You can use search, or go to the categories view and select your media by type, for example, music, sports, news, or talk. Then, press the ️ next to any station to save it to your favorites list.
Funny, I deliberately avoided that charger in the Polestar 2 because plug share had some posts about it sucking so I went to the EVGo in cathedral city instead and it was great. Unlike the Lucid, in the Polestar 2, if you need to a skip a charger you could be in trouble so I didn’t even want to chance the Palm Springs EA.IAll but one (Palm Springs) went off without a hitch!
Same. Once I got the side bolsters and lumbar set correctly, give me those seats and the Stretch massage function and I could sit there all day.i had the same thought - i love the seats! initially i was unsure because they seemed kinda firm, but im finding that i dont even notice/consider my comfort while driving and never have any aches after long drives.
interesting review though! my experience with miles remaining is better than yours as well - even at the start of a trip, its way more accurate than just looking at the miles based on charge. and yeah, it does update - but thats based on how you're driving (in my experience). so, for example, if you're gonna be close on a highway drive and you drop the speed down to 65-70 (from 75-80), you'll see that miles at destination go up. i've also now become accustomed to just watching battery % and calculating miles based on how i plan to drive - i think bobby or one of the other 'ole timers' mentioned that and its worked well.
I am not saying the mileage prediction has not improved. I think it has. And of course, the mileage depends on your driving (speed, regenerative braking, topography).i had the same thought - i love the seats! initially i was unsure because they seemed kinda firm, but im finding that i dont even notice/consider my comfort while driving and never have any aches after long drives.
interesting review though! my experience with miles remaining is better than yours as well - even at the start of a trip, its way more accurate than just looking at the miles based on charge. and yeah, it does update - but thats based on how you're driving (in my experience). so, for example, if you're gonna be close on a highway drive and you drop the speed down to 65-70 (from 75-80), you'll see that miles at destination go up. i've also now become accustomed to just watching battery % and calculating miles based on how i plan to drive - i think bobby or one of the other 'ole timers' mentioned that and its worked well.
According to info on the web, ABRP takes elevation (topography) into consideration when calculating routes and mileage effociency whilst some built-in navigation tools don't. It was recently reported in this forum that Lucid's mileage estimate is 10% more "optimistic" than ABRP. I suspect (don't know for a fact) Lucid's estimation does not take topography into account hence it is "optimistic". My suspicion is based on my recent roadtrip during which I can see (in real time) the estimated range changes (decreases as I go uphill, increases as I go downhill) as I traverse topography.gotcha... and i dont know about the topography, but given that i'm awaiting much improvements in the built in mapping functions anyway, i seriously doubt it considers it!
Why are you certain the Lucid Navigation accounts for elevation in its calculations? I am curious. Not obvious to me.I have used Lucid navigation between Phoenix and Williams and Kingman. It was off by about 20 miles between beginning prediction and arrival. With 6000 feet elevation gain, I can assure you that it accounts for topology. I think it under predicted miles at arrival because I drove over the speed limit by 5-10 mph.
I am not trying to beat up Lucid. Many cars have range estimates that don't take into account elevation changes. I just want to call a spade a spade!Why are you certain the Lucid Navigation accounts for elevation in its calculations? I am curious. Not obvious to me.
At the risk of way over simplification, a change in 6000ft for a 5,000lb car plus occupants only accounts for a delta energy loss of ~1 to 2 kW-hr (using basic physics and potential energy changes). Feel free to check my physics and math.
And if it indeed accounts for topo changes in its routing and energy consumption calculations, why would it continue to degrarde its "range upon arrival" in real time when I am driving up hill.
20 miles off @ 3-4 miles/kW-hr is a signficant deviation, about 4-5 KW-hr offset!
Want to correct a typo in my prior post....it should say "12 kW-hr" of potential energy change, not "1-2 kW-hr". If Lucid's range PREDICTION takes elevation/topography into account, there should be a discrenable difference in the range efficiency going one-way vs the other direction. Furthermore, if the initial miles remaining already took elevation into account, there should be little to no change with the real-time updating of the remaing miles upon arrival en route.I am not trying to beat up Lucid. Many cars have range estimates that don't take into account elevation changes. I just want to call a spade a spade!
I looked at adnillien's data comparing Lucid vs ABRP. adnillien states ABRP is very accurate in its prediction. He also stated thst Lucid's prediction is "optimistic" by ~10%. ABRP uses elevation data. Not sure if Lucid navigation uses elevation data or not. My own observation of the real-time updating going up hill/down hill suggests Lucid's navigation prediction does not use elevation data (or not as accurately as ABRP). Accounting for elevation en route is a plausible explaination of the "optimistic" prediction in the Lucid navigation.Want to correct a typo in my prior post....it should say "12 kW-hr" of potential energy change, not "1-2 kW-hr". If Lucid's range PREDICTION takes elevation/topography into account, there should be a discrenable difference in the range efficiency going one-way vs the other direction. Furthermore, if the initial miles remaining already took elevation into account, there should be little to no change with the real-time updating of the remaing miles upon arrival en route.
Curious as to your experience in the miles-remaining PREDICTION going either directions.
When you say "Predict", are you saying the "miles remaining" displayed on the Lucid Trip (left panel) at the BEGINNING of the trip (hence the original prediction)? As you know, the Lucid updates the "miles remaining" in "real time". Hence, once you are en route, the "miles remaing" is no longer a prediction.I’ve compared ABRP and the Lucid navigation on trips and the Lucid’s predicted SOC% in the navigation panel was actually more accurate than ABRP. But the Lucid predicted miles was off by about 40 miles. So that makes it extra confusing, how come it can predict within 2% of the actual arrival SOC%, but can’t predict miles remaining correctly?
Yeah as far as I can tell both SOC% at destination prediction in the navigation panel and "miles remaining" on the main display are predicted at the start of the trip. Miles remaining adapts, but like you said if there's large elevation changes I'm not sure it incorporates that into the prediction from the start. I haven't tested the SOC% prediction with any routes that had significant elevation changes so I don't know how accurate that is. I've only found that with fairly level routes ABRP thought I'd have about 6% less state of charge than I ended up with, whereas the Lucid navigation thought I would have 2% less than I ended up with. I don't think I ever went above 75mph on that drive though due to traffic.When you say "Predict", are you saying the "miles remaining" displayed on the Lucid Trip (left panel) at the BEGINNING of the trip (hence the original prediction)? As you know, the Lucid updates the "miles remaining" in "real time". Hence, once you are en route, the "miles remaing" is no longer a prediction.
Which means you were only being passed by 3/4 of the other cars on the road.I think it under predicted miles at arrival because I drove over the speed limit by 5-10 mph.
I’m with you on this 100%. As a former software developer (albeit very briefly), I cannot, for the life of me, believe that the end product was allowed to ship to customer vehicles in its state. Even the OTAs break something for me almost every time. How is it that the 360 degreee camera view still needs 20-30 seconds to come on? Lucid software team, wake the F up. You are letting down your hardware team and most importantly, the customers.Yes, the Lucid UI is not ready for prime time. It’s a shame. Such a great piece of hardware, such a lacking piece of software. I have done everything in my power, which is of course limited, to help Lucid improve this. I have made videos, had conversations with Lucid employees and executives, made an entire website of wish list and bug items, conducted huge polls and surveys to prioritize issues, etc. While everybody has been extremely nice, there has been almost zero change. Frustrating, to say the least.
CarPlay has resolved almost everything for me. I have no more frustrations with navigation, audio, Homelink, etc. It’s now a pleasure to enjoy the car and not worry about the glitches. Of course, this solution is not without its negatives. CarPlay is confined to a window that is way too small considering the overall amount of screen space available in the car. It doesn’t help non-Apple users and really shouldn’t be necessary to enjoy the car.