What's new
By:

Roadtrip and Navigation

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.
 
While the navigation usually works pretty well for me, if you need to reset it’s annoying because then you lose your navigation route and have to start over! But the upside is the car’s destination search history is pretty comprehensive so you can find your old destinations if you lost them. The BIGGEST navigation problem for me though that MUST get fixed ASAP is the fact that you still can’t change the damn voice volume. I like to listen to music loud, and the navigation voice is so shockingly loud that I nearly causes a heart attack when it speaks if I’m not expecting it. So then I turn it off, and if I get distracted then I miss my turn. This is why I very much like Apple Maps integration with the Apple Watch, as the watch vibrates when you’re close to your turn. Apple Maps has vastly improved over the last 6 months, it now does a better traffic jam reroute for me than google maps, and it updates faster. Google is laggy. I very much hope Lucid navigator improves though as I think the actual interface for it is great and the satellite view is superior to anything else I’ve used. The drag and drop functionality of waypoints is also nicely done, I’d rather do it on the Lucid display than in the phone app for Apple Maps or Google Maps. I think there’s a glimmer of hope for the navigation, there’s some strengths to it, but it does need better reliability and for the hundredth time we REALLY need to independently adjust the navigation voice!

I should add that when I had a Polestar 2 as a rental, Google Maps integration into that car’s navigation was excellent. It’s a little backwards how it handles waypoints, I found that part frustrating, but over all it could teach many other automakers how to do a better job of implementing native navigation.
 
BS8899 said:
IAll but one (Palm Springs) went off without a hitch!
Click to expand...
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.

I was surprised by your comment about the seat comfort, maybe it’s just my physical shape but the Lucid seats are so good I can drive all day and when I get out of the car I have zero fatigue. That’s a major accomplishment. I did a 3 hour drive in the Polestar 2 by comparison and it kicked my ass, I thought that car was going to be more comfortable given the Volvo ancestry, but maybe it’s those vegan materials or something but it was not very good comfort wise.
 
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.
 
dwfallin said:
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.
Click to expand...
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 dont even have the massaging seats (touring) - i can only imagine! i'd be visiting kids in college every weekend (5hr trip each way)!
 
dwfallin said:
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.
Click to expand...
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).
My point is, [1] since the algorithm updates the predicted miles-remaining in "real-time", it is, by definition, "accurate" when you end the trip. But, what does that really mean? The real usage is to be able to accurately predict the remaining mileage at the beginning of the trip.
[2] I don't think (correct me if I am wrong) the "remaining-miles" takes into account the topography, which could be a big modulating factor on the miles/kW-hr. Iif the last part of your journey is going up (or down) a steep hill, the "prediction" could be significantly off...though at the end of the trip, the "predicted" miles remaining will be "accurate" because the prediction is updated in real time.
If the prediction algorithm considers the topography, then the "prediction" would be better.
 
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!
 
dwfallin said:
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!
Click to expand...
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.
Most people consider ABRP's methodology to be more accurate.
 
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?
 
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.
 
Adnillien said:
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.
Click to expand...
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!
 
BS8899 said:
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!
Click to expand...
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!
 
BS8899 said:
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!
Click to expand...
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.
 
BS8899 said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
Be curious what other owners think.
 
Bunnylebowski said:
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?
Click to expand...
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.
 
BS8899 said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
I appreciate all of the comments above. My seven months and 10,000 miles of ownership experience have certainly engaged Lucid service which has answered as well as I could expect given the demands on their time. OTA updates so far have been very helpful and I expect those on our wish list to be implemented, albeit not as fast as we might like.

My 2,000 cross country in early March when temperatures were consistently in the low 30's was safe and comfortable. It was before CarPlay. Unfortunately, the Lucid nav system was not helpful with EA locations and its range estimates were aggressive, so I could not rely on it with uncertain distances to accessible EA stations. I relied on my iPhone maps and the EA app for charging planning. Charging times were a bit long but it gave me and my dog a chance to walk. The range at about 3 miles/kWh was also not surprising in the freezing temperatures. Oh yes, no problems charging at EA stations.

I love driving my AGT and drove it for no reason around the hills of NH, the Berkshires, and VT in my first few months of ownership. On public roads, especially like those smooth 50 mph roads through the hills and farm country, the AGT was as satisfying to drive as my Porsche 991 Turbo S. Hard to imagine such a large car driving so well, but it delivers brilliantly. The cross-country drive was very comfortable and confidence-inspiring. My perspective for seating comfort is a few recent 18-way Porsche seats and a couple of Audi's. The AGT seat adjustability is perfect for me as is the lateral, lumbar, and support otherwise. Seats are supportive, and comfortable and work well for long segments. The dynamic stability and control are far better than my NA Porsche Panamera GTSs, although it is much heavier and only has steel springs that are damped masterfully.

I could make lots of detailed comments about desired improvements but the overwhelming impression for me is driving bliss. One thing not mentioned in the wish list is the detents on the driver door opening which could be a bit firmer for the first two detents.
 
Bobby said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top