←back to thread

The $25k car is going extinct?

(media.hubspot.com)
319 points pseudolus | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
BatFastard ◴[] No.44414586[source]
https://www.slate.auto/

With rebates a 20,000 truck. Who knows what it will cost when it actually comes out. But I love the concept.

replies(5): >>44415015 #>>44415025 #>>44415722 #>>44416478 #>>44424424 #
QuadmasterXLII ◴[] No.44416478[source]
it’s a shame that they’re spending so much of their capital on manufacturer side customizability. An electric vehicle is a firmware update away from being a stick welder already; make the truck one way and ship it with a pair of jumper cables, a box of 6011, and a pallet of tube steel.
replies(1): >>44418842 #
snuxoll ◴[] No.44418842[source]
Outside of having what amounts to a couple of shells and removable seats that can be mounted to the box (and a removable rear panel from the cab to join them to create a single 'interior' when using them), the majority of their BTO options are really basic module swaps where most of the complexity comes from managing inventory of the various SKUs than anything else.

As somebody with a '99 Ford Ranger, the Slate is incredibly appealing as nearly every other manufacturer has completely abandoned the compact pickup market; although it has the same issue that the Ford Maverick and Honda Ridgeline do, it's a unibody design. If they actually launch I may end up getting one if they release some BTO options to slot a double-din mount and door-mounted speakers in to handle runs to the hardware store and towing lighter loads on paved roads, but I really wish somebody would do a compact frame-on-body pickup again for those of us that drive poorly maintained dirt roads in forested/mountainous terrain where some body damage (and thus, the cheaper repair costs associated with body-on-frame designs are nice to have) is always lurking around the corner.

[Seriously, I understand the difficulties of batteries and such with EV's and that's likely part of why the Slate is designed this way. But, for people like me who actually need a pickup to do pickup things, not haul groceries, it's frustrating when you're accustomed to being able to replace a side-panel on the box for less than your insurance deductible if something falls on it. And that's without even bringing up the obvious disadvantages when it comes to towing and payload capacity.]

replies(2): >>44419678 #>>44419690 #
toast0 ◴[] No.44419678[source]
> Seriously, I understand the difficulties of batteries and such with EV's and that's likely part of why the Slate is designed this way.

In 2000, Ford had an EV Ranger, and Chevy had an EV S-10. Neither with great range, of course. It should be easier to do with modern batteries. Attach the batteries to the frame under the bed, put the bed on top, all engineering problems solved.

replies(1): >>44430649 #
1. snuxoll ◴[] No.44430649[source]
I guess I should clarify, the unibody design makes it cheaper to do this in a compact design, given the extra material you would need to protect modern LiFePO4 cells from physical damage compared to the SLA batteries the EV Ranger and EV S-10 both used (which could pretty much take a bullet and not end up with a volatile reaction), as well as space efficiency with packing the cells.

The F-150 Lightning is body-on-frame, so I know it's entirely feasible, but the same reasons Ford went with a unibody for the Maverick are probably doubly relevant for something like the Slate (cost and weight). I'm going to quietly hope they succeed with this and somebody (Slate or otherwise) makes a proper compact EV pickup designed to get dirty. If not, maybe the market for EV conversion kits will further develop and I'll just yank the V6 out of my Ranger and slap an electric drivetrain in it.