General

Lucid Air or Hot Air

How legitimate are these claims in the latest PR attack from Lucid Motors across CNN, CNET, Electrek, Bloomberg, ChargeDevs, Topspeed, TheVerge.

Could another company, that has not even made a production ready car yet, have conceivably so outclassed Tesla in efficiency, range, and performance?

They were so vague on things like the actual battery pack size in use, and supposedly their motors were observed to be the size of a "squashed volleyball".

I'm just really interested in hearing others, way more informed thoughts on this.
«1

Comments

  • From reading the reports, I think they have accomplished a bit longer range than the Model S100D, maybe as much as 100 miles more range. Now the Lucid is estimated to cost twice as much as the Model S, in the $150K range, so very expensive to get that extra 100 miles of range. Still, if they accomplish it, hats off to Lucid. Doesn't diminish Tesla in any way.
  • I would not take any of it seriously until cars hit the road. Initially they said their cars would start at 60k and that went out the window quickly. They will certainly try to beat the range of others but it is all vapour at this point.
  • IDK what to think as I've heard conflicting reports on the matter...
    First I hear they're claiming 440 mis. of range:

    https://www.businessinsider.com/lucid-motors-air-electric-range-440-miles-tesla-model-s-2020-8

    Next I hear they've upped the range to 517 mis.:

    https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/11/lucid-makes-a-run-for-tesla-with-luxury-ev-sedan-with-a-record-517-miles-of-range-per-charge.html

    Given the contradicting reports on "expected" range, coupled with the reality that they've (Lucid) yet to produce an actual vehicle that is available to the consumer market, I find myself content with adopting a 'wait-and-see' stance on the matter due to my aversion to hyperbole.

    In otherwords I'm allergic to BS, so put up or shut up, Lucid, I'm tired of the baseless hype.
  • There was a test reported today comparing the S100D, Lucid prototype, and a Turbo Taycan, viewed by an outsider. They started all three with 100% SOC and ran on the same course. They ran until the cars stopped at 0% SOC.

    Taycan - 236 miles
    S LR+ - 355 miles
    Lucid - 456 miles

    It was reported that Lucid owns all three cars - so not some overused rental cars. Now different drivers could have maybe played a bit, but it seems like a fair test up to when the LR+ stopped. Far better than a lot of the early Taycan "tests" where they drove maybe 50-100 miles and then interpolated the range.

    There are still a few variables, such as using the prototype, but it seems on the level. They even added weights to the Lucid, to compensate for missing seats and parts on the prototype to get it up to expected shipping weight.

    The only slightly questionable is the Lucid range from 355 to 456, which was run over a different route, and if run at a lower speed - say 55 mph due to traffic vs. 70 mph much of the earlier driving, it would extend the Lucid's range. Still the Lucid is impressive. I expect it may steal a lot of Taycan sales, but I don't see it having much effect on Tesla sales. Prices are far different.
  • edited August 13
    @"TeslaTap.com"

    The Lucid supposedly has a 130kWh pack, which is consistent with 30% farther. They likely have similar efficiencies. The Lucid head was the chief engineer on Model S, so it's not surprising he has the know how.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Rawlinson_(engineer)

    It's good to see some competition, finally.
  • New and good news!

    #Mission
  • where are they charging these on road trips? if they build and sell them? at how much? i think that market is going to be tough. but it did work for Tesla...some 8 plus years ago.

    not that impressed.

    400 miles at 30 grand...now THAT i'd be impressed with.
  • I hope Lucid does well.
    Was there any discussion on fast charging infrastructure?
  • > @"David N" said:
    > I hope Lucid does well.
    > Was there any discussion on fast charging infrastructure?
    >

    https://www.thedrive.com/tech/23813/lucid-motors-to-use-electrify-america-charging-network-for-its-air-electric-car
  • Yep, that's disappointing that they are going with the awful and expensive CCS charging. For a super-luxury car, it doesn't make much sense they picked the worst charging network.
  • I’m still surprised no one has partnered with Tesla’s Supercharger network yet.
  • The first one that does will probably do okay.
  • > @akgolf said:
    > I’m still surprised no one has partnered with Tesla’s Supercharger network yet.
    It’s probably all about the inflated EGOS of the big shots
  • At each Tesla review of a forthcoming model, they actually let people ride in them (except the semi). Where are the public demonstrations in a Lucid Air? I noticed in all of the articles about the Lucid beating Tesla did they mention the battery size? If in fact their battery is 130kWh then obviously it is going to go further.....
  • @"TeslaTap.com"

    Whether they were "...some overused rental cars..." or not is irrelevant as there's nothing stopping them from artificially altering the performance capabilities of the Tesla, or even the Taycan for that matter, to enable their car (the Lucid) to put down better performance numbers.

    If Lucid wanted to conduct a fair and honest comparison then they should've consulted with Tesla and VW to know when to arrange some track time for an actual test of performance capabilities between the three instead of (potentially) staging a quasi Kabuki performance stunt...

    Just saying.
  • @jordanrichard_629778

    Exactly!
  • > @"David N" said:
    > I hope Lucid does well.
    >

    Lucid (like Rivian) might well find itself on the receiving end of a corporate espionage suit over theft of intellectual property/proprietary data, what with given the fact that Lucid's CTO, Peter Rawlinson, is the former Tesla Model S chief engineer.

    I guess Time will tell.
  • > @"blue adept" said:
    > Lucid (like Rivian) might well find itself on the receiving end of a corporate espionage suit over theft of intellectual property/proprietary data, what with given the fact that Lucid's CTO, Peter Rawlinson, is the former Tesla Model S chief engineer.


    I think it’s premature to suggest that. Even if he can’t do it on his own, given Rawlinson’s experience one can assume he would know how to use Tesla’s advances in accordance with their patent pledge.
  • @M-A-B-MCMLXXX

    "...premature...."

    Hence the reason why I suggested that 'Time will tell'.
  • Fair enough on time will tell, but why say it at all?
  • The implied correlation between former Tesla employees passing along trade secrets to their new employer and a former Tesla employee starting a new EV company with the only common denominator being that they were ALL former Tesla employees.

    It seems...obvious to me.
  • Why would you (Tesla in this case) sue a bankrupt?

    One reason that comes to mind is it might pay up the damages in kind.
    Tesla is happy to open share patents provided the receiver does the same.
    Tesla could do quite nicely by doing such a deal with the so-called competition.
    Is there anything could be given up by Rivian, Nikola, Lose it (Lucid), VW, Lordstown, Nio, .......that would be of benefit to Tesla?
  • > @Ross1 said:
    > Tesla could do quite nicely by doing such a deal with the so-called competition.

    POTENTIAL competition, they're all little more than nothing but a lot of hype so far.

    Anyway, how so? How could Tesla "do quite nicely with such a deal"?

    Perhaps I'm not following you...Tesla Motors(TM) is internationally recognized and acclaimed as the foremost experts in EV technology, design and engineering, albeit even begrudgingly so by dyed-in-the-wool, tailpipe sucking, pro-ICE domestic antagonists.

    So how could TM possibly benefit from passing along all of its trade secrets to potential, wannabe competitors? Also, what would be the 'competition' in that if everyone is working from the same blueprint?!

    The only 'pro' that I can see in such an arrangement for Tesla is an increased adoption of their "Master Plan" for market-wide adoption of zero-emission EV's (the final nail in the ICE coffin), but at what cost to Tesla?

    A bunch of re-skinned Tesla's with this or that marque's badging? The total dissolution of Tesla Motors by rendering it little more than a third-party parts supplier, if that?

    The point is to incentivize innovation as the means to bringing about change by sparking growth.

    You're not suppose to throw out the baby with the bath water.

    I also do not, at all, understand your comment about "bankrupt"???
  • This all goes back to what I was saying to @andy.connor.e in the "Tesla sues Rivian" thread in that, potential upstarts aside, a number of legacy automakers have already shown that they can produce a marketable EV...GM's EV-1 and the Chevy Volt, Ford's Focus EV, and Chrysler's ENVI line:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbrB6T0rAVY
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lrcx0vobTj8

    The point of course being that, if they can already do it, then why aren't they? Why do they require additional input from an outside source? Why can't they do for themselves as they have already demonstrated they can?

    The only thing that doing everything for people accomplishes is encouraging lethargy, atrophy and laziness while deterring growth and innovation...

    No one needs any of that.
  • @Ross1

    That's what the world needs, a generation of deteriorating intellect and stagnant masses (heavy sarcasm).
Sign In or Register to comment.