Two important metrics for Lucid?

[MoniputerLM]

They have created a product that is extremely competitive in it’s class and are making it and delivering to customers.

They are delivering limited numbers of cars that, so far, have beta level software and most seem to have a number of hardware defects. If Lucid wants to compete with Tesla, Mercedes, Audi and even Cadillac, they need to up their game. I really hope that they can but they have long way to go.

Just my 2.5 cents.

 

[thecodingart]

They are delivering limited numbers of cars that, so far, have beta level software and most seem to have a number of hardware defects. If Lucid wants to compete with Tesla, Mercedes, Audi and even Cadillac, they need to up their game. I really hope that they can but they have long way to go.

Just my 2.5 cents.

This is an accurate representation of where they are at and where they need to be to grow and survive money burn.

 

[Slam08]

The EQS weighs more than the air and is getting better range. I’m honestly not confusing anything.

What you said and what I said are both true.

Range is how far a vehicle goes.

Efficiency is how much energy is used per distance traveled.

 

[borski]

The EQS weighs more than the air and is getting better range. I’m honestly not confusing anything. I noted the EQS as they have similar battery sizes and weight…

I’m not sure why people on here jump to conclusions.

The range I get on the Lucid is not all that different from what's advertised. I have a DE-P and get about 400-430 miles of range, on the 21" tires. It took me a while to learn the car, but once I did it hasn't been an issue.

The point about efficiency is that it *is* significantly more efficient, particularly in packaging size as well.

 

[Sandvinsd]

The EQS weighs more than the air and is getting better range. I’m honestly not confusing anything. I noted the EQS as they have similar battery sizes and weight…

I’m not sure why people on here jump to conclusions.

Better range? Don’t think so. They do have similar battery sizes.

EQS: 350 miles range from a 107.8 kWh battery = 3.25 miles /kWh efficiency
Lucid Air: 516 miles range from a 112 kWh battery = 4.61 miles / kWh efficiency

Lucid has 166 miles more range and is about 42% more efficient. (4.16-3.25)/3.25

 

[SaratogaLefty]

Better range? Don’t think so. They do have similar battery sizes.

EQS: 350 miles range from a 107.8 kWh battery = 3.25 miles /kWh efficiency
Lucid Air: 516 miles range from a 112 kWh battery = 4.61 miles / kWh efficiency

Lucid has 166 miles more range and is about 42% more efficient. (4.16-3.25)/3.25

Plus it looks way better!!

 

[thecodingart]

Better range? Don’t think so. They do have similar battery sizes.

EQS: 350 miles range from a 107.8 kWh battery = 3.25 miles /kWh efficiency
Lucid Air: 516 miles range from a 112 kWh battery = 4.61 miles / kWh efficiency

Lucid has 166 miles more range and is about 42% more efficient. (4.16-3.25)/3.25

I own both a Lucid GT and recently sold my EQS… your numbers are not reflective of real world data. I’m guessing atm you own neither. Not really looking for a debate on it though. My EQS hit 340 miles on average with my Air hitting 320 under the same conditions. Not much else to say here beyond stating my experience and facts.. there maybe mild improvement after my “engine break in period”, but I’m not expecting anything drastic.

 

[thecodingart]

Plus it looks way better!!

It does look way better, but the numbers provided are not real world reflective. My original comment already stated this… but I guess some people just dont like reading…

 

[SDHacker]

Eh, sorry. Being an owner of many many EVs, Lucid isn’t “winning” the efficiency game atm. They are in line with manufacturers that have similar battery sizes and whatnot. My experience with Lucid has been 1:1 with my EQS experience(not exceeding). There’s plenty other EVs out there hitting in the low 300 range that are on par with Lucid as it stands from my experience.

To be clear, Lucid’s claim of > 400 miles in real life driving (especially highway) is totally bullish and hyper conditional.

With many having confirmed an increase in efficiency after several thousand miles, it will be interesting to hear back from you after you've put several thousand on your GT. I don't doubt that you are currently seeing equal range between the two. I hope that changes with increased miles on the GT. Variances in manufacturing tolerances have some getting a jump in efficiency after only 1500 and others don't see it until much later. But several owners have reported averaging over 4 miles/kwh. I'm thinking of visiting my daughter in Seattle soon after getting the car just to put miles on it to quicken when I might see the bump in efficiency. I hope the West Seattle bridge has reopened by then.

 

[Slam08]

The EQS got 400 miles in the insideEV test. Not too shabby. So it definitely seems to beat its stated range.

2022 Mercedes EQS 450 Plus: InsideEVs 70 MPH Range Test

We fully charge a 2022 Mercedes Benz EQS 450+, take it out on the highway and drive it at a constant speed in the InsideEVs 70 MPH highway range test.

insideevs.com

 

[Sandvinsd]

I own both a Lucid GT and recently sold my EQS… your numbers are not reflective of real world data. I’m guessing atm you own neither. Not really looking for a debate on it though. My EQS hit 340 miles on average with my Air hitting 320 under the same conditions. Not much else to say here beyond stating my experience and facts.. there maybe mild improvement after my “engine break in period”, but I’m not expecting anything drastic.

I own the Air. EPA numbers give an apples to apples comparison. In a 70 mph real world test on an air gave 500, so I dont know what to say.

i am getting 360 real world range from the 250 miles of short trips I have driven with a lot of BMS fans running that sap range. Longer trips will be more efficient. Even with that, the Air is more efficient than the EQS.

 

[borski]

I own both a Lucid GT and recently sold my EQS… your numbers are not reflective of real world data. I’m guessing atm you own neither. Not really looking for a debate on it though. My EQS hit 340 miles on average with my Air hitting 320 under the same conditions. Not much else to say here beyond stating my experience and facts.. there maybe mild improvement after my “engine break in period”, but I’m not expecting anything drastic.

The improvement is more than mild. Having put 5k miles on the Lucid, the numbers are far far higher than 320. If I drive like a maniac, which I often do , I still get 360+. When I drive like I have a kid or my wife in the car, I get 415ish, +/- 15.

 

[thecodingart]

The improvement is more than mild. Having put 5k miles on the Lucid, the numbers are far far higher than 320. If I drive like a maniac, which I often do , I still get 360+. When I drive like I have a kid or my wife in the car, I get 415ish, +/- 15.

Well, here’s to hoping I see similar results. It would be impressive to legitimately get to 400 miles.

 

[Zenithredgt60]

Dear codingart- The EQS is An ugly looking car. The hyperscreen is a video game. Lastly, the EQS has no driving feel and floats down the road like a 1980’s Cadillac . Every serious reviewer scored the lucid higher than the EQS. Mercedes’ will eventually get it right and the EQS has a lot going for it but it is no match for an Air GT.

 

[thecodingart]

Dear codingart- The EQS is An ugly looking car. The hyperscreen is a video game. Lastly, the EQS has no driving feel and floats down the road like a 1980’s Cadillac . Every serious reviewer scored the lucid higher than the EQS. Mercedes’ will eventually get it right and the EQS has a lot going for it but it is no match for an Air GT.

… I honestly am unsure of the point you’re trying to get across.. I sold my EQS for a Lucid Air for a reason, but you’re off topic in the strangest of ways. What does your opinions on the EQS have anything to do with efficiency?

Side note, you know you can reply in the forums and properly tag people right ‽

 

[LCIDdreams]

They are delivering limited numbers of cars that, so far, have beta level software and most seem to have a number of hardware defects. If Lucid wants to compete with Tesla, Mercedes, Audi and even Cadillac, they need to up their game. I really hope that they can but they have long way to go.

Just my 2.5 cents.

That is all true, but my response was to a post that questioned if the Air is a viable proof of concept.

A viable proof of concept does not mean it is guaranteed that the product will succeed and ultimately be profitable.

 

[digiboxer]

That is all true, but my response was to a post that questioned if the Air is a viable proof of concept.

A viable proof of concept does not mean it is guaranteed that the product will succeed and ultimately be profitable.

I fail to see how Lucid’s performance to date “proves” a “concept“. It just sounds like buzz words. Is the concept just to build a car? One with mass appeal? One they can sell at a profit, etc.?

 

[joec]

I fail to see how Lucid’s performance to date “proves” a “concept“. It just sounds like buzz words. Is the concept just to build a car? One with mass appeal? One they can sell at a profit, etc.?

Well, they designed a platform, a motor, and the Wunderbox, and then designed an entire car around that platform from scratch, in house, with limited off the shelf components. Then built a factory, as well as a retail and service infrastructure, including mobile contractors in remote locations, and then manufactured their new car and delivered it to customers.

That’s basically the definition of proof of concept. Can Lucid Motors, formerly Aptiva the battery company, produce a car that regular people can buy and drive? Yes.

Now they can spend the next several years refining.

The fact that only a handful of companies have done even parts of this over the course of the last several decades might be a clue as to just how hard this sort of thing is to accomplish.