MalcolmReynolds said:
If you can get the efficiency from the car then the smaller pack is an advantage for weight, and charge times.
Granted that's true . . . . and as more and more consumers learn what they actually
need and quit comparing BEV's to cars which hold 400 miles worth of fuel, we'll see the market for small EV's really begin to take off. Every pound of battery you put in an EV, the less efficient the car will be, largely because you'll be hauling around extra battery power you will very seldom use. When the iMiEV was first introduced, I'll bet 90% of ICE drivers looked at any BEV with '
only' 65 miles of range as a pretty useless vehicle. But, as most anyone here will tell you, 65 miles will serve at least 80% of the average drivers daily needs, or more like 95% for some of us
If you really
need an EV with 100 or 150 or 200 miles of range, by all means go out and buy one, but for the average person, that's way more than they
need . . . . they just don't know that . . . . yet
It would be nice if we had a Cd of .25 instead of .35 and granted, that would definitely improve range, but it would also reduce the usability of the vehicle. We can haul 4 'real sized' adults and most of them would say this is the easiest car to get into and out of they've ever ridden in, plus we can put the seats down and haul really outsized cargo. Should we give most of that up for another 15 or 20 miles of range?? We wouldn't gain that much anyway - I would say no - I would vote to keep my cars just as they are because they better serve
MY needs than a sleeker, less practical for everyday use vehicle
Mitsu is never going to 'redesign' the car - They didn't sell well enough the first time around and I'm sure they've tired of losing money on the platform
Don