xponents
Active Member
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2022
- Messages
- 5,879
- Reaction score
- 3,228
- Location
- Edison, NJ
- Cars
- Kia EV9, future Air?
Just make sure to drive your lucid there..Great... now I'm hungry
Just make sure to drive your lucid there..Great... now I'm hungry
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.Sunshades. Leather vs cloth. Soft close doors. 200+ more horses. Power frunk.
I feel pretty special already.
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'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.
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 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.
The problem is you keep saying “objective” but all any one person can offer is anecdotal.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.
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.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.
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.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.
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.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.
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.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.
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.
Lucid is offering free bear decals. They install them for owners who want them.Interesting that they put the bear on it.
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.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.
That's the first thing I noticed and I just smiled. I love the Lucid Bear!Interesting that they put the bear on it.
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.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'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.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.
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.