8 ms·
Lucid Motors unveils the Air, a new luxe electric car with a 400-mile range
- S_A_P 10y agoI'm curious whether there will be a sea change in the auto industry. This seams similar to the situation 100 or so years ago with the carriage manufacturers vs the start up auto companies.
- mdorazio 10y agoThat depends what you mean. Most of the major auto manufacturers have an electric vehicle available already (i3, Leaf, Bolt, Soul EV, etc.) or in the works for release in the next few years. The issue is that their entire production line, supplier relationships, sales models, etc. have been optimized for ICE vehicles for decades, so converting to all-electric vehicles while still producing and supporting ICE vehicles is organizationally very challenging. However, as evidenced by Google's recently stated exit from building its own vehicle, actually bringing a new consumer car to market in any kind of decent volume is really, really, hard. I'd put my money on a slow conversion from ICE to EV with the existing manufacturers over the next 20 years, and smaller entrants popping up and going bust every couple years. Remember the Fisker Karma? And also remember how Tesla almost went broke multiple times? Long-term success for startups in the auto industry is rare.
- tempestn 10y agoIt turned out that rumour about Google's car wasn't true. Instead, they spun their self-driving car business into its own company under Alphabet. It's now called Waymo.
- mdorazio 10y agoIt's a little bit unclear, but it looks like Waymo is not intending to build and sell its own cars commercially. It's referenced around the middle of this article: https://techcrunch.com/2016/12/13/googles-self-driving-car-unit-spins-out-as-waymo/ https://techcrunch.com/2016/12/13/googles-self-driving-car-u...
- return0 10y ago> actually bringing a new consumer car to market in any kind of decent volume is really, really, hard. Or they just figure that making battery cars is not going to be a high-margin business (Apart from waymo, they dont seem to have plans for a bigger car), unlike self-driving software which is what Google is doing well.
- mdorazio 10y agoGood point. But to be fair, regular mass market cars are a very low margin (percentage-wise) business today as well, at least on the sales side. EVs just cut down on the long-tail profits to be had from ongoing maintenance and parts replacement.
- return0 10y agoWasn't that the goal of Tesla, to spearhead the shift to EVs? Pretty sure the most successful EVs will be made in china in a few years anyway. We need more work on energy infrastructure though. There are many countries that will be unable to cope if EVs start selling massively.
- redthrowaway 10y agoWhat's the differentiating factor between them and Tesla? Why would I buy an Air, when it seems to be similarly specced to (and less attractive than) a model S, from a far better know company?
- Solinoid 10y agoDo people really find Tesla cars attractive? I get a solid 'engineered, not designed' vibe from them. I don't think in 20 years time they'll be considered classics. This thing is pretty nice looking, but it's not fair to judge a real car vs. photos.
- brianbreslin 10y agoPurely subjective: I love the model S design, loathe the Model X design.
- l33tbro 10y agoPretty certain they'll be classics regardless, due to historical and cultural importance.
- semi-extrinsic 10y agoOTOH, I'm pretty certain a <2015 Model S in working condition in 2035 will be about as rare as a genuine Lancia Stratos is today. They're just not built for longevity, and have a completely proprietary repair tooling and electronics setup. I doubt we'll e.g. ever see a Haynes manual for one.
- holycrapwhodat 10y ago> This thing is pretty nice looking o_O
- redthrowaway 10y agoA Model S is pleasing, not beautiful. It reminds me a bit of Mazda's design language, or some of the more Aston-y Fords. It's not a pinup, but it's a nice car to look at.
- rsync 10y agoIf this electric car has an interior that is on par with, or better than, the low end BMW/Audi/Merc models (3series/A4/C) then I am very, very interested. Setting aside the design aesthetic of the tesla, which is minimal and modern, the actual quality and finish of the tesla is stupefying. It's unbelievably bad. I sat in a mazda recently that was much better by every measure.
- dave1619 10y agoI think it's probably more just taste. There are plenty of folks who prefer the Tesla interior to BMW/Mercedes/Audi, including myself.
- erik_landerholm 10y agoYeah, it's obvious the money did not go into the interior. The fit and finish isn't up to par with other high end manufacturers...yet. It also doesn't handle nearly as well as a comparably priced M5 vs p85d, for example. But, most people are buying the Tesla for completely different reasons.
- semi-extrinsic 10y ago> also doesn't handle nearly as well as a comparably priced M5 vs p85d, for example M5: 4288 lbs, 550 bhp, 400 mm six-piston fixed-caliper compound disc brakes, custom Bavarian elastokinematic suspension honed on German race tracks for decades. P85D: 4936 lbs, 557 bhp, 355 mm four-piston fixed-calliper regular disc brakes, standard suspension setup you find in a Ford Crown Victoria. It's not a surprise that a heavier car with the same power and significantly worse brakes and suspension handles significantly worse. But as you say, no-one is buying a Model S to go play on racetracks. Especially since we know it can't do a full lap of the Nürburgring Nordschliefe without overheating and reducing power output.
- aedron 10y agoWhen people talk about handling in these contexts, I always wonder what they mean. Unless you take your car to the track, all your driving is either on residential roads, where you obviously (hopefully) won't be going fast, or on freeways, which are just long stretches of straightforward road. I've been a driver for twenty years and I have never felt like I cared about 'handling'. When car reviewers talk about it I always picture a 45 year old man-child white-knuckling the wheel at the local intersection while revving his 325i, eyes darting between soccer moms and pensioners in the cars around him and imagining himself to be Ayrton Senna. Though that is probably uncharitable :) I have owned many different cars between a top-end BMW and a beater Hyundai. The BMW is certainly a more enjoyable ride, but 'handling' was never a concern, except perhaps in a very occasional circumstance that might have gotten me arrested.
- friedman23 10y agolucid is a horrible name
- rebootthesystem 10y agoI continue to be astounded to see companies chase each other off the cliff repeating one of the most destructive marketing techniques ever invented: Promoting imaginary non-existing products. "Look at us! We are going to have THIS disruptive product in FOUR YEARS". "Look at us! We are going to have THIS disruptive product in THREE YEARS". "Look at us! We are going to have THIS disruptive product in TWO YEARS". "Look at us! We are going to have THIS disruptive product in ONE YEAR". "Look at us! We are going to have THIS disruptive product in TWO YEARS". "Look at us! We are going to have THIS disruptive product in THREE YEARS". "Look at us! We are going to have THIS disruptive product in... Shit! We have no buyers". People want to solve problems today. They don't go to Home Depot to buy a drill bit for a hole they need to drill in four years. Or two. They need to drill a hole now. The constant announcement of vapor products only serves to either tell the audience you are clueless and have no product anywhere near a reasonable horizon or --not sure which is worst-- push people into making a decision in favor of a competitor. Cars are a displacement market. This is a market where a purchasing decision means a long term loss of the opportunity by all competitors. Once someone buys a car they stop looking for 2 to 10 years. In a displacement market, spooking your prospects into making a decision in favor of a competitor generally means you slit your own throat. You thought you were being hip and cool while making amazing advanced announcements of a vapor product and, instead, you convinced prospects that you and your product are not real. The next move is natural: If they have a reasonably immediate need they lose all trust and hope on you and buy the competitor's product. See you in a decade. This, BTW, is very common in engineer-driven companies. I know. I was the moron making these incredibly dumb decisions for my own business twenty years ago. I can't even described the amount of business I lost because I convinced myself that talking about what's coming "real soon" was actually of interest to my prospects. It wasn't. They bought the competitor's product and I lost them for a decade or for a lifetime. They got tired of hearing me go on about a nonexistent mythical product. Some of these losses represented company-changing multi-million-dollar multi-year lifetime opportunities. Gone. Shitty way to learn a lesson. It's a very different thing if a company like BMW says "We are building a pure electric and here's the i3 and i8, two of our experiments" vs. a Joe-Blow-Startup without a factory or scale saying "...coming soon". BMW can survive this because it has a reputation and a following. Some people (my wife) would rather buy an electric BMW to replace her current IC BMW. She is happy to wait. She trusts and likes BWM and knows they can deliver. She likes Tesla, but BWM saying "we are almost there" along with their reputation is likely to keep her from buying a Tesla. On the other hand such loyalty does not exist with an unknown startup. The effect is to eventually see the continuing announcements of vapor as a signal that they are never going to be a viable option. And they are gone. OK smart-ass. How do you do it then? Simple. Develop a product. Finish it. Get it to the point where you can deliver a good reliable product. At that point, not before, announce it and open the doors. As much fanfare as you want. Market as far and wide as your budget and skills allow. The key is: The product has to be real and you have to be able to take orders AND deliver now, not in two years. Lucid Motors has been blabbering incessantly about a car for quite some time now. And their "important announcement" is: "Look at us! We are going to have THIS disruptive product in TWO YEARS". Yeah. Good luck. Shitty way to learn a lesson.
- 2sk21 10y agoI don't want 1000 hp in a car. I'd be happy with say 200 hp and go for extreme range instead. I have no problem with a car that takes 12 seconds to accelerate to 60 MPH. I would not mind paying say $75000 for such car but but it doesn't exist. Is this caused by the cost of the electric powertrain? Are they forced to go upmarket?
- thephilsproject 10y agoWith an electric drivetrain, it's easy to go for high power. As the battery capacity increases, so does the maximum available current. This means that maximum power scales with maximum range from the battery perspective. Then (and I am simplifying this), higher current motor controller, a bigger motor (they are not a big component anyway) and slightly chunkier drivetrain to handle the torque. You don't have the same limitations of a high powered ICE with regards to cooling and packaging. I can't imagine that the difference between a 200kW and an 800kW drivetrain is more than ~5% of the cost of the car.
- Matthias247 10y agoI guess the same. On top of that I think that the top power output doesn't correlate a lot to the actual range, since that amount of power will not be used for an extended timeframe. I guess even if you have 1000HP you will on average drive around with less than 50HP due to speed limits and traffic jams. The smaller sized motor(s) might have a higher efficiency with that load than the bigger sized one(s) and of course the parts might be lighter, which will really yield more range. But marketing 10 times the power is probably easier than 30% more range.
- dogma1138 10y agoNo it doesn't it's the complete opposite the battery capacity decreases with the max current draw from each cell... If you have a battery with high capacity it would have a very small sustained draw and vise versa. The chemistry that allows for dense storage doesn't allow for high capacity and vise versa. Some of the new chems that are specially designed for EV's try to marry the best of both worlds but in both cases you can have a considerably higher capacity or considerably more power if you use chem that was optimised for either.
- return0 10y ago> Leading a new era of luxury mobility Makes it so obvious what kind of pretentious people they 're going after. I'd love to see a manufacturer say they made a "badass battery car"
- stan_rogers 10y agoWhat, like Tesla's original Roadster?
- GoToRO 10y agoThat will not happen unless you saw a traditional manufacturer say they made a "badass fire stove car" :)
- giarc 10y agoI'm not a fan of this exterior design. It looks like a movie prop from a Robo-cop movie. I still think "executives" will go for a P100D Tesla rather than a Lucid, even if the rear seats are more comfortable. Come to think of it, if you are an executive that rides in the back with a drive, you're likely in a Bentley, Mercedes C class or 7 series, not a Tesla.
- ganley 10y agoAs with Tesla, I skimmed for the price, and once I saw it, closed the window. I never cease to be amazed that there are enough people who will spend $100K on a car to make these businesses work.
- namlem 10y agoSo it's a crazy powerful (and presumably crazy expensive) supercar in the form factor of a four-door sedan?