Out of Spec - Lots of Good Coverage

[SDHacker]

This is something that’s been slightly bugging me. Yesterday I ran a full battery precondition and only saw 130 kWhs out of a 150kWh stalls. My average charging session was more around 100kWh. With that being noted, it’s a fairly consistent experience I’ve had across EA stalls without it being exceeded much even when in 350 stalls. 175 ish is more of the top from what I’ve seen. I’m not entirely sure this is 100% an EA problem but it could be. I did not get the same messaging he did when charging telling me that the car was limited by the station…

Assuming you are at a sufficiently low SOC to get a high rate of charge, others have posted that they swap to the next available "pump" (what do you call each individual stand, is that still a EVSE?) and sometimes they get the expected charge rate and other times, it's the same or worse. It's a mystery to me too.

 

[hmp10]

So if the paint is too thin then when your installer does the paint correction before putting on the PPF there could be problems. My installer told me the paint on my Dream Edition was significantly better than the paint on all the Teslas he had done over the past years. In any case, he did a full paint correction, then the PPF, and then the ceramic coating. My paint looks great and cleans up easily.

Our Lucid Air Dream was delivered with a better looking paint job than our Tesla Model S Plaid, and the Lucid required much less paint correction prior to ceramic coating. A couple of weeks ago the Lucid rear passenger door took a pretty pronounced parking lot ding just below and to the right of the door handle (no note left by the perpetrator, of course).The paint did not break, and a local "dent doctor" removed all signs of the ding with no touch-up necessary.

However, a couple of months back, my detailer put a paint gauge to the Lucid. What he found was a bit alarming. The paint on the hood was at the low end of normal readings, but the paint thickness on the rear doors was well below the standard range. He said the gauge reading included the ceramic coating depth as well as the two clear coats. (We used Opti-Coat Pro 3, which is a 4-application process that supposedly builds to 8 mils, and the Zenith Red color has a second clear coat applied about the tinted clear coat that is exclusive to that color.)

Although the car Conner put a gauge to had decent thickness on the doors but perilously thin paint on the hood -- which was the inverse of where our car paint is thin -- it does seem to indicate a very erratic result coming out of the Lucid paint shop.

Here's the door ding that did not break the paint (about half the size of a nickel):

 

[hmp10]

I was surprised by how good a job the "dent doctor" was able to do with the door ding. The first person I called refused to work on the car because it was electric. He was convinced that if he dropped a tool inside the door he would be electrocuted. I tried to explain to him that all the electrics in the passenger-accessible areas ran on 12 volts and that the powertrain electrics were fully isolated, but he refused to believe it. (He kept going on about how deadly 400 volts was. I didn't tell him that the Lucid has 924-volt electrics in the powertrain.)

The guy who did the work did say that everything about the car made the repair problematic. First, aluminum is a more difficult material to work with than steel when working out dents. Second, the side doors have laminated glass which is more prone to shattering as tools are being worked down inside the door. (He had a sheet metal shield that helped protect the glass, but he was nervous.) Third, the power sunshade adds to the amount of mechanicals inside the door that have to be worked around. Fourth, the ceramic coating prevented the use of a suction device that would have allowed working the dent from the outside. And, fifth, there was a large structural beam in the door that, had the ding been just an inch down, would have prevented the repair from the inside.

End of the day, though, there are no signs the ding was ever there.

 

[AIR.LUCID]

Our Lucid Air Dream was delivered with a better looking paint job than our Tesla Model S Plaid, and the Lucid required much less paint correction prior to ceramic coating. A couple of weeks ago the Lucid rear passenger door took a pretty pronounced parking lot ding just below and to the right of the door handle (no note left by the perpetrator, of course).The paint did not break, and a local "dent doctor" removed all signs of the ding with no touch-up necessary.

However, a couple of months back, my detailer put a paint gauge to the Lucid. What he found was a bit alarming. The paint on the hood was at the low end of normal readings, but the paint thickness on the rear doors was well below the standard range. He said the gauge reading included the ceramic coating depth as well as the two clear coats. (We used Opti-Coat Pro 3, which is a 4-application process that supposedly builds to 8 mils, and the Zenith Red color has a second clear coat applied about the tinted clear coat that is exclusive to that color.)

Although the car Conner put a gauge to had decent thickness on the doors but perilously thin paint on the hood -- which was the inverse of where our car paint is thin -- it does seem to indicate a very erratic result coming out of the Lucid paint shop.

Here's the door ding that did not break the paint (about half the size of a nickel):

View attachment 5172

I’ve been wondering if the paint at the factory in AZ is warmer and therefore thinner when applied. Just a theory

 

[pam4_AGT]

Fourth, the ceramic coating prevented the use of a suction device that would have allowed working the dent from the outside.

@hmp10 , does that mean if you have just PPF and no ceramic coating, the dent could have been worked on just from outside? I have something similar on one of my doors and plan on getting it fixed later. It's probably smaller than what you had. The guys who did the PPF told me that the PPF for that entire panel (rear passenger door) needs to be redone after that.

 

[hmp10]

@hmp10 , does that mean if you have just PPF and no ceramic coating, the dent could have been worked on just from outside?

My guess is that PPF would also present a problem in using outward suction on a panel, but I really don't know. I assume your PPF will have to be replaced because the object creating the ding tore the PPF?

With any luck, maybe they can fix it from inside the door. I hope so.

 

[Tesla2.0]

Watching now, but who would “loan” a reviewer their car for 2 weeks, PLUS the fact they had to drive it first 1000 miles to CO?

He mentioned the generous Peter loaned him that car while on vacation. Could he be Rawlinson?

 

[digiboxer]

I was surprised by how good a job the "dent doctor" was able to do with the door ding. The first person I called refused to work on the car because it was electric. He was convinced that if he dropped a tool inside the door he would be electrocuted. I tried to explain to him that all the electrics in the passenger-accessible areas ran on 12 volts and that the powertrain electrics were fully isolated, but he refused to believe it. (He kept going on about how deadly 400 volts was. I didn't tell him that the Lucid has 924-volt electrics in the powertrain.)

The guy who did the work did say that everything about the car made the repair problematic. First, aluminum is a more difficult material to work with than steel when working out dents. Second, the side doors have laminated glass which is more prone to shattering as tools are being worked down inside the door. (He had a sheet metal shield that helped protect the glass, but he was nervous.) Third, the power sunshade adds to the amount of mechanicals inside the door that have to be worked around. Fourth, the ceramic coating prevented the use of a suction device that would have allowed working the dent from the outside. And, fifth, there was a large structural beam in the door that, had the ding been just an inch down, would have prevented the repair from the inside.

End of the day, though, there are no signs the ding was ever there.

Is "dent doctor" just a regular body shop? Or someone who specializes in small problems like dings?

 

[hmp10]

Is "dent doctor" just a regular body shop? Or someone who specializes in small problems like dings?

A dent specialist. Goes under the name "My Dent Guy". He had done some very nice work on an earlier car. The only reason I had tried someone else for this dent was that his schedule was backed up. I'm glad I ended up waiting to get on his schedule.

 

[Bunnylebowski]

Very true. I charged my GT to 80% on my home charger for the very first time the other night. I checked the following morning - an eye popping 420 miles! And that's at 80%.

Well I think the Lucid maths is bad cuz Kyle just got 435 miles on his 70mph range test on 19” wheels in pretty good conditions. He did have to get off an on e highway a few times but that shouldn’t take off that much range from a projected 500+. I’m curious why such a big difference between that test and Tom’s DE R test on a battery pack that was only 4kW bigger but got 501 miles? And the Edmunds test on their flat loop track got 505 miles. Maybe the DE battery chemistry is that much better, or maybe the software updates have borked some things with the battery management system? No big deal, it’s still the most efficient/best range EV sedan you can buy, but 500 miles may not be achievable without resorting to hypermiling torture.

 

[borski]

Well I think the Lucid maths is bad cuz Kyle just got 435 miles on his 70mph range test on 19” wheels in pretty good conditions. He did have to get off an on e highway a few times but that shouldn’t take off that much range from a projected 500+. I’m curious why such a big difference between that test and Tom’s DE R test on a battery pack that was only 4kW bigger but got 501 miles? And the Edmunds test on their flat loop track got 505 miles. Maybe the DE battery chemistry is that much better, or maybe the software updates have borked some things with the battery management system? No big deal, it’s still the most efficient/best range EV sedan you can buy, but 500 miles may not be achievable without resorting to hypermiling torture.

Lots of potential reasons: temperature, whether AC was on and how much, etc.

 

[Bus Driver]

Well I think the Lucid maths is bad cuz Kyle just got 435 miles on his 70mph range test on 19” wheels in pretty good conditions. He did have to get off an on e highway a few times but that shouldn’t take off that much range from a projected 500+. I’m curious why such a big difference between that test and Tom’s DE R test on a battery pack that was only 4kW bigger but got 501 miles? And the Edmunds test on their flat loop track got 505 miles. Maybe the DE battery chemistry is that much better, or maybe the software updates have borked some things with the battery management system? No big deal, it’s still the most efficient/best range EV sedan you can buy, but 500 miles may not be achievable without resorting to hypermiling torture.

435 miles? That’s, rather disappointing. Who am I kidding - it’s not even close! It would be interesting to see Tom Mologhny do a range test on a GT, because there may be a change in battery chemistry that explains such a difference.

 

[Tesla2.0]

Well I think the Lucid maths is bad cuz Kyle just got 435 miles on his 70mph range test on 19” wheels in pretty good conditions. He did have to get off an on e highway a few times but that shouldn’t take off that much range from a projected 500+. I’m curious why such a big difference between that test and Tom’s DE R test on a battery pack that was only 4kW bigger but got 501 miles? And the Edmunds test on their flat loop track got 505 miles. Maybe the DE battery chemistry is that much better, or maybe the software updates have borked some things with the battery management system? No big deal, it’s still the most efficient/best range EV sedan you can buy, but 500 miles may not be achievable without resorting to hypermiling torture.

Maybe California roads are lighter to efficiency that path to Colorado?

I haven’t watched the Kyle’s video yet. But that is 84% of EPA he is getting. I got 94% EPA driving at night about 100 miles driving 65mph.

Lots of potential reasons: temperature, whether AC was on and how much, etc.

Altitude, elevation differential, carrying weight, tire pressure balance, etc.

435 miles? That’s, rather disappointing. Who am I kidding - it’s not even close! It would be interesting to see Tom Mologhny do a range test on a GT, because there may be a change in battery chemistry that explains such a difference.

I think as car ages, it improves efficiency with lessened motors resistance. I started mine 21” with 2.6~2.8 mi/kWh, now overall lifetime is going 3.1 mi/kWh to 3.2mi/kWh soon. (tug of war in between)

This morning I filled up gas for me Jeep Wrangler Rubicon, I read 423 miles range and 21.2 mi/gallon. When I got that car it was 270 miles for first 10k miles, now that car is 22k miles.

 

[changinator]

I think as car ages, it improves efficiency with lessened motors resistance. I started mine 21” with 2.6~2.8 mi/kWh, now overall lifetime is going 3.1 mi/kWh to 3.2mi/kWh soon. (tug of war in between)

This morning I filled up gas for me Jeep Wrangler Rubicon, I read 423 miles range and 21.2 mi/gallon. When I got that car it was 270 miles for first 10k miles, now that car is 22k miles.

This is absolutely false, cars do not improve efficiency with age. It is most likely your driving style, and your vehicles' computer systems getting used to your driving trends. For the Lucid, likely you were more heavily-footed in the beginning vs now. For the Wrangler, its your ECU calibrating its range based on your driving trends.

 

[Bunnylebowski]

Kyle’s math actually works. 109kw (assuming degradation of 2kw + 1kw left over as buffer) x 4.0 mi/kWH = 436 miles of range. The problem is the car should be doing better mi/kWh than that. Honestly I think part of the issue was a few exits and re-entry getting up to 70mph, plus very slow passing of semi trailers and semis whip up crazy turbulence and it would take him a couple minutes to pass each one, so that probably hurt the aero. He had gone up to 4.3mi/kWH when he was half way done but then some factor screwed the efficiency for the second half of the trip. His AC was 68-72 on auto so that couldn’t have burned much but I’m not sure what the ambient temperature was.

I think Tom got 4.4 mi kWh on the DE R or was it higher?

 

[Bunnylebowski]

Maybe California roads are lighter to efficiency that path to Colorado?

I haven’t watched the Kyle’s video yet. But that is 84% of EPA he is getting. I got 94% EPA driving at night about 100 miles driving 65mph.

Altitude, elevation differential, carrying weight, tire pressure balance, etc.

I think as car ages, it improves efficiency with lessened motors resistance. I started mine 21” with 2.6~2.8 mi/kWh, now overall lifetime is going 3.1 mi/kWh to 3.2mi/kWh soon. (tug of war in between)

This morning I filled up gas for me Jeep Wrangler Rubicon, I read 423 miles range and 21.2 mi/gallon. When I got that car it was 270 miles for first 10k miles, now that car is 22k miles.

Yeah but how many gallons is the tank? ICE range is meaningless since you can have an amazingly efficient car with a tiny tank or a gas guzzler with a huge tank. 21mpg is bad but I guess typical for JEEP/suv/truck.

 

[FastEddi3]

Amen to that. Between the Nav, Tidal/Spotify (playing from the first song always), BT+Keyfob, bootup times, profile switching, the shine is starting to lose its luster!!!

That's curious about your Tidal and Spotify. Mine does not do that. My playlists always start on the last song that was playing. I am using my own playlists and they are all on shuffle. I think I did notice that on Tidal when I used a couple of their playlists.

 

[Bus Driver]

435 miles? That’s, rather disappointing. Who am I kidding - it’s not even close! It would be interesting to see Tom Mologhny do a range test on a GT, because there may be a change in battery chemistry that explains such a difference.

Tom Moloughney of “InsideEVs”, that is. Wanted to correct my spelling of his last name, but EDIT function was gone.

 

[Tesla2.0]

This is absolutely false, cars do not improve efficiency with age. It is most likely your driving style, and your vehicles' computer systems getting used to your driving trends. For the Lucid, likely you were more heavily-footed in the beginning vs now. For the Wrangler, its your ECU calibrating its range based on your driving trends.

Perhap, I’m more spirited driver when I first get any new car. But for Wranger it came from 13.8 mi/gal to 16.8/gal for me, that is drastic. And you are right, when I filled up gas, last 3000 miles was actually my wife drove it, so noe it is now 21.8/gal based on her style of driving. Maybe that explained it. But still I see Wrangler improves as it ages, I almost never get 13.8 mi/gal at spirited drive after my 2nd year of ownership.

 

[Tesla2.0]

Yeah but how many gallons is the tank? ICE range is meaningless since you can have an amazingly efficient car with a tiny tank or a gas guzzler with a huge tank. 21mpg is bad but I guess typical for JEEP/suv/truck.

21 miles was actually GREAT for Jeep running on 2x4 mode, not 4x4 mode. When I first got it at 13.4~14.8 mi/gal range, I was like what a joke compare to Honda Accord Hybrid at 47~51 mi/range. I attributed as fun premium sacrifice of ownership