Top Gear's review of Lucid Air

[hydbob]

FIlming starts on Tuesday!

Can't wait, after filming how long does it normally take to get rhe video edited?

 

[Keithmaj]

Same response I got. Already reached out to Tidal and nobody has a solution yet.

Just picked up my AT on Friday and have been spending "too much time" in the garage setting everything up. Only problem I am having is getting the free Tidal subscription set up. It prompts me for the code and the app seems to be operational and displays music options, but when I select something I get a message stating "You have no active subscription. Please go to account.tidal.com to manage your account." When I check my account online it seems to be operational and the Tidal app plays on my phone. I did get an email from Tidal to complete my registration and start my free trial, but when I follow the link I get a Tidal error saying something went wrong and I should contact Customer Support. Is anyone aware of some missing actions I need to take to have the car recognize my account? Does the free trial include the HiFi Plus or is it just basic? Would like to experience the ATMOS capabilities to determine if it's worth a subscription.

I've reached out to Tidal Customer Support but haven't heard back with any guidance...

 

[BS8899]

I think some of the issues with software aren't discovered in their drives though. For example, all the issues we are seeing with NAV and radio/streaming issues, these testers are probably not testing. They usually do not input a destination to navigate and mostly keep the radio off because they are filming inside the car. So if they are just using the basic functions, seat adjustments, A/C, car modes, etc these reviewers don't even run into the problems. Door locks? Nope, they get in test, film whatever, but don't use it daily or not even multiple times. Mobile key? Nope, I bet they just use the fob. So while they might not mention, I'm not even sure they are using the things the way we do as daily drivers...

I am taking it as a given that the individual engineers (HW/SW) tested their own module (HW + SW) and they do do work, as stand-alone entities. The problem comes when you have the whole ensamble of (HW+SW) modules that need to work TOGETHER and under realsitic conditions such as weather, temperature, electrical noise, interference, etc., do all these things work as a system? Work at speed? Some of these system inteactions/contentions can be serious if not properly architected and arbitrated. I am not as optimistic that "most" of these items can be fixed with OTA without impact to functionality or performance. Some might require firmware fixes (may/may-not be OTA) or some contention might require deprioritizing/ degrading some functions to allow the critical functions to work properly.

 

[borski]

I am taking it as a given that the individual engineers (HW/SW) tested their own module (HW + SW) and they do do work, as stand-alone entities. The problem comes when you have the whole ensamble of (HW+SW) modules that need to work TOGETHER and under realsitic conditions such as weather, temperature, electrical noise, interference, etc., do all these things work as a system? Work at speed? Some of these system inteactions/contentions can be serious if not properly architected and arbitrated. I am not as optimistic that "most" of these items can be fixed with OTA without impact to functionality or performance. Some might require firmware fixes (may/may-not be OTA) or some contention might require deprioritizing/ degrading some functions to allow the critical functions to work properly.

OTAs can and do update firmware for >70 different modules.

It is likely that they do have systems validation, but getting it right always requires real world testing, and most importantly, time. It is ~impossible to get to 100% coverage or anywhere near it without customers testing it, because customers will always do things that make you scream “WHY WOULD ANYONE DO THAT,” which is why things always get better with time.

 

[BS8899]

The things Lucid (and we) should worry about are the errors that manifest themselves when the car is moving. Forget about the trivial things like the phone charger sucks or the how to improve the bass volume on the infotainment.
Errors that manifest themselves when the car is moving and especially at speed are the ones that matter. If your screen goes blank or you lose control at speed, who cares about the deep bass or whether the phone is charging.
That's why we need a pareto/triage and a list and prioritize the bugs and the fixes. Not all bugs are created equal!

 

[Bobby]

The things Lucid (and we) should worry about are the errors that manifest themselves when the car is moving. Forget about the trivial things like the phone charger sucks or the how to improve the bass volume on the infotainment.
Errors that manifest themselves when the car is moving and especially at speed are the ones that matter. If your screen goes blank or you lose control at speed, who cares about the deep bass or whether the phone is charging.
That's why we need a pareto/triage and a list and prioritize the bugs and the fixes. Not all bugs are created equal!

I’m sure they prioritize as you describe.

 

[MHDave]

That's why we need a pareto/triage and a list and prioritize the bugs and the fixes. Not all bugs are created equal!

I see similar comments frequently in this forum (and elsewhere). Many people play the role of armchair quarterback and can offer much better ways to do things, speculating as to the inabilities of others. To me, unless you're right there in the management chain or on the team, with a real world view of the systems, processes, actions, constraints, internal and external pressures, and environment, you'll sound better if you give them the benefit of perhaps having constraints that you don't understand or appreciate. Having done software development or team management for 60 years now, I find it better to say "Looks like this is a pretty hard project. How can I help?" rather than "You guys obviously don't know what you're doing."
If I sat down to coffee or lunch with one of the senior executives, I'd ask if the owner community could help in any way, such as BS8899 is suggesting around prioritizing from a user perspective, or offering to help with an FAQ for owners, or how to provide better information when reporting issues. I imagine that I'd get a lot more insight as to those constraints, regulatory issues for different markets, and complexities. There's a lot I won't understand by not being there and experiencing what they are experiencing first hand.

 

[HariK]

That's a pretty damn good review.

And of course it looks like someone's car I sat in

 

[Bunnylebowski]

I see similar comments frequently in this forum (and elsewhere). Many people play the role of armchair quarterback and can offer much better ways to do things, speculating as to the inabilities of others. To me, unless you're right there in the management chain or on the team, with a real world view of the systems, processes, actions, constraints, internal and external pressures, and environment, you'll sound better if you give them the benefit of perhaps having constraints that you don't understand or appreciate. Having done software development or team management for 60 years now, I find it better to say "Looks like this is a pretty hard project. How can I help?" rather than "You guys obviously don't know what you're doing."
If I sat down to coffee or lunch with one of the senior executives, I'd ask if the owner community could help in any way, such as BS8899 is suggesting around prioritizing from a user perspective, or offering to help with an FAQ for owners, or how to provide better information when reporting issues. I imagine that I'd get a lot more insight as to those constraints, regulatory issues for different markets, and complexities. There's a lot I won't understand by not being there and experiencing what they are experiencing first hand.

Thanks for the rational post, it’s refreshing to have someone here who considers the whole process before making assumptions. It’s much more helpful than the “Lucid is lying about EPA” or “the sound system isn’t good” or the “that owners car went into turtle mode, Lucid doesn’t know what they’re doing” stuff. I thought benefit of the doubt was going extinct.

 

[joec]

I see similar comments frequently in this forum (and elsewhere). Many people play the role of armchair quarterback and can offer much better ways to do things, speculating as to the inabilities of others. To me, unless you're right there in the management chain or on the team, with a real world view of the systems, processes, actions, constraints, internal and external pressures, and environment, you'll sound better if you give them the benefit of perhaps having constraints that you don't understand or appreciate. Having done software development or team management for 60 years now, I find it better to say "Looks like this is a pretty hard project. How can I help?" rather than "You guys obviously don't know what you're doing."
If I sat down to coffee or lunch with one of the senior executives, I'd ask if the owner community could help in any way, such as BS8899 is suggesting around prioritizing from a user perspective, or offering to help with an FAQ for owners, or how to provide better information when reporting issues. I imagine that I'd get a lot more insight as to those constraints, regulatory issues for different markets, and complexities. There's a lot I won't understand by not being there and experiencing what they are experiencing first hand.

Having been on the receiving end of "Why the heck did you morons do it this way?" too many times, I make it a point not to assume I understand any of the constraints on a project before opening my mouth.

There's almost always a perfectly good reason why a system is the way it is. That reason is seldom that the folks building the system have no idea what they are doing. That's a possibility, of course, but it's the least likely scenario.

And even when a system was built poorly, that seldom means the people working on it now aren't fully aware of that and trying to make it better. So much harder to pay down technical debt than it is to start fresh with a clean new architecture.

 

[MoniputerLM]

I see similar comments frequently in this forum (and elsewhere). Many people play the role of armchair quarterback and can offer much better ways to do things, speculating as to the inabilities of others. To me, unless you're right there in the management chain or on the team, with a real world view of the systems, processes, actions, constraints, internal and external pressures, and environment, you'll sound better if you give them the benefit of perhaps having constraints that you don't understand or appreciate. Having done software development or team management for 60 years now, I find it better to say "Looks like this is a pretty hard project. How can I help?" rather than "You guys obviously don't know what you're doing."
If I sat down to coffee or lunch with one of the senior executives, I'd ask if the owner community could help in any way, such as BS8899 is suggesting around prioritizing from a user perspective, or offering to help with an FAQ for owners, or how to provide better information when reporting issues. I imagine that I'd get a lot more insight as to those constraints, regulatory issues for different markets, and complexities. There's a lot I won't understand by not being there and experiencing what they are experiencing first hand.

I just don't agree with your reasoning. You can have good people that are just not good managers even though they mean well. Yes, Lucid is a startup but they have been working on the Air since 2016, I think. I do like my car, and I think the service group is first rate. The PR group is also good, maybe too good but there were/are things that were just not done well and I don't want to berate groups or individuals within Lucid, I also don't want to give them a pass for their mistakes. I do want things fixed and for Lucid to prosper but I gave them over $170,000 for a car that was just not ready for prime time, and it's been a year and while software is better there still a lot of problems.

I know that I will get a lot of push-back, and that's fine, but it's how I feel as a customer not an armchair quarterback.

 

[MHDave]

I just don't agree with your reasoning. You can have good people that are just not good managers even though they mean well. Yes, Lucid is a startup but they have been working on the Air since 2016, I think. I do like my car, and I think the service group is first rate. The PR group is also good, maybe too good but there were/are things that were just not done well and I don't want to berate groups or individuals within Lucid, I also don't want to give them a pass for their mistakes. I do want things fixed and for Lucid to prosper but I gave them over $170,000 for a car that was just not ready for prime time, and it's been a year and while software is better there still a lot of problems.

I know that I will get a lot of push-back, and that's fine, but it's how I feel as a customer not an armchair quarterback.

I agree, no pass for mistakes. Constructive comments are good, slamming bad (not pointing to you). I see a big difference between accusations, such as along the lines of they don't know how to prioritize, and musings, such as I wonder why Airplay seems to be getting a lower priority than SiriusXM? I like posts that are informative as well as those that are prodding.
Regarding mistakes, though ... my approach with my teams was that if I saw they would make a (minor) mistake by doing something, I might ask some prodding questions, but I'd let them make and learn from the smaller mistakes. How else do you learn? But for mistakes that would affect revenue or (larger) reputation, I'd override, with explanation for why I'd done so. Builds stronger long-term teams, experience, trust, in my opinion.

 

[BS8899]

Since I am quoted in this posting, let me respond as follows:

• I am not trying to arm-chair Lucid. I am trying to offer specific experiences and concerns with their product.
• Contrary to some of your assumptions, I have provided links of my postings to Lucid (via their Service Center Manager). They know exactly what I said. How many of you have done that?
• I offered to meet with Lucid management to explain my concerns and offer ways I can help. I have not heard back from Lucid yet. To be fair to Lucid, I only had my car for 6+ weeks (2 weeks back at Lucid’s shop). I requested to talk to Lucid management just around the Christmas holidays (after my AGT froze twice in one day). The Service Center Manager told me he will help me escalate. I am still waiting to hear back.
• I would have written directly to Lucid if Lucid has a portal on their website for raising such concerns. But I have not seen one. Tesla, on the other hand, has a bug reporting portal.
• As I stated before, many SW and computer companies have portals (and bounties) for customers to report bugs. Lucid does not. Point is, other companies have learned to listen to their customer’s concerns directly. Will Lucid do the same?
• I don’t have 60 years of SW experience and I have not worked in the automotive industry. I am sure there are people in this forum who are much more qualify than I. However, I have worked in hi-tech for almost 40 years. I/my direct organization developed and shipped many successful products worldwide. I dare say, all of you in this forum are using or have used products my team developed.
• Yes, I know there are constraints and limitations an outsider does not always understand or comprehend. Yes, I’ve been in front of customers and been beaten senseless by the customers for issues with my products. It is not pretty, but the only way to learn what is important is to talk to the customers and understand their pain-points. Thereafter, it is incumbent upon the vendor set and communicate the expectations to the customers on when and how their issues will be addressed. The wrong answer is to lock yourself in an echo-chamber and rationalize. Your competitors don’t care about your limitations and your rationalization. Rather, they will exploit them. Your competitor’s job is to eat your lunch! Yes, it is a brutal world!
• I also know that the hi-tech business world is extremely competitive. Today’s leader might not survive the next round if they don’t get their act together quickly.
• Unlike Tesla, which spent years struggling with quality and SW issues (and still does to some extent), Tesla was the “first-mover” in the EV car industry. They got a pass to work out their problems. The EV market today is much more competitive.

I am all for stepping up to help Lucid succeed. But they have to be willing to listen and take actions.

 

[borski]

• I am not trying to arm-chair Lucid. I am trying to offer specific experiences and concerns with their product.

There is a distinct difference between offering feedback and suggesting you know how to improve it better than Lucid does and implying you would never have made the mistake in the first place. That may not be what you meant, but that is how it came off, fwiw.

• Contrary to some of your assumptions, I have provided links of my postings to Lucid (via their Service Center Manager). They know exactly what I said. How many of you have done that?

I have, and I’m not sure how many others do.

• I offered to meet with Lucid management to explain my concerns and offer ways I can help. I have not heard back from Lucid yet. To be fair to Lucid, I only had my car for 6+ weeks (2 weeks back at Lucid’s shop). I requested to talk to Lucid management just around the Christmas holidays (after my AGT froze twice in one day). The Service Center Manager told me he will help me escalate. I am still waiting to hear back.

That’s great, but it’s unlikely they can meet with every customer, for obvious reasons.

• I would have written directly to Lucid if Lucid has a portal on their website for raising such concerns. But I have not seen one. Tesla, on the other hand, has a bug reporting portal.

If you log into your account on the website, there is a contact feature you can use for this. You can alternatively email customer care.

• As I stated before, many SW and computer companies have portals (and bounties) for customers to report bugs. Lucid does not. Point is, other companies have learned to listen to their customer’s concerns directly. Will Lucid do the same?

Eventually? Sure. But I can guarantee you there is presently a *very long list* of bugs and things to fix, and they are not at a loss for feedback and work.

• I don’t have 60 years of SW experience and I have not worked in the automotive industry. I am sure there are people in this forum who are much more qualify than I. However, I have worked in hi-tech for almost 40 years. I/my direct organization developed and shipped many successful products worldwide. I dare say, all of you in this forum are using or have used products my team developed.

Cool. I have only 26 years of software experience, but this isn’t a contest. I don’t think that was a snap at your experience, but a more general comment about people looking at industries outside their own and not understanding the nuance that is relevant to those specific industries.

Building a rocket is easy on a napkin.

• Yes, I know there are constraints and limitations an outsider does not always understand or comprehend. Yes, I’ve been in front of customers and been beaten senseless by the customers for issues with my products. It is not pretty, but the only way to learn what is important is to talk to the customers and understand their pain-points. Thereafter, it is incumbent upon the vendor set and communicate the expectations to the customers on when and how their issues will be addressed. The wrong answer is to lock yourself in an echo-chamber and rationalize. Your competitors don’t care about your limitations and your rationalization. Rather, they will exploit them. Your competitor’s job is to eat your lunch! Yes, it is a brutal world!

Agreed. Not sure what your point is? Nobody here is suggesting people shouldn’t provide feedback, or that Lucid couldn’t communicate better.

• I also know that the hi-tech business world is extremely competitive. Today’s leader might not survive the next round if they don’t get their act together quickly.

Sure, agreed. That’s true in every industry, but sure.

• Unlike Tesla, which spent years struggling with quality and SW issues (and still does to some extent), Tesla was the “first-mover” in the EV car industry. They got a pass to work out their problems. The EV market today is much more competitive.

Tesla didn’t get a pass, and neither should Lucid. Nobody should get a pass, and nobody is saying they should.

I am all for stepping up to help Lucid succeed. But they have to be willing to listen and take actions.

Great. I think given how much the software has improved over the last year, they clearly are listening and taking action.

What a lot of commentators fail to grasp is that these improvements don’t happen overnight, and very rarely do they give credit to Lucid for the massive improvements they’ve already made. If you look at the trendline, there are far fewer bugs now than there were previously, and far more features. Trust me, I started with 1.0.4.

The implication that the software teams or management teams are incompetent or don’t care is easy to say, but not backed up by the fact that there has been a shakeup already, and significant improvements made.

 

[Bobby]

I own an app development company, only for 13 years, but it has given me a taste of bugs and updates. I think the main difference we all need to be aware of is the fact that they are designing software for a machine that could literally kill you or others. Software bugs on a device or a computer are way different. Worst case scenario, they brick.

That said, I am definitely not giving Lucid a free pass here. I understand that they are focused on deliveries right now but they need to immediately improve, increase, or whatever it takes to get this software 100% correct. They can’t afford to have a reputation where people are unwilling to buy the vehicle because they fear a software will not work the way they expect. Lucid, if you’re listening, this is your Achilles’ heel that needs to be fixed immediately!

 

[JillyBean]

Great review on a great car
Props

 

[xponents]

Huh, that’s weird! I’ve never seen that message. Did you try using one of the Tidal Dolby Atmos playlists?

(And totally agreed on sharing things with each other! I just get annoyed by folks who don’t have the car and take only the bugs/negative things that exist as gospel. Overall, it’s the best car I’ve ever driven, just has quirks that need fixing - but in software, which is doable. I’ll take that over our last Kia needing a full engine replacement any day. @hmp10 is the only one I’ve seen with *real* bad issues and it sounds like they’re on top of it)

You had a kia?

 

[Steveinarizona]

I own an app development company, only for 13 years, but it has given me a taste of bugs and updates. I think the main difference we all need to be aware of is the fact that they are designing software for a machine that could literally kill you or others. Software bugs on a device or a computer are way different. Worst case scenario, they brick.

That said, I am definitely not giving Lucid a free pass here. I understand that they are focused on deliveries right now but they need to immediately improve, increase, or whatever it takes to get this software 100% correct. They can’t afford to have a reputation where people are unwilling to buy the vehicle because they fear a software will not work the way they expect. Lucid, if you’re listening, this is your Achilles’ heel that needs to be fixed immediately!

It is not just Lucid. Porsche has been skewered over its Taycan software. Audi has also been heavily criticized. And, of course, Tesla has repeatedly lied about self driving. I think the software issue may be more difficult than people had thought and predicted.

 

[joec]

It is not just Lucid. Porsche has been skewered over its Taycan software. Audi has also been heavily criticized. And, of course, Tesla has repeatedly lied about self driving. I think the software issue may be more difficult than people had thought and predicted.

100% this. Anyone who thinks writing car software is easy is delusional. We’re talking incredibly complex stuff here.

 

[MoniputerLM]

100% this. Anyone who thinks writing car software is easy is delusional. We’re talking incredibly complex stuff here.

Well, Lucid has started out worse than the rest and there is no excuse. It's been over a year and we still don't have a production release.

If they weren't up to the task, then they shouldn't have entered the market.