As an engineering exercise, the Lucid Gravity is amazing. We’re talking about a three-row electric crossover that can run from zero-to-60 mph in as little as 3.4 seconds, boast up to 450 miles of range, throw down in the quarter-mile, be properly spacious on the inside, feature a roomy frunk and a big cargo area, and cost less than most of its immediate performance-luxury competition. No joke, we called it “The greatest three-row SUV ever.” On paper, it’s a slam-dunk. There’s just one thing that could be a turn-off to consumers: it kinda looks like a minivan.
Obviously, aerodynamic efficiency plays a huge role in determining an EV’s range, which is why Lucid shaped the Gravity to be as kind to the wind as a three-row crossover can be. However, pulling the base of the windshield forward to increase the rake of the glass does have the side effect of giving minivan vibes. I like minivans, but some people don’t. The market for ruggedized crossovers is so great that pretty much every manufacturer now offers some variation of a unibody family hauler in an Otterbox.
That’s where the Lucid Gravity X concept comes in, a show car designed to move Lucid’s crossover more towards Rivian’s turf. It still has the same 828-horsepower dual-motor setup, 120 kWh battery pack, and basic unibody as the Gravity Grand Touring, but the designers have done more than just make it look rugged and have engineered useful, functional touches for those who prefer to start their hikes way up the mountain.
Visually, it all starts up front with a chunky high-clearance valence with integrated recovery points. With thick cladding and a chunky silver accent emblazoned with the concept’s name, the face of the Gravity X certainly looks ready for business. Hood graphics complement the look, and that’s before we even go down the side of this machine.
Unsurprisingly, the cladding grows from this view as well, but so do the fender flares – considerably, I might add. That’s because Lucid has both widened the track and raised the ride height on the Gravity X concept to fit new six-spoke wheels and chunky all-terrain tires. Is there going to be a range hit? Almost certainly. Does it look cool? Yeah. Speaking of cool features that surely can’t be favorable for range, I’m liking the chunky roof rack with its integrated light bar. There’s definitely some smoothing going on here, but a part like this is always going to add drag.
Out back, it’s much the same story as up front, a high-clearance valence with silver accents and recovery points. There are two touches worth noting, however. Firstly, you really see the vents in the backs of the flares from this angle, which should evacuate air from the widened arches. Secondly, Lucid’s leaning into the way dark plastic extends all the way up to the bottom lip of the cargo opening on the regular Gravity, widening the expanse of plastic to make it even harder to scratch the paint when loading something heavy. It’s also worth mentioning how Lucid states that the Gravity X concept features skid plates, a vital addition to anything with a battery pack set for off-road use, considering how nervous insurers are around dented battery pack cases.
Moving to the interior, Lucid’s gone with a dark theme brightened by splashes of orange. Contrast stitching is standard enough, but the piping, seat belts, and door card inserts go a step further. Weirdly enough, I’m associating this colorway with the pre-facelift Ford Maverick XLT, but maybe that’s not the worst thematic link to have. It does have somewhat rugged connotations, doesn’t it?
Lucid claims that the Gravity X is simply a concept, but come on. The general appetite for creatine-fed crossovers is strong enough that it wouldn’t be surprising to see an eventual production model. Spiritually, it would be the closest thing to the Mitsubishi Delica Space Gear that we’d get in North America, although perhaps Lucid’s looking for a more SUV-like association. There’s just one hang-up I could see: Lucid is saying that “Gravity X” is pronounced “Gravity Cross.” Hmm.
Top graphic image: Lucid
Support our mission of championing car culture by becoming an Official Autopian Member.
It gives modern Dacia vibes which imo is a good thing. Will it be as capable as a Dacia off-road? Hell no.
Does it need to be? Hell no.
From an ev efficiency and packaging perspective The Gravity is the best 3 row ev available in the US market, possibly in the world right now.
1 example it has a 1000 volt charging system that uses one of the ev motors (usually used for forward motion) to ‘step up’ the volts for charging the vehicle. It’s charging performance (currently), is better at a Tesla Supercharger than Any Tesla
It had to kill the engineers on the insides (somewhere between a little to a LOT) intentionally making this ‘concept’ version less efficient.
A skid plate? Yeah, you’re going to need it with that low ground clearance. This whole overlander poser look with gaudy graphics and plastic cladding on a mall crawler just reeks of Instagram influencers desperate for attention. This car is begging for a fake snorkel.
That’s a nice looking overland minivan!
Got to see this one in person yesterday at Monterey. Quite impressive although v1.0 may need a few tweaks to survive expected use (that is: kids).
Other than the lack of sliding doors, it’s a luxury minivan that is smaller outside than a regular one yet bigger inside.
Can actually fit 7 adults. Third row would fit me (6’6″) fine.
When did “ex” (X) become “cross” (+)?
Thomas, did you have a bet on how many times you could say “chunky” before DT noticed?
That could have been a beautiful van. But they skimped on the sliding doors. What a shame.
“The Ruggedized Lucid Gravity X Concept Looks Ready To Fight Anyone Who Calls It A Minivan”…and lose said fight. It looks like a minivan trying to puff out its chest now.
I get butch Toyota Crown vibes from some angles.
Lucid could use a savior. Have they nailed it with the Gravity Cross?
Tee hee
Oh, Jesus…
I guess Lucid is looking on the bright side of life.
I agree it looks a little like a van, but it lacks the “alternatively opening” rear doors like the first EV minivan, the Model X 😉
There is no EV that I’m more excited about and I hope they do well. I wish more people got on board, since this layout is the EV that could appeal to the most people at once. Ideally if you’re going to solve a problem, solve it as broadly as possible with a single tool.
I have one issue, though: They already leaned hard into the gimmick of making the in-car screens show rolling screensavers of California settings. Cool. But now that you’ve painted Death Valley on the hood, you’re leaning harder into the theme than a Red Hot Chili Peppers album.
Actually, those guys should do the ads for this.
Lucid makes highly-efficient vehicles and I hope they succeed. I see the Gravity as the wagon version of the Air. And, I realize I’m in minority wanting a wagon over an SUV.
CANN Action Fund has a raffle to give away various BEVs, and I’d love to have a BEV with the range of a Lucid – if my ticket won.
Call it whatever you want, I still kind of want it. Don’t even want / need the 7 person version after seeing how cavernous the cargo area would be in just the 5 person edition. Will I ever have Lucid $ however? No.
Honestly, I think a van’s taller proportions work better stylistically than this, particularly for an off-road vehicle. It looks way too low to go on virtually any trail also.
Lucid likely wants something to be cross-shopped with Rivian, and this will give them a little bit more of that.
At least the ‘regular’ Gravity has an adjustable height suspension. Apparently from 5-9 inches.
I’ve seen video of it obstacle courses and at full height it does look a little weird. I had thought it could go up to 11 or 12 inches like the Rivians, I was wrong.
Also seems weird that a post by CapitalOne was in the top 3 search results when I looked this up…
https://www.capitalone.com/cars/learn/finding-the-right-car/2025-lucid-gravity-first-drive-review/3765
Hah the first thing I thought was this reminds me of a modern, fancy D:5 Delica, as opposed to an off-road SUV. Not that that’s a bad thing in my opinion, Delicas are cool!
I think that for most non-enthusiasts, minivan = sliding doors, and I tend to agree. If you’re a person who doesn’t like a minivan, you probably remember getting in and out of the one your mom drove via a sliding door. By the same token, the first-gen Honda Odyssey wasn’t a minivan, either.
I guess that’s what makes it a ‘minivan’, but globally most MPVs haven’t got sliding doors and are their equivalent to a ‘minivan’. I find the comparison between PSA’s and Renault’s ‘MPVs’ to be quite academic as they’re basically identical besides the sliding doors.
https://i.imgur.com/ssYBkJZ.png
So I suppose all minivans are MPVs, but by association only some MPVs are minivans.
Yeah, I was specifically referring to the US. Globally, your point is absolutely valid.
Meanwhile in Australia they just call them ‘people movers’. Direct and to the point.
Nearly every single article on the Gravity will sandbag it by wasting way too much time mentioning minivans. The power of suggestion. So once the image of a minivan is implanted in your head, you then can’t unsee it, which will negatively affect people’s perception of it.
Contrast that to when the atrocious grills came out on modern BMW. Since way too many reviewers are paid to shill for these brands, a ton of reviews I read or watched would say something like “…well styling is subjective…” or something noncommittal like that instead of stating the fact that they were awful.
Well now I want a topographic wrap on the hood of my car, preferably some place I enjoy hiking.
Isn’t it spelt ‘valance’ when referring to a car’s lower bumper? I think ‘valence’ has to do with electrons or something. I dunno, I skipped college chemistry.
Are you using British English? The irony is that “spelt” is “spelled” in American English.
I use whatever English pleases me on any given day. I guess I was in the mood for some ancient grains yesterday.
Language isn’t a fixed entity! Especially English.
Do want! Well, not enough to refinance the house on a highly depreciating vehicle. Maybe if I win the lottery.
They’re meeting the market where it is. Make it stupid and worse at its intended function and it’ll be more popular.
As I was driving the twisty roads of the Smokies last week, it occurred to me that there are FAR more situations where I want my “adventure” vehicle to perform well on paved twisties (to get to the trailhead or put-in) than on the very rare gravel or dirt trail.
Obviously YMMV on location, but that realization just hit me last week for the first time.
Agreed. Where I am a gravel road or a well mowed field is the most off-road most people will ever do. My old crapcans handled it just fine. So does my EV. Don’t rip stuff up applies equally.
I think this every time I hear the roar of a lifted 4×4 driving on the freeway on mud tyres. Sure, they might be going to their local mud track but the droning journey there must absolutely *suck*. Also having grown up with a dad who took us off the beaten path every other holiday I’m often pointing out that really the only mod you need to do to your car for 90% of 4×4 tracks is a decent set of all-terrain tyres. No need for a lift kit that completely ruins your car’s ride for the 95% of the time it spends on sealed roads, no need for noisy mud tyres.
I agree with this sentiment. I’d add skid plates if the ride isn’t that high. You don’t need to avoid the rocks as much if they don’t do anything.
Got an uber from the Atlanta Airport a couple of months ago. ( There for a wedding gods what a miserable airport) and was picked up by a nice Toyota 4 runner SUV thing. The guy had put mud tires on it. The worst 30 minutes in a car I can remember. Just completely stupid noise. Could not hear conversation. He got exactly zero tip
Yep, pavement and mud tires are quite miserable. I’ve got an old Jeep on mud tires, which are great offroad, but I drive it as little as possible, and wish there was a dirt road option to the highway near my house so I could try to avoid pavement when I do drive it. It enables some really fun adventures, but the thought of driving it more than 1-2 times a month sounds like torture.
I also get way more attention taking my Bolt on easy offroading when I don’t want to bother with the Jeep, doesn’t take much to lift tires off the ground and such and it seems to entertain people quite a bit.
Yep. My first realization of this was when I was camping on pretty remote federal land in Idaho. We drove 2 hours on pavement, 45 minutes or so on gravel/light dirt roads, and the final 50 feet to where we camped were steep enough that we parked and carried our stuff up.
Was it nice for our friends to be able to drive their trucks up there? Sure. Was it worth the gas and hassle of driving said trucks for 99% of the way when our sedan was much more comfortable? Probably not.
When I want to get off the beaten path I go to a trailhead and walk or bike from there.
I had a similar experience in Utah, just outside Zion, a few years ago — we had a 4WD Suburban, which was great for their notoriously silty sand (even on street tires) but looking back, there was no situation where I couldn’t have just parked 100′ away in any vehicle on the market. Sure, a couple extra inches of ground clearance and AWD are very helpful, but you don’t need a full-on rock crawler unless you’re doing real-deal overlanding or cross-country travel where you’re totally self-supported.
Agreed. I used to go to Moab every year with friends and if you weren’t doing dedicated off-roading (ex: Hells Revenge), then sedans were just fine getting to the trailheads. I drove my Mazda6 all over the place in Arches and Canyonlands NP.
It’s a minivan dude.