Lucid teases EPA Range Test for Lucid Air

[hmp10]

Great article, and amazing range performance for the Air.

I was surprised, though, by the comment about 600 hp. Rawlinson has said repeatedly that the Lucid motor develops 600 hp and that the Air platform can take 1, 2, or 3 of them. He said that the dual-motor car would develop 1,000 hp, 200 less than the nominal combined power due to battery output limitations. I wonder if this means the car used in this test drive was a single-motor car.

 

[Hawk]

Great article, and amazing range performance for the Air.

I was surprised, though, by the comment about 600 hp. Rawlinson has said repeatedly that the Lucid motor develops 600 hp and that the Air platform can take 1, 2, or 3 of them. He said that the dual-motor car would develop 1,000 hp, 200 less than the nominal combined power due to battery output limitations. I wonder if this means the car used in this test drive was a single-motor car.

I had exactly the same thoughts. I'm hoping that the author simply misunderstood that each motor has 600hp? The author also said the car was capable of a 0 to 60mph in 2.5 seconds - is that possible with one 600hp motor? Guess we will just have to wait as I am certain we will not receive any more detail until Sept 9th.

 

[Hawk]

Now this is interesting. The Drive claims that the EPA testing protocol used is outdated and Lucid admitted it wasn't tested to current North American EV standards. If true, I question why Lucid would have done this.

Here is the article - https://www.thedrive.com/news/35618...las-longest-range-beat-by-more-than-100-miles

 

[hmp10]

"The Drive" article is confusing. It says that Lucid issued a release this morning about the test result and then goes on to say:

"This result was allegedly attained by vehicle testing firm FEV North America on a test that 'closely follows' the EPA's Multi Cycle Test Procedure, specifically the SAE J1634 standard introduced in October 2012 . . . . Lucid says its test was run using the older, 2012-standard methodology."

I have looked at that release again, and I can find nothing of the sort in it or in anything else that I have seen Lucid or Rawlinson put out. What the Lucid release actually said is:

"Following the official EPA standard testing procedure [my emphasis], they verified an estimated EPA range of 517 miles on a single charge."

I see nothing in that press release, nor in the tweet by Rawlinson, that says anything about "closely following" something, whether it be the SAE J1634 standard or anything else, or that says it used a "2012-standard methodology".

In any case, getting from a mileage test rating to actual road mileage is always a fraught exercise. What I find more compelling is the report from Edward Ludlow that "Car and Driver" and "Bloomberg News" published today.

In a convoy test where three new EVs were driven on the same roads, at the same time, in the same conditions, and at the same speeds (70mph wherever possible), the Lucid bested the next-longest-range car (the Tesla Model S Long Range) by 101 miles.

That is really the gold standard comparison, no matter what the debate about EPA methodology.

 

[Hawk]

"The Drive" article is confusing. It says that Lucid issued a release this morning about the test result and then goes on to say:

"This result was allegedly attained by vehicle testing firm FEV North America on a test that 'closely follows' the EPA's Multi Cycle Test Procedure, specifically the SAE J1634 standard introduced in October 2012 . . . . Lucid says its test was run using the older, 2012-standard methodology."

I have looked at that release again, and I can find nothing of the sort in it or in anything else that I have seen Lucid or Rawlinson put out. What the Lucid release actually said is:

"Following the official EPA standard testing procedure [my emphasis], they verified an estimated EPA range of 517 miles on a single charge."

I see nothing in that press release, nor in the tweet by Rawlinson, that says anything about "closely following" something, whether it be the SAE J1634 standard or anything else, or that says it used a "2012-standard methodology".

In any case, getting from a mileage test rating to actual road mileage is always a fraught exercise. What I find more compelling is the report from Edward Ludlow that "Car and Driver" and "Bloomberg News" published today.

In a convoy test where three new EVs were driven on the same roads, at the same time, in the same conditions, and at the same speeds (70mph wherever possible), the Lucid bested the next-longest-range car (the Tesla Model S Long Range) by 101 miles.

That is really the gold standard comparison, no matter what the debate about EPA methodology.

Yes I agree. However, Kim Reynolds of Motor Trend in this video - https://www.motortrend.com/cars/lucid/air/2021/2021-lucid-air-first-ride-review-range-test/ - talks about getting out of the EPA test vehicle and getting into a performance 1,000hp test vehicle on the track for a different experience. I'm now fully convinced that Lucid will offer different motor / battery configuration options even in the Dream Edition. I also strongly believe, from compiling the info from different reviews, that the EPA test vehicle and the one used in the actual road test comparison had the "Big" battery and only one motor (600hp).

I'm no longer going to follow the marketing hype, with no additional sharing of any real specs. I'll participate in the Sept 9th reveal and then analyze the actual / real specs to make a decision. Until then I am signing off.

Good luck and stay well.

 

[hmp10]

I should take a break, too, but the article you just posted didn't help. My curiosity is now revved up even more.

For one thing, I think the 130-kWh battery pack is definitely dead. The rear floorboard was going to be completely flat with that pack, which would come only with a bench seat. That was the reason the Executive Rear Seating, which requires deep footwells, was not going to be offered with the longest range during early planning. This author mentioned the rear "foot garage" being "mostly filled" in the range test car. I had noticed a faintly-visible carpet notch in the center of the rear floorboard in the teaser video of the Dream Edition, which suggested to me a not-quite-flat floorboard. I take all this to mean that, while the rear might not have the deep footwells of the lower-range model, they will have some indentation. Since the original design was around a 100-kWh battery pack (deep footwells) and a 130-kWh battery pack (no footwells), the suggestion of a footwell, but a shallower one, aligns with reports of the largest battery now being around 110-KWh.

Rawlinson has said that the Air platform will accommodate three motors, something only mentioned over the last few months. This author seems to refer cryptically to three different configurations during his day with the cars: a single motor in the range test car; a dual motor in the car he first climbed into at the track; and a 3-motor configuration in the final car which he said felt as if it were on afterburner. Perhaps Rawlinson, knowing the Tesla Plaid drivetrain was in the works, laid in plans over the past year to counter it.

A 2-motor configuration in an EV does not necessarily imply less driving range than a 1-motor configuration. In fact, when Tesla introduced its dual motor Model S in 2015, the range actually increased because of the ability to allocate power more efficiently between the two motors based on driving conditions.

I agree that Lucid will probably offer drivetrain/battery options even within the Dream Edition series. My financial advisor just reserved a Dream Edition, so it's clearly not going to be as limited as the Launch Edition was supposed to be.

With that, I should stop the speculation, too. I've probably wrung all the information (and misinformation) I can out of the sketchy and sometimes conflicting stuff we're seeing.

I look forward to hearing your take on things after the reveal. And you stay well, too.