lucid becuase it may have less energy density but a better value compared to a tesla in luxury. The tesla may have more performance but lucid is a better realiable luxury vechile
Wonderful analysis. Never seen this depth analysis between lucid and Tesla. It’s seems lucid is tuned for aero efficiency but Tesla is tuned for overall metrics.
Good walk-through of the numbers. As a hypermiler I can attest to the huge impact tire compound, pressure, and alignment have on ultimate vehicle efficiency. It's the V^2 that gets most everyday drivers though. I was blown away by the EPA Lucid numbers and glad to see them confirmed by Tom Moloughney's real-world test. I ordered one but many tesla fans took a different approach and started spreading rumors that Lucid was somehow cheating. One well known Tesla aficionado even claimed Lucid had extra batteries hidden up in the fenders. I know, hard to imagine a car maker giving extra batteries for free and hiding that fact. Some people simply refuse to hear things they don't want to hear.
Engineer to Engineer! I very rarly write a positive review. That’s compliment in itself. Very balanced and unbiased. All the math checks out. Great job comparing it to EPA and backing up all you math. Net net: Lucid Car is more aerodynamic and hence delivers higher efficiency Tesla battery more efficient.
Good video. I believe the appropriate comparison would be the model s long range to the Lucid range as the model s long range has a comparable drive train with 2 motors vs the Plaid with 3 which has a weight and efficiency penalty. I would think this would make some difference in your calculations...great work
Nice analysis, as usual. It does make me wonder about comparing the Tesla Model S Plaid (which is the performance model) to the Lucid Dream Air Performance model, as opposed to the Range model. Of course most of the specs are the same. But tires and tuning are different, affecting performance and range capability.
Tesla model S wear out the inside of the rear tyres. When I looked into this issue it seemed that the rear tyre negative camber is set at about 2.5 degrees (not adjustable) and this apparently reduces the rolling resistance as the tyre as it is kind of running on the inside edge with a smaller contact patch. So the comparison between the tyre width for the Model S and the Lucid may need to take consideration of the suspension geometry to get a good representation for the comparison of the rolling resistance for the two vehicles.
Thank you for the v. interesting work. It gives some hints why the Lucid has better efficiency than Plaid - tires. But when I just substituted Lucid's Crr of 0.0085 in Plaid's power calculation it gives very interesting power requirement of 10.814 kW, which is slightly better than Lucid's 10.85 kW.
Interesting... It makes sense due to the 400-500 lbs of extra weight in the Lucid contributing to more rolling resistance. The increased aero efficiency almost makes up for it.
Am I correct that you are assuming the efficiency of conversion of potential energy in the battery to kinetic energy at the wheels is 80% for both the Tesla and Lucid? Is it possible that this efficiency is better for the Lucid, given lucid’s 900V battery architecture, as well as the other powertrain improvements Rawlinson has touted. Are Rawlinson’s claims true, or is the better efficiency of the Lucid really all about tires and aero?
Yes, I am operating under an 80% efficiency assumption in this video. I do believe the Lucid is slightly more efficient but it does not impact the overall efficiency equation much. Check out this post (www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/ja89w1/tesla_model_3_lr_performance_consumption/) which is helpful. It concludes that losses due to battery heat are only around 1% of total losses. From a physics perspective battery heat loss follows I^2R where I is current and R is resistance. My understanding is that with a 900V architecture, current (I) is much less because of the power equation Power = Current(I) x Voltage(V). So losses due to battery heat are inversely proportional to the voltage of the pack. So in conclusion you might see roughly 4/9 the heat loss in a 400V versus 900V system. BUT, that is only 1% of overall total loss. So that means the OVERALL efficiency difference is less than 0.5%. Note that this also varies with Power (Speed). Motor efficiency is hard to calculate for these cars, but the Lucid could have slightly higher motor efficiency. Again this will help, but will not have huge impacts on the overall numbers because efficiencies are already so high. So Rawlinson’s claims are probably true, but the impacts they have are exaggerated IMO. Great question and I'm curious to hear your thoughts on this.
Thanks for that- I’m not as savvy w/ the math as you, but I have felt for sometime that given such high efficiencies of electric powertrains, improving them further won’t make as much difference as improving aero/rolling resistance- it is nice to see that quantified as you have done. Thanks.
@@MotorMatchup No, no, no :). The heat in the battery is generated mostly in cells, not connectors. The cell current is the same in 400V and 800V as is the cell's voltage - depended on the state of charge and chemistry only. So, the heat in 400V and 800V battery is exactly the same, only the cell modules are connected in different blocks. The only real gain from 800V system is the lower current in the plug and the DC charger - these can be less robust. E.g. Ionity 350 kW 800V DC charger has only about 180 kW at 400V - much less than the 250 kW V3 SC. BTW - the new MSPlaid uses 450V system. Lucid uses 800V system. The 900 or 925V number is misleading - it is a peak voltage used in some Lucid's marketing BS. 800V is the nominal voltage according to EPA.
@@AndrewSienx Thanks for the insight. I've been deeper diving into battery tech/physics so it's definitely a learning curve. It makes more sense that cell current+voltage is what matters. I'm guessing the overall configuration of the cells is what's changing voltage the most? For example doubling the number of cells in series to double pack voltage? The cells themselves is what matters, not the configuration or quantity.
Well done. The good, the road load information is there in the US. Where can i find the road load (dynamometer efficiency) database entries you are talking about at min 1:12 (on epa.gov) ? I am trying to find it for an old Mercedes, the S124. The W124 was really good 30 years ago.
Yes Aptera is definitely more efficient as it weighs about a 1/3 of the Lucid. Aptera has not been tested by EPA and will not for awhile so the data is very limited.
Thanks! I just ran the numbers on the Model S LR... EPA Road Load Coefficients: (A=28.99,B=0.4592,C=0.0111). This means road load is 95 lbf and power is 11.5 kw at 60 mph. Plaid (same as video) with the same 19" wheels is 103 lbf and 12.2 kw at 60mph. I believe the cars have identical bodies so that difference is 100% due to the 200 lb weight difference.
@@MotorMatchup It is possible to equip MS LR in 245/19 tires on both axes - to get lower Crr and longer range. I suppose it still OK, as some previous MS models were provided with non-staggered tires. As Lucid Dream Air has even more power than MS Plaid, the tire selection can be one of the reasons of somewhat lacking acceleration. It is a marketing decision for both companies.
PLEASE MAKE ENGINE SOUNDS POSSIBLE, REALISTIC RPM SHIFTS LIKE THE GM 5.3L V8'S STOCK 5500-5600ISH REV LIMIT, DIFFERENT RPM VALUES BASED OFF OF DIFFERENT CARS E.G. DIESEL 4000, 4500, 5000, 6000, CARS WAY FURTHER BACK THAN 2000, ALMOST EVERY CAR NOT GOING OVER 125 MPH/200 KM/H SO THE ACTUAL TOP SPEEDS, ETC.!!😔 2021 SUBURBAN TAHOE YUKON ESCALADE WHEN!!😪SADLY THERE'S ANOTHER LONG AWAIT A CAR CONFIGURATOR CALLED RIDESTYLER!!😢😔
Nice calculation but unfortunately not useful in real life. The rivian r1t for example use 292watt/ per km at 100 km/h or 470 watt per mile. That quite fare of also base on this calculation my model x would use somewhere near 152watt per km but again in real world this can only be accomplished at a consistent speed of around 48 miles with smaller wheel ( I have done this last summer) I would speculate the lucid will run somewhere around 240 watt per mile in good condition
I mentioned in the video that those figures are assuming 100% efficiency. Or you could think if it as quantifying the total forces acting the car. Because of various losses through the powertrain, the real-world efficiency is much lower than that. You can see that at 10:26 I get to final efficiency estimates in ideal conditions. (226 wh/mi in the Lucid)
@@MotorMatchup yes I got this but like I said those number are just math nothing realistic. There are so many factors that effect the real range also high power motors run very inefficient at low power consumption that's why an ID 3 or ioniq is much better at lower speed than a tesla model 3 or lucid
The lucid did 500 miles at 70 mph in a real world test. Your math would predict a worse range, where do you think your calculations differed from the real world?
Great analysis I'd say straight line performance or aero doesn't matter in daily car Brakes and comfort matters the most Tesla plaid biggest weaknesses is it's brakes and that Yoke steering they are really bad even with ceramic ones You can buy taycan or model 3 LR over plaid Lucid seems fine would be interesting to see in future how it There are much more better cars at $120k as well there's normal 911 Carrera GT I'm still a newbie about physics calculations and maths Im still studying and I'm a bio student Edit: Sorry for my bad English
What do you prefer: Tesla or Lucid?
Check them out for yourself: www.motormatchup.com/specifications?ids=606b383405cd693ba59c26a5
lucid becuase it may have less energy density but a better value compared to a tesla in luxury. The tesla may have more performance but lucid is a better realiable luxury vechile
@@Nas12223 better reliable luxury vehicle? Have you driven in one yet?
Wonderful analysis. Never seen this depth analysis between lucid and Tesla. It’s seems lucid is tuned for aero efficiency but Tesla is tuned for overall metrics.
Good walk-through of the numbers. As a hypermiler I can attest to the huge impact tire compound, pressure, and alignment have on ultimate vehicle efficiency. It's the V^2 that gets most everyday drivers though.
I was blown away by the EPA Lucid numbers and glad to see them confirmed by Tom Moloughney's real-world test. I ordered one but many tesla fans took a different approach and started spreading rumors that Lucid was somehow cheating. One well known Tesla aficionado even claimed Lucid had extra batteries hidden up in the fenders.
I know, hard to imagine a car maker giving extra batteries for free and hiding that fact. Some people simply refuse to hear things they don't want to hear.
Engineer to Engineer!
I very rarly write a positive review. That’s compliment in itself.
Very balanced and unbiased. All the math checks out. Great job comparing it to EPA and backing up all you math.
Net net:
Lucid Car is more aerodynamic and hence delivers higher efficiency
Tesla battery more efficient.
Nice Analysis. I would love to learn this...
Good video. I believe the appropriate comparison would be the model s long range to the Lucid range as the model s long range has a comparable drive train with 2 motors vs the Plaid with 3 which has a weight and efficiency penalty. I would think this would make some difference in your calculations...great work
Great video, subscribed!
Very interesting video, congats. It would be great if you could do the same exercise for the Mercedes EQS
Great Idea!
Nice analysis, as usual. It does make me wonder about comparing the Tesla Model S Plaid (which is the performance model) to the Lucid Dream Air Performance model, as opposed to the Range model. Of course most of the specs are the same. But tires and tuning are different, affecting performance and range capability.
Tesla model S wear out the inside of the rear tyres. When I looked into this issue it seemed that the rear tyre negative camber is set at about 2.5 degrees (not adjustable) and this apparently reduces the rolling resistance as the tyre as it is kind of running on the inside edge with a smaller contact patch. So the comparison between the tyre width for the Model S and the Lucid may need to take consideration of the suspension geometry to get a good representation for the comparison of the rolling resistance for the two vehicles.
Thank you for the v. interesting work. It gives some hints why the Lucid has better efficiency than Plaid - tires. But when I just substituted Lucid's Crr of 0.0085 in Plaid's power calculation it gives very interesting power requirement of 10.814 kW, which is slightly better than Lucid's 10.85 kW.
Interesting... It makes sense due to the 400-500 lbs of extra weight in the Lucid contributing to more rolling resistance. The increased aero efficiency almost makes up for it.
Am I correct that you are assuming the efficiency of conversion of potential energy in the battery to kinetic energy at the wheels is 80% for both the Tesla and Lucid? Is it possible that this efficiency is better for the Lucid, given lucid’s 900V battery architecture, as well as the other powertrain improvements Rawlinson has touted. Are Rawlinson’s claims true, or is the better efficiency of the Lucid really all about tires and aero?
Yes, I am operating under an 80% efficiency assumption in this video. I do believe the Lucid is slightly more efficient but it does not impact the overall efficiency equation much. Check out this post (www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/ja89w1/tesla_model_3_lr_performance_consumption/) which is helpful. It concludes that losses due to battery heat are only around 1% of total losses.
From a physics perspective battery heat loss follows I^2R where I is current and R is resistance. My understanding is that with a 900V architecture, current (I) is much less because of the power equation Power = Current(I) x Voltage(V). So losses due to battery heat are inversely proportional to the voltage of the pack. So in conclusion you might see roughly 4/9 the heat loss in a 400V versus 900V system. BUT, that is only 1% of overall total loss. So that means the OVERALL efficiency difference is less than 0.5%. Note that this also varies with Power (Speed).
Motor efficiency is hard to calculate for these cars, but the Lucid could have slightly higher motor efficiency. Again this will help, but will not have huge impacts on the overall numbers because efficiencies are already so high. So Rawlinson’s claims are probably true, but the impacts they have are exaggerated IMO. Great question and I'm curious to hear your thoughts on this.
Thanks for that- I’m not as savvy w/ the math as you, but I have felt for sometime that given such high efficiencies of electric powertrains, improving them further won’t make as much difference as improving aero/rolling resistance- it is nice to see that quantified as you have done. Thanks.
@@MotorMatchup No, no, no :). The heat in the battery is generated mostly in cells, not connectors. The cell current is the same in 400V and 800V as is the cell's voltage - depended on the state of charge and chemistry only. So, the heat in 400V and 800V battery is exactly the same, only the cell modules are connected in different blocks.
The only real gain from 800V system is the lower current in the plug and the DC charger - these can be less robust. E.g. Ionity 350 kW 800V DC charger has only about 180 kW at 400V - much less than the 250 kW V3 SC.
BTW - the new MSPlaid uses 450V system. Lucid uses 800V system. The 900 or 925V number is misleading - it is a peak voltage used in some Lucid's marketing BS. 800V is the nominal voltage according to EPA.
@@AndrewSienx Thanks for the insight. I've been deeper diving into battery tech/physics so it's definitely a learning curve. It makes more sense that cell current+voltage is what matters. I'm guessing the overall configuration of the cells is what's changing voltage the most? For example doubling the number of cells in series to double pack voltage? The cells themselves is what matters, not the configuration or quantity.
Why didn’t do you the Tesla S LR versus the Range Dream Air. Or The Plaid versus the Performance Dream Air.
Well done. The good, the road load information is there in the US.
Where can i find the road load (dynamometer efficiency) database entries you are talking about at min 1:12 (on epa.gov) ?
I am trying to find it for an old Mercedes, the S124. The W124 was really good 30 years ago.
the clear winner is Aptera. although, maybe you are only looking at production vehicles?
Yes Aptera is definitely more efficient as it weighs about a 1/3 of the Lucid. Aptera has not been tested by EPA and will not for awhile so the data is very limited.
You are 100% right !
Great stuff. How does the model s LR compare?
Thanks! I just ran the numbers on the Model S LR... EPA Road Load Coefficients: (A=28.99,B=0.4592,C=0.0111). This means road load is 95 lbf and power is 11.5 kw at 60 mph. Plaid (same as video) with the same 19" wheels is 103 lbf and 12.2 kw at 60mph. I believe the cars have identical bodies so that difference is 100% due to the 200 lb weight difference.
@@MotorMatchup It is possible to equip MS LR in 245/19 tires on both axes - to get lower Crr and longer range. I suppose it still OK, as some previous MS models were provided with non-staggered tires.
As Lucid Dream Air has even more power than MS Plaid, the tire selection can be one of the reasons of somewhat lacking acceleration. It is a marketing decision for both companies.
PLEASE MAKE ENGINE SOUNDS POSSIBLE, REALISTIC RPM SHIFTS LIKE THE GM 5.3L V8'S STOCK 5500-5600ISH REV LIMIT, DIFFERENT RPM VALUES BASED OFF OF DIFFERENT CARS E.G. DIESEL 4000, 4500, 5000, 6000, CARS WAY FURTHER BACK THAN 2000, ALMOST EVERY CAR NOT GOING OVER 125 MPH/200 KM/H SO THE ACTUAL TOP SPEEDS, ETC.!!😔
2021 SUBURBAN TAHOE YUKON ESCALADE WHEN!!😪SADLY THERE'S ANOTHER LONG AWAIT A CAR CONFIGURATOR CALLED RIDESTYLER!!😢😔
Nice calculation but unfortunately not useful in real life. The rivian r1t for example use 292watt/ per km at 100 km/h or 470 watt per mile. That quite fare of also base on this calculation my model x would use somewhere near 152watt per km but again in real world this can only be accomplished at a consistent speed of around 48 miles with smaller wheel ( I have done this last summer) I would speculate the lucid will run somewhere around 240 watt per mile in good condition
I mentioned in the video that those figures are assuming 100% efficiency. Or you could think if it as quantifying the total forces acting the car. Because of various losses through the powertrain, the real-world efficiency is much lower than that. You can see that at 10:26 I get to final efficiency estimates in ideal conditions. (226 wh/mi in the Lucid)
@@MotorMatchup yes I got this but like I said those number are just math nothing realistic. There are so many factors that effect the real range also high power motors run very inefficient at low power consumption that's why an ID 3 or ioniq is much better at lower speed than a tesla model 3 or lucid
Wouldn't the increased weight of the Lucid affect the rolling resistance? Maybe offset the narrower tires?
The lucid did 500 miles at 70 mph in a real world test. Your math would predict a worse range, where do you think your calculations differed from the real world?
Thought Lucid had a .21 DC not .20?
Great analysis I'd say straight line performance or aero doesn't matter in daily car
Brakes and comfort matters the most
Tesla plaid biggest weaknesses is it's brakes and that Yoke steering they are really bad even with ceramic ones
You can buy taycan or model 3 LR over plaid
Lucid seems fine would be interesting to see in future how it
There are much more better cars at $120k as well there's normal 911 Carrera GT
I'm still a newbie about physics calculations and maths
Im still studying and I'm a bio student
Edit: Sorry for my bad English
Lucid lying about battery capacity
If true, then Lucid is packing a lot more Wh per Kg, which is VERY impressive. Imagine hiding that impressive tech.