Chevy did that with the volt i think it was, not really worth it in the long run i think the engineers were saying. Good for people that have range anxiety but the average person isn't going to be driving far distances. There's a reason the average electric car for the average consumer is in the 200/300 mile range right now. It's the sweet spot for price and performance since most stay within i think 50 miles of their place
Who is this "average person?" In the US, driving "far distances" is very much a thing
even if you don't do it every week. Having a vehicle that has enough range to get you to the train station but not enough to take you on a weekend outing or on vacation or to visit relatives = the effing thing is useless. Period.
Most people need vehicles that are effective for ALL of their "use cases," not just for "some," even if the "most frequent" use cases might seem "doable" for BEVs.
Further, the "ranges" you quote are manufacturer "estimated" ranges based on fantasy world conditions. First of all, they are based on a 100% charge, which is meaningless since
they recommend against charging the batteries to 100% (higher danger of fire and reduced battery life). So you can begin by multiplying the "estimated" range by 80%. Then you can consider the real world vs. fantasy world "operating conditions" they base their (overly generous) "range" estimates on. Someone posted such information for one BEV, the Nissan leaf, after attempting unsuccessfully to get the dealer to provide it (as Joe Namath used to say in the truck commercial "You know why? - You know why.") and having to
file a FOIA request for it. My memory may not be perfect, but it's something like this:
"Mild" ambient temperature (74ish degrees F).
Flat, dry road.
One occupant.
No luggage.
NO accessory use of any kind. So:
No headlights, wipers, HVAC, heated seats/steering wheels, vented seats, defoggers, radios, navigation systems, USB powered devices, you get the idea.
THIRTEEN mph.
Now compare those with real world driving conditions. In other words, you can take that 80% of 100% of their "estimate" and easily cut that in half, and even then you have a figure that will probably have you "living on the edge" risking a dead battery pack in the middle or who-knows-where. So cut that in half to be conservative, maybe you can count on 20-30% of their "rated" range without risking becoming stranded.
T
he next issue is recharge times, for which BEV apologists will immediately harp about how quickly (and then only to 80% charge) BEVs can be charged on "superchargers" which
still take three times as long as refueling a gasoline or diesel powered vehicle and which
you can't do all the time. There is a limited amount of "fast charging" generally allowed before your EV will reduce the charging rate, because "fast charging" degrades the batteries and reduces their life. And once you're charging at "lesser" rates, your
recharge times become lengthy. Multiply that by how many BEVs are in line ahead of you, and you have a world immobilized - which for the people "at the top" trying to force-feed BEVs may be a "feature" as opposed to a "bug." Couple long recharge times with relatively short range, and "trips" beyond local errands become a problem.
For BEVs, beyond the wealthy that can have one
alongside other, more useful ICE vehicles,
everybody will have "range anxiety," because it's a major problem.
And unlike for ICE vehicles, highway driving (higher speeds) reduces EV range, so the problem is worse for long distance trips which are generally going to be at highway speeds
.
Arguing that BEV "range anxiety" is a non-issue for the "average person" is like arguing that the "average person" doesn't need a heating system in Texas,
because it's warm "most of the time." Please stop being an apologist for the extraordinarily stupid idea of BEVs.
