I hear where you’re coming from, and I don’t think anyone is suggesting owners should just “accept” real issues, especially in a six-figure vehicle. That said, I think it’s important to recognize that experiences with Lucid ownership can vary significantly and what you’re describing may well be your reality, but it doesn’t reflect mine or many other long-time owners I know.
I’ve owned Lucid’s for quite a while now and have driven them extensively; probably more than most. Across that time, the issues I’ve encountered have been minimal and have improved with each software update. That’s not to say it’s been flawless, no car is, (unless you have
@Bobby ’s BMW) but it’s been far from unusable. In fact, it’s been the most rewarding vehicle I’ve ever owned.
When someone compares occasional software quirks to a phone that’s bricked daily and has to be sent out for repair, I can’t help but wonder if we’re seeing a case of bottle variation. It does happen: early builds, unusual usage patterns, or even service center inconsistencies can create a drastically different ownership experience. But those individual cases shouldn’t become the dominant narrative. I think what people dislike most is the prognostication that all of our vehicles are bad. They are not.
You’re absolutely right that feedback like yours is valuable, great companies improve because of it. Lucid takes all of our feedback seriously, and I know for a fact many of the engineers take our concerns seriously. But invalidating positive experiences or suggesting complacency when someone else hasn’t faced the same issues doesn’t move the conversation forward. It’s possible to advocate for improvement without assuming bad faith from those who’ve had a different ride.
We’re all here because we care about the product. Let’s just make room for both the good and the bad.