A new company called Slate Auto — backed by Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, among others — just rolled out its first vehicle, a modular truck/SUV so basic it doesn’t come with paint, heated seats, power windows, speakers, aluminum wheels, or even an infotainment screen. And yet, at around $27,000, it’s not exactly cheap. That’s because it’s fully electric, which in my opinion is the wrong powertrain choice for a high-volume “people’s car,” at least right now. Here’s why.
I think going fully electric with a budget-minded vehicle just isn’t the move right now if the goal is super-high volume.
Slate showed me around its headquarters earlier this month, pointing out the fascinating new vehicle it had engineered — a “back to basics” machine missing many of the features most Americans generally expect in a modern car. The whole concept is refreshing given the heavy “trimflation” and elevated MSRPs of modern cars, and as Slate’s rep showed me how spartan its truck was, I couldn’t help but become more and more excited. I have for years believed that modern vehicles have become far too expensive and far too jam-packed with features that the layperson doesn’t need to get to and from work.
And yet, when the Slate rep told me the truck’s price, I couldn’t help but be disappointed.
The Content Per Dollar Ratio Doesn’t Seem Competitive (Depending On Rebate/Tariffs)
Mid-20Ks. Roughly the price of a Subaru Crosstrek.
To be sure, EV incentives would bring the Slate’s price down below $20,000, which is cheap for any new car, but given the precarious nature of the $7,500 new clean-vehicle incentive, it’s possible this new Slate will cost consumers over $27 big ones when it launches in late 2026. And $27+ grand for a car with no paint, no infotainment system, and no radio is just not competitive at all.
Have you seen how much car you get when you buy a $21,895 Chevy Trax or $21,885 Kia Soul? Here’s the Slate’s interior:
And here’s the Trax’s and Soul’s:
Here’s how the Slate comes from the factory, paintless and with only two doors:
And here’s the Trax and the Soul — colorful and door-rich:
Right about now, you’re probably looking at the pictures above thinking: “OK, so those are dirt cheap cars that do have more creature comforts than the Slate, but even if I think the Soul is fun and the Trax is handsome, The Slate looks so much cooler!”
And I agree! But another SUV with plenty off-road-ish cool-factor is the Subaru Crosstrek, which starts at a reasonable $27,230 — right around what the Slate costs sans rebate. And not only does it have four doors, but it comes with standard all-wheel drive, while the Slate is rear-drive only. Plus, look at everything else it gets in the interior:
We also have to talk about the other small pickup truck built by an American company: The Ford Maverick. Though the 2024 model cost about the same as the Slate, the 2025 model is now up to $29,285 for the hybrid and $29,860 for the turbo four.
That’s a bit more change, though the Maverick is clearly at least five grand more car, with the turbo four-cylinder coming with an eight-speed automatic that will help Iget the truck to 60 mph in under 6.5 seconds compared to the Slate’s 8 seconds (which is about the same as the 38 MPG hybrid Maverick’s 0-60). But it’s not the acceleration that matters, it’s the standard four doors (which is huge to U.S. consumers) and other standard content.
The Maverick looks fantastic, it’s got power windows and an infotainment system, plus it’s got double the towing capacity and a little more payload capacity than the Slate, and all still under 30 big-ones.
So it’s pretty clear that, especially if that EV rebate goes away and this slate costs $27,000 or something in between, the consumer is getting way, way less content per dollar when compared with other budget cars out there.
That said, some of the cars mentioned above — the Trax, Soul and Maverick — are built in other countries, and given the threat of heavy tariffs on imported cars, it’s possible that these vehicles could see a price hike that would make them pricer than the America-built Slate. The Crosstrek, though, is built in the U.S.
But especially if the tariffs end up being just a threat, and deletion of the EV rebate becomes more than a threat, then reality is that, given all the cost cutting, the Slate won’t really be a cheap car, it’ll just be a cheap EV. And whether someone at the bottom of the new-car market is willing to give up standard features and pay more money just to have an EV, I’m not so sure, especially given the challenges associated with EV still to this day. Let’s get into that.
A 150-Mile-Range EV Isn’t Really The Right ‘People’s Car’ For America
When Slate set out to build this truck, the goal was to create a true People’s Car — something budget-friendly for the masses. The vision was a “back to basics, only the essentials truck, and the narrative did outline low-cost solutions for suspensions and minimal-size battery that gets 150 miles of range,” said Eric Keipper, head of engineering at Slate.
He told me the goal was a “Minimal size battery that allows us to optimize for the customer’s commuting needs.” As for a gasoline motor, he said that was “not a consideration,” going on to say: “Literally the first drawing that I put on the whiteboard was how we package the battery.”
“If you’re gonna bring a new car to market, it’s gonna be a BEV,” he told me, saying it’s the right solution given where the industry is going and all the improvements in charging infrastructure.
I respectfully disagree.
I think there are a few problems with choosing an EV as a people’s car in 2025. The first has to do with the political climate and the very possible removal of EV rebates, which will only amplify the cost issue: even a “cheap” EV is expensive when compared to a similarly equipped gas car (or even a hybrid, in some cases).
Second, 150 miles isn’t enough range.
I realize that most commutes are much shorter, but that simply does not matter to many consumers. Car purchases are not rational, and proof of that requires looking no further than the current crop of EVs on the road; think about how many people buy 300+ mile Teslas and Rivians and Hyundais — they’re all probably spending over $10,000 extra and adding over 1,000 pounds of weight to their car just to have some extra range they rarely need.
Look at the prices of 2019-2021 BMW i3 Rexes versus BMW i3 BEVs — both of them offer about 150 miles of range, and most people with the range extender pretty much never use it (me included). And yet range extender-equipped i3s are far more valuable than otherwise equivalent fully electric i3s. People want a backup. Whether that’s in the form of a gas generator or excess battery capacity, I truly think the average person — especially if they live in a cold climate, where 150 miles might actually be 120 — sees a 150-mile BEV as a second car, not an only car.
And when we’re talking about the bottom of the consumer market, the idea that budget-oriented folks are going to buy two cars, with the second helping fill in their brand new EV’s practicality gaps, is a bit silly.
Beyond that is the fact that many people shopping at the bottom of the market do not have a single-family home in which to charge their car. Apartment and condo-dwellers often have to park outside or in a poorly-equipped parking garage. For them, a 150-mile EV is problematic, as it likely means having to charge multiple times a week at a public charger.
And that’s its own issue: charging infrastructure and utility rates aren’t ideal. I live in LA, California, where EV charging infrastructure is better than that of 99% of the United States. And yet, it can still be a big pain in the arse. Of course, Slate will use the NACS plug that presumably works with Tesla Superchargers, so finding a charger shouldn’t be too bad, but the cost thing is still a concern.
Juice from public fast-chargers — which many people living in apartments would have to rely on — can often be more expensive than gasoline on a per-mile basis. I found that out when driving the Rivian R1S to Las Vegas; at one charger, I paid 66 cents per kWh! But even at a more reasonable 40 cents per kWh, if this Slate manages a good 3.4 mi/kWh on the freeway; that’s $4 to go 34 miles. Given current gas prices in California, that’d cost about the same as gasoline for a 41 MPG gas vehicle. You’d spend less money filling up a new 56 MPG Prius, which you can get in the upper $20K range (of course EVs are easier to maintain, but still).
It’s worth pointing out that Nissan currently sells a 150-mile range car for about $29,000 — the Leaf S. While that’s pricier than the Slate, and it’s not a truck, it does have four doors and basic creature comforts. Nissan sells a modest 11,000-ish Leafs a year, and some of those are the 212-mile variant.
This Seems Like A Hard Sell, But Then There Is The ‘Cool Factor’
Let’s just imagine if Slate hadn’t chosen an electric powertrain, but instead a gasoline one. In theory, it’d be cheaper to make than the Ford Maverick or even the Chevy Trax or Kia Soul (obviously, these established companies have economies of scale, so it’s not quite that simple). Imagine an $18,000 pickup truck/SUV that looks as badass as the Slate? I’d walk straight to the dealership, realize that Slate doesn’t have dealerships and is selling straight-to-consumer, and order one online immediately.
Toyota offers a truck that’s not that different from the Slate in that it was built with extreme cost-saving in mind. It’s called the Toyota Hilux Champ, and the base price for the gasoline, five-speed manual (optional six-speed auto) equipped truck is just over $13,000!:
Granted, this thing is built in Thailand is only comes “70 percent finished,” per Road & Track’s interview with Toyota, but still. Even at, say, 18 grand I’d find that compelling and, importantly, usable.
Then there’s the concept of extended-range EVs, EREVs — which, along with a regular hybrid, make most sense, even over a gas one like the Champ above. To me, an EREV Slate would make for a more compelling high-volume “people’s car” than this BEV. You could cut the battery size from 52.7 kWh to 25 kWh, and offer an EV range of about 80 miles, which is plenty for commuters. And when those 80 miles run out, you can just run it on gasoline, making the vehicle palatable for far, far more users than a 150 mile BEV — and at about the same cost.
In 2022, when Slate started this project, the regulatory environment was different than it is now. The sky seemed to be falling for gas cars, and there was very much a “Go BEV or else” attitude in the air globally. I can sympathize with automakers on that; whereas in other nations like China, there has been a firm and united front on electrification, things in the western world are yo-yoing back and forth to no end. It’s challenging, but in a way it means you have to design a vehicle that can weather uncertainty.
And it seems to me that Slate is relying too heavily on the EV rebate sticking around and tariffs cranking up the prices of other cars in the segment. Because if it’s between even a $3-5K pricier Ford Maverick — which comes with paint, an infotainment system, power windows, and a 120-year old company reputation — and a bare-bones, two-door Slate that can only go 150 miles on a charge, it’s pretty obvious which one is the better “people’s car.”
I asked Slate about this. Specifically, I asked its team: “If the tax credit disappears, what about the new Slate do you think will make it more compelling than a similarly-priced gasoline car with significantly more features? (i.e. Ford Maverick).” Here was their response:
If incentives go away, Slate will remain well-positioned in the U.S. with a strong proposition of value, safety, and customization. Slate’s commitment to American manufacturing is foundational to our business, and we are on track to a 2026 start of production, thanks to our highly experienced team and top industry partners.
The “customization” bit is one that I’m going to end on here, because even if a bargain EV doesn’t really make sense as a volume “people’s car” on paper, you can’t ignore the cool-factor.
And while I do think the Slate’s design is a little Ford Bronco Sport-ish, it is cool, and the fact that you can add features later instead of having to tick the King Ranch/Longhorn/LX box at initial purchase is extra cool.
I don’t think the Slate, as currently configured and priced, is going to become the next Volkswagen Beetle or Ford Model T, but I do think its DIY strategy for adding features, its cool interchangeable roofs that let you change body styles, its overall rugged and boxy shape, and its simplicity are deeply compelling and charming, and it will be those intangibles that could bring Slate to more roadways than pure logic might lead you to think.
I don’t know that people looking for a cheap car as their only form of transportation are going to be the ones behind the wheel, but especially if the rebate sticks around, folks like me who have another car and space at home to charge might not be able to resist a cool, brand new, two-door, fuel-saving commuter-pickup for $19 grand, even if you could get a used 300+ mile Hyundai Ioniq 5 for the same price.
UPDATE: I suspected this might upset EV diehards, so I’ll just note: I’m not saying the Slate isn’t a badass vehicle (I say the opposite), nor am I saying it’s not going to sell in significant volumes. I’m saying that — in part because of its powertrain and two door design — it faces significant challenges if it wants to become a true people’s car (like a Corolla or old Beetle). This is hardly a hot take for 2025, though battery developments could totally change the calculus. Also, I could be entirely wrong. Also, note that most outlets are reporting that the Slate is expected to cost over $27,000, so that has been adjusted accordingly.
UPDATE 2: It’s also worth noting that, no, I’m not suggesting that developing a new ICE from scratch would be the move, here. In fact, that’d be prohibitively expensive for a startup. Also, some have mentioned that, though the federal tax credit may go away, states might offer a tax credit of their own. I think that’s great, especially since that tax credit should also apply to EREVs, which are currently more palatable to the masses than BEVs. Another thing that’s fairly straightforward is the reality that “electric” is a buzzword that’s pretty much necessary to get startup funding. Lucid, Rivian, Canoo, Slate, etc. — lots of companies that have received investment because electric is the hot newness, even if they’ve all struggled to make a profit.
Thank you everyone for your comments! There were some very passionate, sometimes heated ones! While a few folks let that passion lead them to insults, by and large there’s been great discourse between folks who think the Slate works as a volume people’s car and those who don’t.
Thank you all for reading and for participating in valuable discussions about the current state/the future of automobiles! None of us are oracles, so we can only opine on some of these issues, but sharing knowledge and perspectives is great, and makes this the best car community on the web.
Thank you!
AFAIK, a range extender still has to pass EPA, which is a large cost. As much as I love the idea (maybe not as a truck as I’m not a truck person, though this is the kind of thing I’d want if I did want a truck), even I would be hesitant to buy from an unknown. Setting aside that new companies often take quite a while to get the ride/handling compromise down (some never seem to) and work through issues, plus the risk of them going under, this is simply uncompetitive and unappealing to quite a lot of people without the rebate, with the rebate only really making it appealing because it makes it about the cheapest thing one could buy, so it’s more an instance of acceptance for the price than desire. And while I like the idea of mods to some extent, I don’t want to be nearly forced to do so (like instal a stereo. Sure, I did that a dozen times on mine and friends used old shitboxes in high school and later, but this is a brand new vehicle and, frankly, I’d rather have those $500 shitboxes were they still available and even they came from the factory with radios) and no paint?! Wrap isn’t paint, it’s an expensive, temporary finish. How about ditch the wuss “safety” garbage and throw in a DIN shelf and some paint instead? If you’re going to appeal to the people who are frightened of power windows (something I have never had fail, though I have plenty of memories of manual window cranks breaking off and regulators falling apart, which is independent of mechanical motivation), the active “safety” crap is also a turn off. And for all of us who talk about simplicity, how many will pull the trigger on something like this to prove it, much less the large number of Normals they need to win over?
They have the looks down, being simple in a way that reflects the vehicle itself, its use, and it looks friendly and familiar in a way that is smartly reassuring for a new company, but what else does it have? I understand the truck/CUV market is the biggest, but not for 2 doors and being a truck is not helping its already short range. Even look at the Bronco, a far more luxury and image oriented purchase—I must see ten 4-doors for every 2-door and that’s with the 2-door looking massively better. OK, that’s anecdotal, but I’m sure the sales numbers reflect a large imbalance that backs up my observation. People just don’t want 2-doors (yes, I do and I even daily one, and maybe you, too, but we don’t buy enough cars and some of us can’t get them for practical reasons or affordability even if we want them).
Given the Slate’s modularity and frunk space, I could see an aftermarket solution for putting in a gas generator engine to juice up the battery (a REX). We’ve seen how small these engines can get.
Respectfully, David, you’re absolutely wrong.
Let’s face it, China is eating our lunch right now in the electric vehicle department. All other US makers are focused on high-margin EV’s with lots of extra crap to inflate the price, while China is selling cheap. If the US wants any world-wide traction in the EV market, we can’t go up-market.
The ONLY way forward is to show domestic automakers that a small, inexpensive EV is an economically viable product.
I don’t think I disagree with you anywhere? I’m all for a cheap EV like this Slate, even if it has its limitations to the average buyer. I myself find it compelling, especially since I can charge at home and use it as a second car.
(Note: I do think the other “way forward,” especially for trucks, is EREVs, and luckily we’re heading that direction).
Love the site’s coverage of this car.
Like Cayde-6 I think I disagree with your thesis in this article, but I’m not 100% sure. Power windows and an infotainment system are active negatives in my book, I definitely disagree there.
It would be very cool if they could do with this what Toyota is doing with the new Lexus ES powertrain options – EV, hybrid, or gas, no fuss no muss, just pick what you want – If they could tuck a puny gas engine in where the electric motor is for the EV and hybrid versions.
And maybe they will if they get this off the ground.
But this operation sounds wonderfully practical in that unlike so many vaporware new vehicle companies, they have a clear vision of actually bringing a definite product to market. All the suggestions re “make a delivery version!” “make an EREV version!” “make a liftable version!” “make an all wheel drive option!” are not wrong, but would definitely make brining this to market nigh impossible.
I am hopeful these will actually show up on the road because – sort of like a Slingshot etc. (yes I know this is a full car and not a motorcycle but still) – the development and production cost is actually attainable and the team is focused on actually making something they can sell, then working from there.
Love it!
Thank you. Great thoughts!
China carmakers are loosing money on cheap cars and are only staying in business due to subsidies. Many of these subsidies come through provincial governments so they are nearly impossible to track.
You’re 100% correct. As much as I love the audience of this site, the fact that the majority of the comments are saying you’re wrong only vindicates that point of view for me. This site’s audience is not at all representative of the vehicle market at large, particularly the new vehicle market. Any time there’s a review of something like an affordable compact crossover (like the ones you presented as an alternative) it’s usually met with reactions ranging from indifference to disdain. Meanwhile cars like the Chevy Trax have been an enormous sales success for GM.
I get it, people on here like the thing because it’s bone stock, customizable, small, simple and “cheap.” I’m not denying that there’s a market for this. But at $25K starting, you’re really sacrificing a lot. You can get a new, nicely appointed ICE compact crossover for the same or less. A new gas or hybrid Maverick for marginally more. A lightly used BEV with significantly more range for about the same price. All of these alternatives are eminently more comfortable, practical and hassle free in today’s current environment.
So yeah, there’s weirdos like my Uncle who are nostalgic for single cab work trucks with crank windows who may consider buying this. But most people in the market would prefer one of the alternatives for a daily driver. I’d go so far as to say that this would also be true if they released this with an ICE powertrain for closer to $20K. It’s “cheaper” but you’re giving up a lot of car, and most people at the lower end of the market would rather just buy a nice used vehicle for about the same price or less. I don’t see this being more than a niche vehicle whether it has a ICE or BEV powertrain, and I have my doubts that’s a sustainable business model.
While Slate won’t admit it the business case for this vehicle depends on the $7500 EV tax credit sticking around. At least as a retail vehicle for the general public.
Without the tax credit it could be a niche vehicle for delivery as there is nothing playing in that space right now.
Yeah, this. As I said to my friend this morning, “I think these guys are gonna find out pretty soon that when people say “I want a function-only truck with roll up windows like they had in 1990″ it’s not because they want that truck but because they want to be young like they were when they HAD that truck”. The people who talk the most about how they want X vehicles to be available – brown diesel manual wagons, barren work trucks, tinny death traps, whatever – are almost by definition the same people who will never buy new vehicles.
They don’t want the cars, they want the past, and Slate can’t give them that.
You’re not serious about building an EV people’s car if it is:
Any taller than 1350 mm
Any wider than 1700 mm
Or AT ALL boxy or rugged-looking.
If you can put a 52 kWh pack in a car for $25k, you can build a practical people’s car with 300 miles of range for that money. It’ll look like a 1992 Civic with some aero mods and no grille.
I also disagree that a gasoline engine is at all desirable here. It forces a lot of cost and complexity and maintenance costs into the car. It also cuts the power-to-weight ratio.
You’ll have to charge at work. The power companies in CA already pay for many large employers to install Level 2 chargers so that they can soak up daytime load. Those is the way we’re heading.
Yes, midday charging at work makes SO much sense as a practical grid balancing solution as more and more solar comes online.
I just get a strange tickling feeling in the seat area from looking at those steel wheels…
The Trax is really compelling for the money, it’s had as much of a glow-up as the new Prius has, and I am excited for both of those platforms. But this is something different. It an Urban Wrangler. I love that market for the Slate. It’s like you stripped any pretentious notion of off-roading and got to the heart of what makes the Wrangler such an iconic platform. It is one of the few modern vehicles that has such a wide range of available upgrades and modifications to fit its owner’s needs. Plus, from a fleet perspective, the RAM ProMaster City starts at $34,000. A slate without incentives is still expected to start below that mark, and while not the same form factor, it should have a similar footprint and offer customization that could work well for the service industry in an urban and suburban setting.
I do think it’s interesting as a potential fleet vehicle.
People crave old (and new) Wrangler (obvs).
And new Broncos.
I think one reason is they are generally just basic car/trucks.
A segment of Jeep/Bronco People offroad with them.
MANY MANY do not ever off road them and have no desire to do so.
They just want a simple vehicle with timeless styling that generally just works.
I could see this becoming that car for a lot of people. The go to around town/errand running second car of suburbia and rural america.
150 mile EV fleet, with a consumer-focused EREV with 300+ miles range would have been perfect. I’m all-in on an EV future, however EREVs are such a no-brainer bridge for the US it’s almost criminal that this market is being basically ignored.
The NAPA by me replaced almost all their old Rangers the used to run parts with Bolts 4-5 years ago. Chick-fil-A has a fleet of Bolts for delivery too.
The Slate with the top and no seats would make a great delivery vehicle and 150 miles of range is plenty.
I don’t think the purpose of this thing is to be a “people’s car.” It’s a useful tool for fleets, contractors, and as an alternative to the beater truck. The Trax, Soul, and Maverick aren’t the competition for this thing. Kei trucks, UTVs, and the dwindling supply of decade’s old compact pickups are. That’s the role Slate will fill (assuming it’s not vaporware).
pretty sure this being backed by Bezos is likely to be a lower cost gig worker delivery vehicle. The rest of the public will likely not warm up to them until they prove to be well made and not cost prohibitive to keep running after 5 years.
That’s a strong possibility, too. Their “guerilla” marketing that used those wraps spells that out perfectly. This is a commercial vehicle.
Exactly. I’m no Bezos fan- (IMO, billionaires shouldn’t exist) but there is no denying he’s a shrewd operator. Unlike the other oligarch-backed electric pickup truck, I’d hazard to guess there is already a vetted business plan in mind for this vehicle.
To reiterate the point I’ve made many times: Aside from wealthy people with ranches- Families and private individuals DO NOT BUY *new* single-cab pickup trucks.
That’s why the Maverick has 4 doors, and the vast majority of privately-owned previous-gen Rangers and Colorados were the extended-cab model. A vehicle cannot be a people’s car unless it can regularly haul the nuclear family.
So this Slate is automatically a fleet vehicle, at which point the range and price are perfectly reasonable.
Weird how 40 years ago families and private individuals bought lots small, single cab pickup trucks despite family sizes being larger. They even sometimes used them for doing truck things.
Well, working people earned quite a bit more relative to the cost of living 40 years ago. Families could afford the luxury of owning their very own two-door commercial vehicle for utility purposes. Don’t forget that was always in addition to the spacious family station wagon…
I do know a few people who own single-cab pickup trucks, and payed good money for them.They are either young, child-free, or retired and can borrow their wife’s fancy SUV when they need anyways.
Regardless, none of this makes a commercial vehicle a ‘people’s car’, certainly not in the sense of theVW Beatle or Citroen 2CV.
Personally I see a lot of fleet Mavericks with FWD and steel wheels.
back when they first started selling them for 20,995 for a 42 MPG Hybrid base model. that was definitely something fleet groups keyed in on. Also probably why the demand was indicated the way it was. those loss leader versions were pretty limited on supply it seemed like. But plenty of people like the idea of a high MPG replacement for say the Focus that had legitimately seating for 4 and truck like looks and somewhat use options.
unfortunately pretty much like the 40K Lightning Pro with a 300 mile battery. the only people that could really buy them, and for the actual price advertised was the fleets. those mavericks were all FWD with Basic wheels.
Man what on god’s green earth are you talking about, here? The proposition here is a sub $20k BEV. The value proposition is that you get a brand new electric (presumably with a new car warranty) for very little money.
You obviate your own point with your examples of the Trax, Soul, and Maverick. $20k ICE cars already exist, so an upstart going after that market makes zero sense. You also gloss over the fact that you will be able to get one with 240 miles of range, which is more than enough.
The customizability is the marketing aspect. It’s not hey lets make a customizable cheap gas car. It’s lets get people interested in buying our cheap car and upselling them on options by making it customizable.
IDK man, this article is a lot of words dedicated to being wrong.
I think there’s a group A of people who need a $20k vehicle, and will accept one despite it being a penalty box because they just need it to live, and there is a group B of people who want an EV because environment, and a group C who love customizing and want a stripped platform for that reason.
I think the overlap between A and either B or C is near nil. And the people in group A require something that doesn’t require either non-available home charging or a daily 45 minutes wait at a public charging station after their 10 or more hour workday.
I’m telling you, I would totally buy one of these for my kid if he were driving age.
You mind if I ask what you’re disagreeing with specifically? I didn’t say there’s no market for this vehicle. This machine — a two-door car with 150 miles of range — has significant limitations as a true high-volume people’s car, and many of the points backing that up seem pretty straightforward.
As for a Trax/Soul/Crosstrek point, are you saying that, since there are already cheap cars, a company making a cooler, cheaper one can’t succeed?
It would be a LOT closer if they used the powertrain to build a CAR. That pack stuffed under a compact monospace vehicle would have a 250+ mile range.
I disagree that this would be a better people’s car if it had a gas engine. Without the Federal subsidies, you’re at the same price point for a gas slate, and now you have to take the car in for fluid changes and wear and tear on mechanical parts that aren’t there.
The cars you compare this to are wildly different and represent the conventional paradigm of car-buying. The whole concept of this car is not only that it’s cheap, not only that it’s electric (or like better for all people, I guess), but that it’s incredibly customizable.
You talk about how it’s not painted. The wrap for this this is going to be similar to what every car company charges for anything but white these days and you’ll be able to get whatever you want, not just various grays.
Yes, I think that a company making a cooler cheaper gas car cannot succeed. A) it can’t be both cooler and cheaper, and B) a new market entrant isn’t going to succeed making a volume gas car competing against the major global automakers. They have to disrupt to succeed.
There’s a reason there are vanishingly few of these cars in gas form – the margins/demand just aren’t there to support more than a couple of players, and none of the cars that exist are “cool” per se.
However, there are approximately zero cheap cool new BEVs right now. So there you go.
This sort of vehicle really makes me think of how pickups were seen when/where I grew up. A lot of households around me had one reliable and comfortable vehicle and one pickup, usually a questionable old beater, that mostly stayed local and was used to haul stuff more than commuting.
This is even better, because it will be reliable and could be a good commuter vehicle.
Personally, I would strongly consider getting rid of my RAV4 Prime and using this as my primary vehicle and maybe getting something else for long drives, like a cheap used convertible or something. But I could use this as my only vehicle and just have my partner’s car do all the road trip duties if we didn’t sometimes take separate longer trips (or if she were more willing to swap vehicles when I’m the one taking the longer trip).
100% this.
The new default second (or third) family car.
Dad gets to have a truck, but it can also be a good car to go hiking with the dogs or a kid or two (maybe three in a pinch/close by).
It doesn’t break the bank.
You have your legit family car or van or SUV for trips/more people/etc.
We’ll see!
Kind of like an MiEV except more useful!
“Give us affordable, capable, simple, easily customizable, low-maintenance, low-running cost vehicles without all the extraneous stuff”
“Here ya go!”
“Oh No – Not that! It needs more stuff and more complexity and more maintenance, and more…”
*Facepalm
I bet they’ll add a crummy infotainment module, offer it in 3 colors and raise the price by $10-15k by release. I’d consider it as-is with a range extender, but the biggest knock against it is the lack of 4 doors. Owners may not drive 4 people around all the time, but they want the ability to, and jumpseats in the truck bed aren’t going to make pulling a carseat out easy.
You can literally buy a kit to convert it into a 5-seat SUV with either a vertical or sloped hatch.
That doesn’t fix the car seat issue. Two doors do not work for people with kids in car seat. They also don’t really work for adults.
Then there is cost. If this is already $27,500 before the DIY kit to make it a 5 seater what will that kit cost? That 5 seater will be up against cars like the Equinox EV that comes with 5 seats, 4 doors, and 319 miles of range from the factory with a MSRP of $33,600.
I don’t know – this is like the perfect nibble negotiation but it moves the conversation into the family kitchen instead of the dealership floor. Buy the truck, look, its only $20,000 with the rebate! Amazon financing for zero percent or something so they can move them at first, maybe. But hey, you know, down the road when we get some free cash/our ship comes in, we can add the backseats and back roof, and it’ll be a useful family car too! I think its brilliant.
Some ppl may be trying to buy this as a primary people hauler but I highly doubt it. It’ll be the run a kid or two to practice, run an errand, etc. car. We’ll see!
The death of 2 door family vehicles in the USA makes me believe that very few people are looking for 2 door family vehicles where they have to crawl into the rear seats.
If it was really cheap – like Mitsubishi Mirage cheap – maybe but I’d bet with the rear seats and roof we are talking at least $30K
super interested as to what the “flat pack” rollbar and seats will cost – not cheap considering the seats have built in airbags etc., I am sure
And that’s why there are other choices out there.
This is why I firmly believe this is a commercial vehicle first, personal/family SUV second. You’d have to be seriously negligent as a product manager to suggest a 2-door vehicle would be acceptable for family use in 2025.
I also don’t buy that the rear doors were omitted to save money. Plenty of dirt-cheap cars like the Mirage have 4 doors. As you say, buying the separate roof topper and jump seats to unlock 5-seater functionality is guaranteed to make the cost uncompetitive vs even electric CUVs like the Equinox. If Slate were serious about competing in that space, this vehicle would have had 4 doors on day one.
As far as those who do pony up to make their Slate a 5-seater, they will use this truck as a lifestyle SUV. This will be the same demographic that buys 2-door Wranglers and Broncos, just with different preferences and a slightly lower price bracket. They will probably wait for the AWD model, and the inevitable CarPlay.
Excellent comment.
They **cannot** offer all the stuff that the commentariot are hilariously demanding and be a startup that actually brings a product to market.
This is exactly what we’ve been asking for!
I think this looks very cool, and I hope it’s successful because it has a bunch of good ideas that, when validated, could extend to other carmakers.
That said, the comparison against similarly-priced gas cars does look pretty unfavorable because of the NEED of someone that this price point targets. The range issue is a valid one – and I agree with what was also mentioned by a lot of the comments that this might be a reach as a first car.
Which makes me wonder whether the true comparison is not necessarily what other new cars you could get for this price, but what gently USED cars this amount of money gets you. If you’re a person who could stretch to spend up to the mid-20s on a car, but that you’re really going to scrutinize the decision…aren’t there a ton of used options that would make more sense?
It just seems to me that when you’re talking about the higher-end (Teslas, Rivians, BMWs, etc.), then new-car to new-car price points matter more. At the lower end, the noted price competition in advertising and in car websites/mags will be against other new cars but in practice I feel that it’s more about how this would stack up against used cars.
I mean, yeah, OK.
The fact that you are comparing this to a used car is, I think, what people will do.
And buying something new is just better for many people.
I could get a used chainsaw that perfectly fits my needs, on Marketplace or whatever, for a lot less than a new one.
But if I just bite the bullet and buy a new one, it’ll be mine, and new, and if I treat it right it will work great forever!
Also, these will become extremely affordable used cars in a couple years.
I think the easiest way to get people to move to EV’s is to offer something different, exciting, and cheap. You can’t have all 3. Tesla, Rivian, Lucid, Polestar, etc. are all under the different and exciting category. Chevy, Honda, Ford, etc. have tried to go different and cheap, but forgotten the cheap part in some aspects.
Slate looks to put all 3 together in one go and I think it’s a great idea. Think about how many people will be able to buy one and do all the fun modification stuff, these can truly be a “personal” vehicle. I see this doing big numbers on the West Coast for sure. In fact, this feels like a very West Coast idea to make a cheap, basic, customize as you go EV. If they can pull off all 3 options and sell them, it very well could be the new “people’s car”.
I’m just thinking about my local Farmer’s Market. I can see several small businesses buying one, wrapping it with their logo, and showing up to sell their wears out the back with a small tent. All without any major maintenance costs of an ICE powertrain.
I also see these becoming the new Student Driver vehicles, same with being a car for teenagers. Tough, easy to replace plastic panels with not a lot of range or power. It’s perfect for a teenager as they can “make it their own” as well. Damn, I really like this thing.
Love this take. Agree!
I’ve been looking for someone to produce a “minimum viable truck” for a while now, and this is as close as I’ve seen since my Datsun 720 pickup. Small, cheap, fewer features to break, enough bed space (but not any more), and a small but useful tow capacity. The relatively spacious frunk is a bonus, but the limited range means it’s not very viable for other stuff I like to do with trucks, like off-grid camping in the desert, or river running with its long drive-arounds.
I’d give up the frunk for a small 4-cylinder engine/Trans and FWD, either with or without EV capability, but that would surely add complications/$$ to the equation.
But it’s close, so close.
Oooh you need to trademark MVT; brilliantly dorky application of agile methodology. The modular and DIY-focused platform makes adding functionality later more possible than anything else on the market. I’d argue that increases value because it could extend ownership beyond when a buyer would typically trade in for a different car.
my MVT used to be a 2004 Ford Sport Trac, looked around and now have a 24 Maverick..
what I really wanted was a Nissan 1400 though.. 0-60 time of, eventually..
can’t see how the Slate can compete, as David says – Maverick has all mod cons, no starter pack addons needed, and over 500 mile range at 42mpg (my avg so far).
To do truck things outside the city, 150 miles is completely inadequate.
If I won the lottery I’d have a Slate, it would be a fun city car for tootling around. Kinda love it, but impractical.
How often do you off-grid camp in the desert? A gas generator would likely fit in that frunk….
A couple of times a year, not as often as I’d like to, but often enough that i don’t want to fart around with renting a suitable vehicle. I definitely don’t want the risk of running out of juice someplace outside Kanab or Mexican Hat with no good way to get back to paved roads, much less an actual charger. If I’m gonna have to haul a genny around for emergencies, I might as well bring an RV or stupid expensive “overlanding” rig.
I grew up on desert adventures based out of my dad’s ’74 VW bus. Looking for the same combo of cheap, tough (or easy to fix when broken) and willing, but not finding it. Unfortunately, you can’t just strap a few jerry-cans of electrons to the back of an EV the way you can with emergency gas.
You hit the nail on the head with the observation that it doesn’t really work as an only car, but didn’t quite take it home. It has to at least be a second, which means it costs at least twice as much as the sticker price. At double the cost, you open up your single car options dramatically, and once you tack on practicalities like insurance and parking, the value proposition is gone.
Different strokes for different folks. This would work fine for a commuter car in a 2-car household.
So yes, there aren’t many people that are going to accept this as the only vehicle in the household. But that doesn’t mean every individual will need a 2nd car. Nor does it mean that the second car would be another brand new car.
Most families in the USA have multiple cars so choosing to have one of those cars be an EV doesn’t “double the cost”. At least not if someone is looking at vehicles in a logical instead of emotional way.
My wife and I got our first EV back in 2016. Not because I wanted an EV but because it was basically the cheapest possible way to own a second car. Our Spark EV had a $99 a month / zero down / 39 month lease. My work had free chargers so we did 80-90% of the charging at work. All in “Lease, Insurance, Maintenance, Fuel) that car cost me 28 cents per mile. (Biggest maintenance expense was for performance all-season tires to tame the 400 lb-ft of torque)
It also only had an 82 mile range (100 in summer / 65 in winter) but worked fine for my 50 mile round trip commute and errands around town. It also showed us that we only need on long range vehicle. Not once in 39 months did the range become an issue because if we were leaving town we just drove the other car. When the lease was up the car went back to GM as my wife was commuting to work on her bike and we dropped to one car.
A few year later she switched jobs to one with a 50 mile commute so we went back to 2 cars with a used 2017 Bolt EV. That car has an EPA 259 mile range which is 300 miles in summer and 200 in winter. Again, range has never been an issue but the longer range means that now the majority of our miles are EV. Now with hundreds of EVs at work chasing 12 chargers the Bolt gets mostly charged at home but at 9 cents per kWh on time of use billing that works out to a bit less than 3 cents per mile.
David gets it! Hell yeah!
There is a solution not sold in the US, called Suzuki Jimny.
I immediately thought of this as well. A Jimny Sierra 5-door with the 1.5-liter engine would be fun to see in the U.S. market.
I am in Brazil currently, and those are fairly prevalent…but here they only get the 2-door version. in Chile, you can get the 4-door variant, which I am tempted to buy there and just drive it here
Yes, but don’t forget just how important 4-doors are to the average buyer.
The 4-door Jimny exists!
That’s right!
I think the point that was mentioned that there is no infotainment screen will keep this from truly being a peoples car. Will they sell a ton to business? Yes, but for mass market adoption like it of hate it most Americans won’t buy it, having a screen is seen as a status symbol and pretty much expected on every car today.
That said I really like the minimalistic styling, and the interior is refreshing to see.
The Slate is a plug and play choose you own screen option. Anything from just your phone to a giant tablet.
Eh, I think screens as status symbols is getting pretty played out by now. People are realizing that physical buttons make a better interface in a car where your attention needs to be on the road. Also consider that the average age of a car on the road today is something like 12 years old. If you are like me and like to hang onto your cars for many years, then would you rather be stuck with a 12 y.o. screen or have the capability to easily mount a brand-new iPad/Android tablet? I think the upgradability is a major selling point.
I love a 2 door SUV and would totally buy one. And the more I think about it, the less I’d miss power windows. I really only use them in parking garages and drive thrus. But I agree, this is not a good value. They designed the cheapest EV that anyone could stand to drive and then priced it one dollar less than the cheapest one on the market, like that one asshole on The Price Is Right.
Somebody will make a “snap in” range extender for it, and somebody will make a roof mounted solar array for it (a la Squad Mobility’s City Car).
Personally, I’d go for the solar. Given my use case for the vehicle, I’d probably never have to plug it in.
I disagree.
If this were the same exact vehicle but had a gas motor, it would be dead in the water. Too many other well established options exist, and no one would buy into this because it’s too new, and an Amazon car.
But this… this is exactly what needs to come to market. 150 miles is more than enough, and that will only work if automotive reviewers stop trying to tell us it isn’t. David, this car is not meant to drive across the country in. It simply isn’t, and trying to force this narrative is feeding into the negative frenzy around BEV’s. Please stop it.
This is more than enough, and we need folks like you to stop saying it isn’t, when you clearly know it is. Stop it with the “if it only had a gas motor” shit. I’m sorry, but this is getting too frustrating to keep reading.
Elon is a douche. His cars are great though. So are the rest of the BEV’s out there. We finally have a company giving us EXACTLY what we need, a cheap BEV, and this should be fully embraced.
This comes down to an education issue. Automotive websites like this need to push the narrative that you don’t need a gas motor, and even as a renter with a crappy extension cord, this vehicle solves 98% of your life needs. When you feed the fear narrative, you hold back progress, which is all this article does.
I agree with you on this, but with out an infotainment screen (is it an option?) most Americans will pass on this, its seen as part of the “status” of owning a car now.
I suppose the average car buyer is too short sighted to see it, but no infotainment is one of the greatest perks. Nothing to go obsolete. Spend $500 on a head unit (you can still get a big touchscreen and carplay) and speakers and get on with life. Replace as needed when it ages out.
Our website absolutely does not have an obligation to tell people to go out and buy 150-mile EVs.
A car is often the first or second most expensive purchase in one’s life, so we take what we write very seriously, and do not try to push people towards certain types of cars just because we like them or because we think they’re going to save the world.
We want consumers to purchase the right car for their lifestyle. And if you can only have one car and you can’t charge at home, I cannot recommend purchasing a low-range BEV in 2025.
The whole “You only need X miles to get to work and back” just doesn’t matter. Car buying is not rational, and people have been purchasing vehicles with far, far more capability than needed since the beginning. That’s not going to change, and meeting the market where it is is the best way to get folks driving electric daily, which is why I’m such a big fan of EREVs.
P.S. No need to get personal; I like the Slate, too. I just don’t think it’s for everyone, and because of this it is limited in how great of a “people’s car” it can be. This really isn’t that hot of a take.
You aren’t writing articles saying that the McLaren P1 should have an electric motor in it. Nor are you writing articles that say “GM Once Tried To Make Diesel Look Cool With A 94 MPG Sports Car That Weighed Less Than A Lotus” but should have been a BEV.
That’s what you did here, and is the frustrating part. I know you are an enthusiast. But, this is a BEV, and only a BEV, meant to be a BEV and should be embraced and promoted as a BEV.
Car buying is NOT rational, and why folks like you need to explain to these irrational people that they are, indeed, being irrational, and maybe need to rethink their view and perspective for what cars are and are becoming.
I love gas too, but now that I have been educated, I love EV more.
I daily drive a BMW i3 and I’ve written tons of extensive deep-dives about EV engineering (plus I commissioned/edited the best EV explainer on the web). Clearly I’m a big fan of EVs, especially from a technical and drivability standpoint.
But this article isn’t an enthusiast saying “Gas cars are better.” It’s a reasoned argument about a $25,000 bare-bones 150mi EV’s limitations as a true “People’s Car” (i.e. a modern Beetle, which is what the Slate was intended to be) in the 2026 marketplace.
It would not have been a better peoples car with a gas motor.
The Beatle worked because of it’s cost and simplicity. Adding a gas motor makes this vehicle more complex, and pushes the narrative that you must have a gas motor in order to have a peoples car, which is simply false. I feel like you know that.
People trust you. People trust you a LOT. I trust you a LOT. But when you push a narrative that says a gas motor is required for a peoples car, you are essentially promoting that “gas cars are better”. You may not directly say this, but it is implied. And the folks who trust you who may be on the fence about something like this, may no longer be on that fence because of this article.
Let’s agree to disagree. Maybe have this discussion in slack with the rest of the crew. I’m curious if I am the only one who thinks this (probably am, which is fine).
Love you, this isn’t personal.
As you can see (and with my history of writing about cool EV stuff), it’s clear I make my argument in good faith, so no need to get upset just because you don’t agree. We’ll get past this. Love you too.
That is not the reality of the majority of the USA. It simply is not. The USA has one of the highest home ownership rates in the world. 73% of US households live in detached single family homes.
I could get the myopic LA bias if you lived your whole live there but you lived in the midwest where even as struggling auto writer you had a detached single family home with 10 cars in the yard.
For people living in single family homes, this could potentially work well as a second car, as I note there at the end.
This could absolutely work as a primary car. The gas car could absolutely work as the 2nd car.
I had this discussion with my colleague this morning. Both he and his wife life 20 miles from work, and own their own home. He is “not ready” to commit to a BEV because he “can’t drive to Florida” with it. I have never heard him say he has driven more than 30 miles from home since I have known him, ever. He does not have that need in life.
He simply has not had enough opportunities to read or speak with a BEV owner whom he trusts to convince him that he is wrong. The argument that he would save more money throughout the year from less gas and maintenance costs has not set in, because people he trusts are not making these arguments.
This is the issue I keep bringing up with the premise of this article. People trust you, and you intellectually know that your argument does not hold enough water to support your claim. It’s based on pure emotion. We need people like you, whom we trust, to remove that emotion from the discussion so folks like my colleague can go home and have an open discussion with their spouses, whom are also not fully educated on the possibilities either.
Instead you push the narrative that this would be better with a gas engine. That is not this vehicle.
David, I want to breathe easy. BEV’s are part of the answer to that. Gas engines are NOT the answer to that. I love them, and don’t want them to disappear, but I also don’t need one for 98% of my life, yet 75% of my cars are gas, and 75% of my cars need a LOT of maintenance right now, maintenance I don’t want to do and can’t afford to pay someone else to do.
Okay, I’m going to disengage. I need to close this browser tab.
You comment about needing experience from trusted sources is so true. 20 years ago I was driving a Jetta TDI wagon and believed all the FUD about hybrids. Then I rented one and drove it from San Francisco to Yosemite and back in a day and was a convert. We ended up with a used 2005 Prius paired with the TDI.
My dad thought I was crazy and it would be a money pit when the battery failed in 5 years, etc, etc, etc. We drove that Prius for 10 years / 145K miles and it was almost perfectly reliable (3 way valve for the coolant thermos failed and cost me $100 to fix). Averaged 46 mpg. When cash for clunkers was around my parents traded their rusted out E150 van with 300K miles on a 2010 Prius. My experience convinced them hybrids were OK. Then a 5 years later some of their friends started getting hybrids – because they trusted my dad’s experience with his Prius.
Another thing that I think holds back more logical vehicle purchases is the illogical emotional attachment people have to “MY” car. This seems especially strong in some of the younger couples I know that are married but still live their lives as single people with separate finances. Each person has “MY” car, purchased from “MY” money and I drive “MY” car. Which can lead to some odd choices like both driving a full size truck, or two almost identical Subarus, etc.
This lack of coordinated buying and hurt economy car sales for years and now is hurting EV sales. People look at me like I’m crazy when I suggest pairing a small compact car with a large family vehicle just as much as if I suggest pairing an EV with a large family vehicle.
Your “MY” car point is a good one – I know lots of couples that keep their finances separate and purchase things from ‘their own’ money. In my limited experience, this stems from a couple of different things:
I’ve heard the logic – it just never seems to work out that way.
Personally my wife and I have a common account that both our paychecks go into. Common household bills and savings come from that common pool of money and we each have an equal say in how it is spent. We review our finances and set yearly and long term financial goals then follow up with quarterly reviews to see if we are on track.
Each of us also gets money monthly to spend on whatever – no questions asked.
I agree 100% – I think the main difference is the trade-off between putting combined income/savings in a shared account, versus keeping them separate.
Either way, if folks are irresponsible with their money and/or don’t communicate about their debts/investments, there is a very good chance things will end badly.
Re this “narrative”: I have made it clear that I want more people driving electric as quickly as possible, as I care about the environment.This is why I’m possibly the internet’s biggest proponent of EREVs (which I think have the potential to provide more environmental benefit in the short term than EVs).
Look at all the articles I’ve written about EREVs! I could just as easily have not written those and said “Just keep buying gas-guzzlers,” but I truly think people should drive electric for daily tasks/commuting, as it’s just the better technology for that.
We’re on the same team here. I just don’t think a 150mi, two-door car with no options is going to replace the Toyota Corolla; this really isn’t a hot take.
Based on my research, the number of households living in detached single-family homes is more like 60% not 73%. And just because you have a detached dwelling does not mean you have off-street parking or a place to charge.
You are correct, 73% was a typo on my part. I’m using 2020 census data. 73% of households live in single family homes (which includes attached units like row houses). 67% live in detached single family homes (stick built 61% and modular 6%)
60% is the number that live in single family homes with dedicated off street parking.
16% of single family homes are rentals – which might mean you can’t do upgrades to add charging – although chargers are becoming more common even in rentals to attract tenants – at least on the west coast with higher percentages of EVs. Same with apartments and condos adding chargers to their parking areas.
No, but we do have an obligation to tell people to buy Miatas, XR4Tis, and Škodas.
Also, like, all those cars listed in this article (crosstrek, trax, Soul) are already gas people’s cars. Like, they start at $20,000, are people gonna save a few grand to get a 2-door car with way fewer features? Probably not.
However, the cheapest electric SUV is, what, north of $40,000? And lots of people would go electric but don’t want the Leaf, they want an SUV (rational or not).
The 2025 Chevy Equinox EV starts at $33,600 now for a 5 seat crossover with 4 doors and a 319 mile range. That is before the tax credit.
150 miles isn’t a freeway-capable vehicle, especially if it’s boxy.
Take a trip on a chilly day (-10%), go 75 mph instead of 60 (-20%), in a car at midlife (-10%), have charging stations at 10 mile intervals (-10 m), recharge to 90% on the road (-10%) and you’re down to recharging every hour.
In addition, you have to make the battery last 1700 cycles to get a 250,000 mile lifespan instead of 1000.
Both engineering calculations and market acceptance scream that an EV must have 260 miles or so of range.
This is a bad take David. I know your instincts as a fellow grease monkey(hope I can use that term here) make you want a gas engine “so you can work on it”. Lets face the facts. ICE engines in 2025 are complicated, less reliable and harder to repair than in days past. Look at what Slate is doing here, it aligns well with DIY and consumers. OTA updates without a subscription or cell connection. Built in diagnostics. Built in open accessories ecosystem. Easy bolted on body panels. I’m sure that if these come to market as promised the maker crowd will have a field day with motor and battery upgrades. This could be really exciting. I hope they make a car too.
I agree with David to the extent that not offering an ICE variant severely limits buyers in the real world.
This thing has the potential to be ubiquitous across rural middle America, a region where EV trucks often don’t make sense.
A workhorse needs to be able to get up and go, not sit in a mall parking lot for 2 hours. And you can forget about using this in Montana cold or Gulf hurricane duty.
A modern 4 cylinder may be more complex than a ‘57 dodge but it’s way easier to find a local mechanic for a Maverick than it is for a Rivian.
The rich guys who can run with their ideas seldom seem to consider markets outside their own city.
This is where I stop taking an automotive stance and switch into a socio/economic/political ‘big picture’ stance. If it takes dragging rural middle America into the future, so be it. Their aversion to change, progress and general evolution of the nation is hurting the long term prospects of the nation. I need not offer recent examples to prove my point.
Even if every citizen wants something that doesn’t mean a viable infrastructure will present itself in time for a company to survive.
The bulk of Americans , even in middle America, live in cities and urban areas. Montana has almost no population, and a hurricane in the gulf is an extreme use case.
At this point, EVs in general don’t make sense unless you are charging at home or at your business – but if that is the case they have some compelling advantages.
Yes the vast majority of US households live in urban areas – that is true. (55% in metros over 1 million people / 67% in metros over 500K / 76% in metros over 250K)
It is also true that 67% of US households live in detached single family homes. Apartment life is the exception not the rule in the USA.
Just because you have a detached dwelling does not mean you have off-street parking or a place to charge.
Correct. Only 60% live in detached single family homes with dedicated off-street parking.
Of course some apartments and condos have chargers too….
So basically Slate is risking alienating at least 40% of potential buyers by not offering an ICE?
Not every car is for every person. 60% of the population is a pretty big market
Hurricane season comes every year and so does winter. Most of the Americans living in cities don’t drive at all. It’s not a scooter, it’s a dang truck.
Montana may be sparse but you don’t have to travel far into New York and Pennsylvania for the same scenario. Most states for that matter. I’m not even factoring in potential global markets like North Africa and Australia.
Let’s be honest, no one wants to spend 20+ on a truck that will leave them in the lurch in a likely scenario.
You don’t get to be Henry Ford by leaving money on the table and deciding certain groups don’t matter.
I, too, would be more compelled to buy this as an ICE car… ooooh, with a manual, please.
150 miles of range is pathetic, and that alone will kill it. If that doesn’t, it will surely be the lack of AWD. Also, it doesn’t come standard with even a radio?! Ask the Civic DX from the mid ’00’s how that went for Honda.
150 miles of range just doesn’t cut it in the intermountain west. Sure, I can commute back and forth to work in Denver with 150 miles of range. Can I take it skiing in Summit County on the weekend? Well, it’s 79 miles to Breckenridge. Up big hills. In winter weather. Range anxiety, can-i-find-a-charger anxiety, or camping on the shoulder of I70 waiting for AAA to bring a tow rig. None of these are good options.
This is going to be a 3rd/4th/5th car toy for the upper-middle-class and wealthy or a first car for their kids. And that is where the market opportunities are (https://www.wsj.com/economy/consumers/us-economy-strength-rich-spending-2c34a571). The only way low income people end up in these is if there is an incentive structure to use these for Amazon/Whole Foods delivery side hustles.
Yep, this is going to be Breydyn’s or Kymbyrleigh’s first car/truck. It’s cheap but new, customizable and can’t go very far. If they can make enough, they’ll flood the used market lol
I saw a big SUV with the back window covered in sportsball stickers with the names Brayden, Kayden, Hayden, and Jayden all next to their respective sports. The referees probably take a fistful of migraine pills as soon as they see those parents coming to make their jobs a living hell.
There was also a QAnon sticker on the back, so that pain train is coming for all of the other parents too.
One thing that I am not sure people are considering is that one would not need to buy gas for an EV like this. That brings down cost of ownership considerably.
As well, an EREV adds a LOT of complexity, which would equal higher cost.
Then there’s the impact of the ICE heat on plastic panels.
Lastly, we all know that EVs can be stupid quick. A cheap ICE engine would probably make this slower than continental drift, and therefore unsafe to drive and unusable for most people.
Agree. People are wanting to change the very thing that underscores the philosophy and business model.
My Honda would “be better” with a Ferrari engine, but is that still a Honda?
Some people just don’t like big changes.
Which holds the rest of us back and produces less than desirable issues across the board.