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

[segbrk]

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.

"real world efficiency" is not a clear cut thing. My lifetime average in my Touring is 3.5 mi/kWh at the moment as well, but that's because most of the time I drive "fun" not "efficiently." When I'm just driving like a normal person on a freeway for long distances, I easily shoot over 4.0. Which one of those is real world? If people are saying Ioniq 5 gets a real world efficiency of 3.5 mi/kWh, are they on the freeway? City streets? Driving like an F1 driver? Or a sloth? What's the point in comparing these numbers??

 

[codys21]

"real world efficiency" is not a clear cut thing. My lifetime average in my Touring is 3.5 mi/kWh at the moment as well, but that's because most of the time I drive "fun" not "efficiently." When I'm just driving like a normal person on a freeway for long distances, I easily shoot over 4.0. Which one of those is real world? If people are saying Ioniq 5 gets a real world efficiency of 3.5 mi/kWh, are they on the freeway? City streets? Driving like an F1 driver? Or a sloth? What's the point in comparing these numbers??

I was taking numbers from freeway tests, which I believe is the most important when looking at fast charging, because that's when fast charging is needed most: long trips on freeways. In those cases, the two cars appear to get similar mi/kw figures.

 

[codys21]

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.

Sure, but 84kwh vs 92kwh is pretty close. And I didn't mean for this comparison to only be against the Ioniq 5. The EQE and EQS would have similar results

 

[Shahman]

So I’ve had my AT for coming up on 2 years now. Early on the charging curves published by users on this site seemed to show a flat curve from 0-50% charge and then a linear curve down to 150 by 80%. When did that change? It seems odd to me that they would quote up to 250kw charging speeds but only have that available from 5% to 7% and drop linearly straight from there. It makes a whole lot more sense now that at 30% you would never get anywhere near 250kw. What make less sense is why if I am at 20% and plug into a 150kw charger. I might get slightly above 150 but see the same linear path down almost immediately.

 

[codys21]

So I’ve had my AT for coming up on 2 years now. Early on the charging curves published by users on this site seemed to show a flat curve from 0-50% charge and then a linear curve down to 150 by 80%. When did that change? It seems odd to me that they would quote up to 250kw charging speeds but only have that available from 5% to 7% and drop linearly straight from there. It makes a whole lot more sense now that at 30% you would never get anywhere near 250kw. What make less sense is why if I am at 20% and plug into a 150kw charger. I might get slightly above 150 but see the same linear path down almost immediately.

What I'd love to see is something like in the Taycan. At that rate, a 10-70% charge in the Pure/Touring would only take ~19 min instead of the 30-35 it currently takes.

 

[Andretex]

So I’ve had my AT for coming up on 2 years now. Early on the charging curves published by users on this site seemed to show a flat curve from 0-50% charge and then a linear curve down to 150 by 80%. When did that change? It seems odd to me that they would quote up to 250kw charging speeds but only have that available from 5% to 7% and drop linearly straight from there. It makes a whole lot more sense now that at 30% you would never get anywhere near 250kw. What make less sense is why if I am at 20% and plug into a 150kw charger. I might get slightly above 150 but see the same linear path down almost immediately.

I think the short answer is yes. Lucid may make tweaks to the charging curve over time. I know GM did. Lucid maxes the charging input by SOC. The curve is preset. Depending on weather, battery temperature, charger health, etc. but the curve is always something like this...

These are actual charging curves on my 23 Touring.

 

[codys21]

I think the short answer is yes. Lucid may make tweaks to the charging curve over time. I know GM did. Lucid maxes the charging input by SOC. The curve is preset. Depending on weather, battery temperature, charger health, etc. but the curve is always something like this...

These are actual charging curves on my 23 Touring.

Those look pretty similar to the data I've compiled on my 23 Pure. Pretty slow indeed and hopefully Lucid will improve, especially with the Gravity release coming up.

 

[hydbob]

They've already adjusted the curve slightly. My most recent DCFC had the car pulling 140 kw up to 78%

 

[codys21]

They've already adjusted the curve slightly. My most recent DCFC had the car pulling 140 kw up to 78%

Was that after the 2.4.4 update?

 

[Andretex]

They've already adjusted the curve slightly. My most recent DCFC had the car pulling 140 kw up to 78%

Hydbob, you have a dream addition which has a better curve than most of us.

 

[momo3605]

I think the short answer is yes. Lucid may make tweaks to the charging curve over time. I know GM did. Lucid maxes the charging input by SOC. The curve is preset. Depending on weather, battery temperature, charger health, etc. but the curve is always something like this...

These are actual charging curves on my 23 Touring.
View attachment 23667View attachment 23668
View attachment 23669View attachment 23670

My suspicion is there will be no more improvements to the 2022-2024 cars. 2025 GT has the GTP battery, so i expect it'll charge quite a bit better. And if Lucid had any chance of improving that, they would've by now. In the last year, Lucid has pushed out 2 updates to improve pre-conditioning performance, but they were not able to improve the curves.

On top of that, Lucid claims 17 minutes from 0-200 miles on the Pure/Touring (at 4.7 miles/kw) which as we know is totally unrealistic, but from a marketing perspective, they're already claiming to have the best charge curve.

 

[HC_79]

On top of that, Lucid claims 17 minutes from 0-200 miles on the Pure/Touring (at 4.7 miles/kw) which as we know is totally unrealistic, but from a marketing perspective, they're already claiming to have the best charge curve.

Its not totally unrealistic. Not Lucid's fault the chargers are unreliable and can't deliver the charging speed the car can handle. Whilst not a Pure, they're a number of videos online showing a Lucid achieving the 0-200 mile charge in the marketed time.

Also, most people don't like running an EV down to a very low SoC. You're only going to achieve these numbers when you pull into a DCFC with a low SoC. Pulling in at 30% etc. won't yield these results.

 

[momo3605]

Its not totally unrealistic. Not Lucid's fault the chargers are unreliable and can't deliver the charging speed the car can handle. Whilst not a Pure, they're a number of videos online showing a Lucid achieving the 0-200 mile charge in the marketed time.

Also, most people don't like running an EV down to a very low SoC. You're only going to achieve these numbers when you pull into a DCFC with a low SoC. Pulling in at 30% etc. won't yield these results.

The reason I say unrealistic is because no one is getting 4.7 miles/kw on freeway drives. Even best case, Out Of Spec at 70mph got 4.0 over a full charge, so you're more realistically looking at 160 miles in 17 minutes IF plugged in close to 0%.

And that's not to mention how the charge curve plummets real fast. Like you said plug in at 30%, and those same 160 miles will take you 30 minutes to achieve

 

[borski]

The reason I say unrealistic is because no one is getting 4.7 miles/kw on freeway drives.

@AwesoM literally posted theirs on Saturday lol

Thread 'Getting good numbers'
https://lucidowners.com/threads/getting-good-numbers.10124/

 

[RM-S8]

@AwesoM literally posted theirs on Saturday lol

Thread 'Getting good numbers'
https://lucidowners.com/threads/getting-good-numbers.10124/

Lol @momo3605

 

[momo3605]

@AwesoM literally posted theirs on Saturday lol

Thread 'Getting good numbers'
https://lucidowners.com/threads/getting-good-numbers.10124/

Come on, seriously? Always have to come in with some crazy one-off data point lol.

This is 100 miles…driving down from Lake Tahoe you could hit these numbers. Show me someone averaging this over a full tank. At least 300-400 miles

Edit: a few posts down his average for RT came down to 4.3. So yea sounds like his route was downhill

 

[segbrk]

Come on, seriously? Always have to come in with some crazy one-off data point lol.

This is 100 miles…driving down from Lake Tahoe you could hit these numbers. Show me someone averaging this over a full tank. At least 300-400 miles

Edit: a few posts down his average for RT came down to 4.3. So yea sounds like his route was downhill

It says something that there’s always some new crazy one-off data point on hand to come in with…
That route is “downhill” by about 190ft over the 100 miles. It’s a flat coastal plain freeway with never-ending traffic.

 

[momo3605]

It says something that there’s always some new crazy one-off data point on hand to come in with…
That route is “downhill” by about 190ft over the 100 miles. It’s a flat coastal plain freeway with never-ending traffic.

He averaged 3.7 on the way back...is the Lucid that susceptible to incline?

It's also an unverified source. The most optimistic verified test runs are courtesy of OutSpec. Video backed, tested in both directions, set at 70mph GPS cruise control, etc...again i think 4.0 is realistic for real-world road trips.

 

[segbrk]

He averaged 3.7 on the way back...is the Lucid that susceptible to incline?

Or he drove faster... or traffic was different... or the wind was different... or it was rainy... what does it matter
You say no one gets 4.7 on the freeway. People do. Sometimes. Really. I get it, you don't. But you take all information that agrees with you as golden fact and dismiss any information that disagrees with you as a fluke. Why are we still even talking about this?

 

[momo3605]

Or he drove faster... or traffic was different... or the wind was different... or it was rainy... what does it matter
You say no one gets 4.7 on the freeway. People do. Sometimes. Really. I get it, you don't. But you take all information that agrees with you as golden fact and dismiss any information that disagrees with you as a fluke. Why are we still even talking about this?

The mass collective, and verified/tested reviewers say one thing. Some unverified random poster says another and we're supposed to just agree that it's possible. Anyway whatever, i think the OP who posted this thread and others will probably understand what fluke data is. I agree with you, we can agree to disagree.