Lucid's Future

[hmp10]

I just came across this post from Tom Moloughney of "State of Charge" renown:

It brought to mind a recent comment by Jason Cammisa on a "Carmudgeon" podcast, where he said that Lucid joins Porsche as the only other carmaker to get suspension dynamics and real-wheel steering right, to the point that the Lucid might be beginning to make sports cars obsolete. And this, in turn, brought to mind an earlier discussion we used to have on this forum about whether Lucid's business model falls more naturally into the Porsche mold than into the mass market role.

With the launch of the Gravity and the teasing of the mid-size Earth to follow, recent conversation has been peppered more with assumptions that Lucid is heading toward becoming a mass market player, especially with Saudi Arabia's announced goal of becoming a global hub of the automotive industry.

One thing over a hundred years of automotive history has taught us is that engineering in a company with its eye on the mass market can be a different beast from engineering in a specialty house. Mercedes' stumbles in bringing EVs to market, BMW's loss of its "ultimate driving machine" luster, and Cadillac's earlier transition from a leading automotive engineering house to a chrome-fins-and-gizmo shop are all emblematic of what happens when sales volume concerns move ahead of engineering focus on the priority list.

But Porsche -- almost alone among major automakers -- is proving that an automaker can remain in a relatively small market niche, can expand its models across a wide array of categories, and can be very profitable . . . all while maintaining its place at the forefront of automotive engineering.

As Lucid transitions from the Rawlinson era, I hope it keeps Porsche's path more in its sights than Tesla's.

 

[Blue Lectroid]

I just came across this post from Tom Moloughney of "State of Charge" renown:

View attachment 28095

It brought to mind a recent comment by Jason Cammisa on a "Carmudgeon" podcast, where he said that Lucid joins Porsche as the only other carmaker to get suspension dynamics and real-wheel steering right, to the point that the Lucid might be beginning to make sports cars obsolete. And this, in turn, brought to mind an earlier discussion we used to have on this forum about whether Lucid's business model falls more naturally into the Porsche mold than into the mass market role.

With the launch of the Gravity and the teasing of the mid-size Earth to follow, recent conversation has been peppered more with assumptions that Lucid is heading toward becoming a mass market player, especially with Saudi Arabia's announced goal of becoming a global hub of the automotive industry.

One thing over a hundred years of automotive history has taught us is that engineering in a company with its eye on the mass market can be a different beast from engineering in a specialty house. Mercedes' stumbles in bringing EVs to market, BMW's loss of its "ultimate driving machine" luster, and Cadillac's earlier transition from a leading automotive engineering house to a chrome-fins-and-gizmo shop are all emblematic of what happens when sales volume concerns move ahead of engineering focus on the priority list.

But Porsche -- almost alone among major automakers -- is proving that an automaker can remain in a relatively small market niche, can expand its models across a wide array of categories, and can be very profitable . . . all while maintaining its place at the forefront of automotive engineering.

As Lucid transitions from the Rawlinson era, I hope it keeps Porsche's path more in its sights than Tesla's.

FANTASTIC post! I couldn’t agree more. I hope that Lucid’s midsize offerings are more like the BMW 3-series of old rather than what Tesla opted to do with the 3 & Y.

 

[PetevB]

Lucid’s current engineering philosophy is fundamentally different than Porsche’s. In fact it’s like the old Porsche, the one that nearly went bankrupt in the 1990s. I do wonder if Lucid can make it work where Porsche didn’t.

In 1991 Porsche sold 23,000 cars worldwide on three platforms, each completely bespoke. Every platform was highly optimized, with a relatively small number of parts shared- brakes, etc. This is similar in volume and approach to where Lucid is today, though Lucid is spending many multiples of what Porsche did on R&D, setting up factories, etc.

Today Porsche sells 310,000 vehicles per year, every one of them on platforms shared either within Porsche (Boxster/ Cayman/ Carrera) or with other models across the VW brand (everything else). This justifies R&D and manufacturing investment by spreading it across many cars sold.

I believe Lucid’s engineering spend is actually far higher than Porsche’s on a per vehicle basis, and we can see the results in the very different level of technology in current vehicles, with Lucid being well ahead. Take the Taycan’s charging performance shown above- impressive, but not hard to achieve if one is willing to spend money of the right battery chemistry, which Porsche is. And 302 miles of highway range from a 97 kWh pack is again not bad, 3.1 miles per KWh, until, that is, you consider that’s for a low slung 4 seater and that Lucid’s likely to achieve almost 20% better from a much bigger, heavier SUV.

The R&D spend needs to be covered one way or another. Porsche spreads it over many vehicle derivatives built off a single platform. But Lucid’s efficiency advantage is made possible in part because they have highly engineered solutions that package very tightly because they don’t need to be modular or flexible for other cars. That approach leads towards Tesla’s model- a small number of platforms that sell in higher volumes to cover the development expense. Currently that seems to be where Lucid’s heading, though more up market. Think a Model Y at a 10-20% premium that has better range and driving dynamics. I think that’s what you’re suggesting re following Porsche’s path, rather than the path Porsche actually took with modularization, many niche models and a highly flexible shared platform strategy to make high R&D spend possible.

 

[hmp10]

Take the Taycan’s charging performance shown above- impressive, but not hard to achieve if one is willing to spend money of the right battery chemistry, which Porsche is. And 302 miles of highway range from a 97 kWh pack is again not bad, 3.1 miles per KWh, until, that is, you consider that’s for a low slung 4 seater and that Lucid’s likely to achieve almost 20% better from a much bigger, heavier SUV.

If I understood what Kyle Conner and Tom Moloughney explained last week about the trade-offs in deciding on cell copper content, isn't this the result: i. e., more copper allowing for faster taking on of energy but lower energy storage density?

I assumed Moloughney's reference to the "Porsche power cell" reflected a choice to use more copper in Porsche cells to get faster charging at the price of range? Lucid, by contrast, opted to favor range a bit more in the mix, relying more on other stratagems such as using the rear motor as a transformer than on further upping copper content.

 

[PetevB]

If I understood what Kyle Conner and Tom Moloughney explained last week about the trade-offs in deciding on cell copper content, isn't this the result: i. e., more copper allowing for faster taking on of energy but lower energy storage density?

I haven’t seen that, but are you sure they’re referring to copper and not cobalt? In any case yes, both play a role and can impact charging performance and cost.

 

[reNT]

I think Lucid's future at this point, mostly rests on working out the software glitches. They got the hardware right (I really like how the car drives), but the software is a BIG part of the user experience. Especially for a luxury car. I've only had the air for a couple months and the software glitches are starting to get on my nerves. The wake up through the app takes way too long and many times it doesn't work at all, the fob has no range, you literally have to be within a foot's distance of the car for the fob to open the frunk or lock/unlock the car, the sound in the car sometimes for no reason, just stops working. No turn signal blinker sound, no music, nothing. Then you have to find a place to pull over and do the air logo reset to get the sounds back.

Coincidentally, the charging performance which Lucid keeps boasting about, is not all that relevant to me as I charge the car at home overnight, 99% of the time.

I want to continue buying cars from this brand as I love the engineering focused philosophy of this company and I'll be very closely watching the user feedback of the Gravity which I am planning on getting next, once the lease on my Air ends. But, if I see that Gravity continues having these same software glitches as the air, I am going back to the germans.

 

[hmp10]

I haven’t seen that, but are you sure they’re referring to copper and not cobalt? In any case yes, both play a role and can impact charging performance and cost.

I have seldom heard copper mentioned in the context of li-ion cell chemistry as opposed to cobalt, so I was a bit surprised when Conner starting talking about copper.

Here was the discussion (starting around 6:45):

 

[PetevB]

I think Lucid's future at this point, mostly rests on working out the software glitches. They got the hardware right (I really like how the car drives), but the software is a BIG part of the user experience.

Lucid’s future, like most startups, rests on their ability to correct all their many mistakes. I suspect many of the UX issues you note, such as the doors not opening reliably, are in fact down to electrical hardware issues, not simply software.

Most traditional OEMs get their electrical hardware and software from tier 1 suppliers, they don’t roll their own. Lucid (and Tesla) big off a lot doing it all themselves, with the upside that they will have much more flexibility, etc, long term as vehicles become more and more defined by software rather than hardware. So the strategy makes sense to me if it can be successfully excited with the resources available.

Unfortunately I’d call Lucid’s execution poor thus far, but the Gravity was a chance to start fresh with a larger team and the ability to implement both software and hardware fixes. I expect Lucid to prove they have learned all the lessons needed this time around (with the exception of self-driving). If they have they’ll be in a strong position. If not I think it’ll be an early indicator of bigger problems, in which case I do worry about their ability to execute their strategy overall.

 

[scal_air]

I agree with @hmp10. Lucid survives as a niche marketer like Porshe or Mercedes Benz. I remember when Tesla was considered a premium brand... the Model 3 changed things. Yes it made financial sense and opened up a wider market at that time. But that is when service really took a drop and many early adpoters became unhappy and disillusioned with the brand. It is difficult to thread the needle like Porshe has done, but it would be more difficult to succeed with a lower cost, high volume model given the current competition. The Porshe Taycan was the only other serious consideration for my new car.

And quite frankly, I enjoy the premium service and would not like to see it further degraded.

 

[Leftlane]

To call Porsche and MB “niche marketers” is pretty funny - they are the farthest thing from it. Lotus is niche. Koenigsegg is niche. Porsche and MB have full product lineups, massive sales, and legions of customers - the opposite of niche.

 

[Volund]

I will say something controversial though from my various Porsche rentals and weeks long ownerships, including even the Taycan.

When I had the gt3rs and even the Targa, and the 911 997 body model, I didn't find Porsche to be "luxury" as many describe. They have amazing engineering in suspension, tuning, control, driving dynamics, all the bells and whistles. But software wise and the actual interior cabin didn't define luxury to me in any way. In fact the suspension was stiff and bumps were uncomfortable.
It was cramped, and barely comfortable at best, unless I had a convertible too, it was claustrophobic.

So I consider them premium, and definitely an amazing sports car in every aspect. I have no idea why people define them as luxury. But Lotus and Porsche would definitely be the top pick if I had to go around a track.

I know to some what I said is blasphemous

 

[scal_air]

To call Porsche and MB “niche marketers” is pretty funny - they are the farthest thing from it. Lotus is niche. Koenigsegg is niche. Porsche and MB have full product lineups, massive sales, and legions of customers - the opposite of niche.

You're right. High end EV market is probably the more correct term. Lucid may not have the total sales of MB or Porsche (just realized I spelled it wrong in the previous post) but I'll bet in terms of EV sales, they're beating MB but behind the Taycan.

 

[hmp10]

To call Porsche and MB “niche marketers” is pretty funny - they are the farthest thing from it. Lotus is niche. Koenigsegg is niche. Porsche and MB have full product lineups, massive sales, and legions of customers - the opposite of niche.

I, too, used the term "niche" while also putting Porsche among "major automakers". I don't think the two terms are necessarily inconsistent.

Porsche is a hugely-followed presence in the industry and a brand with which far more people are familiar than exotic brands. However, it still operates in fewer segments than the likes of GM, Ford, MB, or even BMW . . . and it is largely at price points that make it relatively small even in the larger segments in which it does play outside of sports cars. For instance, the Cayenne SUV starts at almost $87,000 and goes north of $200,000. And its Panamera sedan starts above $104,000 and runs up to over $156,000. Even the Cayman and the Boxster, its (ahem) "budget" models, start over $70,000 and run up to over $164,000.

I think you could argue that Porsche pricing alone puts it in something of a niche.

 

[AlDente]

I think Lucid needs to find a way to make the quality of their driving dynamics more apparent. The car rides so well, and is so smooth. There is no sports model, performance suspension, AMG, M, or V model. It's all baked in like older BMW. Without it being pointed out, many people don't realize how much of the sports car experience they are getting.

If there was a floppier, slower, more plain looking model, and the current model has some sport badging and sport touches, no one would blink an eye. And people would be praising the capabilities of their Lucid.

I don't think becoming the old BMW works anymore. Cadillac and others have tried it. BMW abandoned it. And I have admiration for Lucid just simply delivering one badass product without insane upcharges like Porsche. I don't know what the answer is for the longevity of the brand, but I do feel like the driving experience isn't fully being communicated.

 

[hmp10]

I think Lucid needs to find a way to make the quality of their driving dynamics more apparent. The car rides so well, and is so smooth. There is no sports model, performance suspension, AMG, M, or V model. It's all baked in like older BMW. Without it being pointed out, many people don't realize how much of the sports car experience they are getting.

If there was a floppier, slower, more plain looking model, and the current model has some sport badging and sport touches, no one would blink an eye. And people would be praising the capabilities of their Lucid.

I don't think becoming the old BMW works anymore. Cadillac and others have tried it. BMW abandoned it. And I have admiration for Lucid just simply delivering one badass product without insane upcharges like Porsche. I don't know what the answer is for the longevity of the brand, but I do feel like the driving experience isn't fully being communicated.

There's a real conundrum here. The overwhelming majority of the serious auto press has lauded Lucid to the skies for its performance and handling dynamics. Their reviews sometimes take issue with its price, more often with its quality issues (at least early on), and almost always with its software. But they LOVE its athleticism.

It even drew comment from Kyle Conner ("Out of Spec Motoring") a few months ago, when he was surmising how a car that has won so many major automotive awards here and internationally could still have been so slow to be embraced by the market. And one of the main reasons he suggested was that auto journalists put much more of a premium on performance and handling than do most buyers who look more at the ergonomic and software aspects of a car -- areas in which Lucid does not always lead the pack (except, of course, on its brilliant space engineering).

I'm one of the buyers you posit. I purchased an Air Dream Edition Performance based almost exclusively on the power and driving dynamics that were being ballyhooed in the automotive press without ever having driven one myself. I'm doing the same thing again now with the Gravity Dream Edition.

Unfortunately, though, there don't seem to be enough of me to fill Lucid's order books the way I think people should.

 

[Blue Lectroid]

It’s a young company. Give it time!! Let’s revisit this thread in 2027…

 

[msaunders9430]

The R&D spend needs to be covered one way or another. Porsche spreads it over many vehicle derivatives built off a single platform. But Lucid’s efficiency advantage is made possible in part because they have highly engineered solutions that package very tightly because they don’t need to be modular or flexible for other cars. That approach leads towards Tesla’s model- a small number of platforms that sell in higher volumes to cover the development expense. Currently that seems to be where Lucid’s heading, though more up market. Think a Model Y at a 10-20% premium that has better range and driving dynamics. I think that’s what you’re suggesting re following Porsche’s path, rather than the path Porsche actually took with modularization, many niche models and a highly flexible shared platform strategy to make high R&D spend possible.

A great topic!!!
Another thread I'm watching.

So the challenge seems to be Lucid not putting sales volumes concerns ahead of engineering focus.

With the majority ownership of the Saudi PIF, Lucid is more like Porsche (with Volkswagen ownership) than Tesla, purely from an ownership perspective.
However, that ownership perspective is important because somebody's paying the bills.

The Saudi PIF wants to become a global ev hub. Lucid is in their ev products portfolio along with the PIF-brand Ceer, and more.
If the PIF allows Lucid to operate on the Tesla model, how does that impact Ceer and any other ev brand they may choose to aquire. (i.e. Nissan)?
Perhaps the Lucid platforms remain highly engineered (like Porsche), while Ceer and other ev brands in the PIF portfolio have seperate platforms, not significantly impacted by the Lucid platform. Kind of like a Porsche platform, but not being spread over "many vehicle derivatives", but with the goal of high sales volumes (Tesla).

So, a Porsche engineering focus mixed with a Tesla small number of platforms and high sales volumes.
Or will the PIF decide to have Lucid function in the Porsche role, like Volkswagen does?
2027 will provide us with the answers ... said @Blue Lectroid.

 

[Leftlane]

There’s no mystery at all - they started way too expensive for an untested company and eliminated themselves from consideration for 99% of buyers. What will be interesting is how many Gravity sales are to people who do not already have an Air, because they are repeating the same strategy with the average cost somewhere in the $120k range. There is just a very limited audience for super expensive and super unknown. Porsche gets those prices because they have delivered for decades, and just look at how many Macans and Cayennes they sell compared to any other of their models. And even though I think Porsche’s pricing has become completely outrageous, they still sell all they make, with hard to get allocations and ADMs on their most expensive stuff. It is crazy that zero people have anything bad to say about the Lucid driving dynamics and the engineering, but they still sell at a super low volume - pricing has to be a big part of that.

 

[msaunders9430]

Following the Porsche comparison and considering Lucid's future, with the Gravity in Lucid's immediate future and the Earth not far behind, will an article similar to this be written about Lucid one day?

Gravity like the Cayenne (SUV)
Earth like the Boxster (affordable)

How A Sports Car And SUV Saved Porsche From Bankruptcy

The brand wouldn't be what it is today without these models.

carbuzz.com

 

[Blue Lectroid]

There’s no mystery at all - they started way too expensive for an untested company and eliminated themselves from consideration for 99% of buyers. What will be interesting is how many Gravity sales are to people who do not already have an Air, because they are repeating the same strategy with the average cost somewhere in the $120k range. There is just a very limited audience for super expensive and super unknown. Porsche gets those prices because they have delivered for decades, and just look at how many Macans and Cayennes they sell compared to any other of their models. And even though I think Porsche’s pricing has become completely outrageous, they still sell all they make, with hard to get allocations and ADMs on their most expensive stuff. It is crazy that zero people have anything bad to say about the Lucid driving dynamics and the engineering, but they still sell at a super low volume - pricing has to be a big part of that.

Are you forgetting that Tesla launched with the Model S and followed with Model X? OK, actually they launched with an even less practical and relatively MORE expensive car (the Roadster), but the point stands. That is exactly the same game plan Lucid is running now…seems that Tesla initially being “expensive and super unknown” didn’t hurt their future…