The Slate Truck is an electric two-seater with 150 miles of range and no stereo. | Image: Slate Auto
Ask just about anybody, and they’ll tell you that new cars are too expensive. In the wake of tariffs shaking the auto industry and with the Trump administration pledging to kill the federal EV incentive, that situation isn’t looking to get better soon, especially for anyone wanting something battery-powered. Changing that overly spendy status quo is going to take something radical, and it’s hard to get more radical than what Slate Auto has planned.
Meet the Slate Truck, a sub-$20,000 (after federal incentives) electric vehicle that enters production next year. It only seats two yet has a bed big enough to hold a sheet of plywood. It only does 150 miles on a charge, only comes in gray, and the only way to listen to music while driving is if you bring along your phone and a Bluetooth speaker. It is the bare minimum of what a modern car can be, and yet it’s taken three years of development to get to this point.
But this is more than bargain-basement motoring. Slate is presenting its truck as minimalist design with DIY purpose, an attempt to not just go cheap but to create a new category of vehicle with a huge focus on personalization. That design also enables a low-cost approach to …
Read the full story at The Verge.
From The Verge via this RSS feed
I would pay extra to have “features” removed from modern cars.
Doesn’t that just mean the already rich assholes win?
You should pay for what your actually getting. If the vehicle has fewer features and less complexity, then it is necessarily cheaper and easier to produce (Both in mechanical and human labour.), and therefore the final product should also cost less for the consumer. Any dollar amount above that is used to improve the product in some way. Or, much more likely in this case, considering Bozo’s involvement, is used to line the bloated pockets of executive clowns with more imaginary money than any human being can ever possibly conceive of spending ethically.
Those “features” are subsidize by selling your information and mass production. A low production vehicle will be expensive anyway.
They are talking about the features that track you, listen to you, monitor any data passed through their device inputs, and things like chips that allow for the remote stopping of the car, the heaters in your seats, your remote starter, etc.
Yeah, don’t pay more money to not have any of that.
If I had the option, and i don’t, I am going to have to spend my personal time resources, as-well-as money resources, on getting rid of it, if possible. The argument that the increased complexity, means increased resources to manufacture, doesn’t work when the added complexity turns the customer into a source of revenue generation.
The real way is to get legislation that makes this illegal. That will not happen though, so the equivalent of “ad free” versions of TVs, Cars, Phones, etc. would be a nice option.