Gravity Efficiency and Range

[CraZ8]

I’m well over the break in period at 4000 miles and with the start of moderate weather in the northeast ( still around freezing this morning however ) I have seen my daily trip or trip after charging mi/kWh climb out of the basement to around 2.9-3.1. My longer averages on trip A and trip B are hovering in the 2.68 range and my dynamic range is still clocking in at ridiculous 2.55 which I find inexplicable. I have no idea of what algorithm Lucid uses but I feel dynamic range should reflect a shorter time / distance period to account for changing temps and conditions. I’m no longer driving in sub zero temps and won’t be for another 9 months but my dynamic range I feel still reflects that.
Ps I took the gravity to cars and coffee and even some of the avowed and vocal EV haters were impressed by the car.

 

[dbsb3233]

Maybe Lucid should scrap the EPA number and advertise the Edmonds real world range number of 401 miles? Maybe that will make folks feel happier with their range? I kinda wish all manufacturers would drop the EPA numbers, especially with EVs...

400 is looking like it would have been a much more reasonable number than 450. I still wanna to see the summer numbers before saying for sure, but even the warm weather results are suggesting 400 is about as much as people can realistically reach, on the upper end. 400 is 3.25 MPK (counting the full 123 kWh battery) or 3.42 (counting 117 usable). Maybe we can reach that in the summer after the car is fully broken in.

As a fledgling EV manufacture, I'd probably oversell the range number if I could get away with it too. That eye-popping 450 number likely has sold more vehicles for them (even if it proves to be unachievable).

 

[DeaneG]

400 is looking like it would have been a much more reasonable number than 450. I still wanna to see the summer numbers before saying for sure, but even the warm weather results are suggesting 400 is about as much as people can realistically reach, on the upper end. 400 is 3.25 MPK (counting the full 123 kWh battery) or 3.42 (counting 117 usable). Maybe we can reach that in the summer after the car is fully broken in...

You'll likely achieve the EPA range if you drive at EPA speeds: an average of 48mph on the highway, and 21mph in the city.

 

[tmichael]

You'll likely achieve the EPA range if you drive at EPA speeds: an average of 48mph on the highway, and 21mph in the city.

Yeah, I'll be doing that REAL SOON NOW! That's why I paid for 1,070 HP!

 

[dbsb3233]

You'll likely achieve the EPA range if you drive at EPA speeds: an average of 48mph on the highway, and 21mph in the city.

That's what I'm talking about - city driving. No one is getting close to 450.

Highway is obviously going to be (somewhat) less. Always is in EVs.

But yeah, I think I remember reading that EPA methodology uses 48 MPH. I was thinking that was combined but I could be remembering wrong. Is that just for highway?? Even more ridiculous if it is. That's crazy.

 

[BS8899]

You'll likely achieve the EPA range if you drive at EPA speeds: an average of 48mph on the highway, and 21mph in the city.

Exactly! With Lucid sticking with EPA 5 cycle (with Lucid's fudge factor) but selling the vast majority of their cars in the US and buyers are "enjoying" the drive dynamics, that's why many owners are surprised that the realizable range, when driving in typical US city/hwy speeds, are 20-25% less than Lucid's EPA claims.

I think Lucid's efficiencies on both the Air and the Gravity are good amongst its competitors. But quoting EPA and "implying" lucid is 15 to 20% better than its competitors is setting the owners up for disappointment.

@borski's position is that this is an EPA problem, not a Lucid problem is a head-scratcher. Other EV manufacturers (e.g., German EVs) also use EPA (OK, 2 cycle) and then derated their numbers to match reality. Whilst, Lucid doesn't do that. I am concerned that Lucid is weaving a tangle-web!

 

[DeaneG]

...But yeah, I think I remember reading that EPA methodology uses 48 MPH. I was thinking that was combined but I could be remembering wrong. Is that just for highway?? Even more ridiculous if it is...

The EPA 5-cycle test's average highway speed is just over 48mph. Maximum speed during the highway test is 59.9mph.

I think the rubber meets the road when we get 70mph range test results for the EX60 and Neue iX3, and compare that to 70mph range of Gravity of about 400 miles.

In the meantime, the EV9, EX90, and Lyriq's steady 70mph range is 250-270 miles. Rivian is in roughly the same ballpark depending on configuration.

 

[9point81]

@borski's position is that this is an EPA problem, not a Lucid problem is a head-scratcher. Other EV manufacturers (e.g., German EVs) also use EPA (OK, 2 cycle) and then derated their numbers to match reality. Whilst, Lucid doesn't do that. I am concerned that Lucid is weaving a tangle-web!

Not just @borski. I take issue with with EPA numbers. I have had issues with their method of testing long before I ever heard of a Gravity or a company called Lucid. Feel exactly the opposite way and scratching my head how anyone could be good with EPA but blame the manufacturer...

 

[BS8899]

Not just @borski. I take issue with with EPA numbers. I have had issues with their method of testing long before I ever heard of a Gravity or a company called Lucid. Feel exactly the opposite way and scratching my head how anyone could be good with EPA but blame the manufacturer...

I am NOT endorsing the EPA methodology and the EPA numbers. As a starting point, EPA tests are done on a dynamometer. As such, there is no wind resistance at speed. Now, I presume the manufacturers are supposed to use their fudge factor to account for some of these gaps (e.g., wind resistance at speed impacting efficiency). But the whole process is so muddled (by both EPA and the manufacturers). Yet, it is a legal requirement on the sticker.

With respect to the question of range/efficiency, it is apparent that some manufacturers adjust their claims to more closely match the driving conditions. Others don't.

 

[eelpout]

But that's not true for many ICE cars either. I've about never gotten EPA range on any ICE car I've owned but never really cared with gas bc it was always plentiful and everywhere. I also have always had a lead foot so I'm sure that's why but I didn't care. With Gravity, this is the first EV (3rd for us) where the range and charging, not to mention infrastructure improvementa and access to Tesla network, has gotten me back to the point where again I don't care about EPA range. I think way too many people are hung up on that number. I get it's advertised and all, but the Gravity gets stupendous range for its size and amazing ability to put it back in. We are winning folks!

my Land Rover Discovery actually hits its EPA fairly consistently. And sometimes exceeds highway.

 

[BS8899]

my Land Rover Discovery actually hits its EPA fairly consistently. And sometimes exceeds highway.

So does my 2023 Rivian R1S. And so do the many German EVs. So, why is Lucid/Tesla so different?!

 

[DeaneG]

So does my 2023 Rivian R1S. And so do the many German EVs. So, why is Lucid/Tesla so different?!

Because they chose to use the EPA's 5-cycle test. This has been discussed over and over again in this forum.

 

[BS8899]

Because they chose to use the EPA's 5-cycle test. This has been discussed over and over again in this forum.

I know. But, what about the fudge-factors that Lucid uses? Can't they tune the numbers (as the Germans do) to better match their car's actual performance? If that is not possible on the 5-cycle test, why don't Lucid (and Tesla) go back to the 2-cycle test?

What is the most prominent EPA number displayed on a car sticker when the customer goes into the showroom? It is the mileage efficiency number. If the 5-cycle numbers are significantly off the realizable numbers when driven on US highways and cities, how do the EPA numbers inform the consumers? Ultimately Lucid makes the choice which test to use. Blaming the EPA is a cop-out!

 

[illopp00]

That's what I'm talking about - city driving. No one is getting close to 450.

Highway is obviously going to be (somewhat) less. Always is in EVs.

But yeah, I think I remember reading that EPA methodology uses 48 MPH. I was thinking that was combined but I could be remembering wrong. Is that just for highway?? Even more ridiculous if it is. That's crazy.

THat is the 5 cycle test details, the average highway speed section is a joke of 48 mph, urban is 21 mph between 0 and 56 mph which is realistic. Keep not also a max acceleration rate which looks to be about equivalent to 0.14g which is tiny.

 

[illopp00]

View attachment 38169

THat is the 5 cycle test details, the average highway speed section is a joke of 48 mph, urban is 21 mph between 0 and 56 mph which is realistic. Keep not also a max acceleration rate which looks to be about equivalent to 0.14g which is tiny.

I will add consumer reports has been doing their own EV range testing and their numbers are quite high, they try to test in upper 70s to 80 deg F which is quite favorable to the battery.

 

[dbsb3233]

I know. But, what about the fudge-factors that Lucid uses? Can't they tune the numbers (as the Germans do) to better match their car's actual performance? If that is not possible on the 5-cycle test, why don't Lucid (and Tesla) go back to the 2-cycle test?

What is the most prominent EPA number displayed on a car sticker when the customer goes into the showroom? It is the mileage efficiency number. If the 5-cycle numbers are significantly off the realizable numbers when driven on US highways and cities, how do the EPA numbers inform the consumers? Ultimately Lucid makes the choice which test to use. Blaming the EPA is a cop-out!

They *could* produce a more accurate number, yes. They choose the most inflated number, likely because it sells more vehicles.

And because the EPA allows it, even though it shouldn't. The EPA isn't a consumer agency, it's an environmental agency. Deceiving buyers to sell cleaner vehicles is not a problem for them.

 

[illopp00]

The EPA 5-cycle test's average highway speed is just over 48mph. Maximum speed during the highway test is 59.9mph.

I think the rubber meets the road when we get 70mph range test results for the EX60 and Neue iX3, and compare that to 70mph range of Gravity of about 400 miles.

In the meantime, the EV9, EX90, and Lyriq's steady 70mph range is 250-270 miles. Rivian is in roughly the same ballpark depending on configuration.

Right, Gravity Touring is also 260 by Car and Driver, although they said they got EPA in mixed, that was in a vehicle spec with no options that add weight or use aux electricity.

 

[dbsb3233]

View attachment 38169

THat is the 5 cycle test details, the average highway speed section is a joke of 48 mph, urban is 21 mph between 0 and 56 mph which is realistic. Keep not also a max acceleration rate which looks to be about equivalent to 0.14g which is tiny.

Thanks. I do remember seeing that now. It's been about 6 years since I researched all that when I bought my Mach-E. Forgot that 48 was actually the highway number. It's so utterly ridiculous that I should have remembered.

 

[BS8899]

View attachment 38169

THat is the 5 cycle test details, the average highway speed section is a joke of 48 mph, urban is 21 mph between 0 and 56 mph which is realistic. Keep not also a max acceleration rate which looks to be about equivalent to 0.14g which is tiny.

Also, what about wind resistance at speed? The 5-cycle test is done in a room on a dynamometer, correct?

 

[Adnillien]

So does my 2023 Rivian R1S. And so do the many German EVs. So, why is Lucid/Tesla so different?!

Your comments are based on your personal experience which is OK but not an independent test. Out of Spec 70 mph tests show Rivian under performs EPA while Lucid is very close. I wish that OOS had a Gravity test to add to the comparison. It is myth that Lucid under performs EPA by 20-25% based on third party tests. Red line indicates EPA range in chart below