Think there's any chance Lucid will improve the charging curve in future OTA updates?

[codys21]

Wondering if there have been any talk (official or otherwise) about improving the charging curve while fast charging.

Right now, the charging curve decreases pretty much linearly from start to finish, whereas some other manufacturers have more of a straight line through 70-80%. I was recently chatting with an Ioniq 5 owner while waiting to charge, and he's able to charge at 150kw all the way to 80% (I also witnessed this and Googled the curve afterwards). My Pure awd drops below 150 at 40% and is under 50kw at 80%. A charge from 20-80% takes ~40 min and from 10-70% takes ~35min. If I were able to charge at 150kw through 80%, a 60% charge would only take ~22 min. That's a huge difference. It'd be even better considering I can max out around 250kw, but am currently already below 200kw by 20%.

 

[coma24]

Great question. I suspect if they could've, they would've. It's most likely to prolong battery life and to give them a fighting chance of not dealing with a surge of warranty returns prior to the 7 year mark.

Pete R's recent presentation during the investor tech day somewhat addressed this. He spoke about the pursuit of efficiency and looking at charging during roadtrips slightly differently.

He posited that the most meaningful figure is how quickly you can add 200 miles of range. If the car is in a relatively low SOC, adding 200 miles (40kw if you can achieve 5mi/kwh) can be added to the car in a short amount of time (12 minutes at an average of, say 200kw/h). The thinking, then, is to stop every ~200 miles for a quick 10-12 minute charge/bio break. That's what I took away from it, at least. Of course, you'd be starting the trip with 100% to begin with, potentially, so we're really talking about enroute charging, during which, statistically, there aren't going to be a ton of stops unless you're literally doing a coast to coast thing.

In short, you're better off charging to, say, 60% then getting on your way at a given charging station, driving 200 miles, then charging up to 60% at the next station, etc. The 60% figure isn't firm, it's just a random number that is considerably less than 80% which is what we typically charge to on the road during road trips, presumably.

 

[codys21]

Unfortunately, 200 miles is like 60% on a Pure AWD (3.5mi/kwh on a freeway) and that's taking 35-40 min, even starting at a low percent remaining. If I could actually get 200 miles on 12 minutes of charging, that'd be great, but it's not even close.

I rarely fast charge, but 40 minutes is tough every less than 3 hours of driving.

 

[borski]

Unfortunately, 200 miles is like 60% on a Pure AWD (3.5mi/kwh on a freeway) and that's taking 35-40 min, even starting at a low percent remaining. If I could actually get 200 miles on 12 minutes of charging, that'd be great, but it's not even close.

I rarely fast charge, but 40 minutes is tough every less than 3 hours of driving.

Yeah, this has to do with the smaller battery. I can get it in 12 minutes or less in the DE.

There was talk of improving charging curves at the event last Tuesday. Nothing concrete and no commitments though.

 

[Buffalo Bob]

Wondering if there have been any talk (official or otherwise) about improving the charging curve while fast charging.

Right now, the charging curve decreases pretty much linearly from start to finish, whereas some other manufacturers have more of a straight line through 70-80%. I was recently chatting with an Ioniq 5 owner while waiting to charge, and he's able to charge at 150kw all the way to 80% (I also witnessed this and Googled the curve afterwards). My Pure awd drops below 150 at 40% and is under 50kw at 80%. A charge from 20-80% takes ~40 min and from 10-70% takes ~35min. If I were able to charge at 150kw through 80%, a 60% charge would only take ~22 min. That's a huge difference. It'd be even better considering I can max out around 250kw, but am currently already below 200kw by 20%.

I think you've make a great point, as my experience with a Pure AWD is exactly the same. Even if the initial charge rate was maintained to 50-60%, it would make a huge difference to the typical 35-40 minute charge time to 80%. A couple days ago, I started charging at 28% SOC, and initially hit 217 kW. Within a matter of minutes, I was down to around 150 kW, with a linear drop such that my last 10% (to 80%) was in the 45-55 kW range. BTW, I was properly preconditioned, and it was in the cool early morning.

 

[codys21]

Yeah, this has to do with the smaller battery. I can get it in 12 minutes or less in the DE.

There was talk of improving charging curves at the event last Tuesday. Nothing concrete and no commitments though.

Battery size does make a difference, but referencing the Ioniq 5 again, it has an 84 kWh battery.

At least there was talk about it, though. Means it's on their mind.

 

[sdlucid]

What a timing for this post. Just back from a trip to Zion NP and was really disappointed with the charging curve. I would have been okay with it if the charging stop had good healthy food options, but you can't expect a lot from a Walmart parking lot! I had to stop for charge, and then stop for food again, which would have been acceptable if the charging curve was reasonably faster. Driving to/from Zion NP through Las Vegas means I should avoid charging stops at cities (to avoid waiting). So, it added a lot of extra time to my trip simply waiting to reach 80%. Hyundai is really aggressive in their charging curve.
Another observation is the efficiency right after charging is sometimes really bad - mostly to cool down the battery? That seems to be eating some range out of it.

 

[Rogue]

72% is the sweet spot before a significant drop-off in charging speeds. In addition, folks mentioning always charging to 80% seems odd because you only want to charge to arrive with single digit at the next charging stop. Start with the 100% on a long trip, but every stop after we aim for under 10% state of charge on arrival.

Otherwise, you are wasting time.

Edit: I would still like to see Porsche level charging rates plus the efficiency of the car. That would show total dominance in the market.

 

[momo3605]

72% is the sweet spot before a significant drop-off in charging speeds. In addition, folks mentioning always charging to 80% seems odd because you only want to charge to arrive with single digit at the next charging stop. Start with the 100% on a long trip, but every stop after we aim for under 10% state of charge on arrival.

Otherwise, you are wasting time.

Edit: I would still like to see Porsche level charging rates plus the efficiency of the car. That would show total dominance in the market.

As posted earlier by a couple people, there is no sweet spot because the charge curve is completely linear, I.e there is no plateau or a sharp drop off.

At the end of the day, the most efficient and fastest way to drive the lucid is at the bottom of the pack and charge from 0-x% that you need to make it to the next stop

 

[Rogue]

As posted earlier by a couple people, there is no sweet spot because the charge curve is completely linear, I.e there is no plateau or a sharp drop off.

At the end of the day, the most efficient and fastest way to drive the lucid is at the bottom of the pack and charge from 0-x% that you need to make it to the next stop

I would need to check the charging curves from other posts again. For the GT-P, the curve flattens around 150-165kwh from 30% (or whatever the number near there) to 72%. Anything under 150kwh I would consider less than optimal if you must charge to high states of charge.

 

[borski]

Battery size does make a difference, but referencing the Ioniq 5 again, it has an 84 kWh battery.

At least there was talk about it, though. Means it's on their mind.

That's not what I mean; I mean that smaller battery means lower voltage which means slower charging, separate entirely from the curve.

 

[momo3605]

I would need to check the charging curves from other posts again. For the GT-P, the curve flattens around 150-165kwh from 30% (or whatever the number near there) to 72%. Anything under 150kwh I would consider less than optimal if you must charge to high states of charge.

The Pure/Touring drop below 150kw by like 40% lol

 

[codys21]

I would need to check the charging curves from other posts again. For the GT-P, the curve flattens around 150-165kwh from 30% (or whatever the number near there) to 72%. Anything under 150kwh I would consider less than optimal if you must charge to high states of charge.

150kw to 72% would even be nice but that's certainly not what happens with the Pure (and I assume therefore also not with the Touring). As Buffalo Bob, sdlucid, and mono mentioned above, the Pure charges much more slowly. Here's a graph of 15 of my fast charges. (charge 13 was not preconditioned and no idea what happened on charge 15). But it's clear that charging drops below 150kw around 40%. By comparing this to Google searches of other EVs sold in the US, I believe this actually makes the Air one of the slowest charging vehicles on the market (when doing the typical 10-80% or 20-80% time). (Yes, I know the Air is more efficient than most, if not all, depending on speed and driving style).

Flattening the charging curve seems like a great way for Lucid. to become more competitive

 

[coma24]

What a timing for this post. Just back from a trip to Zion NP and was really disappointed with the charging curve. I would have been okay with it if the charging stop had good healthy food options, but you can't expect a lot from a Walmart parking lot! I had to stop for charge, and then stop for food again, which would have been acceptable if the charging curve was reasonably faster. Driving to/from Zion NP through Las Vegas means I should avoid charging stops at cities (to avoid waiting). So, it added a lot of extra time to my trip simply waiting to reach 80%. Hyundai is really aggressive in their charging curve.
Another observation is the efficiency right after charging is sometimes really bad - mostly to cool down the battery? That seems to be eating some range out of it.

This is what I was getting at in my reply. Did you actually need to charge to 80% to comfortably reach your next charging station? Specifically, what SOC did you have when you arrived at the next charging station? It might be that you're charging more than you need to, which means you're spending considerably longer at slow rates of charge as a result.

 

[sdlucid]

This is what I was getting at in my reply. Did you actually need to charge to 80% to comfortably reach your next charging station? Specifically, what SOC did you have when you arrived at the next charging station? It might be that you're charging more than you need to, which means you're spending considerably longer at slow rates of charge as a result.

That's a valid point in an ideal world. But, there aren't many EA stations which are perfect in this route or anywhere I was planning to go during this trip. The ones which are guaranteed to be empty and reliable are the ones in Baker, Barstow and Primm. Apart from those, all others along my route had one or two broken ones, reduced speed stations and occupied ones. I can't take the chance to be there waiting, or be dealing with a reduced speed station. So, aiming a low SoC at the next charging stop was out of question. I aimed to be at 20s so that I have enough buffer to hit the next charger location if current one had any of the above problems.

Another reason was the uncertainty - I don't plan my trip fully. Along with Zion NP, I visited north rim of Grand Canyon which was quite a remote location with no chargers. So I had to charge enough at Kanab to be there at north rim, drive around and explore anything that's of interest and be back on a single charge. So, I had to keep enough battery buffer enough to roam around at North rim. If it was a travel from point A to point B, this theory works. But, all my road trips are to national parks or similar locations which require enough battery buffer to explore.

 

[momo3605]

150kw to 72% would even be nice but that's certainly not what happens with the Pure (and I assume therefore also not with the Touring). As Buffalo Bob, sdlucid, and mono mentioned above, the Pure charges much more slowly. Here's a graph of 15 of my fast charges. (charge 13 was not preconditioned and no idea what happened on charge 15). But it's clear that charging drops below 150kw around 40%. By comparing this to Google searches of other EVs sold in the US, I believe this actually makes the Air one of the slowest charging vehicles on the market (when doing the typical 10-80% or 20-80% time). (Yes, I know the Air is more efficient than most, if not all, depending on speed and driving style).

Flattening the charging curve seems like a great way for Lucid. to become more competitive

The argument from the OG Lucid Forum crew is two fold

1. Well my DE/GT-P charges fast, so you must be doing something wrong (yes their cars charge a lot faster)
2. The “miles” per hour added is what’s important, not “kW/hr” because the lucid is so efficient!

I agree with you though, the lucid has poor charge curve. Especially Pure/Touring models.

 

[codys21]

That's a valid point in an ideal world. But, there aren't many EA stations which are perfect in this route or anywhere I was planning to go during this trip. The ones which are guaranteed to be empty and reliable are the ones in Baker, Barstow and Primm. Apart from those, all others along my route had one or two broken ones, reduced speed stations and occupied ones. I can't take the chance to be there waiting, or be dealing with a reduced speed station. So, aiming a low SoC at the next charging stop was out of question. I aimed to be at 20s so that I have enough buffer to hit the next charger location if current one had any of the above problems.

Another reason was the uncertainty - I don't plan my trip fully. Along with Zion NP, I visited north rim of Grand Canyon which was quite a remote location with no chargers. So I had to charge enough at Kanab to be there at north rim, drive around and explore anything that's of interest and be back on a single charge. So, I had to keep enough battery buffer enough to roam around at North rim. If it was a travel from point A to point B, this theory works. But, all my road trips are to national parks or similar locations which require enough battery buffer to explore.

You definitely hit it on the head here. Many times, we can't just charge to the exact percentage needed. Or we just want to be safe because you never know about charger availability, etc.

 

[codys21]

The argument from the OG Lucid Forum crew is two fold

1. Well my DE/GT-P charges fast, so you must be doing something wrong (yes their cars charge a lot faster)
2. The “miles” per hour added is what’s important, not “kW/hr” because the lucid is so efficient!

I agree with you though, the lucid has poor charge curve. Especially Pure/Touring models.

The crazy thing is though that the second isn't really true. Using the Ioniq 5 as an example again, it looks like it achieves a real world efficiency of 3.5 mi/kw. Which is exactly what I get. And it charges faster at anything above 40% so realistically, the Ioniq 5 adds more miles per hour than a Pure awd.

 

[Andretex]

Short answer is YES. Over time, Lucid will improve the charging speed. GM did so already and improved the range on the Bolt by changing the software to use more of the battery. I think Lucid already maximizes battery usage.

 

[TiredPlumber]

The crazy thing is though that the second isn't really true. Using the Ioniq 5 as an example again, it looks like it achieves a real world efficiency of 3.5 mi/kw. Which is exactly what I get. And it charges faster at anything above 40% so realistically, the Ioniq 5 adds more miles per hour than a Pure awd.

One thing to keep in mind. Ioniq 5, depending on version, has give or take 80 to 100 miles less range than a Pure. So mi/kW may be the same but Ioniq 5 will be stopping to charge more often.