Reduced fast charging performance

[Shane_SLC]

I realize these photos are lacking context, but throughout the summer I could consistently peak at 270kW+ given proper conditions. I'm fairly sure I've also seen 290kW+ a couple of times, as well. I realize conditions have to be perfect and there are so many variables that affect charging speed, but it seems like as long as the charger was functioning properly I could at least hit 250kW after preconditioning. When things warm up a little here in Salt Lake I'll do another test charge at an EA station and share my results. Haven't heard anything back from Lucid yet.

 

[Shane_SLC]

I documented another charging session this evening, this time at my closest Electrify America station. Ambient temperature was 64F and I had preconditioned for 45 minutes. Starting at 5% SoC, I reached 22% after 5 minutes, 46% after 15 minutes, 68% after 30 minutes, and 80% after 41 minutes. The curve almost exactly matched the results from the EVgo station last week, so at this point I'm confident in saying something about my car has changed.

SoC	kW
5%	243
10%	201
15%	181
20%	164
25%	153
30%	143
35%	136
40%	129
45%	116
50%	106
55%	94
60%	85
65%	78
70%	69
75%	60
80%	51

 

[momo3605]

Is anyone from Lucid's software team active on social media? I have Rivian for example, and their CTO is super active on Reddit, etc...i had an issue with EA at one point, and i pm'd him directly, he asked for station/timestamps, and he pulled logs and sent me a detailed response regarding how in that case the charger had a problem. Also, people will post complaints all sorts of things, and Q&A sessions, and he'll respond with timelines for upcoming features, and bug fixes for charging, suspension tweaks, PAAK, etc...

I'm new to Lucid, have a Touring on order...but not sure how active/responsive Lucid's support is. I hope they are listening and actively resolving situations like this.

 

[suchluke]

I documented another charging session this evening, this time at my closest Electrify America station. Ambient temperature was 64F and I had preconditioned for 45 minutes. Starting at 5% SoC, I reached 22% after 5 minutes, 46% after 15 minutes, 68% after 30 minutes, and 80% after 41 minutes. The curve almost exactly matched the results from the EVgo station last week, so at this point I'm confident in saying something about my car has changed.

SoC	kW
5%	243
10%	201
15%	181
20%	164
25%	153
30%	143
35%	136
40%	129
45%	116
50%	106
55%	94
60%	85
65%	78
70%	69
75%	60
80%	51

This is pretty much identical kW numbers based on SoC what I am seeing in my Pure at EA. I tested at several different stations already. If you saw higher numbers before maybe there was a software update to manage the battery heat more efficiently. It's possible Lucid compared the data logs for Touring and Pure and decided to lower kW to make the batteries last longer. I am sure they already have enough data now to make these decisions. To me it's a good thing if it means the battery degradation will be smaller and last me longer for 5 minutes extra at the DC Charger.

 

[Shane_SLC]

This is pretty much identical kW numbers based on SoC what I am seeing in my Pure at EA. I tested at several different stations already. If you saw higher numbers before maybe there was a software update to manage the battery heat more efficiently. It's possible Lucid compared the data logs for Touring and Pure and decided to lower kW to make the batteries last longer. I am sure they already have enough data now to make these decisions. To me it's a good thing if it means the battery degradation will be smaller and last me longer for 5 minutes extra at the DC Charger.

This is my suspicion as well, but it'd be nice to get confirmation from Lucid. I haven't heard back yet, but I'll be sending some more data to Lucid just in case and hopefully I'll get a response. I'll post my data here as well when I get it organized in case anyone is interested.

 

[momo3605]

This is pretty much identical kW numbers based on SoC what I am seeing in my Pure at EA. I tested at several different stations already. If you saw higher numbers before maybe there was a software update to manage the battery heat more efficiently. It's possible Lucid compared the data logs for Touring and Pure and decided to lower kW to make the batteries last longer. I am sure they already have enough data now to make these decisions. To me it's a good thing if it means the battery degradation will be smaller and last me longer for 5 minutes extra at the DC Charger.

It would be nice to have an option. The Taycan has a two charging profiles. A Blazing Fast profile and a gentle charging profile that caps at 200

 

[Andretex]

I documented another charging session this evening, this time at my closest Electrify America station. Ambient temperature was 64F and I had preconditioned for 45 minutes. Starting at 5% SoC, I reached 22% after 5 minutes, 46% after 15 minutes, 68% after 30 minutes, and 80% after 41 minutes. The curve almost exactly matched the results from the EVgo station last week, so at this point I'm confident in saying something about my car has changed.

SoC	kW
5%	243
10%	201
15%	181
20%	164
25%	153
30%	143
35%	136
40%	129
45%	116
50%	106
55%	94
60%	85
65%	78
70%	69
75%	60
80%	51

I charged recently at a 150kw charger, with 15-minute preconditioning, and I got...

9% 152 kw
32% 151 kw (it stayed flat on about 150kw until about 36%)
37% 149 kw
40% 143 kw
45% 134 kw
50% 123 kw
55% 109 kw
60% 98 kw
65% 88 kw
70% 81 kw
75% 56 kw
80% 47 kw (took a little dip)
85% 65 kw

took 44 minutes the whole thing. These rates are pretty much in line with my last few Fast Charging experiences on previous updates. so, there is no software change that I can tell. (I track all of them)

 

[Rogue]

@Core and I were discussing this issue before a canyon trip.

Signet Surge used to be a problem in my GT, and the car would pull a lot more for a lot longer than the last trip in early November. I forget when I posted about a possible fix to Signet Surge... The timeframe had to be similar of August-ish where the issue went away or minimized to small bands of SoC, but the car has consistently pulled lower numbers afterwards. Cars that pulled relatively high numbers with high voltage systems (anecdotal I know...) were experiencing the surging at much wider and longer SoC ranges (typical, though suggesting no fix station wise).

Of particular note, the last trip was particularly frustrating being 1,300+ mile roundtrip where the estimated charging time was consistently 10+ minutes longer for the targeted SoC. Multiple stops quickly adds up the time.

Single digits SoC multiple times never pulled more than 270-280 kWh, and there was no message from the charging station. Ideal conditions of 60-80F° with preconditioning always allowed the full time.

I wish I had documented numbers, but alas, here we are. The biggest indicator to me is the difference in estimated charging times vs actual charging times when the charger is not the limiting factor. This indicates a change in charging curve calculations for one or both sides.

Side Note: The GT-P loaner did not appear to have this issue. However, this was in the early July timeframe and before the specified timeframe. Bill posted photos of the Sapphire pulling into the 300s well into the 20s SoC. I posted a similar photo in the loaner on a trip.

This begs the question: Is there a significant difference in charging rates between the GT-P, Dream P, and Sapphire vs the other trims?

As we consider the replacement for our car, the range hit of the "performance" models is greatly outweighed by faster charging. The question above matters in the very real sense for those piling the miles on their cars with long trips.

 

[xponents]

@Core and I were discussing this issue before a canyon trip.

Signet Surge used to be a problem in my GT, and the car would pull a lot more for a lot longer than the last trip in early November. I forget when I posted about a possible fix to Signet Surge... The timeframe had to be similar of August-ish where the issue went away or minimized to small bands of SoC, but the car has consistently pulled lower numbers afterwards. Cars that pulled relatively high numbers (anecdotal I know...) were experiencing the surging at much wider and longer SoC ranges.

Of particular note, the last trip was particularly frustrating being 1,300+ mile roundtrip where the estimated charging time was consistently 10+ minutes longer for the targeted SoC. Multiple stops quickly adds up the time.

Single digits SoC multiple times never pulled more than 270-280 kWh, and there was no message from the charging station. Ideal conditions of 60-80F° with preconditioning always allowed the full time.

I wish I had documented numbers, but alas, here we are. The biggest indicator to me is the difference in estimated charging times vs actual charging times when the charger is not the limiting factor. This indicates a change in charging curve calculations for one or both sides.

Side Note: The GT-P loaner did not appear to have this issue. However, this was in the early July timeframe and before the specified timeframe. Bill posted photos of the Sapphire pulling into the 300s well into the 20s SoC. I posted a similar photo in the loaner on a trip.

This begs the question: Is there a significant difference in charging rates between the GT-P, Dream P, and Sapphire vs the other trims?

As we consider the replacement for our car, the range hit of the "performance" models is greatly outweighed by faster charging. The question above matters in the very real sense for those piling the miles on their cars with long trips.

Well, the GT-P does have the 118 kwh samsung battery, which MIGHT be able to sustain higher charging rates due to the special chemistry.

I know you have always wanted the sapphire, so if you can afford it, jump on it!

 

[borski]

Is anyone from Lucid's software team active on social media? I have Rivian for example, and their CTO is super active on Reddit, etc...i had an issue with EA at one point, and i pm'd him directly, he asked for station/timestamps, and he pulled logs and sent me a detailed response regarding how in that case the charger had a problem. Also, people will post complaints all sorts of things, and Q&A sessions, and he'll respond with timelines for upcoming features, and bug fixes for charging, suspension tweaks, PAAK, etc...

I'm new to Lucid, have a Touring on order...but not sure how active/responsive Lucid's support is. I hope they are listening and actively resolving situations like this.

Short answer: no. The best way to get feedback to the team is through customer care. Sometimes, for very serious issues, we will page @mcr16 here, but please let only the mods do that.

Also, the reason to go through CS is so they can track it across vehicles. Easy to contact them via email, call, or text (I always text, and they’re very responsive).

Some folks have a good relationship with their service advisors and text them directly. That is not explicitly “Lucid approved” so YMMV.

 

[hydbob]

Well, the GT-P does have the 118 kwh samsung battery, which MIGHT be able to sustain higher charging rates due to the special chemistry.

I know you have always wanted the sapphire, so if you can afford it, jump on it!

GTP, Sapphire and Dream and GT have the ability to charge faster than Touring/Pure due to 920V vs 720V or whatever the actual number is. @Adnillien

 

[xponents]

GTP, Sapphire and Dream and GT have the ability to charge faster than Touring/Pure due to 920V vs 720V or whatever the actual number is. @Adnillien

Yes, but right now we are comparing a GT vs GT-P, and I think the difference goes down to batteries.

 

[Adnillien]

GTP, Sapphire and Dream and GT have the ability to charge faster than Touring/Pure due to 920V vs 720V or whatever the actual number is. @Adnillien

The GT has 220 cells in series where the Touring and Pure have 180 cells in series. The voltage and charge speed scale accordingly. Ignoring other constraints like thermal management, Touring and Pure charge at 82% of GT.

 

[Rogue]

Agreed on voltage differences. I suppose I meant to only relay that I noticed the same behavior for the GT model (eg. not a Touring specific behavior).

 

[Shane_SLC]

Charging Curve Analysis 11/17/23 - 11/19/23

Here's the link to the data I gathered going to and from Los Angeles. Highest speed was 240 kW at 5% SoC at the first stop. Charging curve was very consistent across different stations and units, assuming preconditioning had been done. I tried not preconditioning on a few stops on the way home just to see what difference it would make.

Just to be clear, I'm not meaning to complain that something is wrong with my car and Lucid needs to fix it. Ideally, I would just like confirmation from Lucid that the current charging behavior is intended/expected or that the speeds I was getting before were not intended/erroneous. I will admit that I'm a little disappointed that other 800V cars seems to charge faster for longer, but it's certainly possible that I'm misunderstanding the benefits/intentions of using 800V architecture versus 400V. Part of the reason I chose a Lucid Air to begin with was because I thought I was getting the fastest or at least one of the fastest charging cars available. I would call the current charging curve average, at best, but perhaps it's in the best interest of preserving battery health. While an extra 5-10 minutes of charging at one stop isn't a big deal, it can add up over a long trip.

If Lucid decides to respond I'll share it here, but I'm guessing they'll choose not to avoid any potential criticism or misunderstanding. All the best!

 

[hydbob]

Charging Curve Analysis 11/17/23 - 11/19/23

Here's the link to the data I gathered going to and from Los Angeles. Highest speed was 240 kW at 5% SoC at the first stop. Charging curve was very consistent across different stations and units, assuming preconditioning had been done. I tried not preconditioning on a few stops on the way home just to see what difference it would make.

Just to be clear, I'm not meaning to complain that something is wrong with my car and Lucid needs to fix it. Ideally, I would just like confirmation from Lucid that the current charging behavior is intended/expected or that the speeds I was getting before were not intended/erroneous. I will admit that I'm a little disappointed that other 800V cars seems to charge faster for longer, but it's certainly possible that I'm misunderstanding the benefits/intentions of using 800V architecture versus 400V. Part of the reason I chose a Lucid Air to begin with was because I thought I was getting the fastest or at least one of the fastest charging cars available. I would call the current charging curve average, at best, but perhaps it's in the best interest of preserving battery health. While an extra 5-10 minutes of charging at one stop isn't a big deal, it can add up over a long trip.

If Lucid decides to respond I'll share it here, but I'm guessing they'll choose not to avoid any potential criticism or misunderstanding. All the best!

Based on what @Adnillien says is true, the Touring/Pure can only charge at 82% of what a GT can charge. Assuming a MAX charge of 350 that would mean a Touring maxes out at 287 kW. 240 kW would be a GT equivalent of 293 which is pretty good!

 

[Shane_SLC]

Based on what @Adnillien says is true, the Touring/Pure can only charge at 82% of what a GT can charge. Assuming a MAX charge of 350 that would mean a Touring maxes out at 287 kW. 240 kW would be a GT equivalent of 293 which is pretty good!

Agreed, not bad at all. Just curious why the peak shifted down from 270-290 to 240. Inquiring minds want to know!

 

[hydbob]

Agreed, not bad at all. Just curious why the peak shifted down from 270-290 to 240. Inquiring minds want to know!

True, it'd be great to have a GT at low SOC charge with you to see if they would cap at 240 also.

 

[Adnillien]

Agreed, not bad at all. Just curious why the peak shifted down from 270-290 to 240. Inquiring minds want to know!

I suspect the charger more than the car. May be unjustified but I have a lot more faith and trust in Lucid than in EA or EVGo.

 

[Shane_SLC]

I suspect the charger more than the car. May be unjustified but I have a lot more faith and trust in Lucid than in EA or EVGo.

EA's infrastructure deserves skepticism, for sure, but after seeing the same charging behavior across 10+ different charging locations, 2 separate charging networks, and charging units from multiple manufacturers, I'm pretty confident in saying the cause is on Lucid's side. If it was the chargers I would think cars from other groups would have noticed something similar, but maybe there just isn't enough collective evidence yet.