A $20k American-made electric pickup with no paint, no stereo, no screen
806 comments
·April 25, 2025aidenn0
zx10rse
Automotive industry is one of the biggest scams on planet earth. One of my favorite cases recently is how Suzuki Jimny is banned in Europe and US because of emission standards allegedly, so the little Jimny is emitting 146g/km but somehow there is no problem to buy a G-Class that is emitting 358g/km oh and surprise surprise Mercedes are going to release a smaller more affordable G-Class [1].
[1] - https://www.motortrend.com/news/2026-mercedes-benz-baby-g-wa...
MostlyStable
Example #5621 that a simple carbon tax would be miles better than the complex morass of regulations we currently have.
JumpCrisscross
> a simple carbon tax would be miles better than the complex morass of regulations we currently have
Doesn't this just punt the morass into the magic variable of one's carbon footprint?
How about this: fleet efficiency standards are stupid, anachronistic and counterproductive. Scrap them. Then, separarately, create a consumer-side rebate based on a vehicle's mileage. (Because a gas tax breaks American brains.)
aidenn0
That's overly reductive.
1. Poorer people tend to drive older vehicles, so if you solely encourage higher fuel economies by taxing carbon emissions, then the tax is (at least short-term) regressive.
2. You can work around #1 by applying incentives for manufacturers to make more efficient cars should lead any carbon tax
3. If you just reward companies based on fleet-average fuel economy without regard to vehicle size, then it would be rather bad for US car companies (who employ unionized workers) that historically make larger cars than Asian and European companies.
4. So the first thing done was to have a separate standard for passenger vehicles and light-trucks, but this resulted in minivans and SUVs being made in such a way as to get the light-truck rating
5. We then ended up with the size-based calculation we have today, but the formula is (IMO) overly punitive on small vehicles. Given that the formula was forward looking, it was almost certain to be wrong in one direction or the other, but it hasn't been updated.
MostlyStable
All carbon tax is inherently regressive but that's also trivially fixable. Make it revenue neutral and give every citizen a flat portion of the total collected revenue. Bam, it is now progressive, since on average richer people will spend more on fuel (and therefore the tax) even though it is likely a much smaller percentage of their spending.
Every single one of your ideas has problems that are solved by a carbon tax. Taxes are simple, they accomplish what you want, and they don't have loopholes. A carbon tax will _never_ have the unintended consequence of making emissions worse. Many of our current regulations, including the one I was responding to do exactly that because they actually cause people to buy larger trucks than they otherwise would with worse fuel efficiency.
A carbon tax might not on it's own be enough to solve the problem (especially if you set it to low), but no matter what level you set it, it will help. Thanks to unintended consequences, many of our current regulations are actively counter productive, while _also_ having negative economic and other costs.
danans
> 1. Poorer people tend to drive older vehicles, so if you solely encourage higher fuel economies by taxing carbon emissions, then the tax is (at least short-term) regressive.
You give it back to poor as a income-phased out refundable tax credit. Crucially, base it not on how much they drive or consume, but on their income.
Name it something like the "Worker's Energy Credit". In the worst case, it cancels out the carbon tax spent by them commensurate with their lower income.
In the best case poor people who don't drive much actually come out ahead, and it's just a very progressive sales tax.
The rich might hate it, and call it "redistribution", which is fine because that's exactly what it is, and what taxes have always been, but this one would redistribute downwards instead of upwards, and incentivize lower carbon emissions by those who can afford it.
breakyerself
Carbon taxes become progressive with the simple step of returning the revenue to taxpayers as a dividend payment using the existing social security payment infrastructure. Richer people have such outsized carbon footprints that most people would get back more in dividends than they lost in higher costs.
bflesch
Meanwhile jet fuel for private jets is (and remains) not taxed at all, even in the EU.
xvokcarts
Looks like as long as only positive change is allowed to touch the poor, there will be little change.
AdrianB1
If you want to reduce carbon emissions, if the tax is regressive or not does not matter as long as you tax emissions. If you want to mix too many things, you will not get a good solution for any.
nullc
> 1. Poorer people tend to drive older vehicles, so if you solely encourage higher fuel economies by taxing carbon emissions, then the tax is (at least short-term) regressive.
The idea that policy makers care about this in any meaningful sense is absurd given the EV mandates, as EV's radically change the lifecycle costs of cars in a way that is absolutely destructive to people who aren't wealthy.
EV's lower the 'fueling' cost but shift part of it into large cashflow crushing battery replacement costs.
Automobiles have been a significant engine in elevating less wealthy americans because you can buy a old junky car for very little and keep it limping along with use-proportional fuel costs and minor maintenance. Even if it's an inefficient car, you use it to go to work, so you're making money to pay for the fuel. Less work, less work fuel required.
EV's significantly break the model and will push many more less wealthy people onto predatory financing which they'll never escape. Yet policy makers refuse to even discuss the life-cycle cashflow difference of EVs, and continue to more forward with policies to eventually mandate their use.
> it was almost certain to be wrong in one direction or the other, but it hasn't been updated.
It's been broken all along. We've had decades to fix it.
DrNosferatu
This.
ponector
I think the best way is to tax fuel itself. This way worse mpg result in more tax.
Tax diesel more than gasoline, LNG less.
michpoch
This is already done, in Europe most of the fuel costs are taxes.
nandomrumber
Thereby penalising existing vehicle owners who can’t switch to a more efficient vehicle overnight.
We have to come up with a rigorous alternative that doesn’t disproportionately affect lower income folk, because people tend not to be overly concerned about nebulous concepts like the climate impacts on unborn future generations, especially when my carbon impact at the margin is negligible when taken in context of global population.
ChadNauseam
That makes sense, but there would be no incentive to switch to an engine that emits less carbon for the same fuel consumption (if such a thing exists)
2OEH8eoCRo0
Isn't that what a carbon tax is? Adding a tax to the fossil fuel based on carbon content.
DrillShopper
We already do in the US (but the money mostly goes to road maintenance)
rcpt
The purpose of the CAFE regulations is very explicitly to favor American automakers who make big trucks.
tlb
It wasn't the intended purpose. It turned out that way because the Detroit lobbyists were smarter and more motivated than the government policy people, and they bamboozled them.
aidenn0
That was one of several purposes.
conductr
This has been a known problem and could be changed if the political will to make common sense policy changes and corrections when needed was anywhere near existing. Unfortunately, we live in a [political] dystopia
guywithahat
I don’t think it would be possible to produce a carbon tax that’s simple
patmcc
Tax the fuel. Gasoline now has a $X/gallon tax, as does propane, as does coal, whatever.
What is the difficulty with that?
bgnn
why can't we just tax the gas at the pump? this is, at least, what I'm used to in Europe.
brianwawok
We do. But it’s a super regressive tax. Lots of very poor people depend on a bad MPG car to get to work and live.
null
darth_avocado
And what you’re describing is exactly the reason Kei trucks aren’t a thing despite most farmers actually liking them for their utility.
You can’t import them unless they are old because we want to protect the automotive industry. But we can’t build them new either because they don’t meet the safety standards (FMVSS) and are penalized more for being fuel efficient because the standards are stricter for smaller vehicles.
mtillman
Fine print: The truck in the link is only $20K after government subsidies/rebates. So if the government gives my tax dollars to buyers of this truck, then it will cost $20K.
Brybry
Electric vehicle tax credits are non-refundable tax credits meaning you can't get a credit for more than you owe. [1][2]
Which means no one is getting your tax dollars to buy vehicles (though there may be some infrastructure or manufacturing grants for companies).
[1] https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF12600
[2] https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/tax-credits-for-individuals-wha...
crazygringo
That's not really true.
If the taxes someone would otherwise pay are going to their electric vehicle instead, somebody else has to make up the difference.
So yes, other people are getting my tax dollars to buy electric vehicles. It just takes two steps rather than one, if you want to look at it that way.
PopAlongKid
>Which means no one is getting your tax dollars to buy vehicles
Then who is making up the difference between the tax that would have been paid, and the credit reduction?
anannymoose
So, should I wish to purchase a vehicle this tax year, I tell my HR to adjust my income withholding such that I owe 7,500$ come tax time and then reap the rewards?
Or is there more to the incentive structure?
floxy
Even finer print: the $7,500 federal incentive is a tax rebate. If you don't have a $7,500 tax liability, you won't get the full amount. (this also applies if you transfer the credit to the dealer at point of sale). I mean, money is fungible and all, but your particular tax dollars aren't going to people who buy EVs, they are just paying less in taxes.
PopAlongKid
>this also applies if you transfer the credit to the dealer at point of sale
No, it does not. See Q4 at the following link:
https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/topic-h-frequently-asked-questi...
nullc
It's ~28k without them, particularly when considering recent inflation it's an attractive price... inflation corrected it's in the vague ballpark of other small IC trucks when they were still available.
E.g. a early 2000's Nissan frontier base model was $23k in today's money. It was a somewhat better speced (e.g. more hauling capacity) and much better range, but this new car likely has significantly lower operating costs that would easily justify a 5k uplift.
So I think it ought to be perfectly viable without the subsidy, especially so long as the absurd CAFE standards continue to exist giving EV's a monopoly on this truck size.
standardUser
As opposed to other prices that are not the product of a political economy?
null
aaroninsf
Yes, and you will benefit, because the role of the state is to advance the collective and common good.
That's why we have TeH gOvErNmEnT.
throwaway29812
[dead]
_fat_santa
My favorite thing to come out of CAFE regulations was the Aston Martin Cygnet. It was just a re-badged Toyota iQ whose sole purpose was to raise the average fuel economy within their fleet.
Later they made a one off version for Goodwood that has a V8 stuffed under the hood.
mmooss
> My favorite thing to come out of CAFE regulations was the Aston Martin Cygnet. It was just a re-badged Toyota iQ whose sole purpose was to raise the average fuel economy within their fleet.
Maybe that's a good thing. It compelled Aston Martin to provide their customers with a fuel-efficient option.
masklinn
Nobody looking for a fuel efficient car would look at Aston, and nobody looking at Aston would go for a fuel efficient car.
Which was borne by its sales: sold for nearly 3 times the price you'd have paid Toyota for an iQ, it sold all of 600 units in two years before being cancelled, Aston's second shortest production run. The shortest was the Virage which sold more than 1000 units in a year.
lupusreal
Rebadging doesn't add any meaningful consumer choice.
nullc
I have a small(*) twenty year old i4 pickup and I regularly get cash offers for it while out and about. There is a lot of demand for the small inexpensive and relatively fuel efficient utility vehicles that the government currently prohibits manufacturing.
(*Ironically, though small it has a considerably longer bed than many currently produced larger and less fuel efficient trucks... I'm mystified by trucks that can't even contain a bike without removing a wheel or hanging one over a gate. Looks like the bed on this EV is a bit short too, but a short bed on a small truck is more excusable than a short bed on a huge truck)
UncleOxidant
This is largely why all the vehicles around us have become supersized. It's completely idiotic.
ethagnawl
It's also who sedans and compact cars have largely ceased to exist. The vast majority of new vehicles are crossovers or _light trucks_, which aren't held to the same emission/efficiency standards.
Aurornis
> It's also who sedans and compact cars have largely ceased to exist.
Consumer demand is still an important factor.
Sedans and compact cars are still out there, sitting on dealer lots with reasonable prices.
Yhippa
Anybody know how it got to this point? It can't be because of regulatory capture, right? I don't think small cars are getting made for the US because of SUV mania and something like a 67 MPG requirement for the Honda Fit based on it's build.
Aurornis
> I don't think small cars are getting made for the US because of SUV mania and something like a 67 MPG requirement for the Honda Fit based on it's build.
The famous 67MPG requirement was for a hypothetical 2026 model year car
But Honda discontinued the Fit in the United States in 2020, long before the hypothetical 2026 target.
The reason is consumer demand. People weren't buying them. There are thousands of lightly used Honda Fits on the used market for reasonable prices, but they're not moving.
Yes, the regulations are flawed, but that doesn't change the lack of consumer demand.
null
api
> since 2011, bigger cars are held to a lesser standard by CAFE[1].
... and this is why American cars got so huge, if anyone was curious.
resters
This is extremely refreshing. I think that it would be possible to make something like this in the US for under $15K even. Cars and trucks are so over-engineered and come with tons of low value options intended to drive up the price.
For a case in point, consider that headlights that turn on and off automatically in response to darkness (or rain) are not a standard feature on many cars, yet they include a manual switch that costs more than a photosensor only because of the trim-level upgrades.
Cars could include a slot for a tablet but instead come with overpriced car stereos and infotainment systems that are always light years worse than the most amateurish apps on any mobile app store.
As should be very clear by now after the 2008 US auto industry bailouts and the 100% tariffs on Chinese EVs, the US auto industry is heavily protected and faces virtually no competition, which is why a common sense vehicle like the one in the article sounds revolutionary, though I imagine BYD could deliver something a lot more impressive for $10K if allowed to compete in the US without tariffs.
smcleod
To be honest most of those accessories are actually incredibly cheap at manufacturing time and several have a direct impact on safety (e.g. ensuring people don't drive around with lights off). The cost usually comes as companies use them for pricing tiers where they market them as suggested extras to ratchet up profits.
seanmcdirmid
BYD could totally avoid the tariffs by making in the USA (well, they were planning a factory in Mexico, and tariffs on car parts will kill that if something doesn’t change). They already set up a bus factory in SoCal. My guess is that Chinese automakers are still hesitant about introducing their brands to Americans given politics (Volvo and Polestar are Chinese owned but I think the design is still mainly done in Sweden?).
Japanese, Korean, and European brands already make a lot of vehicles to get around tariffs, although it makes sense for some sedans to be made abroad given American lack of interest in them (so economy of scales doesn’t work out), and sedans typically not being tariffed as harshly as trucks.
worik
> BYD could totally avoid the tariffs by making in the USA
Or concentrate on the 80% of the worldmarket that is not the USA
tw04
>heavily protected and faces virtually no competition
Huh? Out of the top 25 vehicles sold in the US in 2024, 16 of them are non-US automakers. Just because the US is actively blocking China from dumping heavily subsidized vehicles into the north american market, doesn't mean they "face no competition". Kia and Hyundai alone show that it's VERY possible to break into the US market if you have even a little bit of interest playing fair.
https://www.caranddriver.com/news/g60385784/bestselling-cars...
decimalenough
The only real way to break into the US market is to have factories in the US. Trucks in particular are protected by the notorious 25% "chicken tax", which has been in place since the 1960s.
tw04
>Trucks in particular are protected by the notorious 25% "chicken tax", which has been in place since the 1960s.
And yet, that applies to everyone, including US automakers, which is why Ford had to do unnatural things to import the transit from Europe.
They aren't protecting US automakers, they're trying to retain some semblance of manufacturing in the US, which I'm fully in support of.
Both because those are well-paying jobs and because it's a matter of national security.
taylodl
I LOVE it! THIS is the kind of truck I'd be looking at to replace my 1998 Ford Ranger.
Here is what could be potential deal-breakers:
- Lack of a mobile app. Minimalist design is great, but I still want an app to manage charging and be alerted to any vehicle issues.
- Lack of good charge management and battery conditioning. Either that, or a cheap and easy to replace battery pack. I'd really like both!
- Comparable hauling and towing capacity to the 1998 Ford Ranger. Those numbers aren't exactly impressive, but I do use the truck as a truck, and I occasionally need the hauling capacity (weight).
- Bucket seats. I need a bench seat so I can take my wife and dog. Think weekend glamping trips. Picture 8 shows a bucket seat. It doesn't look like that would work.
If anyone from Slate is reading this, this is how I'm looking at this truck. FYI, I'll be comparing this to the Ford Maverick.
ryandrake
> - Lack of a mobile app. Minimalist design is great, but I still want an app to manage charging and be alerted to any vehicle issues.
Noooooooooo! No apps, please! Finally a car not tethered to and dependent on your phone, and we already have our first request to app-ify it!
EDIT: Ughhh, according to the video that another user posted, it looks like there's an app, and yes, "updates" go through it :(
> - Lack of good charge management and battery conditioning. Either that, or a cheap and easy to replace battery pack. I'd really like both!
Yes to a simple battery system!
> - Comparable hauling and towing capacity to the 1998 Ford Ranger. Those numbers aren't exactly impressive, but I do use the truck as a truck, and I occasionally need the hauling capacity (weight).
Yes!
> - Bucket seats. I need a bench seat so I can take my wife and dog. Think weekend glamping trips. Picture 8 shows a bucket seat. It doesn't look like that would work.
Yes, definitely. It being a 2 seater is kind of a deal breaker for families. You really want a bench seat to at least stick a small child between the driver and passenger. Back in the day, we'd stuff 3 kids between two adults, but these days the Safety People would have a heart attack just thinking about that.
The article mentions an SUV upgrade kit that will bolt onto the back of the truck. Ugh, OK I guess. Sad that that's the way it will probably have to go.
hylaride
> Yes, definitely. It being a 2 seater is kind of a deal breaker for families.
What you need is not a pickup truck. Catering to families means expensive bells and whistles, like entertainment systems, etc.
> Back in the day, we'd stuff 3 kids between two adults, but these days the Safety People would have a heart attack just thinking about that.
Rightfully so. Back in the day we did so many things we shouldn't have, and survivorship bias makes us default to thinking it was ok. As kids, we used to go barrelling down dirt roads in the back of pickups or played in the backs of station wagons. There's a reason automobile deaths have gone down.
RandomBacon
> Catering to families means expensive bells and whistles, like entertainment systems, etc.
It absolutely does NOT mean those things.
Cars didn't have entertainment systems for nearly a century and families did just fine.
<Get off my lawn>
My entertainment system was the window. Observe the world, not just whatever AI-generated garbage some algorithm pushes to a small screen 8-10 inches away from your eyes.
</Get off my lawn>
Beijinger
Is written in the article that it can fit more seats. And if you click through the pics you will see it.
7speter
Station wagons from the prehistoric era were family cars and had bench seats, and only had a Radio…
drivingmenuts
> Yes, definitely. It being a 2 seater is kind of a deal breaker for families
I believe I saw there are plans for some sort of SUV conversion.
> Catering to families means expensive bells and whistles, like entertainment systems, etc.
IF it could just get a bluetooth signal from an iDevice or some Android thing, that would probably suffice for a basic option. If the owner needs more than than, let them install (or have installed) some sort of third-party infotainment head of some sort.
Back in the old days, cars sometimes had a single speaker and that was plenty sufficient for listening to music.
Animats
> - Lack of good charge management and battery conditioning.
Why should it lack that? That's a tiny piece of software in the charge controller, which on this vehicle ought to be some tiny microcontroller.
enslavedrobot
In car it requires liquid cooling and from conversations I've had with former Tesla engineers, exquisite control over power quality.
Just ask a Nissan Leaf or Chevy Bolt owner.
taylodl
I'd want the mobile app to be an auxiliary, not a requirement for operating the truck. Keep the dashboard simple.
ryandrake
I'd be worried that once an app got a foothold into the product, the company would be unable to resist the urge to spread the app's tentacles across the entire vehicle, adding connectivity and telemetry and DRM, integrating it into the other car's systems, adding remote-this and wireless-that, and then inevitably the product would end up just like the turd cars we have today.
theamazing0
I think legally they would need to require using an app for their back view camera. All new cars in the United States after 2018 need one and I don't see how it would work without using the phone/tablet as a display.
reginald78
Nice idea in theory. In practice, apps imply ongoing OTA connectivity, which means the truck will be updated to show ads or at the very least collect and sell all my driving information to any dirtbag that can rub two nickels together. Connected devices can alter the deal so they will, after all I've lost any leverage against them after I purchased the vehicle.
organsnyder
If the vehicle had an open interface (maybe via CAN bus over the OBD2 port?), then DIY and aftermarket apps become possibilities.
Beijinger
You need an app. You could make steering to the left only available in a 50 USD per month subscription but steering right is free or something like it.
EvanAnderson
> Noooooooooo! No apps, please!
I wish devices could have web servers and web-based UI rather than thick "apps" that end up rotting when device manufacturers arbitrarily decide that old software won't work anymore (cough, cough-- Apple-- cough, cough).
I know we can't because "security", no end-to-end over the Internet anymore, etc. >sigh<
It seems like we've engineered the networking and software ecosystem to promote disposable "smart" devices. It's almost like somebody profits from it. Hmm...
nine_k
Why, we of course could if we cared. Let the car offer a wifi access point. WPA3 is secure enough, but you can of course have an extra layer of TLS inside it.
For the extra paranoid, a car could have a USB socket that pretends to be a wired network interface, offering DHCP.
Run a web server for car diagnostics and maintenance when connected to this interface. Do it from the comfort of your laptop, or anywhere anytime using your phone. Zero chance of remote exploits, if you set the things correctly on the car side. An ESP32-based system with $5 BOM would suffice to provide this.
nine_k
> Yes to a simple battery system!
Battery balancing and conditioning does not need to be fancy, and does not need a fancy screen; a couple of LEDs should suffice.
But I'd like my batteries charged competently, recharged efficiently while braking, worn uniformly, and kept at reasonable temperature. It's not hard to do completely automatically and invisibly; a quality electric bike would have it.
burnerthrow008
> Yes to a simple battery system!
But you realize this will make cold-weather range suck and on-the-road charging suck, right?
Preheating the battery and cabin on "shore power" is something EV buyers just expect at this point because that can consume 2-3kWh of energy (equivalent to 6-10 miles or 10-16 km). That's almost 10% of Slate's range (see below).
Preheating the battery about 10-15 minutes before you arrive at a supercharger is another expected feature. It can increase charge acceptance rate by over 50% (reduce charge time by 1/3).
The 150 mile range is extremely optimistic given the size of the battery and shape of the truck. With just 5% top and bottom buffers, you'd need to achieve over 3.1 miles/kWh... which is the consumption expected of a small aerodynamic sedan. I would bet real money that highway range (at 75 mph) for the small battery is less than 120 miles from 100% to 0.
tw04
>Noooooooooo! No apps, please! Finally a car not tethered to and dependent on your phone, and we already have our first request to app-ify it!
What car is tied to your phone? A mustang mach-e, for instance, does not require your phone at all. It has a FOB for opening the doors and starting it, you can program the charging times from the in-car screen.
The app is optional, exactly as it should be. This car DESPERATELY is going to need an app when it comes to charging whether you know it or not. With no in-car screen you'll have absolutely no way to control charging which WILL come back to bite you.
>Yes to a simple battery system!
"simple" in this case will add cost. Nearly every EV has the battery as a part of the structural frame of the vehicle for a reason (there are some niche exceptions in China). Nothing is impossible, but I don't see them making the battery easily swappable, while also being structurally sound, and keeping the low price point.
nancyminusone
> DESPERATELY is going to need an app when it comes to charging whether you know it or not
I don't own an EV. What for? Do you really need more than a button or two and some leds?
potato3732842
> - Bucket seats. I need a bench seat so I can take my wife and dog. Think weekend glamping trips. Picture 8 shows a bucket seat. It doesn't look like that would work.
Take her car on those trips then. You wouldn't complain you can't take a Miata camping, why would you complain you can't take a 2-seat pickup? camping? The product isn't trying to do everything. It's trying to be the minimum viable truck and be good at it. And just like the purpose built roadster you give up unrelated stuff, like family hauling.
83
> You wouldn't complain you can't take a Miata camping, why would you complain you can't take a 2-seat pickup? camping?
Because 2-seat pickups used to function this way. It's okay to pine for functionality that has been lost, particularly when a new product like this comes along and gets your hopes up.
fishpen0
Bench seats are almost certainly not coming back in modern low cost vehicles due to side impact safety regulations. They aren't _illegal_ but its extremely difficult to meet those standards with a bench configuration and ironically probably why a budget pickup is less likely to have them. Cutting those corners by not having a bench at all is an easy way to save money in the design.
The hauling and towing is another one. Unfortunately batteries are much heavier than a combustion engine and take away from the total capacity of the vehicle. It's curb weight is 500lbs more than the 1998 Ford Ranger. Same thing, budget vehicle means budget suspension, so its weight lowers the capacity instead of increasing the cost of the suspension.
hinkley
The problem with bench seating is not side impact but accidental steering wheel input during hard cornering. In the typical 10 and 2 hand position having your butt move makes your shoulders move, the shoulders make the hands move, and now you’re understeering. Understeering on a mountain road likely means death, and on other roads a ditch or hitting a phone pole.
f001
Steering position has been taught as 9 and 3 for a long time now… but still fair point. You can add a bit of alcantara to the seat to help you stay in place though. My RDX has it for the sporty-ish trim and it helps.
taylodl
I had no idea bench seats had such an impact to side impact safety regulations. Thanks for that insight!
It also makes sense that the total capacity of the vehicle would diminish, but at the same time, and engine isn't weightless (though neither is an electric motor). If I had 1,500 pounds capacity, then I should be good to go.
Braxton1980
The rear seats of almost all new cars are bench seats though. Is side impact safety requirements the same or apply the whole side of the car?
I believe airbag requirements prevent this because the middle seat would require a console mounted airbag where infotainment systems normally live
hinkley
I suspect GP is misremembering why bench seating went away. Bench seats for the driver can lead to steering errors which can result in crashes.
potato3732842
> Same thing, budget vehicle means budget suspension, so its weight lowers the capacity instead of increasing the cost of the suspension.
Leaf sprung solid axle is great for doing things on a budget.
But it's probably impossible to put one in a new vehicle because the hiring pool of the automotive industry is too indoctrinated against that sort of stuff at this point.
toast0
> - Lack of a mobile app. Minimalist design is great, but I still want an app to manage charging and be alerted to any vehicle issues.
I get that cars have these, but my PHEV (which I don't often charge) lost its app when Ford pulled the plug as 3G was sunsetting and I don't think I'm missing anything. If there's anything wrong with the car, it can show the check engine light (or whatever it's called when there's no engine).
> - Lack of good charge management and battery conditioning.
Seems like a little early to declare this on a vaporware product? I don't think you need a screen or an app to have reasonable battery conditioning?
Anyway, I would love small trucks to return. I had a 2007 Ranger and I have a 2003 S-10, and there's nothing in the US new vehicle market that fits the small truck niche anymore. CAFE standards can't be met with a small footprint truck, so we only get large footprint trucks. But EV trucks don't have efficiency standards, so maybe we'll see the niche again. (I think you could maybe hit the CAFE standards with a single cab ranger and a hybrid drive train, but I also think automakers prefer to sell luxury trucks rather than base model trucks)
Aurornis
This is why it's so hard for companies to introduce stripped-down or small models of anything: People will tell you how much they want it, but as soon as they see it they realize they actually miss something from the models that are already out there.
It happens with small phones (iPhone mini) to laptops and cars. There are comments throughout this thread claiming that everyone would be buying small sedans if not for CAFE regulations, but we have plenty of small sedans on the market that aren't selling well.
It always comes down to market demand. The big companies have market demand figured out better than many give them credit for, even if it's not exactly the product you want.
octorian
I'm grateful they don't make truly stripped down models of cars anymore, because those were always what would end up in the rental car inventory. Every time I'd rent a car, it felt like I was taking a step back in time.
Now all rental cars actually have some reasonable set of features, without you having to pay for any up-sells.
actionfromafar
So the rest of the economy should suffer to subsidize your rental.
m463
This sounds like the feature creep tesla always struggled with.
also, no mobile app? that is a feature.
The appeal of this vehicle is that it IS like your 1998 ranger, not: mobile app = data collection = monetized vehicle = mobile upgrades = basically all the things that are bad with technology.
Honestly, all these "monetized experience" companies forget that (like matt ridley's rational optimist says) with trust, trade is unlimited.
adamhowell
> Lack of a mobile app…
At the 6 mins and 40 seconds timestamp on this video (https://youtu.be/cq1qEjwSYkw?t=400) he shows the car app that will tell you current range, etc
conradev
I'd recommend folks watch the video – it's fascinating.
The truck gets OTA updates through your phone and not some LTE modem. It doesn't have one. They moved all car management including OBD-like functionality to the phone, too, which I think is awesome.
This is how I want the interior design philosophy of manual controls to be digitized – with digital control. I'd pay $10k more for physical buttons, though.
Brian_K_White
Only if the phone app is open source, or at least the api, alllll of it, is public so no one needs the default app nor is limited by it.
Alternatively, maybe the overall simplicity will mean that a 3rd party full computer replacement would be feasible even without any official help from the manufacturer.
bilsbie
I’d be good with no updates. Ie make it simple enough that there shouldn’t need to be updates.
And if there’s something major maybe you download it onto a thumb drive and plug it in.
I’m tired of my vehicle being changed without my consent.
instaclay
Oh sweet. Delicious. Very reassuring. Was really hoping this thing was going to be device agnostic.
My 2015 car had 3g "smart" features that no longer work since 3g has been sunset in the US. Awesome to see forward thinking of a smart feature-set that can be updated with a module you'll likley already have an upgrade path for.
ryandrake
Ugh. Yuck. Very disappointing. Was really hoping this thing wasn't going to be phone dependent.
jws
Bucket seats. I need a bench seat so I can take my wife and dog.
Ah, there's the problem. You have violated Pauli's "spouse/dog size exclusion principle". You need to either have a dog that can sleep curled up on the spouse's lap during the trip, or a dog big enough that the spouse can sleep curled up on the dog.
Bench seats also aren't a panacea, I still feel the burn of my dog's stink eye when then girlfriend was prompted to center of bench seat and dog on the side.
Jach
What a gross looking vehicle, and at that price? I just want the old ranger design. I've been using a 2006 ranger for quite a while and it's served me well, I'd like to upgrade it to a ranger XL for that little extra cab room for crap, along with 4WD and power windows and AC, but people rightfully guard them and when they do show up at dealerships they're typically pretty expensive too.
I've thought about importing a Kei, but I don't think it's for me. When I think "American kei truck" I at least think something in the ballpark range cost of a Kei, which is quite a bit less, at least half as expensive for the best options like 4WD, even less if you can compromise. It also has charm unlike this. The range is just ridiculous, too. My little ranger isn't exactly great, I don't push it much more than 300 miles on a tank, but having half that (new! let alone after a few years) is such a deal breaker. Last time I took my truck camping it was around 60 miles each way, and that was a nearby spot.
PaulHoule
I like it. My wife runs a riding academy and we use a Honda Fit the way some people would use a pickup truck: we can fit 10 bales of wood shavings in the back. [1] We’re dreading when it fails because they don’t make the fit anymore and compact hatchbacks seem to be on the way out. Recent experiences have made me a bit of a Buick enthusiast and I can see driving a 2005-ish sedan except that I won’t get those sawdust bales into the trunk. We are also thinking of fitting in EV into the fleet, so far the used Nissan Leaf has been the main contender but this is a pickup truck I could get into.
[1] We were profitable from day one because we didn’t buy a $80,000 pickup on day one the way everybody else does.
hansvm
The Honda Fit is great. You can probably squeeze an extra decade out if you're willing to swap out the motor or transmission (used, 100k miles or so, if you shop around $2k-$3k should be doable), and if you're using it heavily then you have the advantage that most cara on the market take less abuse, so you can maybe grab a decade beyond that by picking up somebody else's used Fit when you're done repairing yours.
itsoktocry
>You can probably squeeze an extra decade out if you're willing to swap out the motor or transmission
In many parts of the country (I'm Canadian, I assume the same for the US) the body and undercarriage are going to rot before the drivetrain goes.
germinalphrase
This is the issue with mine here in Minnesota. Rust is the car killer.
rockostrich
> used, 100k miles or so, if you shop around $2k-$3k should be doable
Where are you finding a 100k mile Honda Fit for $3k? Before I bought my current daily driver, Honda Fits were on my list to look out for and in the central NJ area I never saw one in decent condition around that mileage for less than $5k. Even looking now I see people trying to part out theirs for $2k or looking for $4k for a 200k mile one. I messaged someone on FB Marketplace that had a 2013 with 65k miles on it to try and bring down their $11k asking to $8k and just got ignored.
NJ is probably on the higher end of the market but the deviation can't be that big.
hansvm
Sorry I wasn't clear. You can get a motor with 100k miles from a totaled car for $3k, including the labor to replace it.
To your actual question, I bought mine (2008, manual) in 2018 for $5k with 100k miles in The Bay, and it took about a month of waiting for a good deal to crop up. I've put another 100k on it without issue and plan to drive it a long time. Inflation and the chip shortage have roughly kept up with depreciation, so I'm currently seeing some good options in the $6k range and similarly expect that $5k is around the bottom of what you can pay for a nice vehicle with 100k miles on it.
Also, deviations can absolutely be that big. It's more prevalent at the top of the market, but there are big differences in Subarus and Civics, for example, in different parts of the country, even in the sub-$5k range. It's often worth a flight and driving back to purchase a car (if you value your time at $0 or have other things to do while you're there).
PaulHoule
Japanese cars, particularly cars that have been orphaned, keep their value at high mileage.
If I had to get a high mileage car in a hurry in upstate NY with some expectation that my acquisition + repair costs would be reason I'd go looking for a 2005 Buick. Maybe half of that is getting older, the other half is that my son drives a '96 Buick which has needed some creative maintenance but has been rock solid reliable after a flurry of work where we replaced aging parts.
rozap
I also love this design and I'm happy that someone is doing it. I think it's unlike anything else on the market.
But, they won't necessarily be competing against other new things on the market. My wife also rides horses and we got a $5000 20 year old F250 which is very basic but has been bulletproof, and it can tow. I imagine old, basic trucks, either cheap domestic ones or kei trucks will be what this thing competes against.
I hope it does well. This is the kind of design thinking that the auto industry needs.
Also I'm increasingly convinced that the Honda fit is what peak performance looks like. But when it dies you do have options - maybe a Ford Transit Connect or a Metris.
kyledrake
All micro cargo van providers have stopped building them. The Transit Connect, Metris, Promaster City and NV200 are all now discontinued. The VW Caddy isn't sent to the states.
There are rumors that they will make a cargo van based on the Maverick but they make them in Mexico, and with the tariff situation I'm not sure if they will be going through with that anymore.
All of the perfect compacts and hatchbacks are slowly disappearing, and solid work trucks have been replaced with $60k+ fake trucks that will melt their gaskets with crappy turbos and can't even fit a piece of 2x4 in the back. There is an enormous category of consumers that just want an auto that's simple, affordable, safe, fuel efficient and reasonably sized. Almost nobody is serving them right now.
masklinn
> All micro cargo van providers have stopped building them. The Transit Connect, Metris, Promaster City and NV200 are all now discontinued.
This is an entirely american problem, because the small van is largely dead in the US. They're doing fine elsewhere.
The Metris is still manufactured (as the Vito, or V260 in China), and is not the smallest model which is the Citan (based on the Kangoo, with its second gen based on kangoo III in 2021).
The Promaster City (Fiat Doblo) still exists, as a rebadged Berlingo since 2022.
The NV 200 was replaced by the NV 250 (a rebadged Kangoo II) in 2019, which was then replaced by the Townstar (a rebadged Kangoo III) in late 2021. There's also the Docker / Express below that (which descends from the Logan MCV / Van).
And the Transit Connect was replaced by the Caddy (rebadged), but Ford dropped its original plans of a US release.
> There is an enormous category of consumers that just want an auto that's simple, affordable, safe, fuel efficient and reasonably sized.
Apparently not sufficiently so (or with a consistent enough need) that they can be catered to. Or at least not so that you couldn't make more money selling them pavement princesses.
ethbr1
To give credit where credit is due, the ~$25k Ford Maverick was a decent step towards "enough" vehicle for many people, while minimizing cost.
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a64351746/2025-ford-mav...
And definitely went the other way from the industry.
PaulHoule
To be fair, a lot of farms need a big-ass pickup truck because they are always towing horses to go to shows or trailheads. We have 70 beautiful acres and a network of trails my wife built that were inspired by Het Vondelpark in Amsterdam. [1] If everything goes right we trailer in a horse once and never have to trailer it out although some horses don't fit in or have to go to the vet.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vondelpark
The Fit, however, is really genius. It's got the utility of an SUV in the body of a compact. I can't believe Honda's excuse that it wasn't selling -- in my area it is a running gag that if you have a blue Fit somebody will park another blue Fit next to you at the supermarket or that it makes a great getaway car, if somebody catches you doing donuts in their lawn you can say it musta been somebody elese.
542354234235
If the grocery store parking lot is any indication, farming is the number one profession in America. All farmers can have their big trucks and still regulate out the other 99% of the 22-foot monsters used to commute to offices.
ethbr1
Something I also only really appreciated after spending more time out plains-west in the US, it's dangerous to drive small vehicles because of the average distances and abundance of larger wildlife.
When you're regularly driving 2+ hours one way to a town and a random pronghorn appears in the middle of the road, at night, when you're doing 85 mph... you want to be in something that can take the impact.
PaulDavisThe1st
> Also I'm increasingly convinced that the Honda fit is what peak performance looks like
Close. A bit of work on the rear hatch dimensions so that you could get 4'x8' sheet goods in there, as was possible on the 1980s Honda Civic.
Also, just a teensy-weensy bit more power, please. Ours struggles even on moderate hills here on the edge of the Sangres de Cristo (southern Rockies).
Otherwise, all hail the Fit/Jazz, car of the future past.
AlanYx
They're both good in different ways. The advantage of the Fit is largely in cargo height (with the magic seats flipped up), but for some other objects the 80s Civic is better.
jjice
The Fit is a wonderful car. I'd buy one if I could find one for a decent price, but 40k miles 2020 (last year for them in the US) still runs around $20k at dealers and Carvana! For five grand more, I can get a brand new Corolla Hatchback, which is what I'll likely do, but I'd pick up a Fit without thinking if I could find a good price.
redwall_hp
I'm also a Honda Fit fan. Technically, it is still made, just not sold in the North American market. It's had a new generation come out since they stopped selling it here, matching the new Civics' style.
The closest Honda offerings are probably the Civic Hatchback (lower roof, but the seats still fold down) and the HR-V, which is basically a Fit on stilts with more weight and slightly less room.
I went with a hatchback Civic Sport Touring to replace my Fit (which has 210K miles on it and is still reliable, though I'm passing it on to someone else) and my girlfriend is about to try the HR-V to replace her (newer) Fit that was just lost in an accident, since she needs more roof height for dog crates.
foxyv
I am going to drive my Honda Fit until the wheels fall off, then I'm going to put new wheels on and drive it some more. Best car in the world IMO.
CobaltFire
Would a used Metris cargo work? We have the passenger version and it’s excellent. True 1000kg load rating, and the cargo version can be had extremely cheaply.
We also have our eye on this truck, but with less urgency since our van does everything we could want.
The Telo MT1 also has us eyeing it…
HeyLaughingBoy
Most small SUVs should be fine though. You switched between wood shavings and hay bales, but I reliably fit 7 hay bales in a 2005 Saturn Vue (wife always managed to get 9 in there), which means that 10 bales of shavings should not be a problem since they're much smaller.
TBH, I think a minivan would make it even easier.
anannymoose
I run a Honda Pilot for this reason. With the seats folded I can haul 8’ lumber or 10’ PVC pipe inside the vehicle, no tie down needed. If I need to tow, I have a 5,000LB tow rating so most anything around the property is possible with a good trailer for a couple thousand extra.
I bought reasonably used, spent about 30k instead of 50k+ for a comparable pickup truck which lacks the ability to haul 7-8 passengers when needed.
Also has the benefit of being one of the most “Made in America” vehicles out there, #3 IIRC.
hbsbsbsndk
I use a 2018 Subaru Forester to move stuff like this, with the seats folded flat the cargo space is decent. You can add some cargo boxes on the back trailer hitch as well.
The dream is a Pacifica minivan - they make a hybrid version.
Kon-Peki
The Pacifica and Sienna (and probably Odyssey as well) are absolute garbage for hauling crap. If that is what you are looking for, get a used one from the prior generation.
NewJazz
The Chevy Bolt is very similar shape and size to the fit. Supposedly there is going to be a 2026 model. People have thrown after market tow hitches and towed (small) trailers pretty far even. Check out the BoltEV subreddit.
dogline
It's a $20k, street-legal, EV modding platform. Sounds like you can mount your own infotainment system. Just an electric motor, battery, and chassis, and the rest is up to you. Isn't this what we've been asking for?
ryandrake
Yea, it's pretty exciting. I'd like to see how much more they could strip out to reduce the price and still have a viable commercial product. I guess I'm living firmly in the past, but $20K still seems to be a high price for a car. Then again, I haven't bought a car new since the 90s, so I'm probably just an old fart who hasn't grokked what things cost today. I still remember the day when the base-model Corolla started costing more than $9999 and I thought the world was coming to an end.
EDIT: Yep, I'm just old. Another commenter linked to a "10 cheapest new cars" list and there seems to be a price floor of around $20K. No major manufacturer seems capable of making one cheaper!
connicpu
According to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics[1], $9999 in 1995 is equivalent to $21,275.25 today, so it's a pretty spot on price for a barebones car.
patagonia
Except, with advances in computational design and engineering, manufacturing automation, and moving to plastic for the body I would expect a reduction in price, in real terms. Not impressed.
mikestew
I guess I'm living firmly in the past, but $20K still seems to be a high price for a car.
You're not even living in the past. Our 20 year old Scion xB cost us $20K out the door new (granted, that's with most of the paltry list of options added, $15K base). And that was a cheap car at the time, Toyota marketing to "the kids".
The last time $20K was "a high price" for a new car was probably before most HN folk were born.
dublinben
The average price of new cars sold in the US last year was nearly $50k. The manufacturers make more money from expensive cars than cheap cars, and people keep buying them, so that's what they sell. Before they canceled the Fit, Honda was selling almost 10 times as many of the larger CR-V each year.
You can find numerous new cars for sale in Mexico for under $15k USD.[0] Even Europe has several new cars under €20k.[1] These are the same manufacturers we have here, but lower cost models that are only sold in lower-income countries.
[0] https://compra.autofact.com.mx/blog/comprar-carro/mercado/au...
vaidhy
For those price-comparing, it is $20K after the federal incentives. So, its real cost is around $27K which makes it way more expensive than what the article claims.
jffry
Keep in mind $20k in 2025 dollars is the equivalent of ~$10k in 1997 dollars, if that helps set your frame of reference
neural_thing
According to this, there is only one new car model of any kind selling for under $20K in the US these days
ty6853
One would be wiser to based on annual depreciation in real $ plus time value of purchase price. I suspect out of new trucks a tacoma would be the cheapest since the depreciation is low to negative (IIRC recently a Tacoma was worth more 1 year old than new).
hbsbsbsndk
This article is missing at least the Mitsubishi Mirage - the 2024 model year still seems to be available for 17k in the base trim?
MetaWhirledPeas
> $20K still seems to be a high price for a car
Keep in mind this price is before the USA federal tax credit. So we're potentially talking about a $12,500 car. And consider inflation.
mikestew
After federal tax credit, ergo $27K.
(Hat tip to @vaidhy: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43794867)
kachurovskiy
That's with federal incentive and likely before they factored in the tariffs. Those 500 parts aren't all coming from US. I wouldn't expect any usable version of it to be below 30k once it's actually available.
gaws
> It's a $20k, street-legal, EV modding platform.
And it'll always be sold out.
542354234235
I'm sure you can get on the waiting list (for a lead time of 3-40 years) or buy it from a reseller for $70k. Problem solved.
gaws
> buy it from a reseller for $70k.
Now there's the real price.
moffkalast
> a comprehensive active safety system that includes everything from automatic emergency braking with pedestrian detection to automatic high beams
No stereo, but luckily they still found space for a few DNN accelerators that will slam on the brakes randomly when getting false detections. Likely still has a 4G uplink and all the modern car cancer to make sure they can datamine their clients as much as possible and offset the subsidized purchase cost.
Worst of both worlds?
eightys3v3n
Another comment said there is no cellular modem; updates come through the app using a phone.
moffkalast
That's exemplary if true, though it's a bit hard to believe.
stefan_
Is it? They show speakers mounted in the front as a "soundbar". Will people figure out there is a reason cars with good sound systems have them mounted all around the vehicle?
snowwrestler
So mount speakers all around the vehicle? The idea is: customize it yourself.
dogline
I just want some power ports and good mounting points, then I can put whatever I want there, and upgrade it. I'd imagine that people will come up with a mountable radio kit, like the DIN format radios of old, but with less restrictions.
baby_souffle
> I'd imagine that people will come up with a mountable radio kit, like the DIN format radios of old, but with less restrictions.
I am hoping like hell this ends up being the case. Give me power, a place to put my own stuff and some details on the CAN bus and leave me to it.
I do not want to pay a premium for your slow, locked down, buggy / seldom-updated touch screen.
dmonitor
DIN format radios are still around. My recent-ish corolla's infotainment display is just a well integrated double-DIN. I'm surprised this car doesn't as far as I can tell, have a DIN slot for one.
MetaWhirledPeas
> Will people figure out there is a reason cars with good sound systems have them mounted all around the vehicle?
No, because they knew what they were getting into when they bought this truck. And I'm sure there will be a dozen DIY ways to add a more traditional sound system.
hugs
on long car trips, it seems like everyone in the car (except, me, the driver) has headphones on. no one will miss the lack of rear speakers.
euroderf
Sounds very twenty-first century. No shared music recognition, no sing-alongs.
If passengers want to DJ, you can get one of those little FM transmitter thingies that plugs into a phone/table headphone port.
blt
As a car audio enthusiast, the biggest obstacle to putting a system into a new high-tech car is bypassing the deeply-embedded infotainment system while retaining decent aesthetics and steering wheel controls. The idea of getting an electric drivetrain and new-car safety with a 90's-style blank canvas for audio is amazing.
I hope that the noise isolation and intended speaker mounting locations are good!
maerF0x0
feature, not a bug, they want you to buy their $4000 BOSE upgrade which is actually $500 of equipment.
skort
Do you have any proof or even a hint of a reason that this will be the case? Or is this just nonsense?
Their FAQs even state: > Built-in infotainment systems raise a car’s price, and they become outdated quickly and have high failure rates.
It seems unlikely that a company saying this will throw in a $4,000 infotainment system in a $20,000 vehicle.
manacit
I read this as the parent complaining about other car manufacturers selling you crappy default stereos so that you'll upgrade, not that Slate is excluding a stereo on this truck to upsell you.
In fact, I would be rather surprised if you could buy $4,000 worth of stereo equipment for this car, given their promo materials seem to include a $100 bluetooth speaker below an iPhone.
burlesona
I LOVE this idea. I’ve specifically been looking to buy a tiny truck or van, “can hold sheets of plywood” being a major criteria. I love the idea of that being a simple electric I can charge at home. Beautiful!
flustercan
Its a cool car, but forgive me for not getting Lucy-Footballed again by an electric car startup claiming to be able to "change the game" while never actually getting any cars sold.
jandrese
Yeah, the completely unrealistic timeline, price point, and the fact that the company is only now looking to hire engineers sets off my "fun looking product that will never be available for sale" alarms. I don't think they even have a prototype built yet, everything you see is just a render. They have not even started planning how to start building the factory.
The price point is assuming the R&D is already paid off, the factory is built, the supply lines are optimized, and they're building a million of these things every year. History has shown that you can't start off with a cheap mass produced car as your only product because mass production requires way too much startup capital. The success stories started with hand built extremely expensive cars that were used to pay down R&D costs and keep the company afloat while they built the factory for the mass production model.
About the only way I see this happening is if Bezos goes all in and dumps an outrageous amount of money into getting the production line running knowing that he won't see a return for at least a decade or more, and I don't think he's quite that generous. Also this assumes that cheap lightweight powerful batteries become widely available in the next couple of years.
floxy
>I don't think they even have a prototype built yet
https://insideevs.com/news/757237/slate-ev-spotted-los-angel...
https://insideevs.com/news/757649/slate-auto-truck-suv-revea...
perihelions
In rebuttal:
- "This doesn't seem to be a working vehicle. The Autopian's David Tracy climbed underneath and didn't see any powertrain or proper suspension components, indicating this is a non-functional show car."
rainingmonkey
> The Autopian's David Tracy climbed underneath and didn't see any powertrain or proper suspension components, indicating this is a non-functional show car.
null
null
thekevan
>The rather extreme omission of any kind of media system in the car is jarring, but it, too, has secondary benefits.
>“Seventy percent of repeat warranty claims are based on infotainment currently because there’s so much tech in the car that it’s created a very unstable environment in the vehicle,” Snyder says.
I'm totally cool with them not having an infotainment screen or even a stereo itself. But speaker management might be a pain.
I really hope they decide to either include speakers to which you connect to your own infotainment system or at the very least, have the space or brackets where you can bring your own speakers and install them without cutting.
Having a bluetooth speaker take care of all the sound is just too bulky and cumbersome for those of us who need to live with constant music in the car. Plus, I don't want to leave a $150 bluetooth speaker in my car all the time and encourage break-ins.
spookie
just place 4 bluetooth speakers connected to eachother in a mesh or something
cma
I'd rather have my Bluetooth speaker stolen than an installed stereo stolen where they just gut parts of the car and rip things up. But it will be a bigger target since it's easier to resell.
BoorishBears
> But it will be a bigger target since it's easier to resell.
Indeed: https://www.reddit.com/r/Toyota/comments/1bt8ck8/loved_dropp...
iamben
Absolutely love this. Love brands taking the SLC (simple, lovable, complete: https://longform.asmartbear.com/slc/) approach - minimalism is an absolute delight in a world where everything is crammed with unnecessary/unused feature bloat.
(That said, I'd love a stereo - even if it was just a built in bluetooth speaker/aux-in, which feels like a perfect compromise!)
cbdumas
I like this comment because it both argues for "SLC" design and contains the reason why we don't get it: "Sure this thing looks great if only it had <FEATURE>" where <FEATURE> is different for every buyer.
kelseyfrog
Good news, it can be added.
> A Bluetooth speaker holder that fits under the climate knobs is available, but there is also a soundbar that can be installed in the dashboard storage compartment.
https://americancarsandracing.com/2025/04/25/best-accessorie...
teruakohatu
Technically you could zip tie or duct tape an Amazon Basics Bluetooth speaker to just anything even a lawnmower. This looks like just one step above that.
It’s a shame they didn’t add a DIN head unit slot and throw a plastic cover over it, preinstall install speaker wires. Anyone could then DIY a real stereo for less than they are probably selling the Bluetooth speaker/soundbar.
eightys3v3n
Or even just conduit between all the common places we would need to run cables.
guywithahat
The issue with this is they claim the cost savings came from not having a screen and other silly features, but that’s not where money is spent.
The real cost savings came a tiny, 150 mile battery. It could easily be <100 miles loaded up after a few years of use, which means there are very few use cases for this truck, and it certainly doesn’t make sense without the tax credit. Cool idea, but there’s no getting around the price of batteries
ceejayoz
There are plenty of use cases for a ~100 mile truck.
DangitBobby
Right, but it needs to be competitive with ICE cars that travel several hundred miles per tank and fill up in minutes. Literally 0 of my friends have been willing to transition to electric due primarily to range anxiety, and that's for vehicles that achieve over 200 miles per charge. I drive an EV and even I would simply never, ever consider this vehicle based on the range.
ceejayoz
I’d want one of these for in-town stuff, which is 90% of my driving.
eightys3v3n
I would buy a 160km truck to drive to and from work.
Jach
You can get a lot of Uber rides for $20k.
aksss
There are plenty of use cases in the narrow band that it can operate, but it is a pretty narrow band. Around town commuter in climate that doesn't need AWD/4WD, like great for shopping, commuting, or for small contractors doing jobs. Two people in the vehicle plus luggage, it will be interesting to see what happens to range. Love the concept.
brundolf
The plastic frame probably helps by making it super light. And that + the lack of paint definitely helps cut manufacturing costs
turnsout
Let me introduce you to a concept we call "the city"
For anyone curious, if you made a similarly sized gas-powered pickup with an i4 engine, it would be penalized more than a full-sized pickup for being too fuel inefficient, despite likely getting much better mileage than an F-150 because, since 2011, bigger cars are held to a lesser standard by CAFE[1].
1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_average_fuel_economy...