I would use something other than mpge. Tesla advertises numbers you won't see in the real world, more so than some other manufacturers (Porsche is an example that goes the opposite direction and under-promises). The EPA test isn't anywhere close to as objective as many people believe, there are ways to game it.
I do wish my Model 3 LR would actually go 358 miles on a charge, that's for sure, but it would have to get even lower Wh/mi than Tesla claims on the Monroney sticker. I suppose that's not the most egregious lie on Tesla's web site, however.
Engineering first? From the company with 1 inch gaps between panels? From the company that had no mechanical handles in the back, so if the electrical stuff stopped working (say, because the battery was on fire), passengers in the back had to finish a puzzle to find out how to get out of the car?
Physically, no, but practically there is little incentive. ICEVs are so inefficient to begin with that small improvements don't really move the needle much on fueling cost like they do with EVs. Combined with the fact that you necessarily have to carry a great deal more energy with you in an ICEV anyway.
Electric motors are very efficient, regenerative braking helps, EVs are designed to be super aerodynamic, etc.