still don't get the point of huge batteries. in USA average commute is about 20 miles one way. seems like a 75mile battery + gas is both more practical and requires less infra.
edit: it seems some are confused. I'm saying a PHEV is superior to BEV.
edit: it seems some are confused. I'm saying a PHEV is superior to BEV.
I think it's hard to economically hit that and give a car that folks are OK driving within limitations.
Mazda tried to do a range extender setup on the MX-30, however it didn't sell that well and my understanding is the range extender wasn't good for hills or highway cases.
Non Range Extender setups, actually typically work better if you're stuck in gas mode than a range extender, mostly because you can use the mechanical energy from the ICE more directly than the losses of something feeding energy directly into the drivetrain. However, once you hit that point anything after 2 or 3 KWh of battery is just dead weight on the car. I'm guessing that's why even the Prius prime is only around 40 miles of range.
Of course, the elephant in the room is the US addiction to huge vehicles (which need even bigger batteries...)
Edit:
Seeing the edit of what I'm replying to, I'll add that yes PHEVs are probably a 'better' option than BEVs for many people, but the cost of a PHEV can be as much or more than a BEV. Look at a Chevrolet Equinox EV vs a Rav4 Prime. The Rav4 Prime is 10K more expensive. Happy to consider a different comparison here but overall nobody has figured out how to make a PHEV that is cheaper than a similar EV.
$28,790: MSRP of the 2022 Niro L HEV (hybrid)
$34,390: MSRP of the 2022 Niro EX PHEV (plug-in hybrid with an electric range of 51 kms.
$46,790: starting price of the 2022 Niro EX EV (all battery electric vehicle with a range of 386 kms)
it's just simple math. if you take a 400 mile road trip 4 times a year, and your electricity is totally free for the sake of example, gas is 5 bucks a gallon, how long does it take for the EV to pay itself off, assuming the regular commute is 40km daily otherwise? answer is almost 15 years. doesn't make any sense.
We tend to act with a scarcity and "what if" mindset.
It doesn't matter if you never drive 400 miles, or rarely, you're spending money, significant one in case of a car, thus range becomes an issue.
400 miles is the range where I
1. Seriously consider flying
2. Plan it in such a way that I can have lunch as a long break between driving sessions.
3. Rent a car and carpool with other people if it's a road-trip type thing.
It just so happens that my friends are either all within 150 miles of me, or so far away that driving isn't a real option.
I've known far more people who have to do a 400-600 mile drive at least once a month.
All you're doing is letting a dickhead bully win and letting bad people get away with bad behavior.
If I'm in my WRX and I do need to go above 75 quickly, I can drop into 4th and get to 80 more quickly. But I've got a stick so I can do that. If I'm in something with a slushbox, I have to wait for the thing to decide that downshifting is needed before it will pick up. I'll admit the Toyota Hybrids hit a good 'in-between' for these (probably closer to an EV than either a Manual or a slushbox.) I'll get a bit of instant acceleration but anything after a half second to second is a bit slower.
If he's riding your rear bumper for 5 miles after the fact, well obviously he wasn't in that much of a rush to begin with.
This morning I was in the rightmost lane doing 5 over and I indeed had someone come up at me 15+ over and ride my ass.
Was I supposed to just pull over to the shoulder at that point or kowtow?
Sometimes, but not so common not in my experience.
But I don't think a powerful engine is needed in that scenario either. The only case where it's really needed is accelerating up a steep hill.
Also, a bigger motor can be more reliable, if you're not running it at full bore you've probably got better heat dissipation so it will last longer.
The other issue is people's addiction for large vehicles; bigger vehicle means bigger battery means more weight means more power needed to move everything. As an example a Blazer EV weighs 25-35% more than the ICE version. Take that with the comments about reliability, it counter-intuitively makes a lot of sense that the Blazer EV has a 500hp motor vs the 200-300HP in the ICE.
As far as 'acceleration' itself, Acceleration tends to be more of a factor of torque curve. Electric motors tend to give lots of torque very quick... I accidentally chirp the tires on my Ford Maverick in a year more times than I was ever able to do even trying in my WRX. [0]
[0] - Sure, the WRX is all wheel drive but it's also a good 450 pounds lighter than the Mav.
The i3 is rear wheel drive but it's also rear wheel motor. Bigger skateboard battery means lower center of gravity. But perhaps the biggest factor is RWD the drive wheels don't have to steer (I'd say at least 2/3 of my 'chirps' were starting a turn). I'd be willing to wager the BMW has a better TCS software too.
Also I don't run stock tires on my Maverick, I run DriveGuard Plus[1] which are probably less grippy than the standard tires.
[1] - FWIW The WRX has 'OG' DriveGuard tires, The Plus supposedly are a -little- more grippy... Only lost 1 or 2 MPG on the Maverick changing to them from stock.
I think targetting the 99.9th percentile trip is maybe even a bit low. A commuting American has at least two car trips per typical day, probably more like 5. So 1 trip in a thousand means something that comes up more than annually.