> But you're going to stop somewhere along that path already, right?

Honestly, no, I didn't. It's only 2 hours. Having to stop for a 30+ minute charge in each direction would add a significant amount of time to the trip.

I don't really understand why you're being so aggressive about this. We are almost entirely agreeing. 300mi is a selling point for buyers because it means an easier time doing 100+ mile road trips, which are not uncommon in the US. More range is a tick in the "pro" column when comparison shopping, and it could convince someone to buy a car other than this one. That's all I'm saying.

▲

gravatron 12 hours ago | parent | next [-]

All this guy has done for 2 days is make bad arguments in car posts. I don't think he is a very happy person.

▲

vel0city 12 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Having to stop for a 30+ minute charge in each direction would add a significant amount of time to the trip.

Sure it would, but why would you? It would be more like one 20 minute charge in Brainerd. Maybe a half hour if you want some extra buffer. And that's assuming you're unable to charge wherever you're staying.

▲

coldpie 12 hours ago | parent [-]

Well I mean yeah. That's exactly my point, you don't have to do that with the 300mi range. I think 300mi is the "sweet spot" where you're probably going to stop anyway to take a break or whatever, or your trip will be done already, so charging isn't really an issue. 200mi feels on the short side to me, and I think my Brainerd trips are a good example of the difference that 100mi difference makes.

	▲	vel0city 11 hours ago \| parent [-]
		And my point is people will often overestimate their needs, like suggesting for that few times a year road trip they'll need to stop twice for probably an hour or more on their trip when in reality it'd be more like one twenty minute stop.

▲

12 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[deleted]