Lucid chief executive Peter Rawlinson has turned into one of the electric car industry’s most outspoken critics, arguing that the sector’s slowdown is not about demand drying up but about carmakers selling the wrong products in the wrong way. Instead of pitching electric vehicles as joyless eco-upgrades, he says, brands should be building and marketing cars that feel like genuine luxury or performance upgrades to gasoline models. His attack on what he sees as “underwhelming” rivals is also a pitch for Lucid’s own strategy, which leans on efficiency, range and space rather than dashboard gimmicks.
Rawlinson’s blunt verdict on today’s EVs
Peter Rawlinson, the CEO of Tesla rival Lucid, has delivered a scathing assessment of the American electric car landscape, arguing that most battery-powered models in the United States are, in his words, “frankly not very good.” He has described drivers as being “ill-served by underwhelming EVs,” a phrase that captures his view that the typical electric crossover on sale today is heavy, inefficient and compromised, rather than a clear step forward from gasoline competitors. In his telling, the problem is not that buyers have lost interest in electrification, but that they are being offered products that fail to justify their price or their trade-offs in charging and infrastructure, a point he has underlined in his public assessment of the market.
Rawlinson has also warned that American brands risk being outclassed by Chinese automakers that are racing ahead on cost and technology, while many domestic models stagnate. He has framed this gap as a matter of engineering reality rather than marketing spin, arguing that efficiency, range and packaging are measurable advantages that Chinese companies are rapidly improving. In that context, his criticism of “underwhelming EVs” is not just a swipe at rivals like Tesla and legacy manufacturers, but a warning that the United States could cede leadership in a technology it helped popularize if it continues to flood showrooms with mediocre products that do not excite mainstream buyers, a concern echoed when he said drivers are being ill-served while China races ahead.
“Sold the wrong way”: why the pitch matters
For Rawlinson, the core mistake of the past decade has been how electric cars were framed to consumers, not just how they were engineered. He argues that early EVs were “sold the wrong way,” presented primarily as green appliances for climate-conscious drivers rather than as aspirational objects that could outclass gasoline cars on comfort, performance and running costs. That approach, he says, limited the audience to people already motivated by environmental concerns, instead of appealing to the far larger group of buyers who care first about space, power and convenience. His critique is that the industry leaned on moral arguments when it should have been making a hard-headed case that a well-designed EV is simply a better car, a point he has tied to the way early models were sold to a narrow slice of the market.
He has contrasted that misstep with the way luxury gasoline vehicles are marketed, noting that buyers of high-end sedans and SUVs are rarely lectured about emissions. Instead, they are sold on craftsmanship, quiet cabins, acceleration and status, all areas where a well-executed electric platform can excel. Rawlinson’s argument is that if automakers had emphasized the superior refinement, instant torque and lower lifetime running costs of EVs from the start, adoption would be further along today. He has pointed to the way some brands still compare electric models to economy cars rather than to established luxury benchmarks, even though a premium EV with strong range and low maintenance can credibly rival a high-end gasoline model on total cost of ownership, a comparison he has drawn between electric flagships and luxury gas cars with higher fuel and maintenance costs.
What buyers actually want from an EV
Rawlinson’s critique of the sales pitch is rooted in a simple claim about consumer priorities: most buyers are not primarily motivated by climate concerns, they are motivated by what a car does for them day to day. He has said that “buyers want space and power, not the eco-lecture,” arguing that the winning formula is a roomy interior, strong acceleration and effortless long-distance capability, wrapped in a package that feels like a clear upgrade from a gasoline equivalent. In his view, the industry has spent too much time talking about carbon footprints and not enough time explaining how a well-designed electric drivetrain can deliver smoother performance, quieter cabins and more usable cabin space than a traditional engine, a point he has underlined when describing how buyers actually shop.
He has also emphasized that mainstream car buyers are intensely practical, focusing on range, charging convenience and total cost of ownership rather than abstract environmental benefits. That is why he frequently highlights efficiency metrics and real-world range, arguing that a car that can travel farther on a smaller battery is not just greener but cheaper to build and own. By centering the conversation on space, power and cost, Rawlinson is trying to reframe EVs as rational upgrades rather than lifestyle statements, and he has criticized rivals that lean on software gimmicks or oversized batteries instead of solving those core needs. His message is that until automakers align their products with what drivers actually value, the market will remain vulnerable to slowdowns whenever subsidies fade or early adopters are saturated.
Lucid’s efficiency-first playbook
Behind the rhetoric, Lucid is trying to prove its point with hardware, particularly with the 2025 Lucid Air Pure, which Rawlinson has described as the most efficient vehicle sold in the United States. He argues that this sedan shows what happens when engineers chase efficiency and range rather than simply stuffing in a bigger battery, delivering long-distance capability with less weight and lower energy use per mile. That focus on efficiency is not just a bragging right, he says, but a structural advantage that makes the car cheaper to run and potentially cheaper to build at scale, since smaller batteries require fewer raw materials and less cost, a claim he has linked to the way the Lucid Air Pure outperforms rivals on efficiency.
Rawlinson has gone further, saying it will take years for the competition to catch up if they continue at their current rate of progress, because efficiency is a system-level achievement that touches motors, inverters, aerodynamics and software. In his view, many rivals have focused on eye-catching acceleration figures or giant touchscreens while neglecting the hard engineering work that yields more miles per kilowatt-hour. By contrast, Lucid’s strategy is to build a technical moat around efficiency and range, then use that to justify premium pricing and to argue that its cars are objectively better tools for long-distance travel. Whether that bet pays off will depend on how quickly other automakers can close the gap, but his confidence that it will take years for them to match Lucid’s numbers is central to his claim that most current EVs are simply not good enough.
Rivals in the crosshairs and the road ahead
Rawlinson’s sharp words are aimed at a broad set of rivals, from Tesla to legacy automakers and emerging Chinese brands, but they also serve as a high-stakes promise about Lucid’s own trajectory. By calling out “underwhelming EVs” and insisting that most American electric cars are not very good, he is effectively telling buyers to judge Lucid by a tougher standard on efficiency, space and performance. He has positioned the company as a kind of corrective to the industry’s missteps, arguing that if EVs are engineered and marketed properly, they can win over drivers who have never considered themselves environmentalists. That stance puts pressure on Lucid to keep delivering cars that feel like genuine upgrades in every measurable way, from range and charging speed to cabin comfort and driving dynamics, rather than just another expensive electric badge.
More from Morning Overview