Blog Cadillac Introduces Luxury Electric SUV

The Cadillac LYRIC electric luxury crossover was debuted by the automaker Thursday.

The LYRIQ is based on GM’s next-generation, modular electric vehicle platform, expected to offer “beyond 300 miles of range on a full charge,” according to a release. The vehicle will be offered in rear-wheel drive and performance all-wheel drive configurations.

The LYRIQ is expected to go on sale late in 2022. Cadillac is calling the vehicle it debuted a “show car,” which suggests the production version will not be the same.

“Led by LYRIQ, Cadillac will redefine American luxury over the next decade with a new portfolio of transformative EVs,” Steve Carlisle, executive vice president and president, GM North America said in a release. “We will deliver experiences that engage the senses, anticipate desires and enable our customers to go on extraordinary journeys.”

The LYRIQ is powered by GM’s new Ultium battery system, which offers “approximately 100 kilowatt-hours,” according to a release. LYRIQ offers DC fast charging at rates over 150 kW.

A unique feature of the interior is a 33-inch-diagonal LED screen that spans the viewing area for the driver and incorporates driver information details, infotainment controls and camera views. GM says the new display has the highest pixel density available in the automotive industry.

Check out Cadillac’s livestream of the unveiling above.

 

[vegas888]

Lol Any Tesla looks like a toy comparing this. This will be game changer in EV industry. Tesla can continue with boring interior for 6 more months but thats it.

 

[vegas888]

This means we are going to see HUD in new Tesla vehicles in next 5 years. Amazing how technology is advancing fast. HUD will be new advantage for Tesla, we just need 5 more years for Elon to make it. Teslas future is bright

 

[Zorg]

NOT kWh. kW

The significance is simple. You can cut the charging time to almost half.
You can have the car waiting for you rather than waiting for the car.

Actually, with current battery technology, this is not true at all. The 250KW charging power is a bit of a gimmick as it only occurs for a very brief period and then tapers down very quickly. Fact is that it's very hard to charge batteries at faster than 1C on average, which is why it's close to an hour to go from nearly empty to 100%. So, unless we have new batteries in the next couple years that can somehow take over 2C of charging current for long periods of time, 150KW is perfectly fine and will not be materially slower than your 250KW Tesla peak charging power.

 

[75Shappyt]

I feel sorry for GM, there trying, but that Caddy will not work, Like my dad would say, (All Flash, But No Cash)

 

[MichaelP90DL]

Cool looking car. I wonder how well it will sell. Anyway, I'm sticking with Tesla.

 

[Saghost]

Actually, with current battery technology, this is not true at all. The 250KW charging power is a bit of a gimmick as it only occurs for a very brief period and then tapers down very quickly. Fact is that it's very hard to charge batteries at faster than 1C on average, which is why it's close to an hour to go from nearly empty to 100%. So, unless we have new batteries in the next couple years that can somehow take over 2C of charging current for long periods of time, 150KW is perfectly fine and will not be materially slower than your 250KW Tesla peak charging power.

All about the chosen design and chemistry compromises. There’s nothing inherently magical about 1C charge rates - there are chemistries in production today that are perfectly happy doing 5 or 10C every day, like the Lithium Titanate ones used in some of the California buses.

But the energy density and cost per kWh suck compared with the ones Tesla is using. So that particular choice isn’t right for Tesla.

I think it is reasonable to expect faster charging rates going forward as more money gets poured into battery research.

 

[Zorg]

All about the chosen design and chemistry compromises. There’s nothing inherently magical about 1C charge rates - there are chemistries in production today that are perfectly happy doing 5 or 10C every day, like the Lithium Titanate ones used in some of the California buses.

But the energy density and cost per kWh suck compared with the ones Tesla is using. So that particular choice isn’t right for Tesla.

I think it is reasonable to expect faster charging rates going forward as more money gets poured into battery research.

Indeed, but we have a long ways to go before 250KW peak charging rate is significantly faster than 150KW peak rate on a 100KWh battery. Now that 250KW gonna come in real handy on the 200KWh CT battery.

 

[SageBrush]

Actually, with current battery technology, this is not true at all. The 250KW charging power is a bit of a gimmick as it only occurs for a very brief period and then tapers down very quickly. Fact is that it's very hard to charge batteries at faster than 1C on average, which is why it's close to an hour to go from nearly empty to 100%. So, unless we have new batteries in the next couple years that can somehow take over 2C of charging current for long periods of time, 150KW is perfectly fine and will not be materially slower than your 250KW Tesla peak charging power.

You are presuming a 0 -> 100% SoC charge but that is not required or even preferred. I can average ~ 200 kW in my Model 3 LR over the bottom-ish 30% of its SoC. No gimmick there, and extremely useful. It gives me the needed flexibility to almost never wait for my car to charge up to the amount I want.

 

[Zorg]

You are presuming a 0 -> 100% SoC charge but that is not required or even preferred. I can average ~ 200 kW in my Model 3 LR over the bottom-ish 30% of its SoC. No gimmick there, and extremely useful. It gives me the needed flexibility to almost never wait for my car to charge up to the amount I want.

No, I was not. I'm only highlighting that the average charging speed from 0 to 100% is about 1C in current electric cars. Conversely, you're assuming that everyone is interested in charging speed from low single digit SOC to 30%. For most users that charge from say 20 to 80% (or thereabout), the 250KW peak charging rate is marginally faster than 150KW. It's even more so true in an S or X. Now, hopefully the next 2 years will bring about all kinds of wonderful advances in the world of batteries and higher sustained charging rates will become the norm. Until then, 150 vs 250KW peak charging doesn't materially impact charging speed for the average user.

 

[msm859]

No, I was not. I'm only highlighting that the average charging speed from 0 to 100% is about 1C in current electric cars. Conversely, you're assuming that everyone is interested in charging speed from low single digit SOC to 30%. For most users that charge from say 20 to 80% (or thereabout), the 250KW peak charging rate is marginally faster than 150KW. It's even more so true in an S or X. Now, hopefully the next 2 years will bring about all kinds of wonderful advances in the world of batteries and higher sustained charging rates will become the norm. Until then, 150 vs 250KW peak charging doesn't materially impact charging speed for the average user.

Except your analysis assumes that the 150kw "peak" on the Cadillac will not drop off like the peak with the 250kw charger. "peaks" are nice to talk about but it is the more sustained or perhaps average charge rate that matters more. I would hope if the peak is 250kw it will also have a higher sustained charging rate than a care that peaks at 150kw.

 

[Zorg]

Except your analysis assumes that the 150kw "peak" on the Cadillac will not drop off like the peak with the 250kw charger. "peaks" are nice to talk about but it is the more sustained or perhaps average charge rate that matters more. I would hope if the peak is 250kw it will also have a higher sustained charging rate than a care that peaks at 150kw.

If Cadillac cells work like Tesla, a 150KW peak will last longer than a 250KW peak. In a model X (and I assume S), the current 200-250KW peak lasts exactly 10 seconds.

For clarity, I think that 250KW peak charging rate is awesome, however, I also don't think that it's a game changer vs 150KW charging rate on current size batteries and with the current battery technology.

 

[SageBrush]

I'm only highlighting that the average charging speed from 0 to 100% is about 1C in current electric cars.

Sure, and I'm saying that the current peak V3 Supercharging has a very useful application outside of 0 to 100% SoC charging scenario

 

[RubberToe]

Interesting take from several of you. Polarized like a permanent magnet motor. In the absence of facts as none were provided such as cost or battery innovation, this is merely a discussion of emotion and a function how people are invested in the markets.

Not quite an absence of facts. GM produced the EV1 (crunched), Volt (discontinued), ELR (more spent on advertising than vehicle revenue), Bolt (don't get me started). Now something new is being proposed a couple years from now.

I used to bet the horses a lot. People study the past performance, cause past performance is often a good indicator of future performance. A horse that finishes last in 4 straight races isn't going to win the Kentucky Derby in the next race. That's GM.

RT

 

[SageBrush]

Bolt (don't get me started)

Actually, I'm curious

 

[tonybelding]

I wrote before in another thread, and don’t want to belabor the point(s) too much, but…

• They have nothing like Tesla’s Supercharger network.
• Super Cruise doesn’t work — at all — on the vast majority of roads.

To me those are serious shortcomings. A HUD and some walnut burl is not going to compensate for that. There will be more CCS stations built by the time Lyriq actually ships, and I’m sure GM will get more “compatible” highways mapped into the Super Cruise system by then, but that just brings us around to the point that Lyriq won’t be shipping for A While yet.

 

[75Shappyt]

Like I said earlier, Lyriq seems to be all Flash, and no cash.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

No, I was not. I'm only highlighting that the average charging speed from 0 to 100% is about 1C in current electric cars. Conversely, you're assuming that everyone is interested in charging speed from low single digit SOC to 30%. For most users that charge from say 20 to 80% (or thereabout), the 250KW peak charging rate is marginally faster than 150KW. It's even more so true in an S or X. Now, hopefully the next 2 years will bring about all kinds of wonderful advances in the world of batteries and higher sustained charging rates will become the norm. Until then, 150 vs 250KW peak charging doesn't materially impact charging speed for the average user.

Why assume 20% to 80%? Only Tesla would know that.
Fastest non-nerfed travel strategy is more like 5%/10%-70% (or less).
And anybody who charges at home would often be charging to just-enough-to-get-home%.

 

[SageBrush]

Why assume 20% to 80%?
Fastest non-nerfed travel strategy is more like 5%/10%-70% (or less).
And anybody who charges at home would often be charging to just-enough-to-get-home%.

Exactly. Or to the next destination type charging. That could be a meal, a hotel, home, a tourist spot ...

Most trips are not x-country cannon balls runs.

 

[SOULPEDL]

If anyone's still comparing GM Liriq, our 2018 Model 3 just charged to 306 mi last night for a road trip.

It's 2 yrs old, 20K mi odometer, Phx Az, 94 deg at time of photo (heat also degrades some, not just cold). I drive it very hard at times (more in the first year though), and is based on ave 70 mph freeway, and many short trips (affects the calculated range displayed).

I put GM at least 4 years behind Tesla in Range just on this fact alone (2022 GM - 2018 Tesla). These are facts, not projections.

To be fair, our Model 3 only had 310 mi new, but then Tesla gave more for free to 325 mi range on the LR RWD only. There is some flattening to the curve, but considering the heat in Arizona along with our driving style, I'm impressed, but not by GM.

 

[theganjaguru]

Oh no, another concept you cannot buy from GM. Sure is going to be a real Tesla killer. SELL YOUR TSLA STOCK NOW!