Lucid is raising the bar for all EV's. Hopefully they can make their way to profitability. The Gravity should make a big splash. They need to produce these sooner and in volume. Hoping for great things for Lucid.
Peter is an EV master in his knowledge and design. Wonderful product it's a shame so many people want to put the product down but you can't put excellence down. This product has its place in the future. The oil blockades and instability in the Middle East will show us we need to get off oil.
I wish we had these before the Lucid, Air, but better we have them now as Lucid has used the Lucid Air as a foundation and improved on it in the new Gravity, well done! Thanks Tom for bring this interview with Peter Rawlinson to us!
The thing is, journalists love to drive and talk about high performance sedans, not SUVs. The Air came out and won every award in sight. An SUV, no matter how good, wouldn't have gotten that attention. Sedans don't sell as well as SUVs. That gave Lucid time to work on their factory, production processes, and 'get the bugs ironed out' before stepping toward higher volume production. Believe it or not, Lucid's product rollouts are pretty well in line with the roadmap outlined in their first public presentation. Sales are lagging, but that is a broader economy thing, not unique to Lucid.
@@Miata822 It's not just bugs but improvements based on real life use. I don't have a lot of issues with the Air but I can see things that I like better in the Gravity. Had the Gravity come first, it would likely lack the newer innovations, and the Air would end up being a better car if it came later. For these things, it would be more a matter of finding the newer one even better rather than thinking of the older one as frustrating or inadequate. I don't personally need an SUV, and the Air has more cargo space than some SUVs, and more passenger space than ones with two rows of seats. I have my son's SUV sitting in the driveway in case I need to haul something bigger, but on a day to day basis, I'm fine with a sedan. That doesn't mean that I wouldn't like the Gravity better. Only test driving it could tell me that. Journalists like to talk about sports cars and while the Air is by no means a sports car, in terms of performance and handling, it blows away ones I've owned in the past. So sedans fill that slot where you can beat a typical sports car (if Lucid made its own sports car it would be a different story though) and have something more convenient.
@@bW9taeH4 Many good points but the whole purpose of the Air was to gather headlines while Lucid was still building their factory. All Lucids to date have been assembled in the building that will be just the paint shop by next summer. Lucid won't be able to produce at volume before the end of next year. It would have been pointless to roll out a popular SUV and not be able to deliver it. I got my GT in April '22. It had _Many_ software bugs, but I was super impressed with the rate that OTA updates fixed them and then started adding new features.
Great interview! One question I would have liked you to ask him is why don't they produce a lower cost version of the Gravity with 300 mile range and a smaller battery. By my calculations that should enable Lucid to drop the price to about $54,000 and which probably would substantially increase the demand. 300 miles of range is still very respectable.
They are working on more cost-efficient vehicles that probably won't be announced until 2025-2026. They need to be financially stable before producing cheaper EVs. If you can't wait, just go with a different company.
For now, they don't produce a Gravity at all, but Lucid is looking forward to following up with things along those lines. The constraint is that if they try to do everything in parallel, they'd go bankrupt. Having the revenue from the Gravity should be able to give leverage to move to that next step. So I hope they can get the Gravity out as soon as they can, as long as they get it right.
Well done interview in a small space. Explaining how some of the critical efficiencies were gained. Weight, size, drag coefficient, smaller battery, ergonomics, slope line, range per kilowatt hr. Might be the best value for a seven seater made in America. Kudos to all involvec at Lucid.
Great interview, Tom. I know you're the charging guy, but you're so knowlegable about the EV industry writ large that it's great to have your input on special cars like this.
As an engineer, I love this. Paraphrasing, but "people look for a single solution, but I have my engineers come up with tiny improvements, and 1000 tiny improvements add up" I'm currently on a project doing that now, and it feels great hearing a CEO acknowledge this fact about engineering.
I appreciate Lucid CEO and engineers for creating what they consider to be the perfect EV. I recognize his passion for the car. It’s a tough road for a new car company but I bet it’s got the investors with big enough pockets to see it through. The SUV looks fantastic. And it looks like a fantastic vehicle to ride in and conduct family life in. Can’t wait to check out the car!
The interior design is fantastic. Love the large single display. Most other cars just have several different displays mounted together and pretend like it is one display (like Mercedes hyperscreen for example). I just wish the sunshades would be mounted on the A-pillars like the Tesla model x. I prefer to have a giant open expanse of glass.
I have contact lucid employee and have been informed that the tesla sunshade has copyright so lucid can not copy that style and they still look to find some other way . But for now, the federations require sunshade to be sale .
On the Air, I can pivot the sun visors toward each side window, pull back to extend them, then fold them up toward the roof. That puts them pretty much out of view. Ideally, if the metal rod could be pivoted up slightly when it that position, the visors would be even more tucked away. But as it is, with the visors in that position, people don't notice them.
Good stuff, Tom. Thanks! Yes, there's a lot of financial FUD being spread about Lucid, mostly by Tesla fans too young to really remember Tesla's early years. Love driving my Air GT and looking forward to watching this company grow.
That’s amazing that they are dedicated to improving on their class leading products like their highest efficient motors. Lucid is in it for the long haul. Tesla lost billions and billions for well over a decade.
I hope lucid succeeds. But tesla had a lot of challenges unlike lucid. Tesla entered into scene during the 2008 collapse. They entered when the whole market was not taking ev seriously. They had to convince the market that evs are actually practical and fun. Lucid and frankly all other ev startups has the advantage of tesla paving the way.
@@StateOfChargeWithTomMoloughney It was funny to see Franz squirm when saying the term in his interview with Leno. It doesn't feel very dignified rolling off the tongue.
Rivian owner here... Not sure why it's not mentioned but the R1S you have is a quad motor...and the range you shared was in all terrain mode. 1. You can drop to converse mode in the quad motor and add 20-30 miles. Additionally, the newer R1S dual motor gets 400 miles.. Again, not sure why these important details are not mentioned.
All true. Riv owner here as well after passing on every Lucid I drove ( nice old mans car) . Realistically, not a single BEV ever gets the “ proclaimed “ range. My closest was my Bolt, but add in HVAC and they all take a 20-30 % range hair cut in winter or summer. Yes, my Tesla did as well.
However that RIVIAN is still ~2.5mi/KWh. I think their point was more about efficiency than range since they mentioned they just didn’t want to keep adding batteries. It may be like comparing a 4Runner with a better city performance vs a Highlander. The Highlander won’t take you to all the places the 4Runner can, but it’s more efficient in the city.
@@manuelias86 if you’re looking for pure efficiency, then yes,Lucid is the choice. However, the current Air models are nothing more than E class sized sedans that offer little else in hauling capability. At 70 mph constant highway, a Riv on Conserv mode will get you 342 miles which is quite impressive. The big plus is the R1T bed and gear tunnel. Don’t think the Gravity will have that kind of tow or haul ability.
Rawlinson really makes Musk look like a child. Gravity looks great even though a 7 seater is not my choice. It makes some saloons look bad on the efficiency . great video. see if you can get an invite to the factory
I like the great idea of new Porsche Macan to split high voltage in 2 halves in order to allow faster DC charging on current chargers. It would be nice Lucid to embrace the idea since Lucid charges DC only at 40 kW on existing V3 Superchargers.
Lucid, consiedr 3 seperate seats in Gravity and childseat tilt for those seats for easy 3rd row access for big families with small kids. I dream about Gravity Pure in EU in few Years - maybe with next gen battery:)
Lucid is having a very tough time selling their vehicles. It's going to be very hard to scale and get to profitability when folks just don't like your vehicles. Rivian on the other hand at least had folks all over their first offerings That's because they were at $75,000. If you look online now there are hundreds of Rivians for sale across the country. Plenty R1t's listed for around 65 grand with respectable mileage. Give it about 6 months it might be a good time to get a Rivian.
Hi, and yet the CEO is making $300-$400mil while the company is trying to survive.....i don't get it. It doesn't go well with me so i am staying with Tesla.
Cool guy. Fantastic SUV. The battery size of the Escalade intimidated me. Anything above 150kW is too much. And the Caddy is pushing 250kW😮 Can't wait to see Gravity around town. It's not for me, I'm not a family man. But still cool to know it exists if things should change. For now, Im waiting around for my first midsized EV pickup. Will it be Fisker, Toyota or Lucid? Only time will tell.
Love the commitment from Lucid to efficiency, but honestly the Gravity is not THAT groundbreaking in that front. They could have made a slightly smaller SUV/ Crossover even more aerodynamic and achieve 500 miles
My Air GT will go as far on a given amount of energy as my much smaller Model 3 did, despite it being a car as big as the Model S on the outside, and the Mercedes S class on the inside. I'd say that's groundbreaking. It will be a long time before I know how much it will help having so much range. I think that if I had to get by on 440+ miles, I'd do fine. I had a lot less than that on earlier cars.
They may not be in a production state that they can go smaller since the price should go down as well thus more orders. I thought their factory throughout wasn’t that great yet.
Peter's sentiments about the yoke design pretty much matched my objections to Tesla's choice for the S & X and particularly at the time of the CYBRTRK reveal event. You'd get a lot of complete Pickup truck novices deciding to do an 'off-road adventure' and should they lose control of the yoke, for whatever reason, & especially in an emergency, I felt that there stood to be a LOT of broken wrists and forearms (at a minimum) & perhaps something a hell of a lot worse if a major accident ensued. This [would not] have reflected well on Tesla had they stuck to their design guns with the yoke; thankfully, they saw sense. Their customers' overall reaction to the yoke probably also contributed to the design change.
Are seven seat configurations standard on all trims for the Gravity? I’m most curious if the sub $80k variant will have 7 seats as this would be hands down the best 7 seat EV option if so.
Yes that is correct , the different would be about like size of batteries, some features like seat heating , and like auto-drice( when it will be released) and some stuff
That figure was to compare to the EPA data on the other vehicles and that figure published on the EPA site included charging losses, not running efficiency. If you were to back out the charging losses (subtract .02 kWh/100mi - my rough estimate), it would add up to 444 miles.
@@StateOfChargeWithTomMoloughney hmmm, I’ve never considered charging losses in a mileage figure. I’ve also never seen it mentioned that it was included either. I would wager that even enthusiasts in the EV space wouldn’t assume this. I feel like charging efficiencies should be pulled out as a separate metric, and it would be interesting to see how that metric in isolation compares between vehicles and brands.
I wish Rawlinson would talk about reducing his salary and actually doing something to help the Lucid stock price! I'm sorry but I'm not that impressed with this guy. I was a believer early on but the company isn't moving forward fast enough. They still don't have many service centers and everyone I know that had a Lucid got rid of it because of the lack of service locations. If they can fix this, then I'd be a fan again. But it was a good interview.
Hey Tom, I do enjoy your videos and find your information very helpful. I am a Lucid Dream Performance owner and when I bought my car the Lucid team was actively promoting through their Sales Reps and online the bi-directional capability of the Lucid Air. The battery in my Dream (118 kWh) is the equivalent of almost nine Tesla PowerWalls. I bought the Lucid Connected Home Charging Station (LCHCS) when it first became available in early 2022 with the understanding it was bi-directional capable and would facilitate V2H/V2G. Can you shed any light on why after two years this capability hasn't been brought to market by Lucid? Wouldn't it be an additional sales feature that could attract buyers who live in areas subject to power outages?? Your thoughts will be greatly appreciated.
Basically, I believe (with no proof) that it is a simple matter of the company putting more effort into other more pressing matters. I know they are still working on it, they just have other engineering challenges that are taking up a lot of bandwidth.
Well thank you for your response. I hope you are right but after two years and the fact Ford has it operating I have to wonder how much longer we’ll have to wait.
@@saratogalefty5337 Ford has nearly endless resources and engineers to work on as many projects as needed all at once. The startups don't have that luxury.
Tom. I am a Retired VW/Audi Rep 37 Years. I own a 2023. Audi E Tron. &. Qty. 2 VW. ID-4. 2023. Pro S RWD. What EVSE Brand would you 1000000% Recommend Please !! So I can get it and installed in my Home
Heya Tom, I hear people say (as you did a few times during this) that you have to start with expensive cars to arrive at economical cars, but this is simply not true, and I think if you go back in to history, you'll find many examples of what I mean. Ford's model T is easily the best example that almost anyone would be familiar with, at a time when most cars were selling for 2k plus, Henry started and built one of the most successful car companies in the world by selling a car almost anyone could afford at (roughly) $750.00, or in todays money, about $25,306.40. It went on to become certainly one of the highest selling cars in history. Ferdinand Porsche came out with the "People's car", the VW Beetle, again a car almost anyone could easily afford, and it went on to become another of the highest selling cars in history *despite* having started during a war and being sold for a good part of the time during one of the worst economies on the planet and well after those times. Lots would probably at this point say something like "...Well, that was a long time ago, things were different then.." or "...sure, but you couldn't do that now, that isn't how it works anymore...", but I don't believe that is true. The Nissan Leaf was literally produced in a manner that it was to be profitable from day 1 of sales. BYD currently sells cars that often rival the quality of current manufacturers at a fraction of the price by comparison to other more established manufacturers, and although this may be China specific, the Wuling Mini Ev also makes a profit (although small) on every single unit. Nio, MG, Renault, the list goes on and on. I am not trying to take anything away from Mr. Rawlinson's abilities or accomplishments, please do not interpret my post in that way, and I think his car and engineering portfolio is not only enviable but quite impressive. I am however quite tired of hearing how you have to cost a ton to get anywhere, or you get what you pay for, or this may be for you, sometime, much later, if you have to bankrupt yourself to get it... None of that is literally true but is only a perceived truism which is simply not true at all, anymore than any other patently false statement. I sincerely hope you stop using it, as I otherwise find your channel to be informative and interesting to watch. Thank you for your time.
Your examples are not accurate reflections of history. Henry Ford made expensive, limited production cars for 10 years before he made the Model T. He made his name developing race cars, and after he resigned from the first auto company he founded, it went on to become Cadillac. According to Wikipedia, "Between 1903 and 1908, Ford produced the Models A, B, C, F, K, N, R, and S. Hundreds or a few thousand of most of these were sold per year." Ferdinand Porsche had a career designing high end cars and race cars before the founding of Volkswagen. And when he finally got the opportunity to develop the Beetle, it was only made possible by government funding. Not only this, but during the war years when the Beetle first went into production, 80% of VW labor was actually slave labor. After the war, production of the Beetle resumed under oversight of the British government. These are hardly examples of an auto company becoming commercially successful by starting with an affordable car as their first product. That whole "pulling themselves up by the bootstraps" idea is very romantic and attractive. But reality is a whole different thing.
Hello@@davidmenasco5743 , I think the examples I gave were accurate for the point trying to be made, which is that you do not have to start with an expensive car to arrive at an economical one, and *not* that you have to pull yourselves up by your bootstraps, although certainly in Ford's case, you'd be hard pressed to find a better example of just that. I also limited the examples for purposes of brevity, there were certainly other examples available, such as the Japanese manufacturer's entry into the American market (more a matter of timing with the oil embargo leading to success), or Hyundai's own story, where the cars started out being so poorly perceived it took an incredible amount of time for it to rise above that to become the brand they are now. As to Ford's history, he started as a farmer, became a machinist, and yes, Cadillac did come out of his original company. You conveniently left out that he was the chief engineer in that company, and that he left it with in a year. I think it disingenuous to suggest he made some huge fortune in one year as an engineer in which to start producing economical cars, so I hope that is not what you were implying. If you took the time to thoroughly read that Wikipedia Ford entry, you will I think find out that almost from the start, his goal was designing an inexpensive automobile, and what allowed that was not some vast previously acquired fortune from racing, but backing by other investors. All of the mentioned letter cars preceding the T were exactly that, attempts to perfect that type of car. The end result, as Wikipedia says, "The car was very simple to drive, and easy and cheap to repair. It was so cheap at $825 in 1908 ($26,870 today), with the price falling every year, that by the 1920s, a majority of American drivers had learned to drive on the Model T." Your version of VW's history is very accurate, however, I again was not talking about people who pulled themselves up by their bootstraps, I was merely pointing out that cars don't have to start off expensive to provide the continuation of the line into something VERY impressive. It could be well argued that the success of the VW Beetle came literally as a result of the failure of Germany to win that war, or of the dismantling and taking over of the company by the British, however, that would be glossing over a LARGE part of the success and rise of the Beetle prior to the end of the war. Stating that the Beetle was subsidized by the government matters I think far less, or rather, certainly sounds strikingly like what most governments are currently doing for the very type of car we are discussing here, electric cars. I would add, I would rather they subsidize that than keep pouring subsidies into oil companies, but that is a whole other discussion. Again, I think if you (dispassionately) go back and look throughout history, you'll find some of the largest car companies around achieved that level of success from selling comparatively lesser priced vehicles. I am not necessarily saying 'poor quality' or 'throw away' vehicles, and maybe not 'superior to all around' vehicles, but definitely value for the money spent vehicles. Toyota, Honda, Mazda, Subaru all followed that model. The Chinese are continuing to follow that model, and when they hit these shores (where ever your shores are), I am sure you will see a very poignant example of what I am pointing out here. Be well, and enjoy the holidays (should you celebrate them, if not, enjoy the days period ) 😁
I appreciate the comment, but it's really not fair to make those comparisons. Starting a company in the US today is nothing like starting one in 1910 and the same goes for 1930 Germany. The cost of bringing a vehicle to market because of regulations is staggering, and costs multiple billions of dollars. I have discussed this with many automotive industry experts - those working in the field their whole lives and they all say the same thing. Elon spoke about this at great length also years ago and said it's impossible to start a company today if you don't start out with a high-end expensive vehicle. I defer to the people that are in the industry and those that have actually done it, rather than what I might think makes sense. 🙂 @@bogess1738
Good morning@@StateOfChargeWithTomMoloughney , I'd say if I had only pointed to Ford and VW, or hadn't already pointed out the very same point about those might not be applicable for (reasons), that what your 'experts' say might be more overwhelming. Of course, I did already say those things, and then went on to list a lot of other examples well post all the wars and into modern times (Hyundai started making itself known with the car produced as the Ford Cortina in '68, they didn't start off with a version of a Rolls Royce). Also noted was the Nissan Leaf, an electric car made to be profitable from close to day one as Nissan then (as now) was in a fairly precarious state as a company. Again, what I am saying is no knock on you personally, or on Mr. Rawlinson (whom I hold in no small amount of respect), or even on Lucid (either as a company or as a vehicle) as I appreciate both for what they are. However, with the number of examples even in today's wicked startup atmosphere of cars being started at less than current mainstream manufacturer's are selling known brands at, I'd say those same experts are either misguided or suggesting the (perceived) 'easy' way out. Yes you would need billions to start a car company, that is true. and Yes it would take billions to bring it to a model ready for market. The people providing those billions are not you, personally, unless your the owner of Vinfast (who could be pointed to as ANOTHER example of my point), but by investors (such as the 13 investors Lucid currently is working with). Would they like to see a profit instead of a continuing pouring out of money? I'm sure they would, and while I understand the way Lucid is going about it, it is *not* the only way, just as there is no one way to tie shoes, make spaghetti, or (other silly statement to shock a point home). As shown here and in previous statements, there are just too many examples of it even today for it to be said and taken in any serious context. However, all of this is only an opinion (not just mine, but I do align with it). I'm glad you took it as it was meant, and I certainly understand the reasoning behind yours despite not agreeing with it. Be well and have the best of Holiday weeks 🥳
Technologically Lucid is by far the most inovative US EV startup. It's such a shame they might be driven (by hostile capital,.... Musk etc) to forced takeover/filling for CH11 before they can trickle down this tech to high volume models... you can see on Peter's face the amount of stress he's under. The arab capital is not happy with the stock price...
How about mirrors folding into the doors on highways, would it be better option compared to Cybertruck manualy removing them, would it be worth at least like a option in some countries
For now, the mirrors are a legal requirement in the US. I haven't driven a Cybertruck and don't know if I ever will, but I can say that the Air has the blind spot camera displays more intelligently placed than Tesla does on earlier cars. I still use the side mirrors on occasion but could probably do fine without them. And they do have the blind spot indicator, which Tesla stubbornly leaves out. That information is available on the screen, but after nine years, I still haven't gotten accustomed to that to the point that I like it. Another advantage of mirrors is that if I want to take a quick glance when my turn signal isn't on, I can. I don't think that I'd want the side view cameras displayed at all times.
I hope Lucid offers a solid roof option. For some an all glass roof is a deal breaker. I have begun to hate it in both my model 3 and my Mach e. The after market shade helps but I would rather I had a solid roof option.
Lucid offers a metal roof on the Air for all trims except the Grand Touring. I haven't driven a Mach e but I'm curious why you find it a problem in the Model 3.
@@irfanhusein1445 I've found Tesla's air conditioning to be better than in any other cars I've had. I've driven a Model S in temperatures in the triple digits without realizing it until I got out of the car and felt how hot it was. I'm not saying that your experiences aren't real, but I find it surprising. I did have a Model 3 and never had that problem. I haven't had a Lucid long enough to see how it will be in the summer.
@@bW9taeH4 I purchased a roof shade form Tasmanian to put up in the summer months. The fact that Tasmanian make these shades for both the Mach e and the model 3 tells mr I’m not the only one with this concern
Is GRAVITY working against LCID? , serious question, your input much appreciated! i wànted to buy @ IPO..🤔 Bought TSLA instead,must sày Peter is a brilliânt and smart guy, just think he is with the wrong company.
@@StateOfChargeWithTomMoloughney Sliding doors can be quite practical. But then it ends up in a class that's being derided for no other reason than a conception of what a minivan is. I've had minivans and they were practical when I had three young kids. They drove like midsize non-performance sedans, which wasn't terrible. There's no way that the Gravity will be like a minivan, except in the practical sense, which is not a negative. And on the inside it won't feel like one at all.
Nice Car/SUV. @ $80K STARTING PRICE. Ha Ha Ha Ha........ Unless I win the Lottery, I'll NEVER be able to afford One EVER!!! NEVER!!! Just Simply don't have that kind of $$$$$$ Just Laying around, And I Ain't got no way to Charge the Unit!
Station wagons aren't really station wagons, if you go back to the days when they took people and cargo to and from train stations. They were practical, but eventually sexism made their "mom's car" image undesirable. Then Iacocca took the macho image of a van and created the more macho minivan, but over time, people began seeing that as a soccer mom's car as if there's something wrong with that. Then people moved to SUVs even though most people didn't need something for off road that drove like a truck. So crossovers came along. It all comes down to what's practical, meets a person's needs, has the desired performance and features, etc. And this does that for a lot of people. Getting hung up on definitions where they don't apply isn't helpful. Since EVs have separate power trains in front and back, the idea of a traditional SUV body and suspension isn't relevant. If it's marketed as an SUV and it meets people's needs better, it should do well. Ironically, it's closer to the original notion of a station wagon than what modern station wagons are, and I don't mean that as a bad thing. But calling it that isn't a good thing in today's market.
Close, but SUVs were a way for manufacturers to get around the EPA mandates for efficiency. By putting a car/station wagon on a truck frame they bypassed car requirements and instead got much less restrictive truck regulations. It’s not an SUV. It’s probably not even a crossover. It’s a minivan with a low profile and low loading decks front and back per the CEO… the only people that don’t want to call it a minivan are the ones that have negative image of them… If all else fails, just use your eyes. It does not look like any SUV but looks like every minivan.
no matter what he says, losing $300,000 per car on a $120,000 car that is full of quality issues is a formula to go bankrupt. Building a factory in saudi arabia where there is no ecosystem nor engineering talent, is a sure way to accelerate that demise.
We are on our second Tesla -- a 2021 Model S Plaid -- as well as owning an early-production Lucid Air Dream Edition (No. 154). Outside of software issues, the Model S was delivered with more quality issues than the Lucid Air, and dealing with Tesla service is a bear. (The Lucid software issues have largely disappeared with the OTA updates following UX 2.0, and the control suite combo of buttons and screens in the Lucid is now something we prefer over the Tesla.). Right now we're trying to get a replacement for the Model S yoke that has lost a sizable plug of its cover on the upper left corner (a widespread issue), and Tesla is saying they are not available right now and that we should check again "sometime" in 2024.
@@blakespringpasturemortimer9168 Tesla's support used to be at that level, but they got overwhelmed once the Model 3 came out. Even before that, they were slipping not in terms of quality of service but in terms of being able to get through to them on the phone. Tesla does manage to have good mobile service. So far, things have been good with Lucid service.
I'm curious. Where do your second-row passengers rest their inboard arms? Did you buy the aftermarket strap-on armrest from EVannex? A $100,000 SUV without armrests is something of an ergonomic joke.
Nobody is "milking" anything from Tesla. Tesla will receive significant revenue from NACS users as well as other benefits by opening up its network under the terms of the federal infrastructure act.
@@blakespringpasturemortimer9168 why are they waiting so long to manufacture these cars with NACS plugs who wants to use an adapter that’s pretty lame and put it in the taillight instead of an ugly fender door
@@Anthony__420 The Gravity will almost certainly have a NACS plug, and Airs probably also will down the road. But the first order of business is to bring the 924-volt architecture of the Air and its Wunderbox circuitry into compatibility with Tesla's aging charging architecture that was premised on 400-volt cars. In real-world driving at highway speeds, our Lucid Air Dream Edition gets about 100 miles more range than our Model S Plaid. So we can cross Florida from Naples to Miami, spend an afternoon driving around, and get back on a single charge in the Air but not in the Plaid (both on 21" wheels). And on longer road trips, there have been vanishingly few times where it would have been more convenient to use a Tesla supercharger more frequently than a CCS charger less frequently. Personally, I'm a lot more interested in seeing the CCS network cleaned up (which is finally starting to happen) than in getting access to the Tesla network.
@@Anthony__420 They designed the vehicle long before Tesla opened up its standard and before anybody else but Tesla was using NACS. If they switched to NACS today, it would leave people with new cars and no high speed charging network. I can charge an Air GT and add as much as 200 miles of range in 12 minutes at a CCS charger, but it would take over an hour at a Supercharger. Tesla needs to get V4 chargers in place and all other companies need to add NACS before it's practical for drivers of non-Teslas to have NACS ports. In the meantime, Tesla's cables are too short and their voltage is too low. As for adapters, I expect Tesla to have magic docks built into all Superchargers that are suitable for a Lucid, so an adapter will rarely be needed. It's unlikely that other charging companies will replace CCS cables and more likely that they will add NACS cables to the same chargers. So decades from now, when it's long past when CCS ports were being put on cars, we'll see a need for adapters for old EVs, when it's no longer practical to put CCS plugs on chargers.
LET'S GOOOOOOOOOO LUCID🏁 FAMILY ❤WOOHOO! KEEP ADDING ON TO YOUR LUCID POSITIONS EVERYONE STAY FOCUSED AND DISCIPLINE HARD WORK DEDICATION TOGETHER AS ONE LUCID FAMILY GOONIES NEVER SAY DIE!🙋♂️♥️🫡🥳🥳🥳🥳🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🕺🕺🕺😉👍
This is an awesomely designed SUV. The more I learn about LUCID and the development that goes into each component makes me realize how advanced this company truly is. Keep up the great work!!!
At 11:09 we overhear Peter Rawlinson mentioning the name of the next, mid-size vehicle Lucid is developing, the "Earth", sporting the same, even more efficient drive units than "Air's", that will power "Gravity"!
The formula of starting with an expensive high end EV and then using profit from its sales to finance a mass market affordable EV worked for Tesla because it had no other competition at the time. However, this formula may no longer be effective given all the competition following the same formula. Now we have Tesla, Lucid, BMW, Mercedes, Audi, Porsche, Volvo, Polestar, Cadillac and Rivian all fighting it out in the high end EV market. Even Tesla's Model S and X sales have fallen significantly from their peaks. Lucid has a huge uphill battle in front of it to positive cash flow for the Lucid Air and Gravity.
@@alexnutcasio936 That would have bankrupted the company. The only way to profit with vehicles in that price range would be to sell in high volume, and no company is going to be able to start out selling 5000 cars per week when nobody heard of them before that. The way Lucid is doing it, they will produce a vehicle in that price range and it will be coming from a company that made award winning high end cars.
When you actually start looking at cars in person, you will find that cars that really go head to head with the Lucid air aren't there. The problem is that not a lot of people know about Lucid and they don't have a presence in many states. I still remember getting the "who makes Tesla?" question almost a decade ago. Now people know what Tesla is, and certainly know what Mercedes and BMW and most of those others are. More likely than not, if I mention that I have a Lucid, I get a confused reaction from people who don't know what it is. Those who do know are immediately impressed. I'm not trying to knock any of those companies. I still have My Model S and still think that Tesla makes good cars. But it all depends on what you are looking for.
@@bW9taeH4 Lucid must be very selective because they’re not selling very many. Production is a mess and they’ve missed every quarterly. Plus, except for Sapphire, the Air editions look like old man’s car. That’s the consensus.
@@bW9taeH4 no one has said it’s a bad car. I love the Sapphire as a Plaid killer, but their pricing for a niche brand, yet alone a niche BEV brand will kill the company long term. They’re better off making a little bit of money off a lot of people ( pyramid of buyers) than a lot of money off the few. It’s all about selling cars and Lucid is just not selling. Rawlinson comes from a brand(s) that sold few cars and has been bought and sold like a French whore. ( Lotus and Corus).
Tom I'd love to hear Lucid's response on the record about what they plan to do about their 900V architecture Gravity charging on the NACS infrastructure. Obviously we know that the Air's Wunderbox can only output on the Magicdock equipped V3's. But the Gravity won't come out for 12+ months. I wonder if they have plans to upgrade the Wunderbox for 150kW charging on the older, sub 500V chargers.
Seems Tesla needs to upgrade their equipment. They seem to be stuck in 2017 mode for the most part. They are still installing v3 superchargers. Even the v4 superchargers are not set up at the moment for 800v charging. Other companies have the tech out there now and have been out there.
@@jackylsmith8138 Tesla seems to be installing a handful of V4 chargers in North America with the same back end equipment. But I suppose that it will be easier to upgrade that part in the future if the chargers themselves can handle it. For now, Tesla's V4 network is practically non-existent. The existing CCS infrastructure isn't adequate, but when it's working, it can charge a Lucid fast. I've yet to try it. The GT has enough range that any trip that I anticipate for a long time is unlikely to need a charging stop, especially if I stay at hotels with destination charging. There's a maximum number of hours that people want to drive in a given day. For those who insist on driving more, Lucid has it covered in theory by being able to add up to 200 miles of range in 12 minutes on the Air GT. But that assumes that there's capable equipment available and you aren't going to see it from Tesla for a while.
I just love these videos because of the direct questions asked to the CEO’s about the design and performance of the vehicle and the future manufacturing by someone who buys EV’s. If these interviews were on CNBC the world would be talking about them.
Didn't realize how inefficient the Rivian is. I imagine the Tesla Model Y is in the vicinity of the Gravity. The Kia EV9 isn't as efficient, but does seem more like a real SUV than these crossover types from Tesla, Mercedes, and Lucid.
Don't be surprised if the Kia EV9 costs in the mid $70k after dealership mark-ups and trim level plus no US EV tax credit. A base Gravity after the EV tax credit makes it very competitive. Lucid is doing a fantastic job and with interest rates going down next year, maybe they will finally be able to move towards profitability.
I think lucid is missing a huge critical point in design, the design should be more bold . I'd rather have a hummer ev or rivian r1s over this one. The design looks like a van which is not a good thing. Look at the rivian r1s and compare it to this one. Space, efficiency,tech doesn't compensate for bold design
I think it’s just efficiency. Low to the ground (air suspension helps) and 🥚 shapes. I agree the hummer and RIVIAN are more my style, but you won’t get the +3mi/KWh that Lucid or Model X can do. However, these probably can go off road like RIVIAN or Hummer can do.
I have nothing at all against Rivian and think that they are doing a great job. Some people will prefer them, and there's nothing wrong with that. Others will prefer the Lucid. If Lucid had gone more in the direction of Rivian, that wouldn't leave consumers with much choice and variety. For some people, not only do those things more than compensate, they spend almost all their time with the car on the inside of it. How it looks to others isn't everybody's biggest concern.
Tom, thanks for interview. Peter really likes you - I think that's why he wanted to spend time with you. Nice job! I would like to see the ~$40k Lucid in a few years.
Awesome!! Great interview as always. Gravity will be the best full size SUV ever. People just don’t understand how important range & efficiency is. Our Lucid Air GT with 500+ range is incredible. It just goes and goes! I never DC fast charge. Cheers!
They don’t lose money on cars. If a company sells 1000 cars, and also spends a billion on new factories, if you divide total spend by number of cars sold, it looks like they’ve lost money per car. In reality that’s not the case. Tesla went through this for 10+ years
@@pravinpravin9936 People made the same argument with Tesla, as if every solar panel or roof tile they made was part of the cost of making each car. Some of the expenses are related to current production. Others are not. Fixed costs divided by vehicles are going to be too high when volume is low. But expenses related to the Gravity or anything on the drawing board for the future are not part of the cost of building an Air. So dividing the total loss by the number of cars made and acting as if that's the loss per vehicle is far off base. Software costs are going to be higher now, but when they are selling in volume, those costs don't rise with production volume. If they were losing that much per vehicle, then losses would increase proportionally as sales increased.
That efficiency is quite impressive for an SUV. Well done Lucid.
*minivan
@@1970351C2VLuxury urban SUV. 🚙
Lucid is raising the bar for all EV's. Hopefully they can make their way to profitability. The Gravity should make a big splash. They need to produce these sooner and in volume. Hoping for great things for Lucid.
Peter is an EV master in his knowledge and design. Wonderful product it's a shame so many people want to put the product down but you can't put excellence down. This product has its place in the future. The oil blockades and instability in the Middle East will show us we need to get off oil.
This is funded by the Middle East 😂
I wish we had these before the Lucid, Air, but better we have them now as Lucid has used the Lucid Air as a foundation and improved on it in the new Gravity, well done! Thanks Tom for bring this interview with Peter Rawlinson to us!
The thing is, journalists love to drive and talk about high performance sedans, not SUVs. The Air came out and won every award in sight. An SUV, no matter how good, wouldn't have gotten that attention. Sedans don't sell as well as SUVs. That gave Lucid time to work on their factory, production processes, and 'get the bugs ironed out' before stepping toward higher volume production. Believe it or not, Lucid's product rollouts are pretty well in line with the roadmap outlined in their first public presentation. Sales are lagging, but that is a broader economy thing, not unique to Lucid.
@@Miata822 It's not just bugs but improvements based on real life use. I don't have a lot of issues with the Air but I can see things that I like better in the Gravity. Had the Gravity come first, it would likely lack the newer innovations, and the Air would end up being a better car if it came later. For these things, it would be more a matter of finding the newer one even better rather than thinking of the older one as frustrating or inadequate.
I don't personally need an SUV, and the Air has more cargo space than some SUVs, and more passenger space than ones with two rows of seats. I have my son's SUV sitting in the driveway in case I need to haul something bigger, but on a day to day basis, I'm fine with a sedan. That doesn't mean that I wouldn't like the Gravity better. Only test driving it could tell me that.
Journalists like to talk about sports cars and while the Air is by no means a sports car, in terms of performance and handling, it blows away ones I've owned in the past. So sedans fill that slot where you can beat a typical sports car (if Lucid made its own sports car it would be a different story though) and have something more convenient.
@@bW9taeH4 Many good points but the whole purpose of the Air was to gather headlines while Lucid was still building their factory. All Lucids to date have been assembled in the building that will be just the paint shop by next summer. Lucid won't be able to produce at volume before the end of next year. It would have been pointless to roll out a popular SUV and not be able to deliver it.
I got my GT in April '22. It had _Many_ software bugs, but I was super impressed with the rate that OTA updates fixed them and then started adding new features.
Great interview! One question I would have liked you to ask him is why don't they produce a lower cost version of the Gravity with 300 mile range and a smaller battery. By my calculations that should enable Lucid to drop the price to about $54,000 and which probably would substantially increase the demand. 300 miles of range is still very respectable.
They are working on more cost-efficient vehicles that probably won't be announced until 2025-2026. They need to be financially stable before producing cheaper EVs. If you can't wait, just go with a different company.
They said they will by 2026
For now, they don't produce a Gravity at all, but Lucid is looking forward to following up with things along those lines. The constraint is that if they try to do everything in parallel, they'd go bankrupt. Having the revenue from the Gravity should be able to give leverage to move to that next step. So I hope they can get the Gravity out as soon as they can, as long as they get it right.
Well done interview in a small space. Explaining how some of the critical efficiencies were gained. Weight, size, drag coefficient, smaller battery, ergonomics, slope line, range per kilowatt hr. Might be the best value for a seven seater made in America. Kudos to all involvec at Lucid.
120 kWh is by no means a small pack.
Great interview, Tom. I know you're the charging guy, but you're so knowlegable about the EV industry writ large that it's great to have your input on special cars like this.
Again, thank you Tom! Another great interview and video.
As an engineer, I love this. Paraphrasing, but "people look for a single solution, but I have my engineers come up with tiny improvements, and 1000 tiny improvements add up" I'm currently on a project doing that now, and it feels great hearing a CEO acknowledge this fact about engineering.
sounds (in spirit at least) like the "Atomic Habits" approach.
Can’t wait till you get to drive and do your 70 mph highway test and charging.
I appreciate Lucid CEO and engineers for creating what they consider to be the perfect EV. I recognize his passion for the car. It’s a tough road for a new car company but I bet it’s got the investors with big enough pockets to see it through.
The SUV looks fantastic. And it looks like a fantastic vehicle to ride in and conduct family life in. Can’t wait to check out the car!
On a side note, Congrats, Tom, on being the first to report a few days back that VW will adopt the "NACS' charging standard.
The interior design is fantastic. Love the large single display. Most other cars just have several different displays mounted together and pretend like it is one display (like Mercedes hyperscreen for example). I just wish the sunshades would be mounted on the A-pillars like the Tesla model x. I prefer to have a giant open expanse of glass.
I have contact lucid employee and have been informed that the tesla sunshade has copyright so lucid can not copy that style and they still look to find some other way . But for now, the federations require sunshade to be sale .
I hope they will make it easy for third party solutions to be used instead. That would be an easy fix.@@ahmadtaha2962
On the Air, I can pivot the sun visors toward each side window, pull back to extend them, then fold them up toward the roof. That puts them pretty much out of view. Ideally, if the metal rod could be pivoted up slightly when it that position, the visors would be even more tucked away. But as it is, with the visors in that position, people don't notice them.
Very humble man.
Humble man with 379M compensation for 2022
I would be too with that watch on my wrist
@@jamespaul2587 way overpaid…
@alexnutcasio936 exactly, it's easy to appear humble when you've got millions 😊
enjoy the sour grapes
Interview in Gravity❤️
I am very impressed with the efficiency! The yoke should only be used with drive by wire systems, like the Cybertruck.
Good stuff, Tom. Thanks!
Yes, there's a lot of financial FUD being spread about Lucid, mostly by Tesla fans too young to really remember Tesla's early years. Love driving my Air GT and looking forward to watching this company grow.
Don't be weird. It's a company, not a family member...
Financial FUD? Why do they keep taking money from the Saudis? Look at their sales for 2023. They’re really bad.
That’s amazing that they are dedicated to improving on their class leading products like their highest efficient motors. Lucid is in it for the long haul. Tesla lost billions and billions for well over a decade.
Is Lucid profitable? If not how many more years?I did hear from SOMEONE that production @ scale is hard, " Production Hell"😮..😂
Tesla spent 17 years before turning a profit in 2020. This is partly due to production costs and supply
I hope lucid succeeds. But tesla had a lot of challenges unlike lucid. Tesla entered into scene during the 2008 collapse. They entered when the whole market was not taking ev seriously. They had to convince the market that evs are actually practical and fun. Lucid and frankly all other ev startups has the advantage of tesla paving the way.
inspirational interview. Thx for the vid. I enjoyed watching.
Thanks Tom! Great interview! I want one!
Lucid got GM reevaluating their whole life😂. "Dumb range" gets me every time.
Please open the reservation!
I think this should have been lucid’s first EV. Great addition to the SUV lineup for consumers.
Beautiful. Long live Lucid!!
This is a great update from lucid in the recent days..thank you
Squircle-shaped is also in the Cybertruck (and part of parts catalog and in webpage code)
Yeah, other cars have had it for many years. I just never knew that squircle was a legit word - I thought it was slang
@@StateOfChargeWithTomMoloughney It was funny to see Franz squirm when saying the term in his interview with Leno.
It doesn't feel very dignified rolling off the tongue.
Can’t wait for pre orders to open
Rivian owner here...
Not sure why it's not mentioned but the R1S you have is a quad motor...and the range you shared was in all terrain mode.
1. You can drop to converse mode in the quad motor and add 20-30 miles.
Additionally, the newer R1S dual motor gets 400 miles..
Again, not sure why these important details are not mentioned.
But still, it lucid gravity 440 miles. But you kinda right. The information should be accurate
All true. Riv owner here as well after passing on every Lucid I drove ( nice old mans car) . Realistically, not a single BEV ever gets the “ proclaimed “ range. My closest was my Bolt, but add in HVAC and they all take a 20-30 % range hair cut in winter or summer. Yes, my Tesla did as well.
However that RIVIAN is still ~2.5mi/KWh. I think their point was more about efficiency than range since they mentioned they just didn’t want to keep adding batteries.
It may be like comparing a 4Runner with a better city performance vs a Highlander. The Highlander won’t take you to all the places the 4Runner can, but it’s more efficient in the city.
@@manuelias86 if you’re looking for pure efficiency, then yes,Lucid is the choice. However, the current Air models are nothing more than E class sized sedans that offer little else in hauling capability. At 70 mph constant highway, a Riv on Conserv mode will get you 342 miles which is quite impressive. The big plus is the R1T bed and gear tunnel. Don’t think the Gravity will have that kind of tow or haul ability.
Rawlinson really makes Musk look like a child. Gravity looks great even though a 7 seater is not my choice. It makes some saloons look bad on the efficiency . great video. see if you can get an invite to the factory
Lucid will lose 400,000$ on every Gravity sold....
Lucid bankrupt in 2025.
Lucid only have 6000 costumers pr year. 😂
Musk makes Musk look like a child. Rawlinson looks like a professional who belongs where he is.
@@mikafiltenborg7572 you didn't watch the video, he pointed out what crap those comments are because all the money is investment
@@ckleinheksel yep, the same for all start-ups, Amazon also being a good example
I like the great idea of new Porsche Macan to split high voltage in 2 halves in order to allow faster DC charging on current chargers.
It would be nice Lucid to embrace the idea since Lucid charges DC only at 40 kW on existing V3 Superchargers.
Lucid, consiedr 3 seperate seats in Gravity and childseat tilt for those seats for easy 3rd row access for big families with small kids. I dream about Gravity Pure in EU in few Years - maybe with next gen battery:)
Lucid is having a very tough time selling their vehicles. It's going to be very hard to scale and get to profitability when folks just don't like your vehicles.
Rivian on the other hand at least had folks all over their first offerings That's because they were at $75,000. If you look online now there are hundreds of Rivians for sale across the country. Plenty R1t's listed for around 65 grand with respectable mileage. Give it about 6 months it might be a good time to get a Rivian.
Hi, and yet the CEO is making $300-$400mil while the company is trying to survive.....i don't get it. It doesn't go well with me so i am staying with Tesla.
Marvel of Engineering!
Cool guy. Fantastic SUV. The battery size of the Escalade intimidated me. Anything above 150kW is too much. And the Caddy is pushing 250kW😮
Can't wait to see Gravity around town. It's not for me, I'm not a family man. But still cool to know it exists if things should change. For now, Im waiting around for my first midsized EV pickup. Will it be Fisker, Toyota or Lucid? Only time will tell.
Love the commitment from Lucid to efficiency, but honestly the Gravity is not THAT groundbreaking in that front. They could have made a slightly smaller SUV/ Crossover even more aerodynamic and achieve 500 miles
Umm you forgot peter said In excess of 440+ miles meaning there might be more range not being revealed yet
My Air GT will go as far on a given amount of energy as my much smaller Model 3 did, despite it being a car as big as the Model S on the outside, and the Mercedes S class on the inside. I'd say that's groundbreaking. It will be a long time before I know how much it will help having so much range. I think that if I had to get by on 440+ miles, I'd do fine. I had a lot less than that on earlier cars.
They may not be in a production state that they can go smaller since the price should go down as well thus more orders. I thought their factory throughout wasn’t that great yet.
Peter's sentiments about the yoke design pretty much matched my objections to Tesla's choice for the S & X and particularly at the time of the CYBRTRK reveal event. You'd get a lot of complete Pickup truck novices deciding to do an 'off-road adventure' and should they lose control of the yoke, for whatever reason, & especially in an emergency, I felt that there stood to be a LOT of broken wrists and forearms (at a minimum) & perhaps something a hell of a lot worse if a major accident ensued. This [would not] have reflected well on Tesla had they stuck to their design guns with the yoke; thankfully, they saw sense. Their customers' overall reaction to the yoke probably also contributed to the design change.
Great video. RJ next?!
Are seven seat configurations standard on all trims for the Gravity? I’m most curious if the sub $80k variant will have 7 seats as this would be hands down the best 7 seat EV option if so.
Yes that is correct , the different would be about like size of batteries, some features like seat heating , and like auto-drice( when it will be released) and some stuff
I want one 🤩
9:37 I'm confused by this graphic. If you have 29kWh/100mi that reduces down to 0.29kWh/mi. 120kWh/(0.29kWh/mi) = 414mi. Where does +440mi come from?
440 may be a mixed efficiency. City/Hwy. the efficiency number quote here may be at a specific speed.
That figure was to compare to the EPA data on the other vehicles and that figure published on the EPA site included charging losses, not running efficiency. If you were to back out the charging losses (subtract .02 kWh/100mi - my rough estimate), it would add up to 444 miles.
@@StateOfChargeWithTomMoloughney hmmm, I’ve never considered charging losses in a mileage figure. I’ve also never seen it mentioned that it was included either. I would wager that even enthusiasts in the EV space wouldn’t assume this. I feel like charging efficiencies should be pulled out as a separate metric, and it would be interesting to see how that metric in isolation compares between vehicles and brands.
I wish Rawlinson would talk about reducing his salary and actually doing something to help the Lucid stock price! I'm sorry but I'm not that impressed with this guy. I was a believer early on but the company isn't moving forward fast enough. They still don't have many service centers and everyone I know that had a Lucid got rid of it because of the lack of service locations. If they can fix this, then I'd be a fan again. But it was a good interview.
Hey Tom, I do enjoy your videos and find your information very helpful. I am a Lucid Dream Performance owner and when I bought my car the Lucid team was actively promoting through their Sales Reps and online the bi-directional capability of the Lucid Air. The battery in my Dream (118 kWh) is the equivalent of almost nine Tesla PowerWalls. I bought the Lucid Connected Home Charging Station (LCHCS) when it first became available in early 2022 with the understanding it was bi-directional capable and would facilitate V2H/V2G. Can you shed any light on why after two years this capability hasn't been brought to market by Lucid? Wouldn't it be an additional sales feature that could attract buyers who live in areas subject to power outages?? Your thoughts will be greatly appreciated.
Basically, I believe (with no proof) that it is a simple matter of the company putting more effort into other more pressing matters. I know they are still working on it, they just have other engineering challenges that are taking up a lot of bandwidth.
Well thank you for your response. I hope you are right but after two years and the fact Ford has it operating I have to wonder how much longer we’ll have to wait.
@@saratogalefty5337 Ford has nearly endless resources and engineers to work on as many projects as needed all at once. The startups don't have that luxury.
Tom. I am a Retired VW/Audi Rep 37 Years. I own a 2023. Audi E Tron. &. Qty. 2 VW. ID-4. 2023. Pro S RWD. What EVSE Brand would you 1000000% Recommend Please !! So I can get it and installed in my Home
Do they go smaller or full size truck next?
Truck doesn't fit their ethos
@@laloajuria4678 I would tend to agree, but I’d love to see what they could do to mold the form factor to their ethos.
Heya Tom,
I hear people say (as you did a few times during this) that you have to start with expensive cars to arrive at economical cars, but this is simply not true, and I think if you go back in to history, you'll find many examples of what I mean.
Ford's model T is easily the best example that almost anyone would be familiar with, at a time when most cars were selling for 2k plus, Henry started and built one of the most successful car companies in the world by selling a car almost anyone could afford at (roughly) $750.00, or in todays money, about $25,306.40. It went on to become certainly one of the highest selling cars in history.
Ferdinand Porsche came out with the "People's car", the VW Beetle, again a car almost anyone could easily afford, and it went on to become another of the highest selling cars in history *despite* having started during a war and being sold for a good part of the time during one of the worst economies on the planet and well after those times.
Lots would probably at this point say something like "...Well, that was a long time ago, things were different then.." or "...sure, but you couldn't do that now, that isn't how it works anymore...", but I don't believe that is true. The Nissan Leaf was literally produced in a manner that it was to be profitable from day 1 of sales.
BYD currently sells cars that often rival the quality of current manufacturers at a fraction of the price by comparison to other more established manufacturers, and although this may be China specific, the Wuling Mini Ev also makes a profit (although small) on every single unit. Nio, MG, Renault, the list goes on and on.
I am not trying to take anything away from Mr. Rawlinson's abilities or accomplishments, please do not interpret my post in that way, and I think his car and engineering portfolio is not only enviable but quite impressive.
I am however quite tired of hearing how you have to cost a ton to get anywhere, or you get what you pay for, or this may be for you, sometime, much later, if you have to bankrupt yourself to get it... None of that is literally true but is only a perceived truism which is simply not true at all, anymore than any other patently false statement.
I sincerely hope you stop using it, as I otherwise find your channel to be informative and interesting to watch. Thank you for your time.
Your examples are not accurate reflections of history.
Henry Ford made expensive, limited production cars for 10 years before he made the Model T.
He made his name developing race cars, and after he resigned from the first auto company he founded, it went on to become Cadillac.
According to Wikipedia, "Between 1903 and 1908, Ford produced the Models A, B, C, F, K, N, R, and S. Hundreds or a few thousand of most of these were sold per year."
Ferdinand Porsche had a career designing high end cars and race cars before the founding of Volkswagen. And when he finally got the opportunity to develop the Beetle, it was only made possible by government funding. Not only this, but during the war years when the Beetle first went into production, 80% of VW labor was actually slave labor. After the war, production of the Beetle resumed under oversight of the British government.
These are hardly examples of an auto company becoming commercially successful by starting with an affordable car as their first product.
That whole "pulling themselves up by the bootstraps" idea is very romantic and attractive. But reality is a whole different thing.
Hello@@davidmenasco5743 ,
I think the examples I gave were accurate for the point trying to be made, which is that you do not have to start with an expensive car to arrive at an economical one, and *not* that you have to pull yourselves up by your bootstraps, although certainly in Ford's case, you'd be hard pressed to find a better example of just that. I also limited the examples for purposes of brevity, there were certainly other examples available, such as the Japanese manufacturer's entry into the American market (more a matter of timing with the oil embargo leading to success), or Hyundai's own story, where the cars started out being so poorly perceived it took an incredible amount of time for it to rise above that to become the brand they are now.
As to Ford's history, he started as a farmer, became a machinist, and yes, Cadillac did come out of his original company. You conveniently left out that he was the chief engineer in that company, and that he left it with in a year. I think it disingenuous to suggest he made some huge fortune in one year as an engineer in which to start producing economical cars, so I hope that is not what you were implying.
If you took the time to thoroughly read that Wikipedia Ford entry, you will I think find out that almost from the start, his goal was designing an inexpensive automobile, and what allowed that was not some vast previously acquired fortune from racing, but backing by other investors. All of the mentioned letter cars preceding the T were exactly that, attempts to perfect that type of car. The end result, as Wikipedia says, "The car was very simple to drive, and easy and cheap to repair. It was so cheap at $825 in 1908 ($26,870 today), with the price falling every year, that by the 1920s, a majority of American drivers had learned to drive on the Model T."
Your version of VW's history is very accurate, however, I again was not talking about people who pulled themselves up by their bootstraps, I was merely pointing out that cars don't have to start off expensive to provide the continuation of the line into something VERY impressive.
It could be well argued that the success of the VW Beetle came literally as a result of the failure of Germany to win that war, or of the dismantling and taking over of the company by the British, however, that would be glossing over a LARGE part of the success and rise of the Beetle prior to the end of the war. Stating that the Beetle was subsidized by the government matters I think far less, or rather, certainly sounds strikingly like what most governments are currently doing for the very type of car we are discussing here, electric cars.
I would add, I would rather they subsidize that than keep pouring subsidies into oil companies, but that is a whole other discussion.
Again, I think if you (dispassionately) go back and look throughout history, you'll find some of the largest car companies around achieved that level of success from selling comparatively lesser priced vehicles. I am not necessarily saying 'poor quality' or 'throw away' vehicles, and maybe not 'superior to all around' vehicles, but definitely value for the money spent vehicles. Toyota, Honda, Mazda, Subaru all followed that model. The Chinese are continuing to follow that model, and when they hit these shores (where ever your shores are), I am sure you will see a very poignant example of what I am pointing out here.
Be well, and enjoy the holidays (should you celebrate them, if not, enjoy the days period ) 😁
I appreciate the comment, but it's really not fair to make those comparisons. Starting a company in the US today is nothing like starting one in 1910 and the same goes for 1930 Germany. The cost of bringing a vehicle to market because of regulations is staggering, and costs multiple billions of dollars. I have discussed this with many automotive industry experts - those working in the field their whole lives and they all say the same thing. Elon spoke about this at great length also years ago and said it's impossible to start a company today if you don't start out with a high-end expensive vehicle. I defer to the people that are in the industry and those that have actually done it, rather than what I might think makes sense. 🙂 @@bogess1738
Good morning@@StateOfChargeWithTomMoloughney , I'd say if I had only pointed to Ford and VW, or hadn't already pointed out the very same point about those might not be applicable for (reasons), that what your 'experts' say might be more overwhelming.
Of course, I did already say those things, and then went on to list a lot of other examples well post all the wars and into modern times (Hyundai started making itself known with the car produced as the Ford Cortina in '68, they didn't start off with a version of a Rolls Royce). Also noted was the Nissan Leaf, an electric car made to be profitable from close to day one as Nissan then (as now) was in a fairly precarious state as a company.
Again, what I am saying is no knock on you personally, or on Mr. Rawlinson (whom I hold in no small amount of respect), or even on Lucid (either as a company or as a vehicle) as I appreciate both for what they are.
However, with the number of examples even in today's wicked startup atmosphere of cars being started at less than current mainstream manufacturer's are selling known brands at, I'd say those same experts are either misguided or suggesting the (perceived) 'easy' way out. Yes you would need billions to start a car company, that is true. and Yes it would take billions to bring it to a model ready for market.
The people providing those billions are not you, personally, unless your the owner of Vinfast (who could be pointed to as ANOTHER example of my point), but by investors (such as the 13 investors Lucid currently is working with). Would they like to see a profit instead of a continuing pouring out of money? I'm sure they would, and while I understand the way Lucid is going about it, it is *not* the only way, just as there is no one way to tie shoes, make spaghetti, or (other silly statement to shock a point home).
As shown here and in previous statements, there are just too many examples of it even today for it to be said and taken in any serious context. However, all of this is only an opinion (not just mine, but I do align with it). I'm glad you took it as it was meant, and I certainly understand the reasoning behind yours despite not agreeing with it.
Be well and have the best of Holiday weeks 🥳
Technologically Lucid is by far the most inovative US EV startup. It's such a shame they might be driven (by hostile capital,.... Musk etc) to forced takeover/filling for CH11 before they can trickle down this tech to high volume models... you can see on Peter's face the amount of stress he's under. The arab capital is not happy with the stock price...
How about mirrors folding into the doors on highways, would it be better option compared to Cybertruck manualy removing them, would it be worth at least like a option in some countries
For now, the mirrors are a legal requirement in the US. I haven't driven a Cybertruck and don't know if I ever will, but I can say that the Air has the blind spot camera displays more intelligently placed than Tesla does on earlier cars. I still use the side mirrors on occasion but could probably do fine without them. And they do have the blind spot indicator, which Tesla stubbornly leaves out. That information is available on the screen, but after nine years, I still haven't gotten accustomed to that to the point that I like it. Another advantage of mirrors is that if I want to take a quick glance when my turn signal isn't on, I can. I don't think that I'd want the side view cameras displayed at all times.
Lucid has the right idea they are just late to the game. Being late to this sea change they seem to be expensive, slow and problamatic
I hope Lucid offers a solid roof option. For some an all glass roof is a deal breaker. I have begun to hate it in both my model 3 and my Mach e. The after market shade helps but I would rather I had a solid roof option.
Lucid offers a metal roof on the Air for all trims except the Grand Touring. I haven't driven a Mach e but I'm curious why you find it a problem in the Model 3.
@@bW9taeH4rear passengers complain about the heat and brightness when the sun is overhead
@@irfanhusein1445 I've found Tesla's air conditioning to be better than in any other cars I've had. I've driven a Model S in temperatures in the triple digits without realizing it until I got out of the car and felt how hot it was. I'm not saying that your experiences aren't real, but I find it surprising. I did have a Model 3 and never had that problem. I haven't had a Lucid long enough to see how it will be in the summer.
@@bW9taeH4 I purchased a roof shade form Tasmanian to put up in the summer months. The fact that Tasmanian make these shades for both the Mach e and the model 3 tells mr I’m not the only one with this concern
Lucid👍👍👍
Is GRAVITY working against LCID? , serious question, your input much appreciated! i wànted to buy @ IPO..🤔 Bought TSLA instead,must sày Peter is a brilliânt and smart guy, just think he is with the wrong company.
He was with the wrong company. He no longer is.
@@bW9taeH4 Question s will LUCID become a successful company, Saudi PIF unlimited?
Depth of technology but please don’t sacrifice “looks.”
If Range Rover makes an EV, it’s over. By far, one of the most beautiful machines on the road.
They have opened their waiting list for their Range Rover electric.
look like a mini van...:)
Yes, I agree - except it doesn't have sliding doors
@@StateOfChargeWithTomMoloughney Sliding doors can be quite practical. But then it ends up in a class that's being derided for no other reason than a conception of what a minivan is. I've had minivans and they were practical when I had three young kids. They drove like midsize non-performance sedans, which wasn't terrible. There's no way that the Gravity will be like a minivan, except in the practical sense, which is not a negative. And on the inside it won't feel like one at all.
Prototype is easy, production is not. People don’t see that the production line is THE product itself.
Low in the back, also great for dogs :-)
Nice Car/SUV. @ $80K STARTING PRICE. Ha Ha Ha Ha........ Unless I win the Lottery, I'll NEVER be able to afford One EVER!!! NEVER!!! Just Simply don't have that kind of $$$$$$ Just Laying around, And I Ain't got no way to Charge the Unit!
It’s a pity this wasn’t their first vehicle…
It’s not really an SUV…. More of a minivan or station wagon. Still pretty awesome IF it can go into production with those specs
Station wagons aren't really station wagons, if you go back to the days when they took people and cargo to and from train stations. They were practical, but eventually sexism made their "mom's car" image undesirable. Then Iacocca took the macho image of a van and created the more macho minivan, but over time, people began seeing that as a soccer mom's car as if there's something wrong with that. Then people moved to SUVs even though most people didn't need something for off road that drove like a truck. So crossovers came along. It all comes down to what's practical, meets a person's needs, has the desired performance and features, etc. And this does that for a lot of people. Getting hung up on definitions where they don't apply isn't helpful. Since EVs have separate power trains in front and back, the idea of a traditional SUV body and suspension isn't relevant. If it's marketed as an SUV and it meets people's needs better, it should do well.
Ironically, it's closer to the original notion of a station wagon than what modern station wagons are, and I don't mean that as a bad thing. But calling it that isn't a good thing in today's market.
Close, but SUVs were a way for manufacturers to get around the EPA mandates for efficiency. By putting a car/station wagon on a truck frame they bypassed car requirements and instead got much less restrictive truck regulations.
It’s not an SUV. It’s probably not even a crossover.
It’s a minivan with a low profile and low loading decks front and back per the CEO… the only people that don’t want to call it a minivan are the ones that have negative image of them…
If all else fails, just use your eyes. It does not look like any SUV but looks like every minivan.
Rivian’s efficiency is embarrassing!
no matter what he says, losing $300,000 per car on a $120,000 car that is full of quality issues is a formula to go bankrupt. Building a factory in saudi arabia where there is no ecosystem nor engineering talent, is a sure way to accelerate that demise.
We are on our second Tesla -- a 2021 Model S Plaid -- as well as owning an early-production Lucid Air Dream Edition (No. 154). Outside of software issues, the Model S was delivered with more quality issues than the Lucid Air, and dealing with Tesla service is a bear. (The Lucid software issues have largely disappeared with the OTA updates following UX 2.0, and the control suite combo of buttons and screens in the Lucid is now something we prefer over the Tesla.). Right now we're trying to get a replacement for the Model S yoke that has lost a sizable plug of its cover on the upper left corner (a widespread issue), and Tesla is saying they are not available right now and that we should check again "sometime" in 2024.
@@blakespringpasturemortimer9168 Tesla's support used to be at that level, but they got overwhelmed once the Model 3 came out. Even before that, they were slipping not in terms of quality of service but in terms of being able to get through to them on the phone. Tesla does manage to have good mobile service. So far, things have been good with Lucid service.
Usually your shows are so crystal clear however this episode had too much ambient noise and it was hard to follow your show about the Gravity.
I have lost so much money on lucid stock...but Peter has gained gazillion of dollars...shame on you peter
The next Tesla is TSLA
내 주가는 언제나 오르려나 . .😢
Looks like a station wagon. I’ll stick to my model X
My Model X looks like a blob fish
Model x is ugly af
The model x looks like an egg
I'm curious. Where do your second-row passengers rest their inboard arms? Did you buy the aftermarket strap-on armrest from EVannex? A $100,000 SUV without armrests is something of an ergonomic joke.
@@CK-1000 a Faberge egg
Only more efficient than the Model X Dual Motor because the X uses an induction motor in front.
Beautiful SUV great job!
You should have asked him if they are going to develop a charging network. This is what these companies needs to do instead of milking it from Tesla.
Nobody is "milking" anything from Tesla. Tesla will receive significant revenue from NACS users as well as other benefits by opening up its network under the terms of the federal infrastructure act.
@@blakespringpasturemortimer9168 why are they waiting so long to manufacture these cars with NACS plugs who wants to use an adapter that’s pretty lame and put it in the taillight instead of an ugly fender door
@@Anthony__420 The Gravity will almost certainly have a NACS plug, and Airs probably also will down the road. But the first order of business is to bring the 924-volt architecture of the Air and its Wunderbox circuitry into compatibility with Tesla's aging charging architecture that was premised on 400-volt cars.
In real-world driving at highway speeds, our Lucid Air Dream Edition gets about 100 miles more range than our Model S Plaid. So we can cross Florida from Naples to Miami, spend an afternoon driving around, and get back on a single charge in the Air but not in the Plaid (both on 21" wheels). And on longer road trips, there have been vanishingly few times where it would have been more convenient to use a Tesla supercharger more frequently than a CCS charger less frequently. Personally, I'm a lot more interested in seeing the CCS network cleaned up (which is finally starting to happen) than in getting access to the Tesla network.
@@Anthony__420 They designed the vehicle long before Tesla opened up its standard and before anybody else but Tesla was using NACS. If they switched to NACS today, it would leave people with new cars and no high speed charging network. I can charge an Air GT and add as much as 200 miles of range in 12 minutes at a CCS charger, but it would take over an hour at a Supercharger. Tesla needs to get V4 chargers in place and all other companies need to add NACS before it's practical for drivers of non-Teslas to have NACS ports. In the meantime, Tesla's cables are too short and their voltage is too low.
As for adapters, I expect Tesla to have magic docks built into all Superchargers that are suitable for a Lucid, so an adapter will rarely be needed. It's unlikely that other charging companies will replace CCS cables and more likely that they will add NACS cables to the same chargers. So decades from now, when it's long past when CCS ports were being put on cars, we'll see a need for adapters for old EVs, when it's no longer practical to put CCS plugs on chargers.
Relentless Innovation. Not just another copy of the same Ol Recipe. I really like the improvements and potential. #greatinterview 23:05
LET'S GOOOOOOOOOO LUCID🏁 FAMILY ❤WOOHOO! KEEP ADDING ON TO YOUR LUCID POSITIONS EVERYONE STAY FOCUSED AND DISCIPLINE HARD WORK DEDICATION TOGETHER AS ONE LUCID FAMILY GOONIES NEVER SAY DIE!🙋♂️♥️🫡🥳🥳🥳🥳🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🕺🕺🕺😉👍
This is an awesomely designed SUV. The more I learn about LUCID and the development that goes into each component makes me
realize how advanced this company truly is.
Keep up the great work!!!
At 11:09 we overhear Peter Rawlinson mentioning the name of the next, mid-size vehicle Lucid is developing, the "Earth", sporting the same, even more efficient drive units than "Air's", that will power "Gravity"!
I didn't catch that - I think you're right
Quite an interview catch, nice work Tom!
The formula of starting with an expensive high end EV and then using profit from its sales to finance a mass market affordable EV worked for Tesla because it had no other competition at the time. However, this formula may no longer be effective given all the competition following the same formula. Now we have Tesla, Lucid, BMW, Mercedes, Audi, Porsche, Volvo, Polestar, Cadillac and Rivian all fighting it out in the high end EV market. Even Tesla's Model S and X sales have fallen significantly from their peaks. Lucid has a huge uphill battle in front of it to positive cash flow for the Lucid Air and Gravity.
Rawlinson did it bass ackwards. A $50-60k car or SUV would’ve been a sweet spot.
@@alexnutcasio936 That would have bankrupted the company. The only way to profit with vehicles in that price range would be to sell in high volume, and no company is going to be able to start out selling 5000 cars per week when nobody heard of them before that. The way Lucid is doing it, they will produce a vehicle in that price range and it will be coming from a company that made award winning high end cars.
When you actually start looking at cars in person, you will find that cars that really go head to head with the Lucid air aren't there. The problem is that not a lot of people know about Lucid and they don't have a presence in many states. I still remember getting the "who makes Tesla?" question almost a decade ago. Now people know what Tesla is, and certainly know what Mercedes and BMW and most of those others are. More likely than not, if I mention that I have a Lucid, I get a confused reaction from people who don't know what it is. Those who do know are immediately impressed. I'm not trying to knock any of those companies. I still have My Model S and still think that Tesla makes good cars. But it all depends on what you are looking for.
@@bW9taeH4 Lucid must be very selective because they’re not selling very many. Production is a mess and they’ve missed every quarterly. Plus, except for Sapphire, the Air editions look like old man’s car. That’s the consensus.
@@bW9taeH4 no one has said it’s a bad car. I love the Sapphire as a Plaid killer, but their pricing for a niche brand, yet alone a niche BEV brand will kill the company long term. They’re better off making a little bit of money off a lot of people ( pyramid of buyers) than a lot of money off the few. It’s all about selling cars and Lucid is just not selling. Rawlinson comes from a brand(s) that sold few cars and has been bought and sold like a French whore. ( Lotus and Corus).
Great interview. Look forward to the next instalment.
Tom I'd love to hear Lucid's response on the record about what they plan to do about their 900V architecture Gravity charging on the NACS infrastructure. Obviously we know that the Air's Wunderbox can only output on the Magicdock equipped V3's. But the Gravity won't come out for 12+ months. I wonder if they have plans to upgrade the Wunderbox for 150kW charging on the older, sub 500V chargers.
Seems Tesla needs to upgrade their equipment. They seem to be stuck in 2017 mode for the most part. They are still installing v3 superchargers. Even the v4 superchargers are not set up at the moment for 800v charging. Other companies have the tech out there now and have been out there.
@@jackylsmith8138 name all those companies that have V4 chargers and where are these chargers for general public use?
@@jackylsmith8138 Tesla seems to be installing a handful of V4 chargers in North America with the same back end equipment. But I suppose that it will be easier to upgrade that part in the future if the chargers themselves can handle it.
For now, Tesla's V4 network is practically non-existent. The existing CCS infrastructure isn't adequate, but when it's working, it can charge a Lucid fast. I've yet to try it. The GT has enough range that any trip that I anticipate for a long time is unlikely to need a charging stop, especially if I stay at hotels with destination charging. There's a maximum number of hours that people want to drive in a given day. For those who insist on driving more, Lucid has it covered in theory by being able to add up to 200 miles of range in 12 minutes on the Air GT. But that assumes that there's capable equipment available and you aren't going to see it from Tesla for a while.
Design is absolutely beautiful.
Looking forward to the follow up video.
I just love these videos because of the direct questions asked to the CEO’s about the design and performance of the vehicle and the future manufacturing by someone who buys EV’s. If these interviews were on CNBC the world would be talking about them.
Great interview with Peter Rawlinson.
I beleave this vehicule is comming to the market TOO LATE .......
Didn't realize how inefficient the Rivian is. I imagine the Tesla Model Y is in the vicinity of the Gravity. The Kia EV9 isn't as efficient, but does seem more like a real SUV than these crossover types from Tesla, Mercedes, and Lucid.
Very interesting interview.
Peter u setting record for burning $ so fast ppl can t even realize what s happening......U are the worst ever Thank uuuuuuu
Several years of ‘talk’, his insanely high salary, and a stock price that has sank the entire time: tired of his bs.
Looking forward to seeing Gravity.
Awesome content as always, Tom! I love that you are getting these awesome 1:1 interviews. Keep up the great work!
🤔is it me or does Peter Rawlins eyes look like he just smoked a bowl?
Great interview. Speaks volume about your reputation that Peter spent all this time with you!
Don't be surprised if the Kia EV9 costs in the mid $70k after dealership mark-ups and trim level plus no US EV tax credit. A base Gravity after the EV tax credit makes it very competitive. Lucid is doing a fantastic job and with interest rates going down next year, maybe they will finally be able to move towards profitability.
0.24 coefficient of drag!!! That is amazing achievement for an SUV.
I like the way Lucids looks. Its sleek, minimalistic, clean lines, cozy and warm interior. Then the range, impressive. I wish them all the best.
If they can make that base model compelling enough with the tax credit they could move quite a few of them if the product is truly desirable.
Thank you Tom for such unbiased content. Keep them coming.
I think lucid is missing a huge critical point in design, the design should be more bold . I'd rather have a hummer ev or rivian r1s over this one. The design looks like a van which is not a good thing. Look at the rivian r1s and compare it to this one. Space, efficiency,tech doesn't compensate for bold design
I think it’s just efficiency. Low to the ground (air suspension helps) and 🥚 shapes. I agree the hummer and RIVIAN are more my style, but you won’t get the +3mi/KWh that Lucid or Model X can do. However, these probably can go off road like RIVIAN or Hummer can do.
I have nothing at all against Rivian and think that they are doing a great job. Some people will prefer them, and there's nothing wrong with that. Others will prefer the Lucid. If Lucid had gone more in the direction of Rivian, that wouldn't leave consumers with much choice and variety. For some people, not only do those things more than compensate, they spend almost all their time with the car on the inside of it. How it looks to others isn't everybody's biggest concern.
Tom, thanks for interview. Peter really likes you - I think that's why he wanted to spend time with you. Nice job! I would like to see the ~$40k Lucid in a few years.
Thank You for All that you are doing for our Planet Earth.... Peace.. Shalom.. Salam.. Namaste.. 🙏🏻 😊 🌈 ✌ ☮ ❤
Awesome!! Great interview as always. Gravity will be the best full size SUV ever. People just don’t understand how important range & efficiency is. Our Lucid Air GT with 500+ range is incredible. It just goes and goes! I never DC fast charge. Cheers!
Will Lucid lose 400,000$ on every GRAVITY sold? 😢
They don’t lose money on cars. If a company sells 1000 cars, and also spends a billion on new factories, if you divide total spend by number of cars sold, it looks like they’ve lost money per car. In reality that’s not the case. Tesla went through this for 10+ years
Of course. Anyone that know the industry understands that.@@pravinpravin9936
@@pravinpravin9936 People made the same argument with Tesla, as if every solar panel or roof tile they made was part of the cost of making each car. Some of the expenses are related to current production. Others are not. Fixed costs divided by vehicles are going to be too high when volume is low. But expenses related to the Gravity or anything on the drawing board for the future are not part of the cost of building an Air. So dividing the total loss by the number of cars made and acting as if that's the loss per vehicle is far off base. Software costs are going to be higher now, but when they are selling in volume, those costs don't rise with production volume. If they were losing that much per vehicle, then losses would increase proportionally as sales increased.
Yes crazy model x came out a decade ago now
Thats screen in front of the steering wheel is really looking awful
Lucid should only come up with a 17 Inch central screen like a tesla
Audio needs filtering to remove really loud white noise in the background