But it does matter for CCS charging, since they are limited to 500A, if I recall correctly. So with a 400v pack you are limited to a charge rate of 200kW regardless of what the C rating is. (You have to have at least a 700v pack to get 350kW.)
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
All discussion of Lucid Motors
- Thread starter Right_Said_Fred
- Start date
Unless the EPA ratings are to be ignored for purposes of comparing the two cars, at the end of the day, the Lucid Air is more efficient than the Tesla Model S.
The EPA rates the range of the Air Grand Touring at 516 miles with a 112-kWh battery pack. No matter whether the Tesla's undisclosed pack capacity is slightly below or above the commonly cited figure of 100 kWh, that does not close the gap between 516 miles and 405 miles of rated range of the Model S LR.
Also, when comparing the highest-performance models of the two brands -- the Plaid with 21" wheels and the Dream Performance with 21" wheels -- the EPA found the Plaid consumed 33 kWh in 100 miles, while the Air consumed 30 kWh for those same 100 test miles. 30 kWh is 30 kWh hours, no matter what the capacity of the pack in which it is stored. (And this greater efficiency is despite the fact that the Air has 91 more horsepower and weighs several hundred pounds more than the Plaid.)
Yes, it's interesting to debate how Lucid got to those efficiencies, but it doesn't change the fact that they did. Yet so much of what I see on the internet since the Lucid EPA ratings were released revolves around claims that Lucid is lying about pack capacity; or the tests were somehow rigged; or there must be something shady afoot, because no one can possibly outdo Tesla at anything, big or small, now or ever; ad nauseum.
Frankly, it slightly embarrasses me as a proud two-time Tesla owner. Tesla makes great cars, and Elon Musk will go down in the history books as one of the most important figures in automotive history. However, the cars are not made by God Almighty Himself.
The EPA rates the range of the Air Grand Touring at 516 miles with a 112-kWh battery pack. No matter whether the Tesla's undisclosed pack capacity is slightly below or above the commonly cited figure of 100 kWh, that does not close the gap between 516 miles and 405 miles of rated range of the Model S LR.
Also, when comparing the highest-performance models of the two brands -- the Plaid with 21" wheels and the Dream Performance with 21" wheels -- the EPA found the Plaid consumed 33 kWh in 100 miles, while the Air consumed 30 kWh for those same 100 test miles. 30 kWh is 30 kWh hours, no matter what the capacity of the pack in which it is stored. (And this greater efficiency is despite the fact that the Air has 91 more horsepower and weighs several hundred pounds more than the Plaid.)
Yes, it's interesting to debate how Lucid got to those efficiencies, but it doesn't change the fact that they did. Yet so much of what I see on the internet since the Lucid EPA ratings were released revolves around claims that Lucid is lying about pack capacity; or the tests were somehow rigged; or there must be something shady afoot, because no one can possibly outdo Tesla at anything, big or small, now or ever; ad nauseum.
Frankly, it slightly embarrasses me as a proud two-time Tesla owner. Tesla makes great cars, and Elon Musk will go down in the history books as one of the most important figures in automotive history. However, the cars are not made by God Almighty Himself.
I would say mainly that the car is smaller so it has less aero drag. But I don't think really explains the city efficiency. So there is something else going on as well.
What I find most interesting is that the Lucid is reported as being more efficient on the highway than in the city. (Are there any other EVs like that?)
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
It's hard to know what. Both cars claim identical Cd figures (Lucid recently revised its figure to the same .0208 that Tesla claims), but frontal surfaces are different. The Lucid is fractionally narrower than the Tesla but a full 1.4" lower. However, it's not clear what the suspension height setting is on the Tesla to yield that measure. And, as the Lucid doesn't have an adjustable-height suspension, it might be fixed at a slightly higher point in order to allow clearance of obstructions. Also, the Lucid tires are narrower, at least on the 21" wheels, by 20mm in front and 30mm in the rear.
The Porsche Taycan roundly beats its EPA ratings in highway driving, often attributed to its two-speed transmission. However, I don't know how its actual efficiency compares between city and highway.
Doggydogworld
Active Member
137 kWh to charge a 118 kWh pack is 13.9% charging loss. That's slightly less loss than 116 kWh to charge new Model S 99.8 kWh (your number) pack.
118 kWh for new Samsung SDI cells vs. 112 kWh for older generation LG Chem cells fits with the improvements from the latest generation of active electrode powders, separators, etc. These same improvements recently enabled Panasonic to improve energy density ~5%. (Carmakers love to claim/imply they "worked with the battery maker to create a special new chemistry", but that's just marketing fluff).
Yes, 200 kW in theory and even less in practice. A 400V nominal pack is closer to 350V at low SOC, so 500A limits you to ~175 kW early on. Charging power then increases as SOC and pack voltage climb, but then taper kicks in so you never get much above 180 kW.
Model S had higher highway MPGE than city for years.
Nope, you have your math wrong. 118 kWh + 13.9% (16.4kWh) is only 134.4 kWh.
Doggydogworld
Active Member
With your math a charger that used 105 kWh to charge a 50 kWh battery would have charging losses of 110%, lol.
Of 137 kWh provided 118 kWh goes into the battery and 19 kWh is lost. 19 / 137 = 13.9% charging loss. The exact same math applied to your 116 kWh for a 99.8 kWh Model S battery is 14% charging loss. Doing it your way would be a 16.2% loss for Model S, higher than what you claimed.
Also the Lucid has 6600 2170s. 3/Y LR have 4416. At 18 Wh per cell that 118.8 kWh for Lucid and 79.5 kWh for 3/Y.
Lucid and Samsung announced their battery cell deal almost five years ago, in December 2016. At the time, the press releases put more of an emphasis on repeated fast charging than power density, saying:
"Significantly, this jointly developed cell achieves breakthrough tolerance to repeated fast charging."
"Samsung SDI combined their in-house chemistry expertise with massive real-world datasets and state-of-the-art battery models provided by Lucid to develop a cell that is both energy dense and resistant to damage associated with fast charging."
"The breakthrough battery life demonstrated by the new cell from Samsung SDI will be of tangible benefit to our customers, particularly companies with ride-sharing services operating around the clock."
I'm wondering if the Samsung batteries they are using today are different from the batteries referred to above. At the time all the verbiage about cell life and resistance to fast charging damage made me wonder if they were doing something with graphite or even graphene balls, but I never heard any more of it.
Did LG Chem's cell chemistry catch up in the intervening five years to whatever Samsung was doing on the cell life front at the time Lucid signed up with Samsung? And why would a 6600-cell battery pack with Samsung 21700 cells have 6 kWh more capacity than the same size pack with LG Chem 21700 cells? Would one expect to see that much difference in power density between the same form factor from the two brands?
These aren't rhetorical questions. I'm curious but really have no idea what might be going on here.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Different cell chemistry could easily explain the difference. That's why Tesla uses NCA while most others use NMC.
Is there any information out there about how cell life under fast charging varies for 21700 cells across the brands or chemistries?
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Probably nothing up to date, chemistries get tweaked with additives and a cell produced a year ago my behave differently than one produced today.
RobStark
Well-Known Member
I think it would be highly likely you can get a Samsung cell that performs much better than an equivalent form factor cell from LG. For proportionately more money or bigger premium.
Obviously they don't cost the same or almost the same. If they did then Lucid would use the better Samsung cell on all their vehicles.
Italian firm Automobili Estrema has revealed the Fulminea, an all-electric hypercar with a power output of 1.5 megawatts, equal to 2040bhp using solid state cells. These will be the equivalent of hand made or lab made cells. And the car will cost ~$2.8M.
Obviously they don't cost the same or almost the same. If they did then Lucid would use the better Samsung cell on all their vehicles.
Italian firm Automobili Estrema has revealed the Fulminea, an all-electric hypercar with a power output of 1.5 megawatts, equal to 2040bhp using solid state cells. These will be the equivalent of hand made or lab made cells. And the car will cost ~$2.8M.
Doggydogworld
Active Member
I think you mean energy density. Energy density is how many kWhs you can store in a given size pack. Power density is how fast you can pump charge into or pull it out of that pack.
Energy ==> kWhs ==> range
Power ==> kWs ==> fast charging/1111 hp
The 2016 deal sounds like it drew off Lucid's work with Formula E, where high power is very important. They thought they could translate that experience into a consumer vehicle that could charge very rapidly without damaging the cells as usually happens. They haven't really demonstrated fast charging on the Air yet, so the jury is still out. And as is often the case, the rest of the industry kept getting better while Lucid/Samsung SDI were trying to get their 'breakthrough' to work.
Battery vendors can, within limits, trade off one metric for another. The last minute split of the Dream Edition into R and P variants suggests they use two different variants of the latest cell, one tweaked to favor energy density and the other for power density.
RobStark
Well-Known Member
Lucid DreamDrive ADAS Introduces First Automotive LIDAR In The US
Lucid Group' DreamDrive ADAS platform offers more than 30 features, including collision avoidance, Highway Assist, Traffic Jam assist, and Auto Park.
insideevs.com
RobStark
Well-Known Member
Kyle's thoughts comparing and contrasting Model S, EQS, Taycan Cross Turismo, and Air
Model S the techy Muscle Car.
EQS the Luxury Car.
Taycan the Sports Car.
Air the Grand Tourer that is "perhaps the best blend of the three." Almost as quick as Plaid, almost as luxurious as EQS when suspension set on soft/luxury, almost the sports car handling of Taycan when suspension set on stiff/sport. Biggest unknowns with long term reliability, resale value, and charging curve. And long term viability of Lucid Motors itself.
Kyle has an unconfirmed order on Taycan Cross Turismo but may cancel. May get a Rivian. Says if he was over 50 and lived in South Florida he would get the Air.
Model S the techy Muscle Car.
EQS the Luxury Car.
Taycan the Sports Car.
Air the Grand Tourer that is "perhaps the best blend of the three." Almost as quick as Plaid, almost as luxurious as EQS when suspension set on soft/luxury, almost the sports car handling of Taycan when suspension set on stiff/sport. Biggest unknowns with long term reliability, resale value, and charging curve. And long term viability of Lucid Motors itself.
Kyle has an unconfirmed order on Taycan Cross Turismo but may cancel. May get a Rivian. Says if he was over 50 and lived in South Florida he would get the Air.
RobStark
Well-Known Member
RobStark
Well-Known Member
Road & Track tours Lucid's factory.
www.roadandtrack.com
How Lucid Plans to Avoid Tesla's Quality Control Pitfalls
Lucid's brand-new Arizona factory is filled with cutting-edge tech and staffed with car-production veterans in an attempt to avoid "production hell."
www.roadandtrack.com
:Similar threads
- Marketplace listing