Impressions of my first long road trip

[momo3605]

The conclusion is something that has been discussed on this forum many times:

The 5 cycle tests overestimates real world range. It's a marketing gimmick to advertise the highest possible range. The 3 cycle test has a fudge factor that is decided on by the manufacturer. Some use a smaller fudge factor to underestimate their real range (ie Porsche) and others use a more realistic fudge factor to give a range that is more in line with reality.

Unfortunately, there isn't one standard test by the EPA for unclear reasons. It would certainly level the playing field. That being said, Tom Moloughney, did get pretty damn close to EPA range on his DE 70 mph test. And as others have shown, if you drive closer to 65 mph, your range will be in line with the EPA estimate.

I don’t know about the German automakers (but it’s always common for them to underrate everything, range, performance, etc) , but Rivian uses the 5 cycle test, so how do they manage to have epa figures in line with real world driving?

 

[xponents]

I don’t know about the German automakers (but it’s always common for them to underrate everything, range, performance, etc) , but Rivian uses the 5 cycle test, so how do they manage to have epa figures in line with real world driving?

They don't? At least to my knowledge, Rivian uses the three cycle test... if not, the differences could be down to conserve mode as previously stated. However, just that wouldn't explain the drastic difference between Lucid and Rivian relative to their tested range. I'll do some more research.

 

[momo3605]

They don't? At least to my knowledge, Rivian uses the three cycle test... if not, the differences could be down to conserve mode as previously stated. However, just that wouldn't explain the drastic difference between Lucid and Rivian relative to their tested range. I'll do some more research.

They do...it's in the EPA docs. Rivian I believe one of the only ones that publically shares their 5 cycle test results. But they use a very lowest adjustment of .715 (0.7 being the lowest), whereas Lucid chooses to hide their test results... Tesla also doesn't share, but it's been famously leaked they use a .75 to .80 adjustment factor depending on the model to make it look high. Lucid also likely uses a higher adjustment factor.

 

[xponents]

They do...it's in the EPA docs. Rivian I believe one of the only ones that publically shares their 5 cycle test results. But they use a very lowest adjustment of .715 (0.7 being the lowest), whereas Lucid chooses to hide their test results... Tesla also doesn't share, but it's been famously leaked they use a .75 to .80 adjustment factor depending on the model to make it look high. Lucid also likely uses a higher adjustment factor.
View attachment 19464

A while back there was a news article about Lucid having the potential to increase the Airs range to 550 (it was 517 at the time) by using Tesla's adjustment factor, meaning it is lower than Tesla's but higher than Rivian. I don't have the time, but perhaps somebody could extrapolate Lucid's adjustment factors with that info?

 

[Bill55]

Despite what % of EPA (we) are getting, the Lucid has range that allows it to go places you are not going to go in a Rivan. At least not in the same time frame.

 

[momo3605]

Despite what % of EPA (we) are getting, the Lucid has range that allows it to go places you are not going to go in a Rivan. At least not in the same time frame.

If you’re talking GT, of course, if you’re talking pure/touring…then probably not. Smaller battery Rivian will go further

 

[joec]

If you’re talking GT, of course, if you’re talking pure/touring…then probably not. Smaller battery Rivian will go further

The only Rivian that can go 400 miles is the MaxPack, which is 149 kWh.

I’ve gotten more than 360 with my Touring with 92 kWh. And I wasn’t empty. I likely could have pushed it to 380 or 390.

Does it do that in the middle of winter? No. But neither will the Rivian. And no standard Rivian is ever going to beat my Touring, unless I drive like an idiot and the Rivian driver doesn’t.

So sure, spend an extra $10 grand for the “dumb range” and you can likely beat a Touring. You’re also increasing your time and cost to charge to 80%.

I think it’s remarkable what the Rivians can achieve. But at the end of the day, it’s a truck. The physics are just not in its favor.

And if you actually use it to haul anything (wood or tools in the R1-T, people in the R1-S) your efficiency is going to take another hit.

 

[Knucklehead]

The only Rivian that can go 400 miles is the MaxPack, which is 149 kWh.

I’ve gotten more than 360 with my Touring with 92 kWh. And I wasn’t empty. I likely could have pushed it to 380 or 390.

Does it do that in the middle of winter? No. But neither will the Rivian. And no standard Rivian is ever going to beat my Touring, unless I drive like an idiot and the Rivian driver doesn’t.

So sure, spend an extra $10 grand for the “dumb range” and you can likely beat a Touring. You’re also increasing your time and cost to charge to 80%.

I think it’s remarkable what the Rivians can achieve. But at the end of the day, it’s a truck. The physics are just not in its favor.

And if you actually use it to haul anything (wood or tools in the R1-T, people in the R1-S) your efficiency is going to take another hit.

FYI - the R1 Max Pack usable capacity is 142 kWh.

 

[Bill55]

Real world arriving at ~6pm at 20% in a DE and needing 100% to have some buffer to make it to next stop. Hotel charger was 7kW and took 14 hours, left at 8am. In the Rivian it would have been until 11am.

Full size pickups with 200kW hour battery going 20%-100% with 7kW would take 24 hours. Taking a day out of your adventure.

I use 7kW as an example as out in the sticks away from DC fast chargers, I used many level 2 chargers that were on 30 amp or 40 amp circuits.

 

[momo3605]

Real world arriving at ~6pm at 20% in a DE and needing 100% to have some buffer to make it to next stop. Hotel charger was 7kW and took 14 hours, left at 8am. In the Rivian it would have been until 11am.

Full size pickups with 200kW hour battery going 20%-100% with 7kW would take 24 hours. Taking a day out of your adventure.

I use 7kW as an example as out in the sticks away from DC fast chargers, I used many level 2 chargers that were on 30 amp or 40 amp circuits.

That’s some funky math…rivian battery is 130kwh and yours is 118kwh. The difference is a negligible 1.5hrs.

But is it really a surprise to anyone that smaller car Is more efficient than bigger car?

 

[Bill55]

That’s some funky math…rivian battery is 130kwh and yours is 118kwh. The difference is a negligible 1.5hrs.

But is it really a surprise to anyone that smaller car Is more efficient than bigger car?

If you read previous posts we were discussing the long range Rivian battery with 142kWh

 

[borski]

That’s some funky math…rivian battery is 130kwh and yours is 118kwh. The difference is a negligible 1.5hrs.

But is it really a surprise to anyone that smaller car Is more efficient than bigger car?

The Model 3 is smaller than the Air and less efficient. Size isn’t the only metric.

 

[momo3605]

The Model 3 is smaller than the Air and less efficient. Size isn’t the only metric.

i mean i'd disagree. I got 4 miles/kw in my model 3, and i get 3 miles/kw in my Air. So in normal driving, the 3 was more efficient. I suppose at some arbitrary speed of 60 or 65mph maybe the Air is more efficient. I really don't want to keep hashing this out. From my experience, the Lucid isn't that efficient, i don't know what else to say lol, doesn't seem to matter how i drive, i get 3 miles/kw at the end giving me an effective range of 270 miles lol

If you read previous posts we were discussing the long range Rivian battery with 142kWh

Out of curiosity, what's your lifetime average in your Sapphire, is it around 2.5 miles/kw?

 

[joec]

i mean i'd disagree. I got 4 miles/kw in my model 3, and i get 3 miles/kw in my Air. So in normal driving, the 3 was more efficient. I suppose at some arbitrary speed of 60 or 65mph maybe the Air is more efficient. I really don't want to keep hashing this out. From my experience, the Lucid isn't that efficient, i don't know what else to say lol, doesn't seem to matter how i drive, i get 3 miles/kw at the end giving me an effective range of 270 miles lol



Out of curiosity, what's your lifetime average in your Sapphire, is it around 2.5 miles/kw?

I have to seriously question 4 mi/kWh in a Model3. I was lucky to get better than 2.2, no matter how I drove. Even in most independent tests, I'm finding values of around 3.39, which is way better than I ever got. They must have made some nice improvements in the past two years.

Meanwhile, It's not uncommon for me to get 4.1 in my Touring. I just drove 100 miles in single-digit temperatures this morning, making no effort to keep it under 85 and averaged 3.3.

 

[momo3605]

I have to seriously question 4 mi/kWh in a Model3. I was lucky to get better than 2.2, no matter how I drove. Even in most independent tests, I'm finding values of around 3.39, which is way better than I ever got. They must have made some nice improvements in the past two years.

Meanwhile, It's not uncommon for me to get 4.1 in my Touring. I just drove 100 miles in single-digit temperatures this morning, making no effort to keep it under 85 and averaged 3.3.

This is what I have documented from a couple years ago lol. 3.76miles/kw AFTER I switched to switched to 20s with PS4S. With the original 18s, it was even higher than this

I’ve tried resetting my Trip A in my Air multiple times to goose it up, but I can’t go more than like 30 or 40 miles before it settles back down to 3.0

 

[joec]

View attachment 19471

This is what I have documented from a couple years ago lol. 3.76miles/kw AFTER I switched to switched to 20s with PS4S. With the original 18s, it was even higher than this

I’ve tried resetting my Trip A in my Air multiple times to goose it up, but I can’t go more than like 30 or 40 miles before it settles back down to 3.0

That's awesome. I was never able to get efficiency like that from my 3. It's like the two cars are doing exact mirrors of each other for you and me.

I'm very curious about why your Lucid seems to do so poorly. There has to be some factor at play I'm not considering. Or there's just something off about your particular car, or the combination of the car and the specific circumstances of your driving. (Location, weather, wind, style, etc.)

 

[Daniel2022AT]

I can easily achieve 4.5 in my Touring on highway trips driving 74mph but never accelerating, submitting to ACC. I can get 5.0 around town when regen is working. Regen has not been working fully the past 3 months, but that’s another topic. The EPA test cycle is legit for what it is.

Look, if you want to save the planet, you cannot drive like a bat outta hell at 85-90mph.

 

[BS8899]

I can easily achieve 4.5 in my Touring on highway trips driving 74mph but never accelerating, submitting to ACC. I can get 5.0 around town when regen is working. Regen has not been working fully the past 3 months, but that’s another topic. The EPA test cycle is legit for what it is.

Look, if you want to save the planet, you cannot drive like a bat outta hell at 85-90mph. View attachment 19544

Getting 4.5mi/kWh @ 74mph is impressive! How long did you have your Lucid? How many miles have you logged on your odometer? What is your "lifetime" mi/kWh?

 

[Daniel2022AT]

1 year anniversary March 17. 13,000 miles.

I don’t know the lifetime m/kWh. That is quite frankly irrelevant.

When I want to have fun, efficiency is not the focus. When I drive Milwaukee to Detroit, 400+ miles, it is.

 

[BS8899]

Getting 4.5mi/kWh @ 74mph is impressive! How long did you have your Lucid? How many miles have you logged on your odometer? What is your "lifetime" mi/kWh?

Survey of 278 owners shows most owners achieve between 70-80% of the rated range. Out-of-spec reviews' 70mph test on the Lucid range (AGT) was ~3.9mi/kWh.