Tom Moloughney Range Test

[hydbob]

There's one big differentiator between the i4 and the Lucid at this point, software. The BMW does not suffer from the software issues we're seeing here, and that can be a significant factor in ownership satisfaction. I too have a Pure reserved and I have no idea when I'll get it. I'm sure the production dates for the Pure have been moved significantly back. However I suspect I'm near the front of the line for the Pure since I reserved fairly early. Likewise, I also have no idea when I'd receive the i4 either. I have no production date for that car, despite my dealer saying the car would probably arrive during the spring. I'm beginning to doubt that too.

I'm really torn between these two cars. I love what Lucid has done with the mechanics of the car, particularly the range, even for the Pure. Unlike many here, I do like that the i4 is on the smaller side as I find cars of that size much more maneuverable. Aesthetically, although very different, I like both. Sans the software issues of the Lucid, I'm sure I'd be delighted with either car.

How is the software and range for the new BMW icars?

 

[SDHacker]

Driving 80 I get 360ish on 21"

Weren't you able to achieve 4.3 efficiency for a short period before you were bored out of your mind and had to drive normally again?

 

[Rob Stark]

This is incredible. For me it validates the the biggest reason to buy the Lucid. I am assuming the AGT will do just as good.

Dreams have 118 kWh available packs.

AGTs have 112 kWh available packs.

112 x 4.3 = 481.6 miles

 

[hydbob]

Weren't you able to achieve 4.3 efficiency for a short period before you were bored out of your mind and had to drive normally again?

 

[CraZ8]

No, the 21 p should be closer to 400. EPA on the 21p was P

Dreams have 118 kWh available packs.

AGTs have 112 kWh available packs.

112 x 4.3 = 481.6 miles

Granted but if everything is linear then a drop of 520 to 500 miles for a Dream range in real world situations should mean a corresponding drop of 516 to 496 for the GT on 19 inch wheels since it seems to be lighter and little more efficient than the Dream

 

[Rob Stark]

Granted but if everything is linear then a drop of 520 to 500 miles for a Dream range in real world situations should mean a corresponding drop of 516 to 496 for the GT on 19 inch wheels since it seems to be lighter and little more efficient than the Dream

Things are rarely linear.

Tom used 117. I gave the AGTs 112 not 111.

So I gave the AGT an extra 4.3 miles to account for a little less weight.

At steady speed aerodynamics is far more important than weight.

 

[Bill55]

Having driven around that area, it will also be 2 lane roads with a lot of rvs... it will be annoying for you but a great opportunity to repeatedly test the acceleration as you pass lots of vehicles.

Monument Valley can be pretty empty. Had at least one tank with mpg at 8.

 

[copper]

This is incredible. For me it validates the the biggest reason to buy the Lucid. I am assuming the AGT will do just as good.

The AGT probably will. I‘m guessing the slightly lower weight will help make up for the slightly smaller battery pack (~400lbs lighter and 112kw/h battery).

 

[copper]

Damn that’s impressive. I thought the smart money was on 480-490 miles of range. I did notice that he was being passed a lot so 70 was slow for traffic on this drive. I wonder how much range you loose at 80 mph when you start pushing some air. I’m guessing with a GT at 80 (with 21 inch wheels) I’m still looking at 400 plus. I’m happy but my prostate is not

It think you’re spot. 80mph for an AGT should probably get 450mi on the 19” set and 400ish on the 21” set.

 

[copper]

…when you start out with 60% more nominal range, there is almost nothing you can encounter on the road or you can do with the way you drive the car that will still not leave you with considerably more range than you would have in any other EV that did one thing or another to a bit better to enhance range.

Exactly. I’m still surprised that Tesla has not announced an upcoming “ultra range” model to compete.

I did do a pretty long test drive on an EQS 450 to see how it stacked up for range and I would not be surprised if it can get over 420mi, but that was also being very docile on the freeway (speed limit only). Ripping along at 80 in a lucid will still beat this.

 

[copper]

There's one big differentiator between the i4 and the Lucid at this point, software. The BMW does not suffer from the software issues we're seeing here, and that can be a significant factor in ownership satisfaction. I too have a Pure reserved and I have no idea when I'll get it. I'm sure the production dates for the Pure have been moved significantly back. However I suspect I'm near the front of the line for the Pure since I reserved fairly early. Likewise, I also have no idea when I'd receive the i4 either. I have no production date for that car, despite my dealer saying the car would probably arrive during the spring. I'm beginning to doubt that too.

I'm really torn between these two cars. I love what Lucid has done with the mechanics of the car, particularly the range, even for the Pure. Unlike many here, I do like that the i4 is on the smaller side as I find cars of that size much more maneuverable. Aesthetically, although very different, I like both. Sans the software issues of the Lucid, I'm sure I'd be delighted with either car.

I got to give the i4 a spin and frankly you’d be happier in the lucid if (a) you’re willing to accept incremental software improvements to make the experience better like we’re seeing in 1.1.6 over finished software at launch, (b) find longer range to be a major selling point, (c) want more interior and trunk/frunk space, (d) can accept a smaller nav screen vs. the i4, (e) love a really great driving experience.

The i4 is nice, don’t get me wrong, but is better compared with the Tesla Model 3 Performance. Matt Watson at CarWow did a great comparison.

 

[Bill55]

Things are rarely linear.

Tom used 117. I gave the AGTs 112 not 111.

So I gave the AGT an extra 4.3 miles to account for a little less weight.

At steady speed aerodynamics is far more important than weight.

I agree that the linear calculations will certainly have some error. The miles shown is too optimistic for me at all times. I think I'm going to set it for % battery and use these easy multiples for miles.

Battery % * 2.0 drive anyway you want
Battery % * 3.0 drive "normally" whatever that means
Battery % * 4.0 drive for range "cruise control mode"

I don't know if the Miles range mode shown by the car is a dynamic calculation factoring in use or not. My car the indicated Battery % * ~3.74 = Range in miles shown by car.
I'm averaging very close to 3 miles per kWh. So 3 * % Battery gives me ~15% cushion. At 100% that's 45 miles of cushion which might be excessive. At 20% it's only 9 miles.

Driving the car for daily commute I don't really pay any attention. Longest trip was from San Diego to Santa Barbara and indicated range after 222 miles was 160 miles. With that kind of range available you don't have to think about it in a metropolitan area, which for me was one of the determining factors for buying an Air. Performance / Range / Luxury car philosophy. Now all we need is the software to match the Performance and Range.

 

[hmp10]

The AGT probably will. I‘m guessing the slightly lower weight will help make up for the slightly smaller battery pack (~400lbs lighter and 112kw/h battery).

Lucid shows identical curb weights for each wheel size across the Dream P, Dream R, and Grand Touring trim levels. I still believe the difference in the battery pack capacity lies in the fact that the Samsung cells allow Lucid to use smaller buffers in the Dream than the LG Chem cells allow in the Grand Touring. Both pack have the same number of modules with the same number of cells in each module.

 

[copper]

Lucid shows identical curb weights for each wheel size across the Dream P, Dream R, and Grand Touring trim levels. I still believe the difference in the battery pack capacity lies in the fact that the Samsung cells allow Lucid to use smaller buffers in the Dream than the LG Chem cells allow in the Grand Touring. Both pack have the same number of modules with the same number of cells in each module.

View attachment 604

Thanks for the chart. Thought the DE was ~400lbs heavier, though lucid is also quoting better efficiency on the AGT as well.

 

[dawktah LucidGT]

Poor Tom, he's going to have to do the test all over again for the AGT. I guess this was my concern with the creation of the Dream R. We are still stuck with will AGT be better or worse?

 

[Lucken]

I got to give the i4 a spin and frankly you’d be happier in the lucid if (a) you’re willing to accept incremental software improvements to make the experience better like we’re seeing in 1.1.6 over finished software at launch, (b) find longer range to be a major selling point, (c) want more interior and trunk/frunk space, (d) can accept a smaller nav screen vs. the i4, (e) love a really great driving experience.

The i4 is nice, don’t get me wrong, but is better compared with the Tesla Model 3 Performance. Matt Watson at CarWow did a great comparison.

Matt is a Tesla fanboy, so take his comparison reviews with a grain of salt. I believe he recently bought one for his mother. IMO, it was actually a pretty poor comparison that got quite a few laughs over in the BMW forums.

Personally I don’t think of the M3 as a cross-shopping option because I think of the BMW as a luxury car. I think of the M3 as a poorly assembled, somewhat noisy & harsh riding EV. I owned a MS for nearly 3 years, so I’m not an anti-Tesla guy, but I’m done with Teslas.

He talks about the fact that the BMW price is driven up by extra cost options, but fails to mentions many of those options aren’t even available on the M3.

He really gives himself away when he compares range. He talks about his i4 tester, with 1,500 miles on the odometer with only 2.3 miles/kWh. However he fails to mention those 1,500 miles were all the result of a myriad of reviewers flooring the throttle innumerable times during their own reviews. The M3 is an owned car with almost 19,000 miles. There is no way you can make the comparison he did. Shame! The fact is efficiency tests I have seen show the i4‘s efficiency is actually quite close to the M3.

The other totally nonsensical comment he made was that the M3 was quieter on the highway than the i4. I’ve seen virtually every review on the i4 and without exception, every reviewer has said the opposite when discussing the M3 comparison. The double glazed windows of the M3 that he mentions do little to filter out road noise intrusion or wind noise. I actually laughed when I heard his claim.

Here is a link to one efficiency rating list I found:

Electric Car Efficiency | Electrifying.com

Discover the most efficient electric cars with the best economic efficiency, range and the fastest charging speeds.

www.electrifying.com

 

[CraZ8]

So I just went over to the Tesla motors club and kicked the hornets nest. Some fair minded soul put a link to inside EVs range test which brought out the rabid fanbois “ boy did we screw up , for an extra $75 k we could have had an extra 100 miles and 1/2 seconds trap time” I pointed out that it’s more like 150 miles when you take into consideration that lucid misses the EPA mark by 4% and Tesla generally missed by 13% across models( they haven’t done a long range model S test so the approximation). I also pointed out that the GT has the same rangebut at $139k which the long range S is nibbling at when you add any color but white and self drive for 12 k ( around $108k optioned that way) In all fairness the touring would match up better in range and price but I have no idea how the options will be priced on the Touring. Also I wanted to troll a little heh

 

[manitou202]

Matt is a Tesla fanboy, so take his comparison reviews with a grain of salt. I believe he recently bought one for his mother. IMO, it was actually a pretty poor comparison that got quite a few laughs over in the BMW forums.

Personally I don’t think of the M3 as a cross-shopping option because I think of the BMW as a luxury car. I think of the M3 as a poorly assembled, somewhat noisy & harsh riding EV. I owned a MS for nearly 3 years, so I’m not an anti-Tesla guy, but I’m done with Teslas.

He talks about the fact that the BMW price is driven up by extra cost options, but fails to mentions many of those options aren’t even available on the M3.

He really gives himself away when he compares range. He talks about his i4 tester, with 1,500 miles on the odometer with only 2.3 miles/kWh. However he fails to mention those 1,500 miles were all the result of a myriad of reviewers flooring the throttle innumerable times during their own reviews. The M3 is an owned car with almost 19,000 miles. There is no way you can make the comparison he did. Shame! The fact is efficiency tests I have seen show the i4‘s efficiency is actually quite close to the M3.

The other totally nonsensical comment he made was that the M3 was quieter on the highway than the i4. I’ve seen virtually every review on the i4 and without exception, every reviewer has said the opposite when discussing the M3 comparison. The double glazed windows of the M3 that he mentions do little to filter out road noise intrusion or wind noise. I actually laughed when I heard his claim.

Here is a link to one efficiency rating list I found:

Electric Car Efficiency | Electrifying.com

Discover the most efficient electric cars with the best economic efficiency, range and the fastest charging speeds.

www.electrifying.com

Matt also just order a Model S Plaid for himself. He's definitely a Tesla Fanboy.

I laughed at the i4 / M3 review. It was the same story with the Taycan versus the Model S. The only reason they are compared is because they are both EVs. If the market was flooded with EVs in every category then the i4 and M3 wouldn't be considered in the same class. The i4 interior looks top notch and BMW seems to have done a much better job this time around with the UI. Not to mention I've got to imagine the i4 is so much nicer to drive and probably has similar range.

 

[SD_Prof]

New member here. I have a reservation for a Pure. Can I reasonably infer that the equivalent 70mph range test (with 19"wheels) would be at least 4.3mi/kwh * 85kwh usable battery capacity = 365.5 miles? OR should weight reduction with smaller battery and rear wheel drive (instead of AWD) boost this to perhaps 4.7mi/kwh * 85kwh = 400 miles!? Thanks.

 

[HC_79]

So I just went over to the Tesla motors club and kicked the hornets nest. Some fair minded soul put a link to inside EVs range test which brought out the rabid fanbois “ boy did we screw up , for an extra $75 k we could have had an extra 100 miles and 1/2 seconds trap time” I pointed out that it’s more like 150 miles when you take into consideration that lucid misses the EPA mark by 4% and Tesla generally missed by 13% across models( they haven’t done a long range model S test so the approximation). I also pointed out that the GT has the same rangebut at $139k which the long range S is nibbling at when you add any color but white and self drive for 12 k ( around $108k optioned that way) In all fairness the touring would match up better in range and price but I have no idea how the options will be priced on the Touring. Also I wanted to troll a little heh

You're never going to sway those people away from Tesla. They're just not interested in hearing anything negative and nothing Tesla does is wrong. Even with the 118Kw battery this range test shows that the Lucid is a very efficient vehicle and if you put a similar size battery in the car to match a Tesla they would probably be on par in terms of efficiency. Tesla has been the range king not by just shoving in huge batteries like the traditional automakers are doing and now it appears Lucid is in the same boat. I look at it as, we need companies like Tesla and Lucid to push the limits because it's clear that the traditional automakers just can't seem to get this right.