Real world range touring 19 inch wheels

[BS8899]

I don't want to burden this thread with nuance data. Below is a link you can go look up all the pertinent historical data of my route (Paradise Valley to San Bernadino).

Yuma, AZ Weather History | Weather Underground

Sorry, wrong link attached. Use this link and look up historical data of any way-point you desire along my route.

Local Weather Forecast, News and Conditions | Weather Underground

Weather Underground provides local & long-range weather forecasts, weather reports, maps & tropical weather conditions for locations worldwide

www.wunderground.com

 

[borski]

But simply relying on a deficient aggregated EPA rating as a crutch is, in my opinion, deceptive.

Yes, we got that that is your opinion. Nobody here doubts that that is your opinion.

In reality, not all EV manufacturers default to such a lame crutch. The German manufacturers in particular are more forthcoming.

Again: this is not true. They simply use the cheaper and less time-consuming EPA methods for testing. They are not more forthcoming. They are relating *precisely* the same numbers Lucid is, just using a different (and still valid) methodology.

Nobody is being “more forthcoming,” and to imply Lucid is lying is, once again, inaccurate.

Can we please put this thread to rest

 

[BS8899]

Yes, we got that that is your opinion. Nobody here doubts that that is your opinion.


Again: this is not true. They simply use the cheaper and less time-consuming EPA methods for testing. They are not more forthcoming. They are relating *precisely* the same numbers Lucid is, just using a different (and still valid) methodology.

Nobody is being “more forthcoming,” and to imply Lucid is lying is, once again, inaccurate.

Can we please put this thread to rest

I don't recall making a statement that Lucid is LYING. If you have that statement, please send to me. If not, I like you to retract your mistaken assertion.

I don't think this is a Lucid specific problem. But I DO think that Lucid should be more forthcoming in what the EPA metric means and how it translate to actual highway driving efficiency.

Lastly, if I or other Lucid owners adheres to Lucid's metrics (i.e., EPA), my 330 mile trip from trip from Paradise Valley AZ to San Bernadino would have taken about 6 to 6-1/2 hours instead of the 4hr 20min @75mph. If the community consider that tradeoff is acceptable for a high-performance EV, then everything is fine.

 

[borski]

I don't recall making a statement that Lucid is LYING. If you have that statement, please send to me. If not, I like you to retract your mistaken assertion.

Here:

In reality, not all EV manufacturers default to such a lame crutch. The German manufacturers in particular are more forthcoming.

You stated that the German manufacturers were more forthcoming, implying that Lucid, the obvious counterpoint, was not being as forthcoming. If you know what you are omitting is relevant and you have a specific motive, well that is most definitely a lie. Any attempt at deception is the same as a lie, regardless if it is done through delivering false information or the omission of critical information.

I’m not sure that needed to be cleared up, but there you go. So no, you didn’t say “Lucid is lying.” Instead you said “German manufacturers are more honest than Lucid,” which is definitionally the same as suggesting Lucid is lying.

I don't think this is a Lucid specific problem. But I DO think that Lucid should be more forthcoming in what the EPA metric means and how it translate to actual highway driving efficiency.

Write a blog post about the EPA metric and how it translates. Or make a video. Or write your senator. Or email Lucid.

There is absolutely zero chance Lucid decides to market in a way that hurts them more than their competition.

Lastly, if I or other Lucid owners adheres to Lucid's metrics (i.e., EPA), my 330 mile trip from trip from Paradise Valley AZ to San Bernadino would have taken about 6 to 6-1/2 hours instead of the 4hr 20min @75mph. If the community consider that tradeoff is acceptable for a high-performance EV, then everything is fine.

Not Lucid’s metrics. The EPA’s testing, which is a guideline, and not a guarantee. I don’t really know how to make this more clear.

I am in favor of closing this thread as we are all repeating ourselves and accomplishing nothing, seemingly.

 

[BS8899]

Yes, we got that that is your opinion. Nobody here doubts that that is your opinion.


Again: this is not true. They simply use the cheaper and less time-consuming EPA methods for testing. They are not more forthcoming. They are relating *precisely* the same numbers Lucid is, just using a different (and still valid) methodology.

Nobody is being “more forthcoming,” and to imply Lucid is lying is, once again, inaccurate.

Can we please put this thread to rest

Yes. Car and Drivers did, on 2023 EVs, driven @ a steady 75mph for 200 miles.

 

[Amster]

Yes. Car and Drivers did, on 2023 EVs, driven @ a steady 75mph for 200 miles.

View attachment 21614

My sister has a Chevy Bolt that she says gets much better mileage than the sticker. But I've always thought that it had more to do with her driving style, which is very slow, than the car. This chart has it placed not that different than the Lucid.

 

[Adnillien]

Yes. Car and Drivers did, on 2023 EVs, driven @ a steady 75mph for 200 miles.

View attachment 21614

I thought that you said that Rivian's do better than EPA stciker?

 

[BS8899]

I thought that you said that Rivian's do better than EPA sticker?

There are 3 Rivian model on this chart. Rivian has the R1T and R1S. and they have 3 battery sizes. I don't know of the top of head which DOT is which.

More importantly, this was done @75mph. The Rivian efficiency I cited previous (at or slightly above Mfg Spec) was from Kyle Connor's testing. That testing was done @ 70mph. The test ran the cars from full to empty.

I cannot explain off the top of my head whether these differences explain the Rivian differences between these two test without doing more digging.

Just off the cuff, Lucia Air has a drag factor of 0.21. The Rivian R1T has a drag factor of 0.297. The R1S has a drag factor of 0.28. I think these differences, together with the 75mph vs 70mph, could potentially explain the differences. But I haven't actually done the math. And I don't want to do math in public.

From my personal actual experience point of view, my R1S @70mph meet/exceeds (slightly) the mfg specs.

 

[BS8899]

There are 3 Rivian model on this chart. Rivian has the R1T and R1S. and they have 3 battery sizes. I don't know of the top of head which DOT is which.

More importantly, this was done @75mph. The Rivian efficiency I cited previous (at or slightly above Mfg Spec) was from Kyle Connor's testing. That testing was done @ 70mph. The test ran the cars from full to empty.

I cannot explain off the top of my head whether these differences explain the Rivian differences between these two test without doing more digging.

Just off the cuff, Lucia Air has a drag factor of 0.21. The Rivian R1T has a drag factor of 0.297. The R1S has a drag factor of 0.28. I think these differences, together with the 75mph vs 70mph, could potentially explain the differences. But I haven't actually done the math. And I don't want to do math in public.

From my personal actual experience point of view, my R1S @70mph meet/exceeds (slightly) the mfg specs.

A quick but probably incomplete answer:
> as we go from 70mph runs to 75mph runs, the Rivian R1S will experience about 30% MORE additional drag force than the Lucid because of the aerodynamics.

 

[hydbob]

There are 3 Rivian model on this chart. Rivian has the R1T and R1S. and they have 3 battery sizes. I don't know of the top of head which DOT is which.

More importantly, this was done @75mph. The Rivian efficiency I cited previous (at or slightly above Mfg Spec) was from Kyle Connor's testing. That testing was done @ 70mph. The test ran the cars from full to empty.

I cannot explain off the top of my head whether these differences explain the Rivian differences between these two test without doing more digging.

Just off the cuff, Lucia Air has a drag factor of 0.21. The Rivian R1T has a drag factor of 0.297. The R1S has a drag factor of 0.28. I think these differences, together with the 75mph vs 70mph, could potentially explain the differences. But I haven't actually done the math. And I don't want to do math in public.

From my personal actual experience point of view, my R1S @70mph meet/exceeds (slightly) the mfg specs.

So are we supposed to use this chart as definitive proof that Lucid is being deceptive about their range, but not Rivian because your personal experience differs? Or am I misinterpreting what this means?

 

[AirDoll]

Not sure if it’s just me or not, but I just enjoy the long drives, charge when I need to with a possible back plan when necessary due to unforeseen circumstances, and know that I’m still stopping and charging less often than any other EV out there due to having the longest range. Focusing on too many details seems like a complete waste of time

 

[borski]

So are we supposed to use this chart as definitive proof that Lucid is being deceptive about their range, but not Rivian because your personal experience differs? Or am I misinterpreting what this means?

This is precisely my point.

Nobody is arguing Lucid hits the EPA range when driven at 75mph. Nobody has ever said that.

The article that was written is useful in that it gives people a rough idea of range if driven at the same speeds. Fantastic. Glad it exists.

And? That is still not deceptive.

 

[BS8899]

So are we supposed to use this chart as definitive proof that Lucid is being deceptive about their range, but not Rivian because your personal experience differs? Or am I misinterpreting what this means?

Forget about my Rivian. It performs very close to its specs for my driving. I drive like a Boy Scout. My insurance company is State Farm. And their "Drive Safe and Save" telematics" would attest to my driving. Lucid probably has my telematics as well. They can validate.


Comparing Lucid and the German cars, the German cars (on the whole) deliver at or better than their claims. Lucid's "clever" spec is their range is the best. But that range metric is done @55 mph 0r 60 mph, hardly consistent with the image of the car.

Highway driving in the US means 70-75 mph, Texas excluded. The 75mph data from Car and Driver (and other reviewers) indicate Lucid's range performance drops off significantly whilst the German car makers are typically better.

I never said, "Lucid lied". But YES, I am saying Lucid's range claims do not harmonize with typical highway driving conditions. My belief is, that they should be more forthcoming in explaining that aspect.

Lucid will still be the range and efficiency king. Just less so. And the EV-buying public will be better served.

We are nuancing this whole thing. Let me give you a quick exercise that might come in handy one day:

> you told your wife you are going fishing with your buddies for the weekend.
> in reality, you met up with your old girlfriend for dinner on Friday night.
> you came home on Sunday night. The wife was suspicious. She asks, "Did you go see your girlfriend Saturday night?". You said, "NO!, I did not".
> OK, was that [A] a lie? an embellishment? or [C] a "credibility gap"?

 

[Bobby]

I’m starting to really hate this thread.

 

[joec]

Forget about my Rivian. It performs very close to its specs for my driving. I drive like a Boy Scout. My insurance company is State Farm. And their "Drive Safe and Save" telematics" would attest to my driving. Lucid probably has my telematics as well. They can validate.


Comparing Lucid and the German cars, the German cars (on the whole) deliver at or better than their claims. Lucid's "clever" spec is their range is the best. But that range metric is done @55 mph 0r 60 mph, hardly consistent with the image of the car.

Highway driving in the US means 70-75 mph, Texas excluded. The 75mph data from Car and Driver (and other reviewers) indicate Lucid's range performance drops off significantly whilst the German car makers are typically better.

I never said, "Lucid lied". But YES, I am saying Lucid's range claims do not harmonize with typical highway driving conditions. My belief is, that they should be more forthcoming in explaining that aspect.

Lucid will still be the range and efficiency king. Just less so. And the EV-buying public will be better served.

We are nuancing this whole thing. Let me give you a quick exercise that might come in handy one day:

> you told your wife you are going fishing with your buddies for the weekend.
> in reality, you met up with your old girlfriend for dinner on Friday night.
> you came home on Sunday night. The wife was suspicious. She asks, "Did you go see your girlfriend Saturday night?". You said, "NO!, I did not".
> OK, was that [A] a lie? an embellishment? or [C] a "credibility gap"?

"Nuancing." Also known as following the facts to their logical conclusion.

How in the world are you supposed to win arguments when the facts keep getting in the way?

 

[BS8899]

"Nuancing." Also known as following the facts to their logical conclusion.

How in the world are you supposed to win arguments when the facts keep getting in the way?

What "facts" are getting in the way?

I hope you all are reading the C&D chart correctly. It is on "Percentages", i.e., how much the RANGE C&D testing @75mph deviated from the manufacturer's claim. It should be obvious from the data that most, of the German manufacturers (MB/BMW) are meeting/exceeding their claimed range @75mph.

As for Lucid, its claimed range is large at 516 miles (based on their EPA data). A 21% miss meaning it came in at ~405miles @75mph on the C&D tests. How's that inconsistent with any other data? I think the C&D results are generous.

As for Rivian, one needs to sort out the data concerning R1T vs R1S, the battery sizes, and rated mileages vs C&D test results.

To my recollection, this C&D data is mostly consistent with the OoS data (which was based on 70mph).

Have you guys looked at these data?

I haven't sorted the data according to their maximum range @75mph. My take is, the data is quite consistent with other review sites.

I don't know what's the fuss!?

 

[borski]

What "facts" are getting in the way?

I hope you all are reading the C&D chart correctly. It is on "Percentages", i.e., how much the RANGE C&D testing @75mph deviated from the manufacturer's claim. It should be obvious from the data that most, of the German manufacturers (MB/BMW) are meeting/exceeding their claimed range @75mph.

As for Lucid, its claimed range is large at 516 miles (based on their EPA data). A 21% miss meaning it came in at ~405miles @75mph on the C&D tests. How's that inconsistent with any other data? I think the C&D results are generous.

As for Rivian, one needs to sort out the data concerning R1T vs R1S, the battery sizes, and rated mileages vs C&D test results.

To my recollection, this C&D data is mostly consistent with the OoS data (which was based on 70mph).

Have you guys looked at these data?

I haven't sorted the data according to their maximum range @75mph. My take is, the data is quite consistent with other review sites.

I don't know what's the fuss!?

Because it is comparing apples and oranges. Of course the German manufacturers outlast the sticker; they use the 2-cycle test. If the Lucid were rated on the 2-cycle test, the stated range would be lower and it would also exceed the stated range.

That chart does not provide useful insight on anything because in essence the EPA has two standards.

Also, we get it. You’ve said what you want to say. Can we be done.

 

[Amster]

I’m starting to really hate this thread.

I'm close to ignoring it as well.

 

[HC_79]

I'm close to ignoring it as well.

I ignored him yesterday morning and has been a peaceful week since.

 

[Knucklehead]

Well, at least we don't live in the EU and are mandated to use the WLTP test cycle for range.

One day there might be a industry standard for highway range testing. Right now, organizations like Car and Driver are filling that need. And actually, they are doing a pretty good job. But I think it will be difficult for them to keep up as models evolve and new models are released. Whatever. I just assume my highway driving will result in range that is 80% of EPA, and then I am not disappointed. Usually. As long as I keep it below 80.

I am still interested in seeing posts from people reporting real world range, especially at highway speeds. So please don't lock the thread.