Gravity Features

[hmp10]

That sure does sound like the kind of speculation any attorney would object to

Total speculation. But, fortunately, most attorneys don't work on Saturday.

 

[steveairgt]

Any update or educated rumors as to when Gravity will start taking orders? I love our AGT.
Looking to trade it for a Gravity. I was hoping that would have happened by now.

Your thoughts?

 

[xponents]

Any update or educated rumors as to when Gravity will start taking orders? I love our AGT.
Looking to trade it for a Gravity. I was hoping that would have happened by now.

Your thoughts?

Well, the only thing I absolutely DEFINITIVELY know and can say with 110% confidence is that...










It'll come before the Tesla Roadster!

 

[Chizle]

I can think of a few other promises that will come after the Gravity, if ever.

 

[Joe]

Any update or educated rumors as to when Gravity will start taking orders? I love our AGT.
Looking to trade it for a Gravity. I was hoping that would have happened by now.

Your thoughts?

You can join the speculative discussion here:

Thread 'Poll: When will Lucid open Gravity Orders?'

Oct 10, 2024

Just a fun speculation poll on when you think Lucid will open up Gravity orders/reservations.

• Joe
• Replies: 77
• Forum: Ordering / Pricing / Production / Deliveries

 

[Knucklehead]

"Lucid Gravity draws upon Lucid’s renowned electric powertrain technology, including in-house electric motors. Lucid Gravity’s extraordinary efficiency enables a projected range surpassing 440 miles¹ with a battery pack capacity similar to that of the 2025 Lucid Air Grand Touring. "

I am sure others here know, but I am confused regarding the Air GT battery capacity. Some sources say 118 kWh. Some sources say 112 kWh.

If the Gravity has 112 kWh usable capacity, that means it will achieve 3.93 mi/kWh in the EPA test cycle. That seems pretty high, especially based on what Air owners have reported in this forum.

I am sure there is a formula for this, but I feel a good rule of thumb is 80 mph range is about 25% less than EPA range. So that means highway range for the Gravity will be 330 miles or so, or about 2.95 mi/kWh. That is better than my Mach-e. Is it possible a vehicle that is bigger than my Mach-e has better highway efficiency? I guess it is possible.

Let's just say I am skeptical regarding the real-world range of the Gravity.

 

[Adnillien]

I am sure others here know, but I am confused regarding the Air GT battery capacity. Some sources say 118 kWh. Some sources say 112 kWh.

2025 GTs have 118kWhr and earlier GTs have 112kWhr.

 

[Neurio]

I am sure there is a formula for this, but I feel a good rule of thumb is 80 mph range is about 25% less than EPA range. So that means highway range for the Gravity will be 330 miles or so, or about 2.95 mi/kWh. That is better than my Mach-e. Is it possible a vehicle that is bigger than my Mach-e has better highway efficiency? I guess it is possible.

There are many factors that affect range, but the Mach E has a drag coefficient of 0.28 while the Gravity's is 0.24. Lucid is also the king of miniaturization and efficiency in general, so I believe their claims (assuming you drive the speed limit)

 

[hydbob]

"Lucid Gravity draws upon Lucid’s renowned electric powertrain technology, including in-house electric motors. Lucid Gravity’s extraordinary efficiency enables a projected range surpassing 440 miles¹ with a battery pack capacity similar to that of the 2025 Lucid Air Grand Touring. "

I am sure others here know, but I am confused regarding the Air GT battery capacity. Some sources say 118 kWh. Some sources say 112 kWh.

If the Gravity has 112 kWh usable capacity, that means it will achieve 3.93 mi/kWh in the EPA test cycle. That seems pretty high, especially based on what Air owners have reported in this forum.

I am sure there is a formula for this, but I feel a good rule of thumb is 80 mph range is about 25% less than EPA range. So that means highway range for the Gravity will be 330 miles or so, or about 2.95 mi/kWh. That is better than my Mach-e. Is it possible a vehicle that is bigger than my Mach-e has better highway efficiency? I guess it is possible.

Let's just say I am skeptical regarding the real-world range of the Gravity.

The new EPA testing standards should keep the EPA range much closer to the real world range than previous as well

 

[Pragmatic]

Gravity's frontal area is approximately 20% greater than Mach-e's. This will offset the lower cD. Not saying other efficiencies won't help.

 

[hmp10]

. . . I feel a good rule of thumb is 80 mph range is about 25% less than EPA range. So that means highway range for the Gravity will be 330 miles or so, or about 2.95 mi/kWh.

That is our experience with the Lucid Air, and I, too, am using the same assumption for the Gravity.

Our Air Dream Performance on 21" wheels is EPA rated at 451 miles using the outgoing EPA standard. If the Gravity gets anywhere near the teased 440 miles of range on the new, less forgiving EPA standard, that would put its range on a par with our Air, which has ample range for any road trip we've taken at the speeds I like to drive. Of course, the wheel/tire choice may affect this a bit, and I'm waiting to see what shows up on the Gravity order configurator in this regard.

 

[Knucklehead]

Gravity's frontal area is approximately 20% greater than Mach-e's. This will offset the lower cD. Not saying other efficiencies won't help.

Yes, but doesn't cd capture the drag caused by the shape of the front of the vehicle?

"The drag coefficient of any object comprises the effects of the two basic contributors to fluid dynamic drag: skin friction and form drag." (From always reliable Wikipedia. LOL.)

The fact that cd is lower on the Gravity suggests it will be more efficient at 80 mph than my Mach-e. On my typical 140 mile (one way) commute, I average 2.6~2.7 mi/kWh in the summer, with a large part of that trip at 80 mph. So it is not unreasonable to assume 2.9 mi/kWh for the Gravity, IMO.

I am very, very interested in real world results, like the C&D 75 mph test.

 

[borski]

That is better than my Mach-e. Is it possible a vehicle that is bigger than my Mach-e has better highway efficiency? I guess it is possible.

Yes. Tested in precisely the same conditions, with precisely the same methods, the Gravity is more efficient than the Mach-E. That’s literally what the EPA test measures, and both use the 5-cycle test so it is apples to apples.

That said, the real world is a different question and I’m excited to see it perform.

 

[Pragmatic]

Drag is proportional to the square of speed times area times cD (ignoring constants). So Gavity cD is .24, Mach-e is .26. But Gavity has~20% greater area so drag force will be close to equal. Compared to the Air, between the higher cD and the larger area efficiency will quite a bit lower.

 

[borski]

Drag is proportional to the square of speed times area times cD (ignoring constants). So Gavity cD is .24, Mach-e is .26. But Gavity has~20% greater area so drag force will be close to equal. Compared to the Air, between the higher cD and the larger area efficiency will quite a bit lower.

Assuming all other things are equal, which they are unlikely to be. That have undoubtedly made improvements to motors, materials, various methods of cooling, and so on.

All other things aren’t equal, and I’d be curious to see how efficient Gravity is, but it’s not outlandish to think it will be spectacularly efficient. Remember that the Air was the most efficient when it launched, and they really eked out every mm they could to help it get there.

 

[DeaneG]

It's worth noting that the 2025 GT's 70 mph range is almost exactly the same as its EPA range. Very different than earlier year GTs with different components and a more lax EPA standard.

 

[Bus Driver]

It's worth noting that the 2025 GT's 70 mph range is almost exactly the same as its EPA range. Very different than earlier year GTs with different components and a more lax EPA standard.

Yes, and I take envy as you remind me of this. Also, I’m ever so slightly regretful about not having waited just a little longer before jumping on the Lucid bandwagon.

I’m loving my Air GT’s long leggedness on road trips, but in my world one can never have enough range.

 

[DeaneG]

...I’m loving my Air GT’s long leggedness on road trips, but in my world one can never have enough range.

Coming years will always bring something technically better. We live our life as it's played out to us.

 

[emoylv]

By definition, a HUD, every HUD, is redundant in the information it displays. Lucid has said they might have something new and different on theirs, but in reality you are correct in saying that it shows the same information that is displayed on the dashboard. That said, in two of my vehicles (I Pace, M4) I have had a HUD and from the driver’s perspective (not well shown in photos), the information appears to hover over the front of the vehicle, approximately above the headlights. So you never have to look down to see important information. I actually find it pretty amazing and found that the dashboard was indeed the redundant information, and the HUD became my primary source of information.

This is probably the one thing I wished the Air has. My Lexus RX450h has it, and I love it. You wouldn't think tilting your eyes down about 5-10 degrees is a big deal, but it is. I can't (yet) judge the speed of my Touring by the "whine" like I can with the exhaust note from an ICE car so HUD would be very useful in avoiding speeding tickets, especially with our rockets.

 

[levsha]

I feel thankful to Lucid that they have been continuously talking about frontal area. Everyone else was just always talking about Cd, giving wrong feeling that you can compare efficiency of completely different cars just based on Cd. 911 and Cayenne have about the same Cd.