evnow said:
I don't think you are getting what I'm saying. Look at the entire distribution of miles travelled - not just average. People don't buy a vehicle for their "average" needs. They buy to fulfill 90%+ of their needs - not 50% of their needs.
ps : my commute is 10 to 20 miles roundtrip.
We are in agreement that people buy to fulfill 90% of their needs and that for 95% of the population cars like the LEAF do just that. The sticking point is confusing perceived needs vs. actual needs. Most don't really keep track of how much they drive in a week/month/year, and still, use the "tank to tank" method of estimating needed range rather than the day to day needs. One of the strongest arguments for an EV is that with the ability to charge each evening and destination charging, the car has a "full tank" each day.
With EV's now offering mid and long range "tank" capacities the whole range argument is quickly becoming moot, as is the obsession of focusing on the single criteria of how many miles an EV can travel on one charge. Again this applies to the general population and acknowledging that there will always be outliers that these criteria do not apply to. The challenge now is how well this new generation of EVs passes the "Value" test.
What is the "Value" test? It's the combination of features, usability, reliability, style, and cost.
This is why I don't think that 200+ mile range as the sole criteria for EV consideration is really valid. And the market and some of the leading manufacturers seem to agree.
For example, the Chevy Bolt. Yes, it has 230+ miles of range and its technology is commendable. So why has it been a flop in the market, with GM selling them at a loss to get them off dealers lots? It's because the Bolt's features, value, and cost are off balance.
GM chose the sub-compact Gamma platform for the car which is designed for the European and Asian markets, stuck an expensive 60kWh battery in it, and ended up with a $42K car with a package that just does not pass the value test. (sure they have a $36K version, but that car fails the value test even more).
The Tesla Model 3 faces a similar issue. Despite its record setting pre-order interest, it is even more off balance both for Tesla and those that have expressed an interest in obtaining the car based on the illusion of it being a $35K vehicle. Tesla admits the real entry point is more like $45K, and that is the ASP that the majority of Model 3s will be sold at. Technically and stylistically the Model 3 is a nice effort, but it is off balance in that it is beyond the means of a good chunk of those that have put down reservations.
Then there is the new LEAF. I suspect that Nissan understands their target market very well, and knows that the sweet spot for them is having a well-equipped car with reliability, style, and value that starts under $30K and maxes out at $36K. If that means offering an EV that has a slightly shorter range to achieve that balance that is what they will do. But they will also ride the cost curve and continue to add value for the price points their market demands. So with that in mind, I expect that as soon as they can offer a 230+ mile version that fits in their value space and they can make money doing it, they will.
