Lucid Navigation Opinions

When will we have options like avoid toll roads?
That’s definitely a Lucid issue. HERE maps definitely has toll, ferry, etc options available so that falls on Lucid to enable/implement it.
 
Posted in another thread on navigating to EAs, but thought it would make sense to cross post here. Used the lucid nav on a trip today to navigate to an EA station in Jersey to top up. It wasn't able to navigate me to the specific location, it just had an icon on the map, brought me to the vicinity on the other side of the parking lot and then wanted me to continue on my route home. Luckily I switched to Google maps on my phone and it brought me to the EA station. Lucid also did not list the status of the chargers correctly indicating 0 chargers available, when all three were available when we arrived (giving it the benefit of the doubt, it's possible it hadnt updated, since it was a busy station).
 
Interesting to note: Rivian is moving their map data source from Mapbox to Google: https://blog.google/products/maps/rivian-is-getting-a-new-navigation-system-with-google-maps/
I think it is a good move on Rivian's part. That said, I don't have any problem with Rivian's (R1S) existing map/ navigation. It is much better than Lucid's HERE maps.

That said, I don't think neither Rivian nor Lucid should spend their energy on their own instantiation of maps and navigation. It is a big task to implement AND to maintain. I can't see how doing maps and navigation is the best investment (people/$) for either Rivian or Lucid.

Reality is, most of us either use Android or iPhone all day long, more so that our cars. It is just more natural to make these the default standards on maps/navigation.
 
I was about to post the same. I wish other automakers would follow that approach too...
My preference is actually that the other mapping services get better, but I have no control over that. I have a lot of concerns over the Google monopoly here.

What I don't understand is why Rivian's Mapbox data was (apparently) so bad? Tesla also uses Mapbox, and we've been happy with that nav for the past 6 years. It also sounds like the HERE map quality varies greatly based on where you are.
 
My preference is actually that the other mapping services get better, but I have no control over that. I have a lot of concerns over the Google monopoly here.

What I don't understand is why Rivian's Mapbox data was (apparently) so bad? Tesla also uses Mapbox, and we've been happy with that nav for the past 6 years. It also sounds like the HERE map quality varies greatly based on where you are.
Good point about the monopoly and the need for other brands to get better.
Tesla actually uses both, the data is from Google maps but the engine is Mapbox.
 
What I don't understand is why Rivian's Mapbox data was (apparently) so bad? Tesla also uses Mapbox, and we've been happy with that nav for the past 6 years. It also sounds like the HERE map quality varies greatly based on where you are.
Rivian used Mapbox as is, with limited customization and overlayed EV specific features manually. This apparently led to clunky UI, delayed rerouting, and incomplete address or POI data. Tesla uses Mapbox as a backend provider, but overlays its own heavily customized UI, routing engine, and EV data. Mapbox is just the canvas, not the brains.

Rivian also relied more on Mapbox’s own routing, which struggled with accuracy and real-time traffic updates, especially in rural/off-road areas whereas Tesla has its own routing algorithms (including Supercharger logic, energy predictions, live rerouting). It seems Mapbox wasn't good at factoring in terrain, weather etc. which is critical to an EV's route plan so they jumped ship and went to Google.
 
Back
Top