Gravity 75 mph Range

[borski]

but I detest being tailgated and having cars whip in and out of lanes around me, as happens when driving slower than other traffic.

You should move. I spent a week driving that Acadia around FL and your neighbors whipped in and out of lanes around me as I was comfortably doing 92 or something, so I don’t think this is an issue with how fast you drive.

Since all three wheel sizes have the same width tires, the only effect on range from wheel choices seems to derive from airflow over the wheel face due to different designs.

And rubber.

By the way, OOS reported that Lucid loves the Hankook Ion tires,

Source? I’d love to see this; I know nothing about the Hankooks and am curious.

 

[hmp10]

What are your road-tripping patterns? To me, even 386 EPA is a very comfortable number. If it converts to 300+ real-life under any conditions - heat / cold / speeding (and I think it will), that's sufficient with existing infrastructure. My current car - EQS - goes 300 miles even if I go 85-90 in extreme heat, and I always need a stop faster than the car itself. Coffee / restroom break / stretch my legs. I just try to align my stop with a charging location, and by the time I'm back in my car, it has plenty of juice to go further.

We do road trips mainly in the southeast (Florida up into the Carolinas) and usually fly for longer trips. We also only road trip in our EVs during warmer months, as we run summer tires on them.

As for charging, we sometimes leave home with a 100% Level 2 charge but never charge above 95% at Level 3 chargers, as I'm a stickler about battery stress. We plan our charging stops with 20-30% charge remaining for several reasons. First is our abysmal experience with using Electrify America chargers and problems occasionally even with ChargePoint. We always want to arrive at a charging stop with plenty of range to find an alternative, if necessary. Then there is the risk of having to take a lengthy detour off a main route due to things such as blocked highways from crashes, etc. Finally is weather. Especially in Florida, you can encounter severe thunderstorms that seriously reduce range at highway speeds.

We also prefer secondary roads to interstates for pleasure travel: more variation in terrain (curves, hills) for sportier driving, less stress, less monotony, more interesting scenery, more interesting food choices . . . and, unfortunately, fewer charging opportunities without detours over to major routes.

With the ubiquity of gas stations I never thought in these terms. But the charging infrastructure imposes a myriad of new considerations.

With our Air (EPA rated at 451 miles), this means we can usually go 230-240 miles at around 80mph using 70% of the charge. This is three hours of driving if we're on an interstate, and that is about all our backs and bladders can take without a break. Interestingly, we have found that we get about 78-78% of rated range on a road trip whether we're driving at sustained speeds on an interstate or whether we're driving at more varied speeds (but considerably lower on average than the interstate) on back roads with more slowing, stopping, and starting.

We usually don't mind longer charging stops, so the strategy of driving down closer to 0% charge and topping up only to 50-60% that some people advocate in order to stay on the faster part of the charging curve doesn't really interest us. We also don't mind more frequent charging stops -- or wouldn't if there weren't the growing issue of finding queues waiting to charge.

Bottom line: I so prefer road tripping in an EV for the driving experience that I'll put up with a lot of this and accept it as a fair trade for avoiding gas stations the much greater part of the year in which our driving is local. (We have home charging, of course.)

 

[hmp10]

You should move. I spent a week driving that Acadia around FL and your neighbors whipped in and out of lanes around me as I was comfortably doing 92 or something, so I don’t think this is an issue with how fast you drive.

Okay, now you're calling for a confession. Although I talk about doing 80mph on road trips, that's kinda an average. I don't let too many other drivers get by me when they do that. I opted for the DE Performance version for a reason.

And rubber.

That's what I found so interesting about the mid-size and largest wheel packages having the same EPA rating on the Gravity, as one wears all-season rubber and one wears summer high-performance rubber. Not only did I assume summer tires would produce less range, but the larger wheels also look less aero to me. This leaves me wondering if there's some offset going on between wheel airflow and tire tread where one factor cancels the effect of the other?

Source? I’d love to see this; I know nothing about the Hankooks and am curious.

Me, too. I looked them up on Tire Rack after I saw @Knucklehead's post, and they weren't yet road tested by Tire Rack.

 

[borski]

Okay, now you're calling for a confession. Although I talk about doing 80mph on road trips, that's kinda an average. I don't let too many other drivers get by me when they do that. I opted for the DE Performance version for a reason.

 

[Neurio]

That's what I found so interesting about the mid-size and largest wheel packages having the same EPA rating on the Gravity, as one wears all-season rubber and one wears summer high-performance rubber. Not only did I assume summer tires would produce less range, but the larger wheels also look less aero to me. This leaves me wondering if there's some offset going on between wheel airflow and tire tread where one factor cancels the effect of the other?

I think the issue is primarily with the tire itself. The Michelin Primacy is not an EV tire, so it likely has significantly higher rolling resistance compared to the Hankook and the Pirelli.

Per Google AI:
When comparing the Michelin Primacy Tour A/S and the Hankook iON Evo AS, the Hankook generally stands out as the better choice for maximizing electric vehicle range due to its significantly lower rolling resistance, while the Michelin might offer slightly better overall handling and grip, particularly in wet conditions, though many users report the Hankook's wet performance to be very good as well; both tires are considered quiet and comfortable, with the Hankook often being noted as noticeably quieter. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]
Key points to consider: [1, 2, 4]

• Efficiency: The Hankook iON Evo AS is specifically designed for electric vehicles and boasts superior rolling resistance, leading to better range compared to the Michelin Primacy Tour A/S. [1, 2, 4]
• Noise: Many users report the Hankook iON Evo AS as noticeably quieter than the Michelin, especially on road noise. [2, 4, 7]
• Handling: While the Michelin might have a slight edge in overall grip and handling, especially in wet conditions, most users find the Hankook's performance to be very satisfactory. [1, 8, 9]
• Price: The Hankook iON Evo AS is often priced more competitively than the Michelin Primacy Tour A/S. [1, 3, 10]

Who should choose the Michelin Primacy Tour A/S: [1, 8, 11]

• Drivers who prioritize slightly better wet weather handling and overall grip. [1, 8, 11]
• Drivers who are not primarily concerned with maximizing EV range. [1, 4, 8]

Who should choose the Hankook iON Evo AS: [1, 2, 4]

• Electric vehicle owners who want to maximize their range by prioritizing low rolling resistance. [1, 2, 4]
• Drivers who value a quieter ride and are happy with good all-season performance. [2, 4, 7]

 

[borski]

I think the issue is primarily with the tire itself. The Michelin Primacy is not an EV tire, so it likely has significantly higher rolling resistance compared to the Hankook and the Pirelli.

Per Google AI:
When comparing the Michelin Primacy Tour A/S and the Hankook iON Evo AS, the Hankook generally stands out as the better choice for maximizing electric vehicle range due to its significantly lower rolling resistance, while the Michelin might offer slightly better overall handling and grip, particularly in wet conditions, though many users report the Hankook's wet performance to be very good as well; both tires are considered quiet and comfortable, with the Hankook often being noted as noticeably quieter. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]
Key points to consider: [1, 2, 4]

• Efficiency: The Hankook iON Evo AS is specifically designed for electric vehicles and boasts superior rolling resistance, leading to better range compared to the Michelin Primacy Tour A/S. [1, 2, 4]
• Noise: Many users report the Hankook iON Evo AS as noticeably quieter than the Michelin, especially on road noise. [2, 4, 7]
• Handling: While the Michelin might have a slight edge in overall grip and handling, especially in wet conditions, most users find the Hankook's performance to be very satisfactory. [1, 8, 9]
• Price: The Hankook iON Evo AS is often priced more competitively than the Michelin Primacy Tour A/S. [1, 3, 10]

Who should choose the Michelin Primacy Tour A/S: [1, 8, 11]

• Drivers who prioritize slightly better wet weather handling and overall grip. [1, 8, 11]
• Drivers who are not primarily concerned with maximizing EV range. [1, 4, 8]

Who should choose the Hankook iON Evo AS: [1, 2, 4]

• Electric vehicle owners who want to maximize their range by prioritizing low rolling resistance. [1, 2, 4]
• Drivers who value a quieter ride and are happy with good all-season performance. [2, 4, 7]

I agree - I got that same Google AI result

But I’m curious as to the differing performance characteristics. I’d really love to see some reviews.

 

[Electrified]

Actual question: why get low-profile summer tires on an SUV? Doesn’t it pretty much defeat the purpose of an SUV?

Because it's better to look cool than be practical................

 

[borski]

Because it's better to look cool than be practical................

Fair enough. I guess I try to balance both; that’s why I wear Maui Jims.

 

[Pragmatic]

The summer tires make sense because it's a minivan. If it were an SUV then all seasons for off-roading.

 

[037]

You should move. I spent a week driving that Acadia around FL and your neighbors whipped in and out of lanes around me as I was comfortably doing 92 or something, so I don’t think this is an issue with how fast you drive.


And rubber.


Source? I’d love to see this; I know nothing about the Hankooks and am curious.

TireRack non SUV tire comparison test. Great for range, not so great for rain.

https://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/testDisplay.jsp?ttid=327

 

[Knucklehead]

Source? I’d love to see this; I know nothing about the Hankooks and am curious.

If you have the patience, it is in this OOS 2-hour video:

I didn't mark the spot where they talk about it, but I think it was when they are going through the configurator and selecting the wheels.

BTW - I put Hankook Ion tires on my Mach-e, and they are great. I saw a 7% highway range improvement over the OEM tires. I find it very interesting that OOS/Lucid praise how well they handle, as I think they are more slick than the OEM tires they replaced, but certainly the efficiency is way better. I like them, though. They are very quiet.

I checked Tire Rack and they don't carry sizes that fit any of the wheels on the Gravity. So the base set must be an OEM special for Lucid, which I am sure will show up on Tire Rack eventually.

 

[Knucklehead]

I noticed that adding the third row knocks 3% off the EPA range estimate. This is very surprising., because I didn't think those seats would be very heavy. What happens to the range when you have seven people in the car?

Luckily for the range I am concerned about, steady state highway, weight has a minor impact, and the extra row should not impact range at speed.

In the OOS Gravity first drive video (not the podcast posted above), they discuss EPA range and how important keeping the weight down was for meeting the 450-mile range result. To me that means the city driving component is a significant contributor to the 450-mile range result, which consequently likely means highway range will be even worse than expected. Now I am second guessing the 80%, factor and maybe @hmp10 is right about it being closer to 2.4 mi/kWh. I hope this is not the case.

However, 80% of 437 is 350 miles, which is still good for me.

 

[037]

If you have the patience, it is in this OOS 2-hour video:

I didn't mark the spot where they talk about it, but I think it was when they are going through the configurator and selecting the wheels.

BTW - I put Hankook Ion tires on my Mach-e, and they are great. I saw a 7% highway range improvement over the OEM tires. I find it very interesting that OOS/Lucid praise how well they handle, as I think they are more slick than the OEM tires they replaced, but certainly the efficiency is way better. I like them, though. They are very quiet.

I checked Tire Rack and they don't carry sizes that fit any of the wheels on the Gravity. So the base set must be an OEM special for Lucid, which I am sure will show up on Tire Rack eventually.

Gravity OEM 20/21 tires are already on TireRack when searched by vehicle

 

[Knucklehead]

Gravity OEM 20/21 tires are already on TireRack when searched by vehicle

Excellent!

I think I was looking at the list of sizes for the Ion summer tires, not the EV SUV tires. Thanks for catching that! Here are the sizes available:

 

[hmp10]

Gravity OEM 20/21 tires are already on TireRack when searched by vehicle

Unfortunately, TireRack did not publish the graphs for the Hankooks they usually post when they test a tire. I especially like the spider charts they use. Their comments about the Hankook's wet traction were especially worrisome to me, as our driving in south Florida is often during torrential rains. That may be one of the reasons I opt for the 22/23" wheels (or the 21/22" wheels if I want to swap the tires over to Pirellis), as I have found the Pirelli PZero to be very good in the wet.

 

[037]

Unfortunately, TireRack did not publish the graphs for the Hankooks they usually post when they test a tire. I especially like the spider charts they use. Their comments about the Hankook's wet traction were especially worrisome to me, as our driving in south Florida is often during torrential rains. That may be one of the reasons I opt for the 22/23" wheels (or the 21/22" wheels if I want to swap the tires over to Pirellis), as I have found the Pirelli PZero to be very good in the wet.

They have tested the non SUV iON evo and they did do well in dry and range but sucked in rain.

 

[hmp10]

In the OOS Gravity first drive video (not the podcast posted above), they discuss EPA range and how important keeping the weight down was for meeting the 450-mile range result. To me that means the city driving component is a significant contributor to the 450-mile range result, which consequently likely means highway range will be even worse than expected. Now I am second guessing the 80%, factor and maybe @hmp10 is right about it being closer to 2.4 mi/kWh. I hope this is not the case.

However, 80% of 437 is 350 miles, which is still good for me.

And now that I've seen the 386-mile EPA rating for the configuration I want, I'm kinda bummed. However, as long as we're willing to risk using a bit more of the battery's capacity before we stop for a charge on a road trip, we could still plan for charging stops pretty much the same way we do in the Air: 230-240 miles.

I'm hoping that the tightening of EPA testing protocols since our Air was rated at 451 miles will bring the Gravity's real-world range reduction more into line with our Air's reduction despite the greater impact aerodynamic drag will have on the Gravity at highway speeds.

But when you say 350 miles is still good for you, does that mean you would really use the battery's full capacity between stops?

You know, so much of this whole discussion would become moot if we had anything like the EV charging infrastructure that is beginning to mature in parts of Europe. We could just buy whatever EV we liked most and drive it the way we liked and only worry about how often and how long you needed to stop for a charge, not whether a working charger could be found or whether you'd have to wait an hour to get an empty stall.

 

[hmp10]

Actual question: why get low-profile summer tires on an SUV? Doesn’t it pretty much defeat the purpose of an SUV?

Maybe not this SUV.

The more I consider what we saw of the Gravity's driving dynamics in those test drive reviews last week, the more a new thought is coming into my head. Its arrival will put four cars in our garage with only two drivers in the household. So we've been discussing what, if anything, to get rid of. It was mostly between the Model S Plaid and the Honda Odyssey, but never the Air.

But, as much as I still love the Air, I'm coming to recognize some things. It was a very early production car and still occasionally has a problem crop up that was forestalled by changes in later production units, and the 4-year leg of the warranty that has covered those things will be up in a few months. I and the friends we carry around in it regularly are all getting a little older, and getting into and out of it is getting a bit more challenging. I much prefer its UI suite to that of our Tesla, but it still has some quirks that promise to be addressed with the Gravity's UI.

So . . . is it possible the Gravity will get close enough to the superb driving dynamics of the Air that it could take its place as my favorite vehicle of all time? I don't need an off-road vehicle, but I'm not willing to be without a great driving machine to hand as long as I can still drive (and that Tesla ain't it).

Oddly enough, this might finally come down to how I find the squircle to be. I'm a little leery that it might be too close to that dreaded yoke we finally yanked out of the Tesla, and I want to know before I commit to anything.

 

[borski]

Maybe not this SUV.

The more I consider what we saw of the Gravity's driving dynamics in those test drive reviews last week, the more a new thought is coming into my head. Its arrival will put four cars in our garage with only two drivers in the household. So we've been discussing what, if anything, to get rid of. It was mostly between the Model S Plaid and the Honda Odyssey, but never the Air.

But, as much as I still love the Air, I'm coming to recognize some things. It was a very early production car and still occasionally has a problem crop up that was forestalled by changes in later production units, and the 4-year leg of the warranty that has covered those things will be up in a few months. I and the friends we carry around in it regularly are all getting a little older, and getting into and out of it is getting a bit more challenging. I much prefer its UI suite to that of our Tesla, but it still has some quirks that promise to be addressed with the Gravity's UI.

So . . . is it possible the Gravity will get close enough to the superb driving dynamics of the Air that it could take its place as my favorite vehicle of all time? I don't need an off-road vehicle, but I'm not willing to be without a great driving machine to hand as long as I can still drive (and that Tesla ain't it).

Oddly enough, this might finally come down to how I find the squircle to be. I'm a little leery that it might be too close to that dreaded yoke we finally yanked out of the Tesla, and I want to know before I commit to anything.

I can’t convince myself to love big cars for anything other than snowy or rough road road trips.

I hear you on the rest.

 

[Ughwhy]

Aerodynamic drag is only part of the picture. If you put the drive trains of a Lucid, Tesla, BMW, etc., and had them move the same vehicle shell (same weight, drag, etc.) at the same speed in the same conditions, the Lucid drive train and battery efficiencies are (reportedly) significantly more efficient in their energy use for that same load. So there are a ton of factors to consider.