Reduced fast charging performance

Greetings all,

I just wanted to share some odd charging behavior I've noticed with my car at DCFC stations. I've included a table documenting a recent 6-80% SoC charging session preceded by some context and my thoughts. For reference, my car is a 2023 Touring produced in January 2023. If anyone has seen similar behavior or have any thoughts I would love to hear it!

I first noticed oddly low DCFC speeds about a month ago. I've seen peak charging speeds of 290kW+ several times with my car, but on the last couple of long distance road trips I've taken the highest I've seen is around 235kW at <10% SoC, even after 30+ minutes of preconditioning. It also seems like the curve dips below 150kW about 10% SoC sooner than it used to. This shift seems to have occurred sometime between the beginning of August and October. It's also worth noting that this behavior has been repeatable across multiple 350kW Electrify America stations and a couple of EVgo stations. Ambient temperatures have typically been between 40-80F, usually around 60-70F. The battery has always been preconditioned for 40-45 minutes automatically via the route planner, or manually for at least 30 minutes. Since I've noticed this behavior I have not seen the "Charging speed limited by station" message, so I'm fairly certain the cause is the car and not the charging station, temperature, etc. The table below shows my most recent DCFC session at a 350kW EVgo unit. I noticed that during the charging session the voltage stayed relatively constant from around 700-725v, so no issues there.

So why the sudden change in DCFC behavior? So far I have three theories, the first being battery degradation. I've driven my car farther and harder than most other owners (I assume), and I'm sitting at 16,600 miles after 7 months of ownership. While I've maintained the recommended 80% daily SoC limit and tried not to go below 20% too often, there's been plenty of times I've charged to 100% for long distance travel and been as low as 3% a handful of times. Using the car's range estimate it claims I can travel 367 miles on 100% SoC. This would equate to a 4.5% loss in battery capacity (367 current max range / 384 inital max range on 20" wheels). Given how much I've driven the car already this doesn't seem too far off of estimates I've seen staying to expect a loss of 1-2% capacity per year. I'm not sure why this would cause such a noticeable change in charging behavior, but I thought it was worth noting.

My second theory is that recent software updates to the car have affected the charging curve in some way. This shift I've described occurred sometime between August and October, during which time no major changes in mileage occurred. I'm not sure if a software update even could affect the charging behavior this way, but if anyone else has noticed something similar maybe it's worth investigating. My last and most likely theory would be some kind of hardware or BMS issue with my car. I did almost get stranded in Battle Mountain, NV this summer due to a known issue with ABB units, so I've definitely experienced significant charging issues with my car before.

Thanks for reading! I'd greatly appreciate any thoughts or theories you might have. If this seems to be an isolated issue I will probably forward this issue to Lucid to see what they think. While this issue is relatively minor (especially now that road trip season is ending) and the reduction in charging speed realisically only adds 5-10 minutes of charging, the high charging speeds was something I really appreciated on long road trips. Now I feel like I can barely charge faster than an ID4.

SoC​
kW​
7%​
232​
10%​
205​
15%​
176​
20%​
164​
25%​
153​
30%​
143​
35%​
136​
40%​
128​
45%​
116​
50% (16 mintues)​
104​
55%​
93​
60%​
84​
65%​
75​
70% (30 minutes)​
67​
75%​
59​
80% (40.5 minutes)​
50​
I'm also getting limited by the EA 350kW station in SoCal after the first 100 miles the charge went from 10 miles /min to 84 mi/hr within the next 80 miles of charge.
No change in use at the 3 chargers that were all in use at the time.
I'm thinking that since the charging is included in prc of the car that EA prefers to charge others a higher fee per kW hr and intentional lowers the rate of charge to get you to give up early?
It worked for me, I left at 290 miles total range.
It was the same speed to charge at home at that point.
Anyone else hv this happen?
 

Attachments

  • PIC.jpg
    PIC.jpg
    511.4 KB · Views: 29
I'm also getting limited by the EA 350kW station in SoCal after the first 100 miles the charge went from 10 miles /min to 84 mi/hr within the next 80 miles of charge.
No change in use at the 3 chargers that were all in use at the time.
I'm thinking that since the charging is included in prc of the car that EA prefers to charge others a higher fee per kW hr and intentional lowers the rate of charge to get you to give up early?
It worked for me, I left at 290 miles total range.
It was the same speed to charge at home at that point.
Anyone else hv this happen?
I've only rated it once but I paid for an EA session and got the same rates. So I don't think it's that, just that charger has an issue. I would've swapped if possible
 
I'm also getting limited by the EA 350kW station in SoCal after the first 100 miles the charge went from 10 miles /min to 84 mi/hr within the next 80 miles of charge.
No change in use at the 3 chargers that were all in use at the time.
I'm thinking that since the charging is included in prc of the car that EA prefers to charge others a higher fee per kW hr and intentional lowers the rate of charge to get you to give up early?
It worked for me, I left at 290 miles total range.
It was the same speed to charge at home at that point.
Anyone else hv this happen?
My charge on Sunday initiated at 200 kw at 22% soc. That was the best in my 11 month Touring ownership.
 
Did
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.

SoCkW
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
Did you try the new EVGO station at the Winco on 5600 W?
I can test my AGT side by side with you one of these days
 
This is all very interesting as i was just reading an article in one of the auto magazines rating the five fastest charging cars. It mentioned that Lucid had the highest peak number of about 320 but that its average was 78 on a charge from 10-90 percent. A number of the other car brands beat us in average charge rate over this test model. I have experienced this same issue when I charge near my home. It starts at 110 but quickly goes down in the mid 70 range. I have a 2023 touring with 3500 miles . Is this a known issue with Lucid? Apparently other are experiencing this same issue.
 
Not so much an ‘issue’ as Lucid’s preference in formulating the charging curve for the car. They could decide to change this is the future, but for now that’s the way it is.
 
This is all very interesting as i was just reading an article in one of the auto magazines rating the five fastest charging cars. It mentioned that Lucid had the highest peak number of about 320 but that its average was 78 on a charge from 10-90 percent. A number of the other car brands beat us in average charge rate over this test model. I have experienced this same issue when I charge near my home. It starts at 110 but quickly goes down in the mid 70 range. I have a 2023 touring with 3500 miles . Is this a known issue with Lucid? Apparently other are experiencing this same issue.
Lucid is being conservative to protect the battery in the long run.
 
Lucid is being conservative to protect the battery in the long run.
And I trust them regarding this, given their formula e experiences and reliability. Hyundai and Porsche are going WAY too aggressive on this IMO(maybe not the taycan as it’s buffer is pretty high).
 
I'm thinking we will adapt to a 30 minute charge when on the road. It would be nice if there was a restroom / coffee shop. I was reading earlier about the remote location concerns = had not given that a thought but yeah, safety is an issue too.

{In 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea Jules Verne's submarine could send voltage to the hull and thus repel giant squids attacking the boat...if he can do that in sea water then why can't Lucid have it for charging in remote locations late at night ? }

EV charging is not as convenient as the infrastructure for ice cars. Yet. I generally take a walk around edges of the parking lot, keeping an eye on the car. So it forces me to exercise. I kinda need that, so it's a plus for me. I waste so much time on the overweb...taking a walk whilst waiting for a charge is good for the planet.
My favorite local EA is across the lot from a Whole Foods. I can kill a 1/2 hour there just sipping coffee, and making up stories about the customers.

Charging at home kinda evens the score for me. I realize now I hate gas stations. Anyone ever chat with strangers whilst pumping gas? Ask about their car / driving experience? Did you ever take a walk whilst filling up? Did you ever go lie down on the grass and look at the clouds? We can use our charging time for good.
I'll never go back. I can wait for a better future: I'm part of it!
 
Where do you go to see the charging curve graphic that I see posted here? I just charged my Pure AWD at EA for the first time. A seamless process, and I added 55.1 kWh in 35 minutes, taking it from around 25% to 80%. Not bad, but nowhere near the 350 kW posted on the charger. I preconditioned the battery on the 20 minute drive there. It was about 50 degrees outside at 5:15 AM, with only two of eight chargers in use. I'm guessing it's the car that limited the rate, as there was no indication on the charger. I think seeing that curve would help me figure it out. Thanks.
 
This is all very interesting as i was just reading an article in one of the auto magazines rating the five fastest charging cars. It mentioned that Lucid had the highest peak number of about 320 but that its average was 78 on a charge from 10-90 percent. A number of the other car brands beat us in average charge rate over this test model. I have experienced this same issue when I charge near my home. It starts at 110 but quickly goes down in the mid 70 range. I have a 2023 touring with 3500 miles . Is this a known issue with Lucid? Apparently other are experiencing this same issue.

Yea, I charged my car after preconditioning for the first time around 50% SOC at EA and was shocked to see only 90kw/h. Even my Rivian with older 400V architecture charges at 200KW steady up to like 50%. I'd bet even with the larger battery and older architecture, it probably does 0-50% faster than the Lucid. Lucid's curve is pretty disappointing. I don't really buy arguments of protecting battery life are valid either. Model S pulls 150kw at 50% SOC and there are lots of reports of 100k-200k mile Teslas with plenty of capacity remaining even with regular fast charging.

Ah well, it's ok. I'm optimistic Lucid will boost up the charge curve eventually. Most manufacturers start slow to understand the usage and heat patterns, and then improve through OTA.
 
Last edited:
And if you charge at home, as the majority of EV owners do, the charging curve is all but academic.

yea, i get free charging at work, so that's fine too, but they limit the number of hours, so you don't get much, and you have to run downstairs/upstairs multiple times during the day to take your spot and then move from your spot, etc...kind of a pain. It would be nice though to be able to stop at an EA station for 20 minutes and get a fat charge done. Unfortunately not the case. I've been seeing a lot of Lucids hogging spots at EAs idling recently, which ticks me off. I wish EA would start charging for idle fees lol.
 
Yea, I charged my car after preconditioning for the first time around 50% SOC at EA and was shocked to see only 90kw/h. Even my Rivian with older 400V architecture charges at 200KW steady up to like 50%. I'd bet even with the larger battery and older architecture, it probably does 0-50% faster than the Lucid. Lucid's curve is pretty disappointing. I don't really buy arguments of protecting battery life are valid either. Model S pulls 150kw at 50% SOC and there are lots of reports of 100k-200k mile Teslas with plenty of capacity remaining even with regular fast charging.

Ah well, it's ok. I'm optimistic Lucid will boost up the charge curve eventually. Most manufacturers start slow to understand the usage and heat patterns, and then improve through OTA.
Wait, am I just missing something or is the Lucid more than 150 kwh at 50 soc?
1702406811435.png


(you do have a touring though, so that could make a difference)
 
Wait, am I just missing something or is the Lucid more than 150 kwh at 50 soc?
View attachment 16950

(you do have a touring though, so that could make a difference)
Dream charges a lotfaster. They slowed it down for the GT. Is it just me or is it so strange that the Dream and i think GTP? charge faster and actually go 500 miles on a charge. But on the GT it loses 100 miles of real world range and charges slow. Why is there such a huge difference!?
 
Dream charges a lotfaster. They slowed it down for the GT. Is it just me or is it so strange that the Dream and i think GTP? charge faster and actually go 500 miles on a charge. But on the GT it loses 100 miles of real world range and charges slow. Why is there such a huge difference!?
Is it possible that there is different battery composition between these cars that causes this? To prevent faster battery degradation Lucid might be adjusting the charging curve to preserve the battery health longer.
 
Is it possible that there is different battery composition between these cars that causes this? To prevent faster battery degradation Lucid might be adjusting the charging curve to preserve the battery health longer.

yea but i wonder why they would go with a battery composition that is 20% worse in the GT. You would think that if they can afford to charge faster in the Dream, that there should be plenty of leeway in the lower powered/lower heat generating GT.
 
Dream charges a lotfaster. They slowed it down for the GT. Is it just me or is it so strange that the Dream and i think GTP? charge faster and actually go 500 miles on a charge. But on the GT it loses 100 miles of real world range and charges slow. Why is there such a huge difference!?
Perhaps due to the samsung battery pack and "exotic metallurgy" in the dream motors?
 
Back
Top