Nice Lucid Review on Electrek

Nice. Better than the usual cr@p from the likes of Edmunds.

Given Rivian's reveal of the R2 & R3, it makes sense to 'tease' the mid-size even if it's a way off.
 
I was really intrigued by the following section:

Some of the targeted competitors are the upcoming Macan EV and Kia EV5 and we were told the new EVs will function similarly to model like the Hyundai Santa Fe, Rivian R2, and Ford Bronco. Lucid’s Senior Vice President of Design and Brand, Derek Jenkins walked us around the covered vehicles and even lifted up a corner of the sheet at the crossover’s rear to give us a peak at the clay. It’s definitely a work in progress, but it looks sleek and unique… although its design is sure to change several more times before its targeted arrival in 2026.

One exciting design aspect that Jenkins preached was this idea of “inclusivity,” particularly in the cabin of the mid-seize models. He mentioned integrating music, video, and phone use as immersive experiences unlike anything the public has ever seen, all of which can be controlled from anywhere in the vehicle – adding a sort of group experience to driving… although many of these incoming features will likely only be available while parked.

Jenkins also shared that the smartphone will play a critical role in the mid-size experience, whatever that means. He said that Lucid is not trying to beat or replace the phone but that there is potential in that technology and its experience that the automaker feels can do better with a car.
 
As far as I'm concerned, the Tesla Model Y does the best job of any Tesla model with interior packaging, with first- and second-row seating that is the best in the Tesla lineup. I can only imagine what Lucid will be able to do with its space-engineering elixir in the same vehicle class.
 
We have a Tesla Model S Plaid and a Lucid Air Dream Performance sitting next to each other in our garage, and I've spent a lot of time mulling over the differences in the two cars. At the end of the day, even more than Lucid's better powertrain technology and suspension, the thing that most stands out is what Lucid has done with interior space. I've never seen the like of it in any other vehicle I've owned over the years. When I use the term "space-engineering elixir", I mean it almost literally. There is something of a "miracle cure" tenor about what Lucid does in this arena.

Many people talk about the compact drive units of the Air and what they do to create the vastly greater legroom of the Air -- both front and rear -- compared to the Model S. That jumps out at you the instant you open the doors of the two cars. But there's far more going on than just that, and it takes some time in both cars to absorb it fully. Rawlinson is known for his "every millimeter counts" mantra. He means it, and it really shows up in so many aspects of the Air.

The cars are almost identical in exterior width. Yet the Air cabin is noticeably wider, a little so in hard metrics but considerably more so in feel. There is something about the way the doors scoop away from you that creates elbow room front and rear that you just don't find in other cars of that size. As the feeling defies the metrics a bit, I can only conclude that some of the feel is visually induced by the descending lines of the dashboard sweeping into the door panels. It's a tour-de-force of interior design.

Both cars have a full glass roof. But in the Tesla, the cross-header at the top of the windshield means you have to crane your head back to know that the glass roof is there. In the Air, even though the ungainly sun visors interfere, you are still aware that you are sitting under a glass canopy. You somehow register it subliminally in a way you don't in the Tesla, and it imparts an airiness to the cabin that the Tesla does not. I have never had a passenger climb into the backseat of the Tesla and comment on its glass roof. Many passengers who get in the back of the Air comment on the expansive view of the sky, even though the Lucid has a substantial bar across the B-pillars that the Tesla does not. There is just something about the cabin that draws the view upward and outward in a way the Tesla does not. I have come to think that it derives from the visual interest created by the light bar centerline that sweeps back from the rearview mirror to the crossbar. Even though the Lucid canopy is more interrupted by structures than the Tesla glass roof, it is the Lucid that draws you outside the car visually. It's a piece of design genius in my book.

If Lucid can maintain this level of brilliant interior design with its smaller products at more mainstream price points, the future looks bright, indeed.
 
I was really intrigued by the following section:
That bit about phone integration all but guarantees Android Auto will have to play into the equation. They simply can't integrate the phone into the car experience and leave off half the potential customer base. Particularly as they expand globally.
 
I was really intrigued by the following section:
Although I do appreciate the focus on technology (and coincidentally, streaming services which were just being discussed in another thread), I do hope it still drives well and isn't just a computer with a free car attached like some Teslas tend to be. Happily though, it does seem as if there will be an actually usable rear screen considering they talked about "all passengers." I also wish it was less expensive than the range stated in the article, both to increase the amount of potential customers and because I'm selfish. :)
As far as I'm concerned, the Tesla Model Y does the best job of any Tesla model with interior packaging, with first- and second-row seating that is the best in the Tesla lineup. I can only imagine what Lucid will be able to do with its space-engineering elixir in the same vehicle class.
If it even has the SAME amount of under-seat room and legroom the Model Y has, it would have a lot of legroom. With a spacious frunk, a big subtrunk, and likely better rear legroom, I have good reason to guess the Lucid Midsize will be an amazing family EV.
 
"Some of the targeted competitors are the upcoming Macan EV and Kia EV5 and we were told the new EVs will function similarly to model like the Hyundai Santa Fe, Rivian R2, and Ford Bronco"

I am confused by this sentence. The Kia EV5 is not a performance vehicle and the Porsche Macan EV most definitely is. In my mind they play in completely different spaces. And what does "function" mean in this context? Size? Weight? Range? Speed?

My major concern about the Lucid Air is the size of the vehicle. I prefer a smaller vehicle and I have been therefore very interested in the future of the midsized Lucid and its size and features. But this left me very confused. I am interested in the Porsche Macan EV and would be very, very interested in the midsized Lucid if it turned into a competitor of the Macan. The Kia EV5 is a small and reduced power version of the EV6; I already have the small Genesis version of that vehicle. My major complaint on the Genesis is the handling. It isn't awful but it isn't what I would like. Porsche has managed to get superb handling out of a small SUV in the ICE version of the Macan and I would fully expect any car engineered by peter Rawlinson to be similar.

If it is similar to and competitive with the Porsche Macan EV, I would be very, very interested. If it is similar to and competitive with the Kia EV6, I would not.
 
"Some of the targeted competitors are the upcoming Macan EV and Kia EV5 and we were told the new EVs will function similarly to model like the Hyundai Santa Fe, Rivian R2, and Ford Bronco"

I am confused by this sentence. The Kia EV5 is not a performance vehicle and the Porsche Macan EV most definitely is. In my mind they play in completely different spaces. And what does "function" mean in this context? Size? Weight? Range? Speed?

My major concern about the Lucid Air is the size of the vehicle. I prefer a smaller vehicle and I have been therefore very interested in the future of the midsized Lucid and its size and features. But this left me very confused. I am interested in the Porsche Macan EV and would be very, very interested in the midsized Lucid if it turned into a competitor of the Macan. The Kia EV5 is a small and reduced power version of the EV6; I already have the small Genesis version of that vehicle. My major complaint on the Genesis is the handling. It isn't awful but it isn't what I would like. Porsche has managed to get superb handling out of a small SUV in the ICE version of the Macan and I would fully expect any car engineered by peter Rawlinson to be similar.

If it is similar to and competitive with the Porsche Macan EV, I would be very, very interested. If it is similar to and competitive with the Kia EV6, I would not.
Maybe he means they are targeting a combo of all of those vehicles, kind of like how the Gravity launch event showed multiple SUVs being "combined" into one?
 
Although I do appreciate the focus on technology (and coincidentally, streaming services which were just being discussed in another thread), I do hope it still drives well and isn't just a computer with a free car attached like some Teslas tend to be. Happily though, it does seem as if there will be an actually usable rear screen considering they talked about "all passengers." I also wish it was less expensive than the range stated in the article, both to increase the amount of potential customers and because I'm selfish. :)

I see absolutely no reason to assume Lucid is going to stray from the thing that won them every single award. Building a driver's car is literally in the DNA of the company.
 
"Some of the targeted competitors are the upcoming Macan EV and Kia EV5 and we were told the new EVs will function similarly to model like the Hyundai Santa Fe, Rivian R2, and Ford Bronco"

I am confused by this sentence. The Kia EV5 is not a performance vehicle and the Porsche Macan EV most definitely is. In my mind they play in completely different spaces. And what does "function" mean in this context? Size? Weight? Range? Speed?

My major concern about the Lucid Air is the size of the vehicle. I prefer a smaller vehicle and I have been therefore very interested in the future of the midsized Lucid and its size and features. But this left me very confused. I am interested in the Porsche Macan EV and would be very, very interested in the midsized Lucid if it turned into a competitor of the Macan. The Kia EV5 is a small and reduced power version of the EV6; I already have the small Genesis version of that vehicle. My major complaint on the Genesis is the handling. It isn't awful but it isn't what I would like. Porsche has managed to get superb handling out of a small SUV in the ICE version of the Macan and I would fully expect any car engineered by peter Rawlinson to be similar.

If it is similar to and competitive with the Porsche Macan EV, I would be very, very interested. If it is similar to and competitive with the Kia EV6, I would not.
They showed three cars under wraps. Those targeted competitors likely describe the competitors across the models, not necessarily for a single one. My guess is there is a performance midsize in there, a 'masses' midsize, and an all-terrain SUV.
 
They showed three cars under wraps. Those targeted competitors likely describe the competitors across the models, not necessarily for a single one. My guess is there is a performance midsize in there, a 'masses' midsize, and an all-terrain SUV.
That would be quite a collection of new cars but it does clarify my confusion!
 
They showed three cars under wraps. Those targeted competitors likely describe the competitors across the models, not necessarily for a single one. My guess is there is a performance midsize in there, a 'masses' midsize, and an all-terrain SUV.
My guess is that the "performance" midsize will just be a Sapphire trim of the "masses" midsize, since it would be odd to have a seperate sapphire vehicle. The all terrain SUV completely makes sense, it is like the R2 vs the "R2X" (if that was a thing). If the authors actually meant three distinct models, then I'm secretly hoping for a midsize sedan... Lucid, PLEASE do that!
 
I see absolutely no reason to assume Lucid is going to stray from the thing that won them every single award. Building a driver's car is literally in the DNA of the company.

Tesla was taken over in early days by an entrepreneur who started PayPal. Lucid is run by an automotive engineer who held top engineering roles at Jaguar and Lotus . . . and who was Chief Engineer of the first -- and, so far, only -- Tesla to be named Car of the Year.

That, more than anything else, explains the differences in the two brands.
 
Tesla was taken over in early days by an entrepreneur who started PayPal. Lucid is run by an automotive engineer who held top engineering roles at Jaguar and Lotus . . . and who was Chief Engineer of the first -- and, so far, only -- Tesla to be named Car of the Year.

That, more than anything else, explains the differences in the two brands.
That, indeed, is exactly how I will forever articulate my decision to move from Tesla to Lucid.

Also: Lucid makes cars for people who love to drive. Tesla makes cars for people who like computers.

I remember when the early Teslas came out, and the reviewers were mostly making comments like "And it handles really well, considering x." With X being, "it's an EV" or "it's a new company" and so on.

Meanwhile, savagegeese is putting out videos where they flat out say Lucid is kicking BMWs ass at making fun driver's cars.
 
Last edited:
We have a Tesla Model S Plaid and a Lucid Air Dream Performance sitting next to each other in our garage, and I've spent a lot of time mulling over the differences in the two cars. At the end of the day, even more than Lucid's better powertrain technology and suspension, the thing that most stands out is what Lucid has done with interior space. I've never seen the like of it in any other vehicle I've owned over the years. When I use the term "space-engineering elixir", I mean it almost literally. There is something of a "miracle cure" tenor about what Lucid does in this arena.

Many people talk about the compact drive units of the Air and what they do to create the vastly greater legroom of the Air -- both front and rear -- compared to the Model S. That jumps out at you the instant you open the doors of the two cars. But there's far more going on than just that, and it takes some time in both cars to absorb it fully. Rawlinson is known for his "every millimeter counts" mantra. He means it, and it really shows up in so many aspects of the Air.

The cars are almost identical in exterior width. Yet the Air cabin is noticeably wider, a little so in hard metrics but considerably more so in feel. There is something about the way the doors scoop away from you that creates elbow room front and rear that you just don't find in other cars of that size. As the feeling defies the metrics a bit, I can only conclude that some of the feel is visually induced by the descending lines of the dashboard sweeping into the door panels. It's a tour-de-force of interior design.

Both cars have a full glass roof. But in the Tesla, the cross-header at the top of the windshield means you have to crane your head back to know that the glass roof is there. In the Air, even though the ungainly sun visors interfere, you are still aware that you are sitting under a glass canopy. You somehow register it subliminally in a way you don't in the Tesla, and it imparts an airiness to the cabin that the Tesla does not. I have never had a passenger climb into the backseat of the Tesla and comment on its glass roof. Many passengers who get in the back of the Air comment on the expansive view of the sky, even though the Lucid has a substantial bar across the B-pillars that the Tesla does not. There is just something about the cabin that draws the view upward and outward in a way the Tesla does not. I have come to think that it derives from the visual interest created by the light bar centerline that sweeps back from the rearview mirror to the crossbar. Even though the Lucid canopy is more interrupted by structures than the Tesla glass roof, it is the Lucid that draws you outside the car visually. It's a piece of design genius in my book.

If Lucid can maintain this level of brilliant interior design with its smaller products at more mainstream price points, the future looks bright, indeed.
When I had my MS, rear passengers only commented about the reflections they saw from inside the car against the glass roof. That wasn't a positive in my mind. ;)

For the midsize Lucid, I hope it bears no resemblance to the Kia EV5. From what I've seen it looks hideous to me. :(
 
When I had my MS, rear passengers only commented about the reflections they saw from inside the car against the glass roof. That wasn't a positive in my mind.

Our Tesla's glass roof is significantly darker than the glass canopy In the Lucid, yet I have noticed no more heat gain in the Lucid than the Tesla. The infrared rejection coating on the Lucid seems to be quite effective. It can put a load on the A/C in south Florida sunshine, but I have not yet been in a situation where the A/C can't keep up, including sitting for long periods in airport cell phone lots on hot tarmac.
 
We have a Tesla Model S Plaid and a Lucid Air Dream Performance sitting next to each other in our garage, and I've spent a lot of time mulling over the differences in the two cars. At the end of the day, even more than Lucid's better powertrain technology and suspension, the thing that most stands out is what Lucid has done with interior space. I've never seen the like of it in any other vehicle I've owned over the years. When I use the term "space-engineering elixir", I mean it almost literally. There is something of a "miracle cure" tenor about what Lucid does in this arena.

Many people talk about the compact drive units of the Air and what they do to create the vastly greater legroom of the Air -- both front and rear -- compared to the Model S. That jumps out at you the instant you open the doors of the two cars. But there's far more going on than just that, and it takes some time in both cars to absorb it fully. Rawlinson is known for his "every millimeter counts" mantra. He means it, and it really shows up in so many aspects of the Air.

The cars are almost identical in exterior width. Yet the Air cabin is noticeably wider, a little so in hard metrics but considerably more so in feel. There is something about the way the doors scoop away from you that creates elbow room front and rear that you just don't find in other cars of that size. As the feeling defies the metrics a bit, I can only conclude that some of the feel is visually induced by the descending lines of the dashboard sweeping into the door panels. It's a tour-de-force of interior design.

Both cars have a full glass roof. But in the Tesla, the cross-header at the top of the windshield means you have to crane your head back to know that the glass roof is there. In the Air, even though the ungainly sun visors interfere, you are still aware that you are sitting under a glass canopy. You somehow register it subliminally in a way you don't in the Tesla, and it imparts an airiness to the cabin that the Tesla does not. I have never had a passenger climb into the backseat of the Tesla and comment on its glass roof. Many passengers who get in the back of the Air comment on the expansive view of the sky, even though the Lucid has a substantial bar across the B-pillars that the Tesla does not. There is just something about the cabin that draws the view upward and outward in a way the Tesla does not. I have come to think that it derives from the visual interest created by the light bar centerline that sweeps back from the rearview mirror to the crossbar. Even though the Lucid canopy is more interrupted by structures than the Tesla glass roof, it is the Lucid that draws you outside the car visually. It's a piece of design genius in my book.

If Lucid can maintain this level of brilliant interior design with its smaller products at more mainstream price points, the future looks bright, indeed.
This is a really well written and descriptive comparison! This should be pinned to the front page of the forum for anyone looking to compare the two cars.
 
Tesla was taken over in early days by an entrepreneur who started PayPal
Almost, haha.

That entrepreneur did not start PayPal; he started X.com in March 1999, with Harris Fricker, Christopher Payne, and Ed Ho. Due to conflict on how to run the company, Musk fired Fricker five months after X.com had started, and the other two co-founders, Payne and Ho left soon after.

Confinity, their competitor, had been started in December 1998 by Max Levchin, Peter Thiel, and Luke Nosek.

Confinity launched PayPal in late 1999.

One year after Elon & co. founded X.com, in March 2000, X.com got acquired by Confinity. Musk was its biggest shareholder and was appointed as its CEO. Originally they named the merged company X.com until they changed the name to PayPal because consumers thought it was vague and potentially pornographic (which is not far off from what X.com is now, ironically).

In September 2000 (ironically six months after the merger, just like Musk's five-month firing of his cofounders), when Musk was in Australia for a honeymoon trip, the X.com board voted for a change of CEO from Musk to Peter Thiel, the co-founder of Confinity. In June 2001, X.com changed its name to PayPal and the rest is history.
 
That, indeed, is exactly how I will forever articulate my decision to move from Tesla to Lucid.

Also: Lucid makes cars for people who love to drive. Tesla makes cars for people who like computers.

I remember when the early Teslas came out, and the reviewers were mostly making comments like "And it handles really well, considering x." With X being, "it's an EV" or "it's a new company" and so on.

Meanwhile, savagegees is putting out videos where they flat out say Lucid is kicking BMWs ass at making fun driver's cars.
Although I agree, it must be admitted that Teslas did drive pretty well compared to gas cars, mostly due to their lower center of gravity. What is also true is that they did not exploit the full potential of EVs in terms of chassis, and the Lucid adequately rectifies that.
consumers thought it was vague and potentially pornographic (which is not far off from what X.com is now, ironically)
Brutal, but true 🤣
 
Back
Top