>bunch of billionaires get together and create grifter startup to sell EVs
>design an EV truck with zero options, market it as the most "bare bones" vehicle you can possibly buy
>doesn't come with paint
>cheapest battery possible, barely 100 miles of range
>no radio, no infotainment
>no power windows
>cheapest plastic interior they could find
>lie and say it's 20k but it's only that cheap because the price relies on 7.5k EV tax credit
>MSRP now 28k USD because the EV credit finally went away
>CAFE fines reduced to $0 so there's no point in making it an EV anymore lol
>mfw a base ford maverick is a thousand or so cheaper and is objectively better in every way
>mfw jeff bezos and gang really think americans are going to buy this pos that can barely go two hours on a single charge over a four door light truck that comes standard with all the creature comforts you want and an ICE engine
noooo guys you don't get it this is so heckin awesome we need more automakers like this!!

OP is a faggot.

>I LOVE INFLATED PRICES
>I LOVE BUYING THINGS I DON'T NEED
>I LOVE FEATURE CREEP AND WEIGHT

>>28516718 (OP)
If I got fucked hard by losing the government give-me. Well, at least it was a tax credit so the rich could write it off their taxes.

>>28516723
It's $28,000, shut the fuck up.

>>28516718 (OP)
>>no radio, no infotainment
>>no power windows
based

>>28516718 (OP)
Instructions on making a purchase:
If you want it, go on and buy it.
If you don't want it, don't buy it.

I hope this helps.

>>28516723
>28k for a car with no options
>yes i definitely need this small light pickup truck for my city apartment
>yes having power windows is feature creep
It's so funny to me that redditors will always claim that we need small pickup trucks because "farmers and contractors would use them." And then in reality every farmer/contractor ends up owning a huge 70k+ truck filled with creature comforts because the reality is that these guys DON'T want a small shitty pickup truck, they want something that works and is comfortable, and if they do need a smaller truck they'll just buy a tacoma or a maverick lol.

>>28516751
It really is that easy. Don't like drugs, don't take them - don't like a product, don't buy it.

>>28516756
Meanwhile my 75 yo dad who just bought a $95k full-size for the farm keeps telling me to look for a 90s Ranger because the Silverado is too big to do anything other than highway cruising or getting dirt / gravel.

>>28516767
And yet he bought it and didn't sell it for a 90's ranger. Actions speak louder than words.

>>28516734
Yeah, and aside from being an EV a Nissan versa or fucking Mitsubishi would have been better optioned. This thing got fucked by environmental regulations. They wanted to make a cheap car, saw the writing on the wall about cali banning cars and bidens cafe standards, and figured that it needs to be an EV. Well the only problem is, making an EV affordable required the tax deduction, which they no longer have. At this point, they should just put in a cheap radio and power windows so it's at least slightly competitive even if it bumps the price point up by a thousand. That's fine at 20K, at 27k no one is going to want it.

>>28516718 (OP)
You would think they would've seen what was coming and agreed to sell at around 21-23k, but nope they are still trying to release at 30k when used trucks are cheaper and have longer range (therefore being ironically more efficient and environmentally conscious). Slate was an amazing idea of a no frills truck that was ruined by startup greed

>Corolla with all the creature comforts, 23k starting
>slate truck with no comforts, 28k starting
How the fuck

>>28516789
>>28516800
>>28516807
Honestly I think at this point the only way this works is if one of the billionaire founders subsidizes the cost somehow, either with funding or out of their own pocket. I think if they want to survive long enough to develop a "slate 2" they need to sell these at a loss, because they clearly priced and engineered it with that tax credit in mind. Which was stupid because the mega EV discount stuff was very clearly not sustainable.

Part of what annoys me is that they advertised this as a sub 20k truck when it was never sub 20k even to begin with. It's always been 27.5k minimum, when you go to checkout they will charge you that much and then they will prompt you to fill out government forms to reimburse 7.5k. Tired of EV makers doing this, it seems like deceptive advertising.

>>28516789
>That's fine at 20K
Even at $20k it's pretty pathetic.

>Nissan Versa starts at $17,190
>Nissan Sentra starts at $21,590
>Kia K4 starts at $21,990.
>Toyota Corolla starts at $22,325.
>2026 Honda Civic starts at $24,595
>Ford Maverick starts $28,145

>>28516767
>no i will not pick up a used 1990s ford ranger for 15k on facebook or at auction, it's too old
>well yeah I could still find a rust-free one and modernize it with a new engine and interior for an extra 10-20k but it would be too much work
>well yes i suppose i could very easily pay a shop to install all this for me and they would get it done pretty cheaply and pretty quickly because it's a small truck but it would still cost me an extra 10-15k
>instead of doing all that i'll spend an equivalent amount if not more on a truck i don't like
>i swear i really really hate this truck with all these features!
>i super duper promise if an automaker made a shitbox truck with no creature comforts i would tooootally buy it (wink wink)

>>28516831
I agree but I don't really think this is a fair comparison, the whole gimmick with the slate is that it's a truck, not a car.
You can't really haul lumber or tools or materials with a nissan versa. I mean, you can, but a lot of it won't fit, it'll be a pain, and it'll get your interior all dirty.

A more accurate comparison would be a tacoma or maverick. Both of which are only a little more than a slate, probably the same price as a slate with options. And even then you could find an optioned out tacoma or similar for less than a new slate if you're willing to buy one that's 5ish years old.

>>28516847
I listed the Maverick. It starts at $28,145. Slate starts at $27,500. That's a difference of $645. I 100% guarantee the slate will be $35,000 after options to match the Maverick. The Maverick also has 500+ miles of range. The slate has 150 miles of range and even less in cold weather.

The slate is seriously garbage. If it cost $17,000 it'd be totally different.

>>28516852
and a new tacoma starts at 31.5. granted, the new tacomas are as large as the old tundras (literally, within 2-3 inches aside from bed length).
But you can still buy a 3rd or even a 2nd gen tacoma for pretty cheap, they're not very old and you can very easily find ones with low miles and decent options.
Maverick would be kinda shit as a work truck imo, mainly because of the small bed size. That's really my main complaint with newer trucks, the bed is smaller because all of them have to be four doors with a huge extended cab and a bunch of creature comforts, to the point that you can barely haul a sheet of plywood in some of them.
Of course, like I said, you can still buy an extended cab 2nd gen tacoma, or even an older s10/ranger for cheap and fix it up and it'll have plenty of bed space lol.

>>28516869
>Maverick would be kinda shit as a work truck
It's not designed as a work truck and shouldn't be. And a slate would be wildly worse as a work truck. 150 miles of range with zero payload. I bet the range would be like 85 miles in 40F weather and with a payload in the bed.

People buy full-size trucks for work trucks, as they should.

>>28516875
Trvth Nvke.

Most trade guys I know don't even use trucks anymore. They use full-size vans. More space than a truck, your gear is protected from weather, and most importantly you can lock everything up very easily.
Only case I could ever see a truck being useful is if you're using tools that get super dirty, like with landscaping, or you're working in a rural area, like a farmer, and you need the offroad capability of a truck because a van won't cut it.

>>28516882
Oh, and I forgot to mention that most farmers end up using those John Deere ATV type things to get around their properties anyway. No need for a small truck with a bed when you can pick up a literal ATV and just drive that around, it's significantly cheaper and the fuel isn't taxed lol.

>>28516875
Exactly. I don't understand truck purists.
>IT MUST TOW THIS MANY LBS
>IT MUST BE A 4X4
>IT MUST HAVE AN 8FT BED
I understand if YOU need that.... But I just need to haul some yard waste and move some larg-ish furniture. Might not get a full sized couch in the Marick, but the Marvick can haul a standard refrigerator upright and that is good enough for me. I don't ever see myself needing a tow and if I did the 4000lbs is good enough.

>>28516875
>It's not designed as a work truck and shouldn't be.
Full size truck buyers can't even define "work truck". Some will say it has to have 1000hp and 2000lbft of torque to haul a trailer, 4wd, 10" of ground clearance,and seating for 6. Others will say single cab 2wd capable of hauling 2000lbs in the bed. God help you if you get them to answer what kind of interior they want because its a tax writeoff some want $120k luxury interiors, and for employees they get the plastic and vinyl basics.

Mavericks seem to do more work than full size trucks, every last mile delivery, contractors, technicians, and light duty hauling seem to be where they shine but the same morons will say it should be capable of hauling 2000lbs for no reason and have worse fuel mileage because thats what they currently have, no they never intended on buying a small truck.

>>28516978
>say it should be capable of hauling 2000lbs
The Maverick can tow 2,000lbs. You can add the 4K tow package which bumps it to 4,000 lbs towing. It has 1,500 lbs payload in the bed as standard. It's actually pretty capable.

4K tow package is effectively a total of $3,800. As it requires the addition of AWD and "Ford Co-Pilot360®".

>>28516852
Even at $17k, what’s the point? You can get a decent 10 year old truck for $15k. Imo the slate works great under $10k simply because anything else under $10k may be a lemon.

>>28516718 (OP)
kek they should've made a trophy truck at least there having no options would kinda make sense

>>28517045
New cars are rarely competitive with used cars financially. Other than peace of mind.
>under $10k new car
Not gonna happen.

>>28517045
A slate costs nothing to run or own and won't need work. A $15k used truck will cost a lot to operate and repair. The slate is a much better value proposition from a purely financial standpoint even at $30k.

>>28516718 (OP)
>Buying a new truck for any reason besides a warranty
Lol, Lmao even. New trucks are the biggest meme in existence if you're just buying them for personal use. Even for fleet purchases, who in their right mind would choose an EV with 100 miles of range? Realistically under load, that would be about 80 miles, and probably 70 in cold weather. Then you have to charge said truck, which is going to cut at least an hour off the total time that truck is on the road, time that's not spent going to another call. So why do that when you can buy a fleet of base f150's that can go 300 miles on a tank of gas, carry much more in terms of payloads, and have a much more reliable gas engine in the end.
Slate already showed their primary market is techbro redditors with those "SO RETRO!" graphics they advertise on their website. It's actually fucking hilarious seeing people who never needed or driven a truck in their entire lives try and convince everyone that they need to abandon their half tons for these overpriced "Simplistic" pieces of e-waste, then jerking off Kei trucks in the same sentence.
Just pure vaporware that 90% of "Car guys" drank the koolaid on.

>>28517135
$15,000 is a lot of fuel and repairs. A 12 mpg truck driving 12,000 miles/yr would cost about $4,000 in fuel. An EV would cost about $1500 if you're charging at public chargers, about half that if you charge at home. And if we budget $4,000 for repairs, it would take 4.4 years to break even at $30k.

Another thing to consider is this is not entirely an apples to apples comparison. As the $15k truck would likely be significantly more capable in every way and more roomy etc.

>>28516718 (OP)
The only "people" praising it have been shills. The rest of /o/ has been making fun of this shitty little bev garbage.

>>28516840
>pick up a used 1990s ford ranger for 15k on facebook or at auction
Not sure if youre clinically retarded, a bot, a shill, a third worlder or basement dweller but you can get a clean running ranger for $4k-$5k all day, every day

>>28517201
The idea is praiseworthy, but this is clearly a shotty attempt, especially with the 150 range at the BASE. We can only hope that the hype around it inspired a company like Toyota to try a maverick competitor

>>28516718 (OP)
Because they're poor and can't afford proper transportation.

No radio is a deal breaker. Bezos is a bald faggot.

>>28517348
It doesn't even have speakers.

>>28517299
Didn't toyota already announce they are working on a compact unibody "truck"?

>>28516847
>You can't really haul lumber or tools or materials with a nissan versa
>4ft bed
>1400lb max payload
You can't do that in a slate either.
>>28517135
You are delusional, every vehicle has operating costs, including EVs. 15k Would buy you a nice used mid size truck with less then 100k miles. Its operating costs would be limited to just basic shit like oil changes. And that would be limited to maybe 150 per year depending on how much you drive. You greatly over estimate how much you can save with EVs.

>>28517871
yeh but it's just for third world markets that don't have suicidal 'climate' policies

>>28517914
Every beaner would have one of these

>>28517914
It's also crash safety. They're tin can shitboxes and would need redesigning to meet standards.

>>28517937
Or we can roll back the excessive number of fucking laws and regulations we have in the US.

>>28517914
Damn... What if I import like thousands of these things. put them in a warehouse and wait 25 years to sell them for massive profit. They would all have like 20 miles on them.

>>28517988
>massive profit
its a $13k truck, I doubt it's going to appreciate that much in value.

>>28517904
A $15k midsize truck costs thousands per year to keep on the road

>>28517914
No that's the actual body-on-frame for third worlders, Toyota is actually planning a maverick competitor

https://www.motortrend.com/news/toyota-compact-pickup-truck-confirmed

>>28518010
No it doesn't.

>>28516840
>90s ranger
>15k-35k
you have completely lost it

>>28518084
You're talking about 10 year old trucks. Cars that old are money pits. They need way more than basic oil changes

>>28518212
My truck is 22 years old. It's fine.

>>28518010
>>28518212
>10 year old trucks
>Cars that old are money pits.
How on earth did you come to that conclusion? Have you even owned a car or truck before? 10 years is less then half of the lifespan of the vehicle. Most non commercial vehicles should last 30 years at least if taken care of. I've been driving old trucks my entire life, so has everyone I know. Most of the time your yearly maintenance will consist of changing the oil, and topping off coolant. If you spent 15k on an old mid size truck, you could easily get one in nice condition. You still have to keep up with maintenance required when you hit certain mileage points, but that isn't too expensive or difficult to do either. And you would only need to do that once every few years.

>>28518581
More than likely it's a 17 year old eurocuck who doesn't know anything about cars.

>>28518212
10 years is pretty ok def getting on the older side for rubbers and plastics. I’d make that line at 20 years old where it gets less viable.

>>28516718 (OP)
>why do people praise this reddit car
I don't think that is the case. I'm on this board just about every single day and you making this thread is the first time I've ever heard of this vehicle.

>>28518213
Thank you for your service, Gandpa but the trucks on the market have been through so many owners that an average feminist would be disgusted.

>>28518662
Why do you talk about things you know nothing about? Why are you like this?

>>28518662
Its easy to find trucks that have had less then 3 owners. What market have you been looking at?

Where is my fucking 13k Toyota Champ???

>>28521103
ohhh sorry it doesn't meet our arbitrary emissions standards or crash standards. Also because domestic car makers paid enough money to block all competition.

>>28521106

>>28517986
roll back automotive safety laws? in the country with the largest passenger vehicles in the world?

>>28521113
Population control. Will help save the environment.

I'm not going to defend the current political attitude about EVs, but if you actually value individual autonomy, electric just makes sense. Electricity is something one can cultivate separate from the central state much easier, I don't like the Idea of my property use being reliant on other geopolitical and economic lines. Hopefully EVs can prove themselves in that regard.

>>28516756
Farmers around me like their land cruisers 70, which is a pretty minimal car. Americans are just consumerist soys I guess.

>>28516756
I literally can't find a car besides a versa or sentra for under $28k

can someone point me to the decent cars under $28k, options or not?

>>28516807
>>Corolla with all the creature comforts, 23k starting
nice fucking try, I can't get an OTD price for under $30k in my area, 23k is a 2022 with 40k miles

>>28516718 (OP)
you guys are missing the point of this company completely

if they manage to pull off the whole "single model + first-party aftermarket" model we may actually be able to get cheaper cars again.

and another thing nobody is mentioning is that you don't have to go to a fucking dealership and talk to some retard with a giant watch and zero morals.

bezos should just throw in a free prime sub with every truck so we can order parts with free shipping

>>28517196
Gotta factor time in two
Extra hour sitting adds up fast
52w/y * 40$/hr = 2080$/y
Let alone the missed moments

>>28523018
Check American wages we can afford it and then some

>>28516756
>EV
>city apartment
I do t think k people in apartments drive EV’s… do they? One of the big selling points ts is that everytime you turn it in it’s fully charged because it charges in your driveway.

>>28523590
It's the reason I don't have an EV myself. Charging seems so ass for an apartment, and the charging infrastructure around me is unreliable.

>>28516718 (OP)
If it were half the price it would be perfect. At its current price it's useless. This was true even before the EV credit went away. Sorry Jeff, $20k is still too much if you want to do the kind of volume that makes this thing make sense.

>>28516718 (OP)
Besides being Ev the concept is great. If someone made the same thing with a little NA 4 cylinder and a 6 speed manual for like 23K it would be great.

>>28516718 (OP)
We need more cheap shit made in the US, but it needs to undercut the Nissan Versa. If that was a ICE with a 4 speed manual for less than 17k nobody would care that the body is unpainted plastic. The modular switching between cargo and people modes is a really cool idea, just a shame tech bros were behind the project.

>>28526339
tech bros are the only people doing interesting things

>>28517914
hey, i like this car. i saw it on the street.
in our Country, the name is Hilux Rangga. Rangga means Hero.
it has small stature, but affordable. the rugged body makes it looks strong. overall it represent a hardworking man.

>>28516720
nah, he is right. What drives the cost of EVs are not touchscreens or power windows, but that the drivetrain and batteries are inherently more expensive.

I eagerly await the revelation that it'll have a factory-sealed inverter-motor-AC-charger unit just like the rest of the EVs, making servicing impossible.

It follows from caveman logic that an EV is 1.5x-2x as heavy as an ICE car, its cost in raw materials is much higher, and a lot of that weight is in exotic shit like lithium, not steel,

Heed my words, EVs will never be as cheap as your ICE naturally aspirated shitbox.

As for reliability, I find it weird that people think electronics don't wear out or have limited lifespans.

>>28526652
hilux ranga would be great in oz

>>28526868
Perhaps sodium-ion batteries will replace lithium-ion in some vehicles over time to lower costs.

>>28516718 (OP)
>dudewipes the automobile

>>28527083
Sodium is shit in every conceivable way. They have poor density, round trip efficiency, can't do many cycles, bad voltage curve.

It will never replace anything.

>>28527116
Do you really think the current state of the technology is as good as it'll ever be? Doesn't that strike you as remarkably shortsighted?

>>28526339
Give it 2 years and it will come out with a three-cylinder version for 20k.
They will still sell the EV version, but it will be closer to 30k. It will make up less than 5% of their production.

>>28527177
I'm sorry, I failed to consider the breakthroughs that are sure to occur in just 2 more weeks

>>28527414
I mean, there are plenty of advancements being made in the labs. Also there's already one production car using sodium-ion batteries in China.

>>28527422
>in China
I bet that is because if it burns the driver to death, the company is not liable.

>>28516718 (OP)
i dont understand the EV meme

>>28528267
>charge at home
>cheap to charge (in some places)
>low maintenance

>>28528277
but you didn't answer why everything about EVs is clouded and smeared in bullshit

>charge at home
>cheap to charge (in some places)
>low maintenance
what the hell do those words even mean

>>28528277
>>charge at home
>>cheap to charge (in some places)
>>low maintenance
but what do those words even mean

>>28516718 (OP)
At first I did really think this was a cool idea, but after watching some videos of them introducing the cars to people, I realized it's trying to do too many things at once.
I've always wanted to see an ultra simple electric car, but why do you need to make it a transformer lego plastic vehicle?
Keep the modularity as an in-house cost saving measure.
Make it repairable, but don't make some rattly toy that the owner needs to assemble and customize to get the desired result .
I might be wrong and it'll actually become popular, but I get the feeling most people won't be that much into the manufacturer-endorsed customization. It seems like it's intended to have some of that Suzuki Jimny appeal, but it won't have it.

>>28516718 (OP)
>MSRP now 28k
its DOA youre right op. I was into it at 20k but now that its almost 30 its meaningless. its now 1000% of the a shitbox price instead of just over 400%
% of value means a lot.

Drumpf isn't going to win a second term and whoever wins will put the EV incentive again

>>28528427
>everything about EVs is clouded and smeared in bullshit
Don't know what you're talking about, it's pretty clear to me.

>what the hell do those words even mean
You flunk out of first grade?

>>28528604
This is his 2nd term retard.

>>28523211
>if they manage to pull off the whole "single model + first-party aftermarket" model we may actually be able to get cheaper cars again.
If you're not aware of major OEMs trying this in the past and watching it fail spectacularly because car buyers don't buy many accessories even if they're high quality from the OEM.

Since they're doing it a la carte, each option simply costs more than if they had bundled them into equipment packages (hence why every OEM on the planet does it that way). The first party aftermarket is a failed model from the start. Even Apple saw that as a failure of a model offering phones in 10 different colors, they found most people bought the same 2 colors.

>>28528604
we will have AI trump for at least another 70 years retard

>>28528277
>>28528267
Pros
>cleaner (If you ignore lithium strip mining)
>more torque
>faster take off
>cheaper charging (Sometimes)
>low maintenance (if nothing breaks)

Cons
>weighs more
>higher insurance cost
>higher purchase price
>higher repair cost
>terrible resale value
>longer charging time
>shorter driving range
>even shorter ranges in cold/hot weather
>reliability issues
>battery degradation issues

Really, the only thing that a manufacturer could fix is the repair cost by making EVs easier to fix and selling the parts to fix them. But they are so short sighted that they shot themselves in the foot because every YouTuber can point to a $10,000 repair bill for something stupid. Anyone who was EV curious did not want to deal with the breakdown.

>>28529630
>>faster take off
0 to 100kmh is already sub 10 secs on most cars

this is a very weird and useless metric to base a purchase on

>cleaner (If you ignore lithium strip mining)
>cheaper charging (Sometimes)
>low maintenance (if nothing breaks)
memes