GRA wrote:For me and I expect most people, it's just the opposite. I prefer a hard, guaranteed number to a 'maybe, under this, that and the other conditions' number.
I'd rather dispense with the GOM entirely and have energy units displayed. I can figure out for myself how many energy units it takes to make a trip under varying conditions.
In effect, Tesla does this with a range number based on ideal (or user determined) conditions. If you are getting only 0.8 miles for each standard range mile it is a simple matter to determine the range under those conditions. Those range miles are de facto
evnow wrote:kWh would be totally lost on 90% of drivers. GOM can be accurate if the drivers put in the route and the car uses all the available information about the route (like Tesla is trying to do)...
Not necessarily. Even with terrain and speed adjustments the algorithm still won't account for changing weather conditions. And it can't accurately predict future speeds without some sort of driver input. At some point the driver is going to have to use some sense or experience when stretching the range. Nevertheless, I suppose this is the approach that will be taken for future range estimates and is a lot better than the current GOMs.
However — at the risk of stating the obvious — as the range of EVs becomes significantly greater, the need to precisely estimate how many miles are left becomes greatly reduced
because the vast majority of trips will not come close to exceeding that much greater range. Right?