We made some comments before about developing a more refined range list:
http://listsofjohn.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=234
The consensus is Bob's Range list is not acceptable. This type of thing gets to be pretty arbitrary, and some inconsistent decisions would need to be made to develop anything.
problematic examples:
What is the "true" boundary of the Sneffels Range - does it include the "T" peaks (if not, what about Dallas and "T 0") - what about the Ice Lakes Basin Area - is that a separate range?
Is Anthracite Range really a range (two ranked peaks)?
Why are Pikes Peak and Mount Evans considered part of the Front Range while the Rampart Range in between gets its own range? Kenosha Mountains? Platte River Mountains? Retirement Range? Puma Hills?
Does every USGS name that ends with "Hills" imply a range?
I think it is best to let this concept of Range HPs die...