, if the car is running out of juice before it gets you where you need to go, you need a different car. Otherwise, for me, I’m just going to drive and not sweat the details.

 

[Lucken]

According to the article that I referenced, Inside EVs tested M50 and observed 2.9 mi/kWhr. A similar test on the Lucid DE range observed 4.3 mi/kWhr.


Using a standard comparison like InsideEVs is about as objective as we can get. We know that there are two different EPA test methods that confuse those results. I do not doubt your your Thanksgiving report. however, there is just no way to compare your anecdote to anecdotes from Lucid owners. They are all different and only evidence of anecdotes.

I have the e40, so their test results are not applicable to my car. The e40 gets better range and better efficiency than the M50 with the same battery. Just as the e40 gets better range and better efficiency than the AWD i4 variant, I'm sure the RWD Pure variant will get better range & efficiency than the AWD version. The bottom line is I am actually getting 4.0 mi/kWh lifetime efficiency (I posted the actual picture because I know some can be skeptical), so that is going to be my benchmark. I'm not alone, the BMW forums have many owners with similar results. Obviously there are many who get less and love to go full throttle as often as they can.

However if the Lucid can actually deliver 4.3 mi/kWh with the kind of driving I do, that would be terrific. Objectively, if the Inside EV tests you quoted are even remotely accurate, the Lucid should crush my i4's already excellent efficiency, simply crush it. But honestly, I'm not seeing much evidence of that from actual owners. My tester yesterday, when I looked at the recent trips, all seemed to be in the neighborhood of 3.0. Now this is a tester where a) you can't go on a highway and b) it's software limited to 80mph. The route they take is all local streets without much traffic, so it's not really a 'stop & go' scenario. Range in that kind of driving should be good. So I don't know what to make of that.

Remember too that Tom Moloughney from Inside EV tested the Lucid and got over the 500 mile range mark, yet I haven't seen many reports here of anything approaching that. Many seem to complain about not getting anything near the range estimates. So real world driving routes vary considerably and every EV behaves differently under those different circumstances.

 

[Lucken]

The problem is you keep saying “objective” but all any one person can offer is anecdotal.

To truly get these numbers right, you need laboratory conditions. Which, like you said, are not reflective of the real world, anyway.

We have forum members here who get anywhere from 2.1 to 4.2 efficiency. If that doesn’t tell you all you need that there’s somewhat of a fudge factor between these numbers, I don’t know what else to say. Two different Airs can’t actually be that disparate in efficiency. There have to be external factors at play.

There are so many variables involved in efficiency for a EV that even trying to track it on one car, let alone comparing two different cars, is folly. All it would take is for one day to be slightly windier than the next, and your data is tainted.

The way I see it, if the car is running out of juice before it gets you where you need to go, you need a different car. Otherwise, for me, I’m just going to drive and not sweat the details.

Joe, don't numbers that vary from 2.1 to 4.2 tell you something regarding Lucid's efficiency claims? My goodness, Lucid claims 4.6 or thereabouts. I would expect to see at least a certain percentage getting Lucid's advertised efficiency if they're even remotely accurate. If nobody is getting it, nobody, then certainly one is justified in questioning the accuracy of their claims. Understand, please, I'm not trying to play devil's advocate here, I'm just trying to gather facts & experiences from owners.

 

[SDHacker]

Joe, don't numbers that vary from 2.1 to 4.2 tell you something regarding Lucid's efficiency claims? My goodness, Lucid claims 4.6 or thereabouts. I would expect to see at least a certain percentage getting Lucid's advertised efficiency if they're even remotely accurate. If nobody is getting it, nobody, then certainly one is justified in questioning the accuracy of their claims. Understand, please, I'm not trying to play devil's advocate here, I'm just trying to gather facts & experiences from owners.

You keep saying Lucid but you need to substitute EPA in each instance. That is a tested and verified result done by an outside party, not Lucid. Lucid is simply advertising what the EPA results were. It's absolutely what @joec stated, your anecdotal results for a Pure RWD may be very good but mine might be poor - it just depends on conditions and how we drive. I can get 4.2 if I want and I have gotten that on a long highway trip but I've also gotten 2.9 in mostly street driving and moving through traffic. So if I drive mainly on the highway, I'm reporting 1 figure but if I drive mainly on the street, I'm reporting a much lower number (and we've seen this on the forum). Of course, you can drive like @Bill55 and get low numbers regardless of highway vs street, he just wants to have fun.

 

[Lucken]

You keep saying Lucid but you need to substitute EPA in each instance. That is a tested and verified result done by an outside party, not Lucid. Lucid is simply advertising what the EPA results were. It's absolutely what @joec stated, your anecdotal results for a Pure RWD may be very good but mine might be poor - it just depends on conditions and how we drive. I can get 4.2 if I want and I have gotten that on a long highway trip but I've also gotten 2.9 in mostly street driving and moving through traffic. So if I drive mainly on the highway, I'm reporting 1 figure but if I drive mainly on the street, I'm reporting a much lower number (and we've seen this on the forum). Of course, you can drive like @Bill55 and get low numbers regardless of highway vs street, he just wants to have fun.

It's always been my understanding that the car manufacturer does the EPA testing and reports that to the EPA. The EPA may take a certain percentage of these cars to retest for validation. At least that's been my understanding.

So your example is an interesting one and does provide some useful information, thanks. There may be a greater discrepancy between highway and local driving with the Lucid than I see with the i4. That's fine and this is at least one interesting datapoint. But even with highway driving, you're still not at 4.6. Of course you may be traveling at 75-80 which would obviously lower the numbers as would lower ambient temperatures. As I said, I'll take another test drive and make sure the trip meter is reset to zero. From the point they start the test drive, it's enough travel distance from the Studio where they come from to have had the car warmed up.

 

[stevelitchfieldpark]

If efficiency is your most important factor, and not comfort, handling and miles per full charge, then the Lucid might not be the best option. How far does a BMW i4 go on a charge and how far does a Lucid go on a full charge driving the same way? i don't drive 60 mph to get the best efficiency as I'm not that concerned about that. In my opinion, discussion of Lucid not getting the EPA results is really getting old.

 

[level]

Remember too that Tom Moloughney from Inside EV tested the Lucid and got over the 500 mile range mark, yet I haven't seen many reports here of anything approaching that. Many seem to complain about not getting anything near the range estimates. So real world driving routes vary considerably and every EV behaves differently under those different circumstances.

YouTuber managed to travel 687 miles in the Lucid Air Dream Edition.

The Perfect Cure For Range Anxiety: The Lucid Air Dream Edition

With a few tricks up his sleeve, a YouTuber managed to travel 687 miles in the EV before the battery eventually died.

www.hotcars.com

If one can go 687 miles in a single charge, it should be pretty efficient... right?

 

[stratus]

The efficiency question is complicated .
I would like to emphasize that in cold temperatures ( in my experience ) the Air takes a pronounced hit in efficiency, and I wonder if that is related to the car’s weight. At temperatures below 15 degrees , which I have experienced multiple times now, my m/kWh can be as low as 2.1, with in town driving, using low heater settings and using seat and steering wheel heat. There have even been a few times when I was below 2.1 m/kWh.

When I first received the car in September and through most of October I was achieving 3.8 m/kWh without really paying much attention, just driving naturally.

I actually expected a large decrease in efficiency during winter but it may be a little more pronounced than I had anticipated. This likely because the Air is my first experience with a full EV. This NOT a complaint or criticism; it’s just an observation. The lower efficiency in winter doesn’t bother me because I plug in often in my garage and don’t take long trips in winter with the car. If I go up to the mountains to backcountry ski I take the Subaru.

For the last 3.5 months I have done 90 percent of my driving with the Air and I am satisfied with the m/kWh.

 

[Thinjake]

I've had my GT for 2.5 months. In warmer weather, I was getting north of 3.0 but I was also driving like an a$$hole!

Now, in upstate NY with snow and teens and 20's, I have the heater going non-stop with the seat heaters on. The sound system is always on as well. Massaging seats half the time as well. In that environment, I am getting 2.2-2.5. But I am also still driving like I stole it!

I will never get 4.6....and I doubt I will ever see 4 unless I am specifically TRYING to drive that slow.

Lastly, I never came close to EPA on Jag nor can I on my wife's Genesis GV80. Can I get better gas mileage by driving slower and barely accelerating? Yes, but I don't.

Moral of the story....you will NOT get 4.6 unless you drive on flat ground, with no extra electric drag in 70 degree weather, while taking 45 seconds to get to 60 MPH and leaving it there for 7+ hours.

 

[AZLucidGuy]

Interesting that they put the bear on it.

Lucid is offering free bear decals. They install them for owners who want them.

 

[Rogue]

Joe, don't numbers that vary from 2.1 to 4.2 tell you something regarding Lucid's efficiency claims? My goodness, Lucid claims 4.6 or thereabouts. I would expect to see at least a certain percentage getting Lucid's advertised efficiency if they're even remotely accurate. If nobody is getting it, nobody, then certainly one is justified in questioning the accuracy of their claims. Understand, please, I'm not trying to play devil's advocate here, I'm just trying to gather facts & experiences from owners.

At this point, owners on this forum have told you the range based on a wide variety of driving styles, conditions, etc. Pick someone you think gets close to your driving style and weather. There is your number. It's a sliding scale based on innumerable factors.

Driving like you are with Miss Daisy at ideal temperatures on relatively flat road gets you the EPA range (4.2 for 21" and 4.6 for 19" or thereabouts). Cold temperatures on a scale starting from about 70 and below cuts efficiency as much as 20%+.

Drive like you stole it in ideal temperatures, you start to get 2.8 or worse, even worse in colder weather and extremely cold weather.

I don't understand the obsession over getting exactly the EPA rated range. You pay for what you use. An electric car is not a magic bullet against physics. I drove my hybrid at 85+ from Huntsville, AL to Tampa, FL. Guess what. I lost 20+% of the EPA rated range: 56 -> 44. I drive it conservatively I can sometimes eek out 61+ mpg when driving constant below 45 mph.

At home charging is cheap, particularly compared to less efficient gas cars of 30 or less mpg for the same equivalent mileage.

 

[stratus]

At this point, owners on this forum have told you the range based on a wide variety of driving styles, conditions, etc. Pick someone you think gets close to your driving style and weather. There is your number. It's a sliding scale based on innumerable factors.

Driving like you are with Miss Daisy at ideal temperatures on relatively flat road gets you the EPA range (4.2 for 21" and 4.6 for 19" or thereabouts). Cold temperatures on a scale starting from about 70 and below cuts efficiency as much as 20%+.

Drive like you stole it in ideal temperatures, you start to get 2.8 or worse, even worse in colder weather and extremely cold weather.

I don't understand the obsession over getting exactly the EPA rated range. You pay for what you use. An electric car is not a magic bullet against physics. I drove my hybrid at 85+ from Huntsville, AL to Tampa, FL. Guess what. I lost 20+% of the EPA rated range: 56 -> 44. I drive it conservatively I can sometimes eek out 61+ mpg when driving constant below 45 mph.

At home charging is cheap, particularly compared to less efficient gas cars of 30 or less mpg for the same equivalent mileage.

Great summary.

 

[Babyrocko1908]

Interesting that they put the bear on it.

That's the first thing I noticed and I just smiled. I love the Lucid Bear!

 

[Lucken]

If efficiency is your most important factor, and not comfort, handling and miles per full charge, then the Lucid might not be the best option. How far does a BMW i4 go on a charge and how far does a Lucid go on a full charge driving the same way? i don't drive 60 mph to get the best efficiency as I'm not that concerned about that. In my opinion, discussion of Lucid not getting the EPA results is really getting old.

I suppose it may be getting old precisely because many are less than happy with the delta between the heavily touted high efficiency (by Rawlinson himself) and owners actual experience. Just a guess.

My criteria are comfort, handling, range & efficiency (the latter two are obviously linked). Sure you can keep installing larger and larger batteries for greater range, but one of Lucid’s virtues was to be higher efficiency so that great range could be achieved without huge batteries & extra weight.

To answer the part of your question I can answer, the i4 can reliably go 320 miles in nice weather. The part I can’t answer and precisely why I’m engaging in this discussion, is to get a handle on the Lucid part of this equation. It may well be, based on what I’m hearing thus far, there will be little difference in full charge range between the Pure and the i4.

I suspect I’m spinning my wheels here (bad pun) and only more hands on experience with the Lucid will answer that.

I apologize if I’m being a pain here, but I’m just trying to learn from owner’s experience.

 

[stevelitchfieldpark]

I suppose it may be getting old precisely because many are less than happy with the delta between the heavily touted high efficiency (by Rawlinson himself) and owners actual experience. Just a guess.

My criteria are comfort, handling, range & efficiency (the latter two are obviously linked). Sure you can keep installing larger and larger batteries for greater range, but one of Lucid’s virtues was to be higher efficiency so that great range could be achieved without huge batteries & extra weight.

To answer the part of your question I can answer, the i4 can reliably go 320 miles in nice weather. The part I can’t answer and precisely why I’m engaging in this discussion, is to get a handle on the Lucid part of this equation. It may well be, based on what I’m hearing thus far, there will be little difference in full charge range between the Pure and the i4.

I suspect I’m spinning my wheels here (bad pun) and only more hands on experience with the Lucid will answer that.

I apologize if I’m being a pain here, but I’m just trying to learn from owner’s experience.

I'm afraid that you will have to wait until at least a couple months after the Pure is delivered to get a comparison between the I4 and the Pure as most of us have the Dream or the GT.

 

[Grnr92663]

It's always been my understanding that the car manufacturer does the EPA testing and reports that to the EPA. The EPA may take a certain percentage of these cars to retest for validation. At least that's been my understanding.

So your example is an interesting one and does provide some useful information, thanks. There may be a greater discrepancy between highway and local driving with the Lucid than I see with the i4. That's fine and this is at least one interesting datapoint. But even with highway driving, you're still not at 4.6. Of course you may be traveling at 75-80 which would obviously lower the numbers as would lower ambient temperatures. As I said, I'll take another test drive and make sure the trip meter is reset to zero. From the point they start the test drive, it's enough travel distance from the Studio where they come from to have had the car warmed up.

If you exam the certifications on the EPA website (open to public), you'd see that the EPA did retest a significant number of results from manufactures (Lucid included). Notice that manufacturers have option of keeping their number, or the EPA number, whichever LOWER.

Moreover, I believe most manufacturer do not conduct the EPA test themselves, majority of them sent out the work to an independent contractor/facility in Arizona.

Simply entering the manufacture info (and model) into this link. The results are quite comprehensive.

Basic Search | Document Index System | US EPA

dis.epa.gov

 

[victoryroad]

3500 miles in ten weeks with gradually lower ambient temperatures in the hilly terrain that surrounds me. 3.5 mi/kWh total over 3500 miles but only in the high 2's as the weather has gotten colder. I figure on 3 mi/kWh overall this winter on winter compound tires that are softer than the AS tires. Have to keep psi at 49. The OP's i4 experience is impressive. The fact is that there are a number of variables that impact efficiency so comparisons are difficult. Like the OP, I do not push it and during the week my trips are often only a couple of miles, so not especially efficient. The driving experience more than makes up for less efficient driving intervals for me.