Lucid CEO critiques other EV-SUVs

[hmp10]

I initially purchased my gt 1.5y ago mostly bc of videos demonstrating its efficiency so I was very disappointed when I learned it was essentially the same as my Tesla!

I'm interested in what Tesla(s) you've owned. We've had a 2015 Model S P90D, we now have a 2021 Model S Plaid, and my brother has a 2018 Model 3 Long Range. None of them approaches the real-world range of our Air Dream Performance. (Yes, I know it has the 118-kWh battery pack instead of the 112-kWh of the GT.)

In Car & Driver's real-world driving tests -- which, interestingly, they do at 75 mph -- they got 410 miles on an Air GT and 320 miles on a Tesla Model S Long Range. The Air was, in fact, the longest-range EV they've ever tested.

I've done my own controlled testing of the range of our Plaid and our Air at 80 mph, both on 21" wheels, and the Air got a fraction over 100 miles more of range than the Plaid.

https://www.caranddriver.com/features/g32634624/ev-longest-driving-range/

 

[chinesejpl]

I'm interested in what Tesla(s) you've owned. We've had a 2015 Model S P90D, we now have a 2021 Model S Plaid, and my brother has a 2018 Model 3 Long Range. None of them approaches the real-world range of our Air Dream Performance. (Yes, I know it has the 118-kWh battery pack instead of the 112-kWh of the GT.)

In Car & Driver's real-world driving tests -- which, interestingly, they do at 75 mph -- they got 410 miles on an Air GT and 320 miles on a Tesla Model S Long Range. The Air was, in fact, the longest-range EV they've ever tested.

I've done my own controlled testing of the range of our Plaid and our Air at 80 mph, both on 21" wheels, and the Air got a fraction over 100 miles more of range than the Plaid.

https://www.caranddriver.com/features/g32634624/ev-longest-driving-range/

I had a 2016 model x which I got about 70-75% of predicted range in real world use. For my GT I'm getting 4.9 km/kwh according to my lifetime counter which is about 71% of predicted (21" wheels). I don't bother trying to control for temp or speed or anything else. Just everyday use. Yes, it's the longest range ev out there but the battery is also pretty big for a sedan. In my real world use, I'm disappointed with my range and charging mostly due to expectations built upon reviews that were not applicable to my car, which I didn't know about. It was not openly publicized that dream and GT had different tech and that efficiency and charging would not be equivalent

This is only my opinion, of course

 

[TFCooper]

I'm interested in what Tesla(s) you've owned. We've had a 2015 Model S P90D, we now have a 2021 Model S Plaid, and my brother has a 2018 Model 3 Long Range. None of them approaches the real-world range of our Air Dream Performance. (Yes, I know it has the 118-kWh battery pack instead of the 112-kWh of the GT.)

In Car & Driver's real-world driving tests -- which, interestingly, they do at 75 mph -- they got 410 miles on an Air GT and 320 miles on a Tesla Model S Long Range. The Air was, in fact, the longest-range EV they've ever tested.

I've done my own controlled testing of the range of our Plaid and our Air at 80 mph, both on 21" wheels, and the Air got a fraction over 100 miles more of range than the Plaid.

I have a 2023 MSLR and a 2023 AT. I get similar ranges.

 

[RockSports]

Your bolded comments, will you be able to challenge them?

I did, several times. I explained point by point why Peter's comments were inappropriate and unfounded. Reread the thread.

 

[borski]

Separately, I think Lucid/Tesla should try to understand why their numbers are so much more exaggerated than the German EV makers. I am not sure it is just a 2-cycle/5-cycle deal. If indeed is just the EPA test cycles, perhaps the EV manufactures should agree to standardize.

It is precisely that. I’ve done the math, and I’ve previously linked to the EPA formulas here.

As I said before, can we please lay this one to bed.

 

[Joe]

Any further EPA/efficiency discussion not related to original topic will be deleted after this post. Please take it to another related thread or start a new one if one doesn’t already exist.

 

[RockSports]

Does Rivian advertise 70mph range? Don’t see anything in their website.

Also, range decreases in cold weather. Should manufacturers advertise range at different temperatures, different elevation changes? What about different rates of acceleration and deceleration.

There is a reason we have EPA cycles- it levels the playing field. Causes less confusion. Imagine if manufacturers gave 100 different ranges taking into consideration all these eventualities.

throwing mud or telling the truth? He wasn’t lying was he? Unless Lucid educates, most people won’t understand. Then some guy in a Silverado EV will think his EV is better because it has 400 mile range, despite being grossly inefficient with a battery almost twice the size. Lucid and Peter have every right to brag. It would be suicidal not to.

He wasn't lying, but he was making a stupid comment that meant little to nothing. It's the same as R.J. declaring Rivian superior to all competitors because of his off-road prowess. It is technically true, but meaningless and antagonistic. What's suicidal is making inflammatory statements as they drive prospective buyers away.

Bolded is the TRUTH…why do you keep drumming about this? Do you even daily drive a Lucid? If not, try one out for a week or so. You will realize how right Peter is.

I think you meant to tag me. No I don't daily drive a Lucid, that's not the point. The point is that Lucid isn't superior to anyone else overall, they lead in some areas but lag in others. Therefore calling other EV SUVs bad is a dumb comment.

 

[hydbob]

He wasn't lying, but he was making a stupid comment that meant little to nothing. It's the same as R.J. declaring Rivian superior to all competitors because of his off-road prowess. It is technically true, but meaningless and antagonistic. What's suicidal is making inflammatory statements as they drive prospective buyers away.

I think you meant to tag me. No I don't daily drive a Lucid, that's not the point. The point is that Lucid isn't superior to anyone else overall, they lead in some areas but lag in others. Therefore calling other EV SUVs bad is a dumb comment.

Why do you choose to constantly misquote him. He never said they were bad.

“Yes, there are many EV SUVs out there, but none of them are very good. I’m sorry, they’re not. None of them have anything like the dynamic performance of Gravity. None of them have the range, the practicality, the interior space, or the compactness and versatility that Gravity offers.”

 

[xponents]

Can you clarify,

> you've done the math
> because the 2-cycle test produces more optimistic results than the 5-cycle test,
> Lucid (and Tesla) chose to use the 2-cycle test thus, their range results are more optimistic than some competitors (e.g., German cars) and everything can be explained
> because Lucid and Tesla used an EPG test (2 cycle), therefore, it is legitimate
> it is up to the consumers to do their homework and discover why their highway efficiencies are significantly worse than the EPA (2-cycle) aggregated number


Did I get it right?

If so, no further conversation is needed.

Only took 9 pages to understand! I've been "stationed" somewhere else for the past two days, so I couldn't respond. But my take on this matter as an EV9 owner (likely one of the SUVs he critiqued):

I don't care if he critiques other SUVs. If he believes his product is better, and as long as all of his claims are true (which they are shaping up to be), its fair game! The Gravity clearly has more space than any other EV SUV, and its also clear that no other EV SUV comes close to combining all of the mentioned factors in the way that the Gravity is. For example, our EV9 lacks in terms of third row space, range (it remains to be seen how accurate the 440 mile figure is, though), and dynamics. I don't understand people who got offended by Rawlinson calling out other SUVs. Now, if he was lying, that's another story. Still, what we have seen of the Gravity so far corroborates everything he said.

As for the EPA debate, @borski pretty much nailed it. Lucid's method is valid... and so is the 2 cycle test that the Germans use. You can call out the EPA for being misleading, but calling Lucid out? No way. I consider that strategic advertising, ESPECIALLY considering that their "competitors" (Tesla) also use the 5 cycle test. As others have mentioned, using the 2 cycle test would put them at a disadvantage to Tesla's inflated numbers. I do agree that the EPA needs reforms made to its testing procedures.

 

[RockSports]

Why do you choose to constantly misquote him. He never said they were bad.

“Yes, there are many EV SUVs out there, but none of them are very good. I’m sorry, they’re not. None of them have anything like the dynamic performance of Gravity. None of them have the range, the practicality, the interior space, or the compactness and versatility that Gravity offers.”

Not very good = bad for all intents and purposes. It's not a misquote its a synopsis.

 

[Batteryman]

He wasn't lying, but he was making a stupid comment that meant little to nothing. It's the same as R.J. declaring Rivian superior to all competitors because of his off-road prowess. It is technically true, but meaningless and antagonistic. What's suicidal is making inflammatory statements as they drive prospective buyers away.

I think you meant to tag me. No I don't daily drive a Lucid, that's not the point. The point is that Lucid isn't superior to anyone else overall, they lead in some areas but lag in others. Therefore calling other EV SUVs bad is a dumb comment.

My advice, go rent a Lucid for a week a daily drive it. You will understand more about the company and Peter’s vision. It will all make sense. Lucid is not just another EV manufacturer, they are the leaders in EV powertrains and packaging.

 

[scal_air]

Only took 9 pages to understand! I've been "stationed" somewhere else for the past two days, so I couldn't respond. But my take on this matter as an EV9 owner (likely one of the SUVs he critiqued):

I don't care if he critiques other SUVs. If he believes his product is better, and as long as all of his claims are true (which they are shaping up to be), its fair game! The Gravity clearly has more space than any other EV SUV, and its also clear that no other EV SUV comes close to combining all of the mentioned factors in the way that the Gravity is. For example, our EV9 lacks in terms of third row space, range (it remains to be seen how accurate the 440 mile figure is, though), and dynamics. I don't understand people who got offended by Rawlinson calling out other SUVs. Now, if he was lying, that's another story. Still, what we have seen of the Gravity so far corroborates everything he said.

As for the EPA debate, @borski pretty much nailed it. Lucid's method is valid... and so is the 2 cycle test that the Germans use. You can call out the EPA for being misleading, but calling Lucid out? No way. I consider that strategic advertising, ESPECIALLY considering that their "competitors" (Tesla) also use the 5 cycle test. As others have mentioned, using the 2 cycle test would put them at a disadvantage to Tesla's inflated numbers. I do agree that the EPA needs reforms made to its testing procedures.

So much knowledge, just by changing your avatar...

 

[xponents]

So much knowledge, just by changing your avatar...

Well, I did take the picture myself a couple of months back during spring break (beautiful place), so it isnt that recent! Truth be told, changing my avatar was hard to do. For reference, I still have the same profile picture on my email address that I set in 1st grade!

 

[RockSports]

My advice, go rent a Lucid for a week a daily drive it. You will understand more about the company and Peter’s vision. It will all make sense. Lucid is not just another EV manufacturer, they are the leaders in EV powertrains and packaging.

That doesn't matter to the topic at hand. I keep repeating myself here, and it's become unproductive, so this will be my last response. I will leave you with this: Lucid sold 6K EVs the previous year. For them to survive, they are going to need a large number of new buyers. To attract those numbers, they must win over customers new to EVs and customers from other EVs. Considering the price point, current EV SUV owners are right in Gravity's target demographic. I joined this forum as one of those prospective customers. As I've said previously, one of the significant reasons Tesla isn't in consideration for me is their CEO's inflammatory comments and antagonistic behavior. What do you suppose someone like me, a current Rivian owner, will think when I read that comment?

Do you believe statements like the one Peter made to start this thread make it more or less likely for someone like me to give Gravity a chance? I gotta tell ya, it is a real turn-off. I was disappointed by Peter's comment. My R1 series vehicle has been the best vehicle I've ever owned. When I read about a CEO who hasn't even released his SUV yet criticizing a proven platform that I like, it makes me much less likely to consider them as a vehicle. I get that a few of you here don't seem to care about or even support these comments, but if you really wanted Lucid to succeed, you would be more angry at this comment than I am.

Peter's comment wasn't the worst thing he could have said, but it was not a good strategy.

 

[Bobby]

so this will be my last response

Best part.

 

[SDHacker]

While I understand your umbrage, you could also take Peter’s statement as a challenge to check the validity of his confidence in their product. The Rivian certainly has its strengths where it will be superior to the Gravity and the Gravity will have its strengths and what the customer considers important determines which is the better suv for them. Peter listed where he thinks the Gravity will be superior and where others might be found lacking. As the ceo of a company fighting for attention and name recognition, I think he has to do all he can to draw attention to the brand. If some find it controversial and starts a discussion then he accomplished his goal.

 

[Drendino]

Bolded is the TRUTH…why do you keep drumming about this? Do you even daily drive a Lucid? If not, try one out for a week or so. You will realize how right Peter is.

I don't know how to put this, but RM-S8 is a really big deal.

 

[hydbob]

Not very good = bad for all intents and purposes. It's not a misquote its a synopsis.

No it's not. It might be for your intent and purpose but things can still be good without being bad or very good. Things can also be adequate which doesn't make them bad. It's silly to keep saying things are bad when they are not.

 

[RockSports]

No it's not. It might be for your intent and purpose but things can still be good without being bad or very good. Things can also be adequate which doesn't make them bad. It's silly to keep saying things are bad when they are not.

Saying something is not very good means it's not very good. How can something be good, while not being very good? I think you're splitting that hair pretty finely.

 

[hydbob]

Saying something is not very good means it's not very good. How can something be good, while not being very good? I think you're splitting that hair pretty finely.

Well to use an example of cars. Let's take an EV sedan from driving dynamics.

1. Porsche Taycan - best
2. Lucid Air - very good
3. Model S - good
4. BMW i7 - fair
5. Mercedes EQS - bad