> Why not with US vehicles? Do you think US consumers will continue buying combustion cars even when EVs are cheaper?
Not OP, but I would speculate north american consumers have more range anxiety than many markets (300km range would suit a larger portion of the market in Asia and Europe than in North America). Also, fuel taxes are significantly lower in North America (and the US in particular) than Europe and Asia, so combustion engined vehicles will remain total-cost-competitive for a few years longer.
While I agree with your post in a rational sense, people don't buy their vehicles that way. They buy SUVs for their daily commute, because a few times a year they like to go somewhere that AWD (or the extra storage space, or the extra ground clearance, or..) is useful.
> I know Americans can drive a lot, but I still think 300km or range vastly exceeds 95%+ of use cases.
For commutes, sure. But I know a lot of people (most?) who like to travel to the next city to see their parents (450km), or go camping/hiking/skiing (wilderness where chargers aren't common, 200km one way). A 300 km range wouldn't cut it for them (and a 100km range wouldn't be good for anything except daily commute).
Several of my family members have gotten plug-in hybrids - 40km range, but backed with a gas engine. That means their daily commute (or most of it, with winter weather range impact) is electric, and they have gas for when they want or need to go further (eg kids sports on the other side of the city).
I intend to buy an electric car, but probably not until my current yaris gives up the ghost. I'm willing to put up with the inconvenience of a 400km range, even though I regularly do a 1400km one-way drive, and filling up the battery with a supercharger will take about 15 hours instead of 13 with gas fills.
That's encouraging that at least one company is serious.
Why not with US vehicles? Do you think US consumers will continue buying combustion cars even when EVs are cheaper?