I like this approach. Similar to what some EV drivers are already doing when they hitch generator-trailers to their EVs, but with the potential for more efficient utilization of power from the ICE.

Another advantage (for both this and the trailer approach) is that you are less likely to be caught owning a petroleum-powered car when oil prices go through the roof. By then, there will likely be one or more alternatives that could be swapped in. Rather than having to sell a gasoline car into a market that doesn't want it and buy a whole new car, you could keep your car and just swap in whatever range extender happens to be the best power plant -- whether that be a better battery pack with a future fast-charging network, a CNG engine with a future refueling network, a fuel cell with a Hydrogen refueling network, or whatever.

I think they'll need to get the cost down under $20k, though. That's about the level I'd consider it worth considering, anyway. $33k is a lot to pay for what is essentially an EV with a 25 mile range. Figure the 17 kWh pack will add another $10k (whether purchased, leased, or rented, if you're using one for most of the life of the vehicle, you've got to pay for its cost one way or another). So you're looking at over $40k for a subcompact that still requires that you rent an engine for long trips. And make sure you reserve that engine well in advanced for the holiday weekend when demand for them peaks.

I'll be interested in seeing what comes of this. I wish them the best.

This is more likely to succeed than a flying, nuclear powered car.
But not by much.

A well designed version of this idea (as oft proposed here) might be ideal for the "MPG fringe" and really not a bad concept, but unfortunately it would likely be even less successful than the Insight I; and for the same reasons; low mass appeal.

By the time you wanted to upgrade or rent the "ICE module" they would be out of business and you would have rent (or more likely BUILD) your own ICE trailer.

Just put PV panels on your roof and pretend it makes sense.

It is already as easy to share cars as it is to share wives - why neither is widespread may or may not be for the same reasons.

@Toppa - a fine social question there ...

Why don't people share their cars more ?
Especially their second cars.

I suppose they feel very attached to their cars and don't like the idea of other people leaving their biscuits and sweet wrappers in them.

However, people are happy enough to rent cars from an unknown 3rd party.

So the EV companies should be able to arrange this, but using your insurance to keep costs down, possibly using their own ICE cars (i.e. Nissan Almera/Altima etc.)

They could allow you rent/swap/borrow a grade up, so you would be happy about it.

Swapping personal cars or group ownership could be promoted by the government (especially in countries that do not have native car industries), by forcing insurance companies to allow it.

You have to accept that EVs are not good for long runs at present, and if they want to sell them to people without other cars, they have to solve the long run problem, and if that means using another car every now and then, they should make it happen.

I do not see insurance as an issue.

Rental companies carry/provide/sell insurance to the renter or you can be an self insured/bonded renter.

Sharing cars seems unlikely outside a commune and renting an ICE whenever you want to go further than 100 or 200 miles would seem unlikely also.