There are many reasons, besides lower cost, why people buy particular cars. Also, are you sure you aren't being confusing with how you're using "impractical"?
Unaffordable is impractical. Most families cannot afford an extra $5K unless there is a reasonable amount of benefit to them, they don't have that kind of disposable income.
So unless they can quantify why a Bolt is superior to a Hybrid (and cost definitely isn't a winning argument) you'll struggle to convince the average American household to own one.
> Unaffordable is impractical. Most families cannot afford an extra $5K unless there is a reasonable amount of benefit to them, they don't have that kind of disposable income
If 'most families' acted in the rational manner you present above, then people wouldn't be leasing/financing new cars at the insanely high rate we do in the US. Given that there's a market for it though, the Bolt seems like a great option for GM to offer....
There is no relationship between "unaffordable" and "won't cost exactly as much as an equivalent hybrid until driven 450,000 miles." If you're equivocating, why not condemn the hybrid by comparing it with a traditional gas engine?
I thought the point was to stop polluting? If not polluting has to be cheaper and easier, too, none of these conversations will make any sense.
