Slate Auto reveals its new customizable $20,000 EV, shipping in 2026

[NobleGamer]

Summary

Recent startup Slate Auto is launching with a made-in-America truck EV that with federal tax credits will cost just $20,000, with additional customizations available for purchase that can either be installed yourself or installed by an auto partner.  The base model is a pickup truck with 1000 pounds towing & 1400 pounds max payload capacities that can be converted into an SUV, with a battery range of 150 miles or 240 with an extended battery.  This is planned to go to market by the end of 2026.

 

 

Quotes

Quote

Backed by Jeff Bezos and Eric Schmidt, Slate Auto says that affordable price is possible because of its pared-down, basic model that can then be customized—and even transformed from a truck into an SUV. Slate Auto has been in stealth for almost three years, says CEO Chris Barman, who worked as a Chrysler executive until 2017. The company is officially launching today [April 24 2025], with refundable vehicle reservations open now for $50. In recent days, the company has put some of its prototype vehicles on California streets, showcasing the possible configurations that will be available.

 

The Slate Truck will begin as a two-door, two-seat electric pickup, with crank windows and no infotainment system. Customers will be able to be pick from more than 100 accessories to add on for an extra cost—everything from cup holders to a center console to a single roof crossbar to power windows. Since many people use their phones for music and navigation, the company eliminated the infotainment system to cut costs. Instead, there’s an accompanying app (at no charge) that drivers will be able to use when in the vehicle. If someone wants a radio in their Slate, it’s been designed so that one could be easily installed. Barman notes that customers could even do those changes over time, rather than when they first purchase the vehicle.

 

If a customer wants a longer-range battery, a wrap, and to turn the truck into an SUV, those adjustments would cost roughly $10,000.

 

My thoughts

This appears to be a Framework-like approach to trucks, which has me intrigued aside from the bare bones option & price, and so I welcome it to the industry.

 

I've long thought that things like putting elaborate proprietary center consoles was an absurd way to justify higher vehicle costs, aside from other economic factors.  I'm someone who works from home tends to buy years-old used cars to save money to mitigate throwing away more toward depreciation.  So if I could pay around $20K for a new car that could get me where I needed to go once in a while and the EV aspects like range & charging fit my needs, then I might consider buying it new in after seeing it on the road for a couple years.  Looking forward to seeing how this plays out in the market once they actually go to market.

 

Sources

Slate.auto specs

Fast Company

WIRED

 

[Millios]

It looks like a poorly rendered 3D model

Like a UE5 demo due to how smooth it is

[RONOTHAN##]

It's probably one of the ugliest trucks I've seen, it looks like you gave someone 5 minutes to model a Ford Ranger off memory in Beam.MG. 

 

That said, I'm cheap, repairable trucks, I'd consider buying it. I'll just believe it when it's actually available for purchase though, there's been enough fake MSRPs for cars out there recently. 

[Millios]

5 minutes ago, RONOTHAN## said:

repairable trucks

Nah

 

Thats a repairable truck right there

 

Jokes aside I'd like to see it in action too cause we've seen how real claims can be with stuff like the cybertruck (PoS) but it seems like it'll at least be a better implimentation of their ambition than previous tries from other companinies

[TetraSky]

I mean... The price is not bad. But the range is so terrible... And it's "projected", not actual miles. We can assume it will likely be closer to 75% of that in reality. And in the winter up north it will probably be closer to 30%.

 

But seriously, that's an ugly ass truck. (oh sorry, "SUV")

[MiszS]

23 minutes ago, RONOTHAN## said:

It's probably one of the ugliest trucks I've seen, it looks like you gave someone 5 minutes to model a Ford Ranger off memory in Beam.MG. 

 

That said, I'm cheap, repairable trucks, I'd consider buying it. I'll just believe it when it's actually available for purchase though, there's been enough fake MSRPs for cars out there recently. 

Idk i kinda like how it looks, especially because it doesn't look like literally 99% of trucks do

[Needfuldoer]

Silicon Valley finally reinvents the Ford Ranger.

[wanderingfool2]

I know a lot of people don't like the look of the CyberTruck, but this truck in my opinion is so so so much worse.

 

Almost looks like the front hood area is going to be almost as long as the bed of the truck.

 

1 hour ago, NobleGamer said:

So if I could pay around $20K for a new car that could get me where I needed to go once in a while and the EV aspects like range & charging fit my needs, then I might consider buying it new in after seeing it on the road for a couple years.  Looking forward to seeing how this plays out in the market once they actually go to market.

That I think has to have a massive caveat to it, in that they are projecting $20,000 and that $20,000 projection is also based on federal tax credits of $7500.  So in reality, once those credits "end" (which they could very well be ending) it will put the vehicle at $27,500.

 

Now $27,500 is still pretty decent...but the question becomes who will purchase a truck like this?

With an EPA range of 240km you are going to start running into issues.  The first being battery longevity.  It's best to keep your battery around 70 - 75% state of charge, although many manufactures recommend 80% as it still is a good compromise of range vs life expectancy.  You probably don't want to go below 20% state of charge either though.  Even if you consider 10% - 80% charge though, that means effective range is actually 168km.  Cold weather and your effective range could drop to 100km (or since it's a cheaper vehicle, maybe even 80km).  That starts getting to the point where it becomes impractical as a vehicle.

 

I know that people can charge from home and effectively be at a "full tank", but on a normal trip we are talking about needing to charge every 2 hours of highway driving [and that assumes their EPA range involves only highway driving].  If you keep to the standard 80 - 20 rule as well, that's only 1.5 hours of driving.  [For comparison the lowest Tesla with the 80-20 rule would need to be charged every 2.6 hours...and I consider that lowest range just at the reasonable level for most]

 

1 hour ago, NobleGamer said:

This appears to be a Framework-like approach to trucks, which has me intrigued aside from the bare bones option & price, and so I welcome it to the industry.

It's a Bezos company, until it actually comes onto market I won't really believe much of pricing and repairability.

 

Either way, this is a wait and see type of thing.  Injection molded panels, etc...while actually a neat idea it makes me wonder how well they will hold up in the real world (fading, easily scratched, complete replacement on smallest of impacts etc).

[Needfuldoer]

51 minutes ago, wanderingfool2 said:

Either way, this is a wait and see type of thing.  Injection molded panels, etc...while actually a neat idea it makes me wonder how well they will hold up in the real world (fading, easily scratched, complete replacement on smallest of impacts etc).

Saturn S series cars had plastic bumpers, fenders, and door skins for over a decade. They're usually fine unless it's well below zero degrees and a rock kicks up into them.

 

51 minutes ago, wanderingfool2 said:

With an EPA range of 240km you are going to start running into issues.  The first being battery longevity.  It's best to keep your battery around 70 - 75% state of charge, although many manufactures recommend 80% as it still is a good compromise of range vs life expectancy.  You probably don't want to go below 20% state of charge either though.  Even if you consider 10% - 80% charge though, that means effective range is actually 168km.  Cold weather and your effective range could drop to 100km (or since it's a cheaper vehicle, maybe even 80km).  That starts getting to the point where it becomes impractical as a vehicle.

Small-ish EV batteries really should be LiFePo4, not NMC. They're not as dense, but they're good for over ten times as many 0-100% cycles. (That's one thing that turned me off of electric motorcycles like the Zero lineup, LiveWire S2, and BMW CE 04; they all prioritize energy density over longevity.)

[wanderingfool2]

1 hour ago, Needfuldoer said:

Small-ish EV batteries really should be LiFePo4, not NMC. They're not as dense, but they're good for over ten times as many 0-100% cycles. (That's one thing that turned me off of electric motorcycles like the Zero lineup, LiveWire S2, and BMW CE 04; they all prioritize energy density over longevity.)

LFP batteries being charged to 100% actually is still damaging compared to storing it at like 80% charge...the reason why it's said to charge from 0 - 100% is due to the battery chemistry and not being able to tell the state of charge based on cell voltage.  So that's where the charge to 100% came from (it recalibrates the system so it can guess the total charge)...but that also lead to many just assuming that it can be charged to 100% without damaging it.

 

The biggest factors by the looks of everything are two things, age of the battery, the charge you stored it at with the temperature and amount of cycles it has performed.  It's actually why one of the biggest things is the cooling of the battery (Leaf's suck because it required passive cooling which caused it to cook itself).

 

NMC true is an outlier though, in that specific chemistry from 90% - 100% it can get really damaged holding the charge...but NCA I think is more common when doing energy dense stuff...which NCA performs almost the same from 90%-100% as LFP when talking about keeping at full charge.  100% full charge at 25C when stored for 9-10 months, NMC: 95% cap, NCA: 95% cap, LFP: 95%, but at 40C it's NMC: ~81%, NCA: 90%, LFP: 90% (but slightly higher, maybe 91%).  So overall NCA vs LFP doesn't show too much difference...and if you store it at 80% SOC you pretty much have everything balance back out.  (Here are two graphs, which corroborate,  although the 1st graph has only LFP marked at 9 months so not exactly a fair comparison)

 

 

Anyways though, the biggest factor is age of the battery and the temperature it's stored at with the SOC.  

 

e.g.

On the Tesla chemistries it seems pretty much 15 - 20% loss in a 10 year period. 

 

But the kicker is, based on the NMC vs LFP...if you store an LFP at 100% SOC (as a lot of people seem to recommend) over the course of 10 years (at an average temperature of 20 - 30 degrees), you will lose more about the same amount battery capacity as NMC kept at 80% the majority of the time.

[NobleGamer]

8 hours ago, RONOTHAN## said:

That said, I'm cheap, repairable trucks, I'd consider buying it. I'll just believe it when it's actually available for purchase though, there's been enough fake MSRPs for cars out there recently. 

Just because it's customizable doesn't mean it is entirely DIY repairable, though yes MSRP is a mirage unless your pre-tax payment amount actually matches, which it never does with major purchases & tech nowadays.

 

8 hours ago, TetraSky said:

The price is not bad. But the range is so terrible... And it's "projected", not actual miles. We can assume it will likely be closer to 75% of that in reality. And in the winter up north it will probably be closer to 30%.

I think this is "you get what you pay for" with 150 or 240 miles per charge. Nobody can give "actual" miles unless they call out exactly exact conditions the miles were driven under, so yes all EV dealers could give more details.

 

5 hours ago, Needfuldoer said:

Saturn S series cars had plastic bumpers, fenders, and door skins for over a decade. They're usually fine unless it's well below zero degrees and a rock kicks up into them.

 

Small-ish EV batteries really should be LiFePo4, not NMC. They're not as dense, but they're good for over ten times as many 0-100% cycles. (That's one thing that turned me off of electric motorcycles like the Zero lineup, LiveWire S2, and BMW CE 04; they all prioritize energy density over longevity.)

 

3 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

LFP batteries being charged to 100% actually is still damaging compared to storing it at like 80% charge

 

Wired got a quote that "the battery cells, using a nickel-manganese-cobalt chemistry, will be supplied by Korean maker SK-On from a US production plant". So I don't know if that's the same as what you two mention.

[VirtualDelinquent]

I like the truck, but if they're asking over $28k or $29k USD when it's ready for sale, then that defeats the entire purpose of this type of vehicle. Hopefully they stick to the plan and don't go full Lordstown Motors.

[wanderingfool2]

On 4/25/2025 at 4:43 PM, NobleGamer said:

Wired got a quote that "the battery cells, using a nickel-manganese-cobalt chemistry, will be supplied by Korean maker SK-On from a US production plant". So I don't know if that's the same as what you two mention.

That's NMC (Nickle-Manganese-Cobalt).  The chemistry where you want to adhere to the 80% a lot more (especially in warm climates).

 

On 4/25/2025 at 4:43 PM, NobleGamer said:

I think this is "you get what you pay for" with 150 or 240 miles per charge. Nobody can give "actual" miles unless they call out exactly exact conditions the miles were driven under, so yes all EV dealers could give more details.

The thing is there is almost a critical number of miles almost.  Yes "you get what you pay for" but at that range it won't fit as many use cases.

 

Like realistically that 150 with the EPA is probably close to maybe 145 miles highway speeds...and again if you follow the 80-20 rule you only talk about like 87 miles (Or like 1.5 hours of highway driving).  After a 10 year ownership of the vehicle, you are expecting 10 - 20% drop as well.

 

So after 10 years, that 150 miles becomes 120 miles potentially.  Still maintaining the 80-20 rule, you are at 72 miles of range...which starts getting to really unusable levels for most people, because once you factor in like 10 - 20% drop in winter (50% if it uses a cheap system), you are talking about like 35 mile range.  Now the 240 mile variant, that is where I think it starts making sense (should note, 150 miles I think is more than enough for many places in Europe with density)...but that 240 mile variant will cost more money.

 

With that said, how much extra will the 240 mile variant cost...after all, if it's like an extra $5,000...then at that stage it would be better to just save a bit longer and get a Tesla (which is only ~$15,000 above the base model).

[Psittac]

That's good and all, we need affordable EV's.  But personally, I have no use for one.  I have two cars and they're both for fun or the occasional journey somewhere.  I work with my dad and he picks me up every day so I don't need it for work.  My mustang is for canyon carving and my 4runner is for climbing mountains, neither of which I've done nearly enough.  If it's not a trip to a friends house, the corner store or the fish store I don't really need a car.  My round about point being that there were Fiat EV's here locally being leased for nothing.... literally no dollars.  Just had to return it in the same condition IE: tires windshield wipers etc.  I didn't take that offer though because like I said, my use case is unique.

[NobleGamer]

On 4/27/2025 at 1:24 AM, wanderingfool2 said:

So after 10 years, that 150 miles becomes 120 miles potentially.  Still maintaining the 80-20 rule, you are at 72 miles of range...which starts getting to really unusable levels for most people, because once you factor in like 10 - 20% drop in winter (50% if it uses a cheap system), you are talking about like 35 mile range.  Now the 240 mile variant, that is where I think it starts making sense (should note, 150 miles I think is more than enough for many places in Europe with density)...but that 240 mile variant will cost more money.

 

9 hours ago, Psittac said:

But personally, I have no use for one.  I have two cars and they're both for fun or the occasional journey somewhere.  I work with my dad and he picks me up every day so I don't need it for work.

 

I have a unique use case too, which given my typical uses, the prospect of Slate makes me the least cynical I've been about EV:

• I don't drive for work
• I work from home, so my driving is very often 1-2 times per week into the nearest town @ 20-30 miles roundtrip
• Whether I ever get an EV, I do plan to keep a gas powered primary car, which could be used for ranged driving if needed
• The towing capacity would meet my needs for small cargo or a zero turn mower
• I live in the southern US where winters aren't long or brutal
• My budget for buying cars tends to be in line with paying cash for used cars ~10-15 years old that have 100K-120K miles and have a history of being reliable according to sources like Consumer Reports

[Stahlmann]

1 hour ago, NobleGamer said:

I have a unique use case too, which given my typical uses, the prospect of Slate makes me the least cynical I've been about EV:

• I don't drive for work
• I work from home, so my driving is very often 1-2 times per week into the nearest town @ 20-30 miles roundtrip
• Whether I ever get an EV, I do plan to keep a gas powered primary car, which could be used for ranged driving if needed
• The towing capacity would meet my needs for small cargo or a zero turn mower
• I live in the southern US where winters aren't long or brutal
• My budget for buying cars tends to be in line with paying cash for used cars ~10-15 years old that have 100K-120K miles and have a history of being reliable according to sources like Consumer Reports

But why does it have to be two cars? At that point if you want an EV for short range but also ICE for long range, get a PHEV. There are models with ~100 mile fully electric range.

[wanderingfool2]

1 hour ago, NobleGamer said:

I have a unique use case too, which given my typical uses, the prospect of Slate makes me the least cynical I've been about EV:

• I don't drive for work
• I work from home, so my driving is very often 1-2 times per week into the nearest town @ 20-30 miles roundtrip
• Whether I ever get an EV, I do plan to keep a gas powered primary car, which could be used for ranged driving if needed
• The towing capacity would meet my needs for small cargo or a zero turn mower
• I live in the southern US where winters aren't long or brutal
• My budget for buying cars tends to be in line with paying cash for used cars ~10-15 years old that have 100K-120K miles and have a history of being reliable according to sources like Consumer Reports

Honestly, I'd still argue that in your use case buying cheaper ICE vehicles would still be better.

 

While not as drastic, hot weather can have an effect on range as well.  (Like those 40C days you lose like 30% range).  Actually depending where you park your vehicle as well you could end up costing yourself more in just the drain than driving a gas vehicle (albeit contingent on gas prices, electricity prices etc).

 

Just sitting, without doing anything depending what vehicle it is could range from 1 - 10% loss in a month.  Although admittedly at a 10% loss per month (which hopefully they don't implement it that way), you are talking about 5kwh.  Then again, cabin overheat kicks in on some vehicles...and if parked outdoors you could see like a 50% - 100% loss in a month...which then would start being 25 kwh-50kwh...so depending on electricity pricing you could be talking about more in electricity if you aren't driving it enough.  That's actually a thing that happens, there are some people who don't drive enough so the cost of ownership of an EV actually is higher than owning an ICE vehicle (when higher insurance rates etc are all factored in).

 

The other thing is, depending where they cheap out on it might not be necessarily the most cheap EV to drive.  Like at 150 miles / 52.7 kwh, you get 2.85 miles per kwh.  So your 20 mile - 30 mile round trip will consume, 7 - 10.5 kwh.  [Like Cali pricing you could be paying potentially $3+ per trip].

 

So like the worst case scenario (Assuming Cali $0.30 per kwh pricing),  driving hardly any, and if the vehicle is parked outside so needs to keep the batteries at a good temp (and if they don't implement their systems correctly), you could be looking at ($24 for the trips and $15 in idle)...or $39/month in operation costs.

 

Don't get me wrong, I love EV's...and I do think that there will still be a subset of people, maybe yourself included, where it makes sense...but I view a vehicle like this as more of a hinderance.  There are already enough people who worry about "range" who aren't EV owners, and those who get range anxiety, but having a "cheap" EV on the market really starts fueling those kinds of fears because there will be a lot of people who purchase it because they can afford it and then get trapped in winter time when their range drops by like half.

 

28 minutes ago, Stahlmann said:

But why does it have to be two cars? At that point if you want an EV for short range but also ICE for long range, get a PHEV. There are models with ~100 mile fully electric range.

I'd imagine that the cost can play a factor.  PHEV, while good I think will eventually get mostly replaced (speaking as someone who's daily driver is a hybrid).  You have the downsides to both technologies really.  You need to maintain it like an ICE (well except brake pads), you will have a battery replacement/engine replacement nearby the end of the cycle as well.  All while usually getting less miles per kwh than an EV.  Depending on the brand as well, you have to watch out for stale gas and others you have to start worrying about wearing your PHEV battery (as it remains at a large state of charge usually, or sacrificing a bunch of EV range)

[NobleGamer]

3 hours ago, Stahlmann said:

But why does it have to be two cars? At that point if you want an EV for short range but also ICE for long range, get a PHEV. There are models with ~100 mile fully electric range.

I mistakenly omitted that there are two cars for my family's use - Not that I have two cars just for me.

 

My idea was to have two affordable cars, one for short range like an EV and one for long range like an ICE, as opposed to two PHEV hybrids that could both cost more in total.

 

Doesn't matter, I'm not in the market right now. I just thought an EV minimal to no-console car that tightly integrates with your phone and highly DIY customizable at a reasonable price point was neat, hence me trying to share this as tech news.

 

For others reading this who dont know other EV related acronyms:

ICE: Internal Combustion Engine

PHEV: Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicle

[Wildskiller]

Hey linus, could you invest in slate.auto

[wanderingfool2]

On 4/29/2025 at 2:18 AM, Wildskiller said:

Hey linus, could you invest in slate.auto

A lot of EV companies tend to be just hype though (although admittedly that is "good" in the sense that early investors can capitalize before the hype really starts going)...but ultimately the financials don't generally look great for EV companies.

 

Not saying that this is necessarily the case, as they seem to have at least a novel idea on lowering the costs...but EV's tend not to make money.

 

Rivian, still losing money

Lucid, massive losses

Ford, not sure, I know they had taken losses before on EV's not sure if they are making a profit margin on EV's now though

GM, for a time also was losing money on it, and the margins last I checked weren't great

 

Hyundai...not sure, last I checked their ICE and EV stats were still put together which can mask if they are making a profit (and what their margins are).

 

With a 53 kwh pack, even at $100/kwh (which I think is still cheap...they are using NMC)...we are talking about $5300 for the battery cost [Excludes manufacturing etc].  So that is going to really eat into their cost.  Although bypassing dealerships I think is the way that truly will be able to save a lot of the money.

 

 

Have thought about this as well, I'm curious at how much having manual windows will cost...it does mean reduced electronics...but out of all the vehicles I've owned the manual windows are some of the first things that broke on the vehicles.

[NobleGamer]

8 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

A lot of EV companies tend to be just hype though (although admittedly that is "good" in the sense that early investors can capitalize before the hype really starts going)...but ultimately the financials don't generally look great for EV companies.

I agree, and it is just one of many hype fueled industries that drives investment disproportionate to actual profitability. In this case it has bolstered by national subsidies and pursuing sustainability (like less dependence on fossil fuels), which both prevent it from being a bursting bubble, for now.

 

8 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

Although bypassing dealerships I think is the way that truly will be able to save a lot of the money.

...if that is even possible. There are no country-level US laws requiring dealerships to sell new cars, but the US Dept of Justice determined that nearly every state prevents direct sale of new cars by manufacturers:

 

Quote

In the United States, however, direct manufacturer auto sales are prohibited in almost every state by franchise laws requiring that new cars be sold only by dealers. These bans on direct manufacturer sales are part of a broad array of state laws that bar manufacturer ownership of dealers and regulate entry and exit of dealers through territorial restrictions and provisions on dealer termination. Analysis of the economic effects of these laws has led some to conclude that they harm consumers and should be eliminated.

 

As for car windows:

Quote

I'm curious at how much having manual windows will cost...it does mean reduced electronics...but out of all the vehicles I've owned the manual windows are some of the first things that broke on the vehicles.

Well out of 3 cars Ive owned with power windows, I've had 2 window motors fail. So the "grass is greener" syndrome cuts both ways, as perhaps there's issues with window mechanics no matter how the window is moved.

[wanderingfool2]

12 hours ago, NobleGamer said:

...if that is even possible. There are no country-level US laws requiring dealerships to sell new cars, but the US Dept of Justice determined that nearly every state prevents direct sale of new cars by manufacturers:

True, although from my understanding a lot of that comes from the fact that dealerships already existed and now are pushing back when companies like GM and Ford are introducing direct-to-customer sales.  Tesla has shown though that it's possible to exist despite the state laws being in place (they sold to customers out of state etc to bypass those types of laws).  The other factor is since Tesla didn't start with dealerships they don't have to worry about the current dealerships crying foul on "pricing" or undercutting because they didn't exist.  It's why GM and Ford are in a tougher situation though.

 

13 hours ago, NobleGamer said:

Well out of 3 cars Ive owned with power windows, I've had 2 window motors fail. So the "grass is greener" syndrome cuts both ways, as perhaps there's issues with window mechanics no matter how the window is moved.

While true, I think it can also be determined by how the thing is designed.  Some of the areas that you put the crank mechanism (like on my old school van that used it that failed), they had used a tensioned geared belt to translate the cranking motion from a normal height down to the actual mechanism.  It's actually the area that failed on one of mine.  The other was the sprocket mechanism that holds the handle onto the gear...the handles being made out of plastic and a few instances of the handle being pulled caused the sprocket to eat away at the plastic until it was no longer able to be reliably turned without putting a lot of pressure on the handle (eventually it got to the point of not working at all since the plastic was eaten away).

 

Not saying that Slate will be like that though, but if their goal is to cost cut...well replacing metal components with plastic is a good way to do it but can cause early failure.  It's why it's a wait and see in regards to all this stuff.

[VirtualDelinquent]

On 4/30/2025 at 1:18 PM, wanderingfool2 said:

Hyundai...not sure, last I checked their ICE and EV stats were still put together which can mask if they are making a profit (and what their margins are).

Reminds me of my recent trip to the Kia dealership, the sales guy tells us that, "we can't even give the EV's away" when asked about their advertised deals on them. I'm not sure if he was lying or not because we couldn't afford them anyway, but that seems like something you shouldn't be telling your customers about.

[wanderingfool2]

2 hours ago, VirtualDelinquent said:

Reminds me of my recent trip to the Kia dealership, the sales guy tells us that, "we can't even give the EV's away" when asked about their advertised deals on them. I'm not sure if he was lying or not because we couldn't afford them anyway, but that seems like something you shouldn't be telling your customers about.

Depends.  Some of the cars are essentially coined "compliance" cars.  Where some sure are meant to still sell and hope to make a slight profit, there are still a handful which are essentially designed to meet the regulatory requirements so that they don't get fined for not selling EV's.  That means that they sell some of the vehicles at slight losses to prevent fines that will be greater than the losses of trying to sell EV's.

 

Not sure if Kia is the case...haven't really looked into it.  There is at least one manufacturer about 3 - 5 years ago put out an absolute stinker of an EV just say they had one (but knew no one would buy because it was terrible range and high price)...but it was designed to just fit as a car to build cheap enough to again skirt the fines.

[NobleGamer]

The news was a small topic on the WAN show - Hear Linus & Luke's first impressions:

 

Quote

Slate Auto is shaking up the EV market with a $20,000 all-electric pickup truck that skips the frills: no paint, no touchscreen, no stereo. But is that a bad thing? Linus and Luke explore what makes the Slate Truck so appealing, from its customizable plastic body panels to its simple, mod-friendly interior. Would you drive a vehicle stripped down to the basics?

 

I suppose this story fell into a weird place where I assume it was removed from the Tech News forum because is it tech news to report on the absence of tech in something that normally has tech (which I admit I didnt really articulate in my original summary), but still worth some forum discussion and on WAN show.