The 5-cycle test is more forgiving but also more expensive. Lucid and Tesla pay the extra time and money for the more forgiving (but not unachievable, at least by Lucid, as we’ve seen countless times) test. The German manufacturers (and others) don’t. That’s it.
They aren’t “hiding behind EPA test results.” That’s a mischaracterization and you know it.
I stand by my statement. Lucid can to a much better job of calculating available range.
In what way should they show you available range? Website? Software? If you use the built in Nav the range is very accurate. The EPA range is reflected on the battery / range on the dash. No clue if that is regulated but it is my understanding the same is true for Tesla.
I can see both sides of this argument. While I do not fault Lucid for quoting the highest possible EPA efficiency, I do think it would be a good idea for the driver to have an accurate display of miles remaining in the battery. It is simple math, efficiency X battery size X percent remaining. The efficiency one is the wildcard: what should the calculation take into account? At first, I’d at least like to see it take into account the last 10 or 15 miles of driving and have it be easily resettable so if your last 15 miles is not going to be representative of your next 15 miles, you can reset it. Or, use the logic that it is currently using when navigating. This would be way better than telling me I have 469 miles available at a 100% charge when I know that with my average efficiency of 3.1 I am nowhere near that. I do not wish to use navigation in order to see these numbers because I tend to use CarPlay navigation. Our workaround of displaying percent remaining and then doing math is reasonable, but I’d like the car to do the math itself and display the answer.
100% on board with this. I’ll add that Lucid should wire up CarPlay so that CarPlay nav can also do this calculation.
My car will say you have 385 miles available, which is based on EPA, I guess, but I don't. I want the car to give me a realistic number of miles available based upon past history just like most ICE cars. I don't have this issue with the EQS because it seems to be spot on as to the actual miles available.
I follow you. So on the dash where it displays battery percentage or range. I wonder if the main dash reading is regulated in some way as it's a gauge ? Does the EQS show the EPA milage when fully charged or is it showing something different? I switched my reading to battery percentage as the miles remaining is indeed useless. However the only time it really bothers me is when I'm on the highway and then I use the Lucid Nav for an accurate range estimate.
My wife's Jaguar I-Pace displays miles remaining based on driver history. I'm not exactly sure what the logic is, but it is surprisingly accurate. EPA is 273 miles and when I first got it, that's what it showed. My wife has a leadfoot and now it says 231. Holding down the accelerator and brake for 10 seconds while in park resets it to EPA.
Very interesting. Thank you Bobby. Agreed that this would be a nice enhancement for LUCID.
Same here on my 21's average about 3.1.
My Honda Clarity's PHEV battery readings were the same way. It was rated at 47, but I only saw that once or twice. Between my lead foot and the huge hill I live on, it quickly dropped to a 42 average. Over the next four years, it dropped to 33 from battery degradation. I've been adding the "Since Last Charge" number to the Remaining miles in the center, and usually end up at about 75 to 80% of the miles after a charging session is complete. A pretty decent loss, but I'm not too worried about it for local driving.
Once one moves off a standard, no matter how inaccurate the standard may be, the result is chaos. Car makers could hire drivers to hypermile trips and then use the results to claim super long range. The EPA tool at least gives us a standard for comparison.
There are two sides to this. Steve, I completely agree with you when a person is comparing vehicles to purchase. The EPA would and should be standard across all electric vehicles to give a basis for fair marketing and comparison. Once an owner begins to drive it, though, the available range should be based on driving style and history.
I have enjoyed reading this thread, but chuckle about you flatlanders. Compound your issues with big mountains. Driving at 85 mph from 4500 ft to 10,000 on steep grades quickly drains the battery so fast that no algorithm can accurately predict now, I believe. Then going downhill back to Denver, I gain range. Personally, I dont find range helpful in my driving and needs. I focus on an accurate SOC.
I sort of agree but look at Worldwide Beagle's comment above. I live at 1400 feet above sea level. Tuesday I am scheduled to play golf at a course 14 miles away but at 2500 feet above sea level. So going there I will have terrible range but coming back I will have excellent range. Like the Beagle, I prefer to (a) just drive and (b) use SOC to make sure I am not getting into trouble.
