Gravity Spec coming Oct 3 ?

[RockSports]

Yes . . . in 2023. But Taycan sales have taken a nosedive this year, while Air sales have climbed. For the first half of 2024, Porsche sold 2054 Taycans in the U.S., and Lucid sold 4361 Airs (figures from InsideEVS).

Could you please tell me what the reason for this is? I speculate that Lucid has sold as many airs as they have because of the Pure trim and generous leasing deals. The Taycan has decreased sales because the Porsche premium isn't popular in a strained economy. Releasing a 120K dollar SUV into this market where people are price-constrained probably won't be the most outstanding seller. I thought I read somewhere that the Lucid leadership acknowledged they made a misstep launching the Air by pushing the ultra-premium trim too long, which gave the brand an unattainable image. It seems they are repeating this mistake by launching the top trims of their Gravity first in the same way.

 

[jace]

100% agree the first trim will be GT level or whatever they call it for Gravity. Hopefully they keep trim names consistent.

 

[hmp10]

Could you please tell me what the reason for this [Taycan sales decline] is?

We've done some guessing several posts back, but I really don't know.

I thought I read somewhere that the Lucid leadership acknowledged they made a misstep launching the Air by pushing the ultra-premium trim too long, which gave the brand an unattainable image. It seems they are repeating this mistake by launching the top trims of their Gravity first in the same way.

While the Gravity may launch only with its upper trim, that doesn't mean the intervals before the lower trims come out will be the same as for the Air. Very few manufacturing managers would want to start a new production line with the highest volume product coming first. Kinks during and after production are much more easily and quickly worked out with lower-volume products.

In the lead-up to the Gravity, the impression has somehow taken hold that it is Lucid's entry into the mass market. It's not. That will come with the midsize products. And this misunderstanding has already led to complaints that Lucid has the pricing all wrong for the Gravity at every trim level.

The Gravity is Lucid's entry into a broader SUV market compared to sedans, but Lucid still wants to stay positioned as a luxury, high-performance player in whatever vehicle category it plays. Erich Bach said as much in the "Motor Trend" interview when he said he "does not see Lucid going further down market from this [the midsize] platform." That is also why Peter Rawlinson has said that the Gravity was benchmarked against the Porsche Cayenne and the Lamborghini Urus. That is not the mass market.

I suspect part of rolling out the Grand Touring trim first is due to wanting to put the press first into the Gravities that play more in the Cayenne/Urus performance space.

 

[marsarbu]

I have to disagree with the red text. Polestar is a division of Volvo and while they might fail it will have more to do with import tariffs and bans than not making it. Rivian has a pretty solid plan and has a good chance to be net positive on a per vehicle basis in the fourth quarter of this year. They are selling 50K R1's a year this year and did last year as well. Their 5Bn dollar deal with VW, contract with Amazon and the R2 on the horizon leaves a pretty decent path forward for Rivian and while it isn't guaranteed I see a pretty strong chance of them succeeding.

I hear you. Unfortunately, VW is going through some of the toughest times in its history. For the first time in 87 years they will have to close German factories. That 5B is on very shaky legs if you ask me. Also, Rivian is losing significantly more money per car sold, compared to Lucid, even tho they sell so much more.

 

[borski]

Now you're being deliciously judgy I said the points were valid, because it was a very specific comparo. Overall I still believe what I believe. Which doesn't make me right, or wrong, it's just my opinion.

Not being judgy. I have no problem with you having your opinion. It just doesn't further your argument, and if your goal is to persuade people, it won't help you there. If your goal isn't to persuade people, I think we have understood your position.

Aaaahhh, the beauty of agreeing to disagree. I agree, I care about stupid, insignificant things like being able to open the doors anytime I want, cameras working, soft-close working, having all speakers work, etc. Small stuff.

Literally all of those things have worked for me with zero issues since the day I bought the car in January of 2022. I've had other issues, but not those. Meanwhile, my wife's Ioniq 5 has yet another recall for a service visit this week.

I'm sorry you've had those issues. That sounds like it sucks.

Hence me saying that comparing Lucid Xs with Tesla Ys makes no sense. See, even between a sea of differences, we can find agreement!

I'm the last one you'll find has a problem agreeing to disagree.

 

[RockSports]

I hear you. Unfortunately, VW is going through some of the toughest times in its history. For the first time in 87 years they will have to close German factories. That 5B is on very shaky legs if you ask me. Also, Rivian is losing significantly more money per car sold, compared to Lucid, even tho they sell so much more.

 

[joec]

View attachment 23477View attachment 23478

This is a really dumb and deceptive way to calculate cost per vehicle. We've been over this many times on the forum.

Capital intensive companies always spend a ton up front for R&D. You can't look at the cost of building a factory and put it into your math for each car. Lucid is doing a ton of internal development while Rivian is using a ton of off-the-shelf parts and outsourcing. Any comparisons using plain old dollar-for-dollar spent by the company overall is not really a good measure of anything.

I'd be more worried if Lucid and Rivian WEREN'T losing money on every car sold at this point. It would indicate they aren't investing enough in their future.

 

[RockSports]

This is a really dumb and deceptive way to calculate cost per vehicle. We've been over this many times on the forum.

Capital intensive companies always spend a ton up front for R&D. You can't look at the cost of building a factory and put it into your math for each car. Lucid is doing a ton of internal development while Rivian is using a ton of off-the-shelf parts and outsourcing. Any comparisons using plain old dollar-for-dollar spent by the company overall is not really a good measure of anything.

I'd be more worried if Lucid and Rivian WEREN'T losing money on every car sold at this point. It would indicate they aren't investing enough in their future.

While I agree, Rivian built a factory too and they also are doing a ton of internal development. I am aware that car startups burn piles of money to get started, but the whole point of posting the values of each is to compare where each company is relative to each other. Those numbers are also deceptive as Rivian sells quite a few more vehicles than Lucid does at this point.

 

[hmp10]

. . . Rivian built a factory too . . .

Well, actually they retooled an existing Mitsubishi factory that they bought for $16MM. They recently "delayed" (canceled?) plans to build a new $5B factory in Stanton Springs, GA.

 

[RockSports]

Well, actually they retooled an existing Mitsubishi factory that they bought for $16MM. They recently "delayed" (canceled?) plans to build a new $5B factory in Stanton Springs, GA.

And expanded it significantly. Regardless, they are further along on the path to profitability.

 

[levsha]

The only other EV SUV that will be in the vicinity of the Gravity in terms of both range and interior space is the Cadillac Escalade EV.

For me Gravity will compete with Kia EV9 and Volvo EX90: they all have almost identical length, all 3 row EV. EV9 seems to be cheaper. EX90 should have comparable price, comes from established brand (and has nice things like Android Automotive). Sure Gravity will have better range, but EV9 and EX90 have "enough". So will I want to have more range? Sure! Will I want to pay much more for this? Not so sure.

 

[levsha]

Yes . . . in 2023. But Taycan sales have taken a nosedive this year, while Air sales have climbed. For the first half of 2024, Porsche sold 2054 Taycans in the U.S., and Lucid sold 4361 Airs (figures from InsideEVS).

Porsche has a lot of sales also globally however, 8,838 Taycans sold in 2024 globally as result. How many Airs sold outside of the US?

EV market has since exploded -- admittedly due, in no small part, to Tesla -- with Norway now having more EVs than ICE vehicles on the road and other countries, especially in Europe, heading in that direction.

European market has significantly different requirements: Gravity is _large_ SUV for Europeans; comparison with Cadillac Escalade IQ doesn't make sense as it unacceptably enormously huge; Tesla became popular in Europe with midsize 3 and Y

 

[hmp10]

For me Gravity will compete with Kia EV9 and Volvo EX90: they all have almost identical length, all 3 row EV. EV9 seems to be cheaper. EX90 should have comparable price, comes from established brand (and has nice things like Android Automotive). Sure Gravity will have better range, but EV9 and EX90 have "enough". So will I want to have more range? Sure! Will I want to pay much more for this? Not so sure.

Not all 3-row SUVs are created equal. We are looking for an EV to replace our Honda Odyssey minivan which we keep primarily for local outings and day tripping with groups of 5-6 older adults. (We're the only ones in our circle of friends who have such a vehicle, so it gets a fair bit of use. I have even lent it out to friends for outings we are not joining.)

We had a chance to talk to an EV9 owner who showed us his SUV at an Electrify America station recently. He liked it very much but volunteered before I even asked that its third row was a bit cramped for adults. I have since seen the Gravity in the flesh twice, and its third row is considerably roomier. In fact, it gives the Odyssey a run for the money in terms of 6-passenger adult seating.

So it really depends on one's priorities. If 6-seating adult comfort is among them, I'm not sure that any coming EV except the Cadillac Escalade fits the bill as well as the Gravity . . . and there are so many reasons I wouldn't touch that behemoth.

 

[hmp10]

Porsche has a lot of sales also globally however, 8,838 Taycans sold in 2024 globally as result. How many Airs sold outside of the US?

True, but I used U.S. sales figures because a comparison of what customers choose only makes sense in markets where both products are equally available. The Air is on sale in only six other countries (not sure whether Saudi Arabia and the UAE are in that count), and most of them have only one Lucid location in the entire country thus far.

 

[hmp10]

When do First Drive reviews of at least very-close-to-production builds tend to come out? Love to see something more than the pretty website.

By this point in Air pre-production days, reviews of RC (release candidate) cars were already appearing from several auto journalists, including a drive Johnny Lieberman of "Motor Trend" took from San Francisco to L.A. If there are any such drives going on with the RC Gravities, we've yet to see the resulting reviews.

A few outfits, such as "Throttle House" and "Top Gear" were allowed short independent test drives of beta Gravities many months ago, but there was so much still in development at that point that the reviews were really only useful regarding space packaging (and those cars even used the front seats from the Air and had interior panels produced on 3D printers).

Lucid has pretty comprehensively rewritten the Air's roll-out playbook when it comes to the Gravity: no early reservations, probably no limited-run special edition, no orders several months before deliveries, no show cars in numerous Design Studios (except one of the Gravities from the L.A. Auto Show that has been making the rounds for short appearances), no exterior and interior color blocks on display months before orders open up . . . and perhaps no extensive test drives of RC vehicles that will make it into print?

 

[hydbob]

By this point in Air pre-production days, reviews of RC (release candidate) cars were already appearing from several auto journalists, including a drive Johnny Lieberman of "Motor Trend" took from San Francisco to L.A. If there are any such drives going on with the RC Gravities, we've yet to see the resulting reviews.

A few outfits, such as "Throttle House" and "Top Gear" were allowed short independent test drives of beta Gravities many months ago, but there was so much still in development at that point that the reviews were really only useful regarding space packaging (and those cars even used the front seats from the Air and had interior panels produced on 3D printers).

Lucid has pretty comprehensively rewritten the Air's roll-out playbook when it comes to the Gravity: no early reservations, no limited-run special edition, no orders several months before deliveries, no show cars in numerous Design Studios (except one of the Gravities from the L.A. Auto Show that has been making the rounds for short appearances), no exterior and interior color blocks on display months before orders open up . . . and perhaps no extensive test drives of RC vehicles that will make it into print?

My guess is they are just on embargo and will it will be lifted once Lucid reveals the final specs and pricing for Gravity.

 

[charleyscott]

It depends on how sophisticated the analysis is, and my years in the financial industry have taught me that much of it isn't.

If you look at the top-25-selling SUVs in the U.S., you have to get to numbers 6 and 7 (Jeep Grand Cherokee and Ford Explorer) before you find the first full-size SUVs. After them, the next 11 are again CUVs (compact utility vehicles).

The segment of the SUV market -- full-sized vehicles -- where Lucid will land is not as huge as many people assume. And it's populated with plenty of pricey products (Range Rovers, Cayennes, GL's, Q7s, X7s) that don't make Lucid's anticipated pricing look that scary in comparison. That's why Lucid's long-term fate really rests on its midsize products. And there are no signs that Lucid won't at least get the first of them to market, when the real tale will be told.

In the lead-up to the Gravity, the impression has somehow taken hold that it is Lucid's entry into the mass market. It's not. That will come with the midsize products. And this misunderstanding has already led to complaints that Lucid has the pricing all wrong for the Gravity at every trim level.

The Gravity is Lucid's entry into a broader SUV market compared to sedans, but Lucid still wants to stay positioned as a luxury, high-performance player in whatever vehicle category it plays. Erich Bach said as much in the "Motor Trend" interview when he said he "does not see Lucid going further down market from this [the midsize] platform." That is also why Peter Rawlinson has said that the Gravity was benchmarked against the Porsche Cayenne and the Lamborghini Urus. That is not the mass market.

I suspect part of rolling out the Grand Touring trim first is due to wanting to put the press first into the Gravities that play more in the Cayenne/Urus performance space.

You say that Gravity will be sold in a relatively small market segment (full-size SUVs), and that the true test of Lucid's competitiveness will be whether it can sell a significant volume in the much larger mid-size vehicle market segment (which we will only know in 2026 or later).

That does not change the fact that Lucid needs Gravity to create significantly increased sales volume in 2025, and to sell relatively well in comparison to competitors in its segment. Peter Rawlinson himself has called Gravity "a big step in our volume" given that its total addressable market is six times Air's.

As an aside, reasonable minds can disagree on which competitors should be taken into account in making volume comparisons---Rawlinson referred to the Porsche Cayenne, BMW iX, Mercedes EQS, and Rivian R1S, and was resistant to including the Kia EV9. But, unless and until there is a Sapphire-type Gravity variant, the Lamborghini Urus should be viewed as a "benchmark" for marketing purposes alone, not (God willing) sales.

 

[hmp10]

You say that Gravity will be sold in a relatively small market segment (full-size SUVs), and that the true test of Lucid's competitiveness will be whether it can sell a significant volume in the much larger mid-size vehicle market segment (which we will only know in 2026 or later).

What I actually said was that Lucid's "long-term fate" rested on the its midsize products. Lucid can be competitive in a segment -- dominant even -- and still not survive if the segment is not large enough to support the capital and operating expenses of trying to play in a larger market beyond that segment.

I believe the Gravity will be very competitive in its segment: full-size luxury SUVs. But being competitive in that segment alone will not generate an adequate return on the investment Lucid has already made to move into the larger midsize market.

I don't know how Rawlinson was defining the addressable market that he said was six times larger than the Air's. If that definition included the many SUVs that sell between $45-70,000, the Gravity is not going to get much share of that end of the market. A potential BMW x7 buyer might cross shop a Gravity. I doubt that many Ford Explorer or Chevrolet Traverse buyers will.

But, unless and until there is a Sapphire-type Gravity variant, the Lamborghini Urus should be viewed as a "benchmark" for marketing purposes alone, not (God willing) sales.

Yeah, I found the reference to the Cayenne as a benchmark spot on, but that Urus reference still has me scratching my head. He probably meant from an engineering standpoint, but to cite a quarter-million-dollar car as a benchmark when you're trying to convince people you're all about moving into the mainstream is a tad confusing.

 

[hydbob]

What I actually said was that Lucid's "long-term fate" rested on the its midsize products. Lucid can be competitive in a segment -- dominant even -- and still not survive if the segment is not large enough to support the capital and operating expenses of trying to play in a larger market beyond that segment.

I believe the Gravity will be very competitive in its segment: full-size luxury SUVs. But being competitive in that segment alone will not generate an adequate return on the investment Lucid has already made to move into the larger midsize market.

I don't know how Rawlinson was defining the addressable market that he said was six times larger than the Air's. If that definition included the many SUVs that sell between $45-70,000, the Gravity is not going to get much share of that end of the market. A potential BMW x7 buyer might cross shop a Gravity. I doubt that many Ford Explorer or Chevrolet Traverse buyers will.



Yeah, I found the reference to the Cayenne as a benchmark spot on, but that Urus reference still has me scratching my head. He probably meant from an engineering standpoint, but to cite a quarter-million-dollar car as a benchmark when you're trying to convince people you're all about moving into the mainstream is a tad confusing.

I think he was mainly referencing from a performance viewpoint. Remember, that first and foremost, Rawlinson loves driving and performance and seems to have approached the Air and Gravity with those 2 characteristics in the forefront of design.

 

[hmp10]

I think he was mainly referencing from a performance viewpoint. Remember, that first and foremost, Rawlinson loves driving and performance and seems to have approached the Air and Gravity with those 2 characteristics in the forefront of design.

Probably right. And I hope he never starts thinking too much like a businessman and too little like an engineer / driving enthusiast. Leave that road to the Big Three.