Bigger may not be better when it comes to the battery.

[skidoofast]

What I indeed wish is to outright replace what my present CR-V is capable of, including, I'm talking to you Slate, AWD. I recognize the cost savings and lifetime carbon reductions that EVs offer, and wish to use that in hitting skiing trips there and back without having to worry about charging, road trips, around-town hauling... Things most people would want from a vehicle. Enthusiasm for this car notwithstanding, these are not unreasonable wishes. They're what most normal people want in a car. And to survive as a company you need sales numbers. The better Slate meets these above noted wishes, the better their chance to actually succeed. Not hitting those marks guarantees a poorer outlook. I speak from a real-world perspective, not from an excited apologists one. And I am the latter: I love this vehicle already-- I just wish it to surpass the low bar it's been set to. In fact, I'm willing to overlook all the other shortcomings if they'd include AWD. But without it, NO DEAL. I'm not going backwards from 2006 in 2026.

Your 2006 in 2026 prices would probably be $45k

 

[GeoLogic]

The sticker price for the Honda CR-V EX in 2006 was $24,300, sticker prices typically being higher than you otherwise pay unless it's a unique or brand new design. The 2006 CR-V was the last year of the 2nd Generation, and thus the antithesis of new.

$24,300 adjusted for today's inflation is $38,667.25, for a vehicle with a range of 306 miles city/397.8 miles highway, moonroof, power everything (including windows), AWD, four doors, rear seats, alloy wheels, an AM/FM cassette/6-disc CD changer, roof rack rails, ABS, stability control, full airbag compliment, high crash scores for its time, and best-possible reliability as measured in Consumer Reports owner data. I also bought my CR-V used in 2017 for $8000 with 98,000 miles on it, incidentally. With all systems in 100% operational capacity. For an ICE this is an excellent vehicle, notwithstanding Honda's typical cavalier and wanton attitude toward road-noise control. More accurately lack thereof.

So what I want is a Slate with AWD (dammit), accessorized exactly as I want it, delivering 397.8 miles of road range, current safety standards, and Much Better Than Average reliability, for $38,667.25. I'm even willing to live without the two extra two doors at that Apples to Apples price point. A tall order for Slate? Maybe. Unreasonable? NO. This is going to be 20 years past the point of what my CR-V offered in 2006. And these characteristics are what the greater populace would also want.

 

[slateya]

Buy a new CRV. ICE to EV is apples to starfruit.

 

[skidoofast]

The sticker price for the Honda CR-V EX in 2006 was $24,300, sticker prices typically being higher than you otherwise pay unless it's a unique or brand new design. The 2006 CR-V was the last year of the 2nd Generation, and thus the antithesis of new.

$24,300 adjusted for today's inflation is $38,667.25, for a vehicle with a range of 306 miles city/397.8 miles highway, moonroof, power everything (including windows), AWD, four doors, rear seats, alloy wheels, an AM/FM cassette/6-disc CD changer, roof rack rails, ABS, stability control, full airbag compliment, high crash scores for its time, and best-possible reliability as measured in Consumer Reports owner data. I also bought my CR-V used in 2017 for $8000 with 98,000 miles on it, incidentally. With all systems in 100% operational capacity. For an ICE this is an excellent vehicle, notwithstanding Honda's typical cavalier and wanton attitude toward road-noise control. More accurately lack thereof.

So what I want is a Slate with AWD (dammit), accessorized exactly as I want it, delivering 397.8 miles of road range, current safety standards, and Much Better Than Average reliability, for $38,667.25. I'm even willing to live without the two extra two doors at that Apples to Apples price point. A tall order for Slate? Maybe. Unreasonable? NO. This is going to be 20 years past the point of what my CR-V offered in 2006. And these characteristics are what the greater populace would also want.

The whole reason this company can startup and compete is because it’s 1 vehicle, 1 color, no variety in trim or options as it rolls down the assembly line, Slate needs to order or build 12,500 of every part each month if they produce 150,000 per year - I’m sure because of that volume they get preferential pricing

 

[Blackspots76]

After a little research and some basic math, you should only charge an MNC battery to 80% (120 miles). On average MNC batteries loose up to 30% of their capacity after 10 years (84 mile range) and, loose about 40% below 32 degrees (50.4 miles)

Worst case scenario for the bigger battery is 80.64 miles.

Slate has talked about how great this vehicle will be for the 2nd and even the 3rd owners of this vehicle because they can customize it and make it their own but they never mentioned that the 2nd or possibly 3rd owners will have to drop between $15-20k for a "Small" replacement battery (at today's cost).

Hate to say it but if any of the top 3 auto manufacturers finally wake up and build a small regular cab ICE truck then it's good by Slate.

This truck is looking more and more "Disposable" after about 10 years...

This is only true in non-EV use for batteries where they don't have any temperature control. In EVs, the degradation is far lower.

 

[5ohbrad]

@GeoLogic it may be time for you to consider a different vehicle. Perhaps a Honda CRV? As others have stated, this is an upstart company that is trying a novel concept of offering a stripped down bare bones approach. Large volume sales will get it off the ground. As time goes on I’m sure they will offer more feature rich products (like VW after the Beetle). The strength of the product is an unwavering commitment to simplicity. Some people’s needs won’t be met by this and that’s ok- lots of other offerings on the market to suit your needs.

 

[GeoLogic]

I already own a Honda CR-V. I needn't another one.

And I agree with the postulation that this company is starting with simple, and adding additional options later, similar to Volkswagen in prior decades. Slate is already rumored to be eventually offering AWD, for instance, and hope would be they'll eventually offer industry conquerable range as an additional option.

But what I'm saying in all this is, the vast majority of customers are going to want accessories and options along the lines of that which I previously outlined. And for those additions, Slate is going to have to offer them at a price point the same as, or better than, what competitors offer for the same components. For instance, eventually I'll likely be able to option/accessorize a Slate similar to what my present CR-V offers. And that will need to cost $38,667.25 or less, in present dollars, for those capabilities. I'm betting it'll cost more, which is not good. While we as enthusiats of modularity might be willing to pay more, most everyday plebes would not. And to survive, Slate must appeal to the masses, not just we niche customers.

So anyway, despite what many may believe, I'm very much a Slate proponent, and am willing to pay a bit more, give up some range, and live without four doors for the benefit of being able to change my vehicle to suit my wishes at any time (as long as I can get AWD, and it offers 1985 Toyota truck reliability). But I think Slate is going to have to offer closer to what my 2006 CR-V offers if they're going to survive as a company. I hope I'm wrong, but the market over the past 40 years hasn't shown that to be likely.

 

[cvollers]

While this is universal across all EV manufacturers, it alas mustn't be forgotten that they're all exaggerating the actual range you're going to get from the battery, including Slate. Cargo/passengers, heat, running audio/accessories... Every single addition is something you know they're not counting when they boast about ranges. Best-case, biggest battery range in the Slate is poor by any reasonable measure, and that, along with daft lack of AWD, severely reduces my confidence in this otherwise compelling vehicle. I'm very disappointed in this. But I do hope Slate might vastly improve range, and offer brain-dead necessary AWD, at some point in the future if these egregious shortcomings don't kill the company before they get the chance to address them.

I must also add, even though the cost is lesser than the average wanton new vehicle, it's still extremely expensive for nothing. Just wait until you add anything the normal person would want, and I bet this truck will cost $35 - $40K. That's a lot of damn money. And let's be honest, Slate: That Federal incentive is GONE. You know it, we know it. There is a probability of Zero that that incentive is still there by the time you go to production.

Anyway, none of this is meant to throw shade on the potential for this vehicle. I just personally feel it suffers from some serious, potentially fatal flaws. And I feel burned by that because I otherwise immensely want one of these.

There are just so many current unknowns that it is difficult to fault a company that hasn’t produced a single unit yet. Slate has a clear goal and a plan to achieve it. Let’s see what they actually do before we tell them it can’t be done.

 

[cvollers]

I already own a Honda CR-V. I needn't another one.

And I agree with the postulation that this company is starting with simple, and adding additional options later, similar to Volkswagen in prior decades. Slate is already rumored to be eventually offering AWD, for instance, and hope would be they'll eventually offer industry conquerable range as an additional option.

But what I'm saying in all this is, the vast majority of customers are going to want accessories and options along the lines of that which I previously outlined. And for those additions, Slate is going to have to offer them at a price point the same as, or better than, what competitors offer for the same components. For instance, eventually I'll likely be able to option/accessorize a Slate similar to what my present CR-V offers. And that will need to cost $38,667.25 or less, in present dollars, for those capabilities. I'm betting it'll cost more, which is not good. While we as enthusiats of modularity might be willing to pay more, most everyday plebes would not. And to survive, Slate must appeal to the masses, not just we niche customers.

So anyway, despite what many may believe, I'm very much a Slate proponent, and am willing to pay a bit more, give up some range, and live without four doors for the benefit of being able to change my vehicle to suit my wishes at any time (as long as I can get AWD, and it offers 1985 Toyota truck reliability). But I think Slate is going to have to offer closer to what my 2006 CR-V offers if they're going to survive as a company. I hope I'm wrong, but the market over the past 40 years hasn't shown that to be likely.

The CRV is very clearly a small family SUV. I don’t think this is the target for Slate, even with the SUV Kit. It’s not a family vehicle.

 

[GeoLogic]

Lack of four doors indeed likely does discount the Slate as an everyday family mover. But even with my CR-V, my use case is mostly for my own use, with weekend ski trips with our son and such. The Slate would be perfect (even better) for everything that the CR-V is used for, if only for maddening lack of AWD In the Slate.

Fascinating discussion, all, if apologetically drifted off-topic.

 

[skidoofast]

Lack of four doors indeed likely does discount the Slate as an everyday family mover. But even with my CR-V, my use case is mostly for my own use, with weekend ski trips with our son and such. The Slate would be perfect (even better) for everything that the CR-V is used for, if only for maddening lack of AWD In the Slate.

Fascinating discussion, all, if apologetically drifted off-topic.

great conversations, My order will be the standard configuration and the extended battery

if they had AWD I would add that and the lift, AWD would be a plus for winter in Minnesota

 

[RevCaptJack]

My understanding is that the Slate comes with a 52.7-kWh battery which can be upgraded to an 84.3-kWh battery. That adds an additional 302 pounds to the little truck.

Range increases from 150 to 240 miles. So there is that.

The electric motor rated for 201 horsepower and 195 pound-feet of torque, however, remains the same.

In my opinion, the heavier battery will make the handling feel sluggish, decrease acceleration and reduce the towing capacity and payload.

Because 98% of my time behind the wheel will be local, I think I will pocket the difference and on the rare occasion I choose it to take a long trip, use the money to buy snacks at Buc-ees while I charge up.

Makes sense to me. My slate would just be an around town truck anyway. We have another car for trips and a full-size pickup for pulling the boats.

 

[sodamo]

I already own a Honda CR-V. I needn't another one.

And I agree with the postulation that this company is starting with simple, and adding additional options later, similar to Volkswagen in prior decades. Slate is already rumored to be eventually offering AWD, for instance, and hope would be they'll eventually offer industry conquerable range as an additional option.

But what I'm saying in all this is, the vast majority of customers are going to want accessories and options along the lines of that which I previously outlined. And for those additions, Slate is going to have to offer them at a price point the same as, or better than, what competitors offer for the same components. For instance, eventually I'll likely be able to option/accessorize a Slate similar to what my present CR-V offers. And that will need to cost $38,667.25 or less, in present dollars, for those capabilities. I'm betting it'll cost more, which is not good. While we as enthusiats of modularity might be willing to pay more, most everyday plebes would not. And to survive, Slate must appeal to the masses, not just we niche customers.

So anyway, despite what many may believe, I'm very much a Slate proponent, and am willing to pay a bit more, give up some range, and live without four doors for the benefit of being able to change my vehicle to suit my wishes at any time (as long as I can get AWD, and it offers 1985 Toyota truck reliability). But I think Slate is going to have to offer closer to what my 2006 CR-V offers if they're going to survive as a company. I hope I'm wrong, but the market over the past 40 years hasn't shown that to be likely.

A possible difference. You got your CRV options together, installed as a package whereas the Slate has the flexibility to add after the initial purchase, hopefully as funds and desire changes. I’d suspect that even if you could get a bare bones CRV and then add those amenities after the fact the cost would increase dramatically. I know from following the Tundra forum after market mods get expensive fast.

 

[AZFox]

I just personally feel it suffers from some serious, potentially fatal flaws.

Pardon me for noticing something...

They're exaggerating the range.​

Additions will make it expensive.​

Range is poor.​

Lack of AWD is a daft, brain-dead omission. (<-- seriously?)​

Reduced confidence.​

Disappointment.​

Shortcomings could kill the company.​

It will cost $35 - $40K.​

EV incentive will not be there.​

And then...

​

"Anyway, none of this is meant to throw shade"​

Oops! Any solar panel you could put underneath that post would generate pretty near zero volts.

But what I'm saying in all this is, the vast majority of customers are going to want accessories and options along the lines of that which I previously outlined.

We can't know, obviously, but I'll speculate.

The vast majority of customers will want to leave their Slate as an inexpensive-to-operate and enjoyable little runabout pickup.

There are some hints in the Reservation Tracker, currently at 253 entries. Admittedly the tracker group may not a globally-representative sample group:

SUV - 14.2%
Cargo - 1.2%
Multiple - 34.0%
Pickup - 50.6%

Wrap 33.6%
Factory Gray - 66.4%

Regarding the thread's topic, the range is kinda skimpy when you consider that the state-of-charge should be kept between 20% and 80%. That's 90 miles Standard and 144 miles Long-Range. In mild weather. Unladen. With brand new batteries.

 

[metroshot]

.......

SUV - 14.2%
Cargo - 1.2%
Multiple - 34.0%
Pickup - 50.6%

Wrap 33.6%
Factory Gray - 66.4%

Regarding the thread's topic, the range is kinda skimpy when you consider that the state-of-charge should be kept between 20% and 80%. That's 90 miles Standard and 144 miles Long-Range. In mild weather. Unladen. With brand new batteries.

I agree the Slate is more of a basic mini pickup truck for daily chores/commuting. My order will be basic w/ extended range battery which will rival that of my current EV with a 240 mile range.

As for the battery range and charge I disagree.

I have never believed in under charging my EVs since all of them have SOC buffers built in and advanced BMS. Sort of like I don't believe in filling my ICE tanks to 80%.

Even charging to 100% does not mean the cells are truly going to 100%; there's a buffer built in - my Mach E has about 7% buffer built in so even when I charge to 100%, it's less than that in reality.

Never had an issue charging to 100% - always do it at home on L2 and on the road at Tesla Superchargers 5 times a month.