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.
A pessimistic number will make people (like my wife) get more range anxiety and perhaps use the Leaf less.
I'd caution against generalizing your perception as that of "most people".
My guess is - most people keep a buffer i.e. they want to see on GOM x+20 miles (or some other number) if they have to drive x miles. That buffer will take care of the variability.
I think most people prefer a 'real' number, even if pessimistic, to a 'highly variable and maybe attainable provided you've read all the manuals and used all the tricks' number provided by most GOMs. Early adopters, being more interested in the tech and more technically inclined, are more likely to push the limits, but the average A to B commuter doesn't care what's under the hood or how the number's arrived at, as long as they can count on it. They can then apply whatever amount of reserve to that number that makes them comfortable, and KNOW they'll be able to go that far with no worries, unless they decide to try and tow a space shuttle
For a BEV, I want at least a 10% emergency reserve, and it could be more in inclement conditions.
I believe Tesla allows you to set your own personal mileage reserve in the car, and subtracts that when calculating whether or not you have enough charge to make the trip. That's the kind of mental security that a pessimistic GOM provides - you can almost certainly go further, but you _know_ you can go that far.
As to what 'most people' like, no one seems to complain about the Volt and Spark's very accurate DTE, and no one feels the need to call them GOMs. That's certainly not the case with the LEAF or other cars that use last few mile predictions.