Absolutely buying, but worried about this one thing...

[GaRailroader]

I guess you had “cabin overheat protection” -COP - enabled? That will reduce your range quite significantly. I turned mine off, and lose typically one mile per day. But keeping your speed low while traveling to a supercharger was a wise decision.

Yeah that and Sentry. At some point it turns those off so than it is just the more organic phantom drain.

 

[TPL]

The pedestrian warning sound is required, but some cars dramatically exceed the legally required amount.

A nice Jetsons-esque pedestrian warning noise is no problem at all. The giant "beep beep beep" of a commercial truck would be excessive.

IMO, the noises are not actually needed. In our utopian all-EV future, cities will be quiet enough that tire noise will suffice. Though, in our utopian all-EV future, traffic will move fast enough to exceed the low-speed noise thresholds anyway...

 

[KevinRS]

Sound is probably one reason there haven't been test drives besides the Jay Leno one. People who have gotten to events early have commented about the only sound being the tire noise. In a parking lot, with road traffic on the surrounding roads, you just aren't going to hear the tire noise of the car backing into you.

 

[Shrink36s]

I am positive the visually impaired will disagree with the premise that the sound is not needed.

 

[SparkYellow]

There are all sorts of EVs in my neighborhood and I am not able to distinguish one from another. Earlier this week though, a new sound caught my attention while I was chilling in the porch, it was from an Audi EV driving by, large SUV size, the sound was different and much more pronounced. Does anyone know which model that is, and does it make a different sound or is it just louder? 🤦

Edit: It must have been an e-Tron GT, they can sound like spaceships.

 

[TPL]

I am positive the visually impaired will disagree with the premise that the sound is not needed.

Manufacturers for sound-producing components and their lobbyists agree with them.

 

[Shrink36s]

Manufacturers for sound-producing components and their lobbyists agree with them.

Have worked extensively with those with various impairments, I find your dismissal highly offensive. To completely dismiss people with disabilities and replace their concerns with your perceived corporate greed is appalling. Yeah, late stage capitalism sucks, and disabilities are real and those with them deserve just as much right to navigate the world safely as you.
Why do there have to be so many terrible humans out there?

 

[NMNeil]

No idea what sound Slate uses.
The sounds are necessary, though, for safety. Especially in big cities where you have people with visual impairment who rely on hearing cars at cross walks for safety.

Do you mean cell phone zombies?
No matter how loud an engine is, ICE or EV, they will still be oblivious.

 

[NMNeil]

The pedestrian warning sound is required, but some cars dramatically exceed the legally required amount.

A nice Jetsons-esque pedestrian warning noise is no problem at all. The giant "beep beep beep" of a commercial truck would be excessive.

Agreed, so maybe just mandate that they have the same pedestrian warning noise generators already fitted to bicycles and electric scooters.
Oh, wait a second

 

[NMNeil]

My worry isn’t Slate specific. I know I’ll figure it out and make do, but I often use the entire 6‘-4” bed of my current truck (+ the extra length of the tailgate) to move lots of lightweight cargo around for work. I’m worried about the occasional extra trip I’m going to have to make with the shorter bed. I’m definitely going to need the roof and cargo rack accessories for longer stuff.

On that note I wonder the maximum size trailer it will be able to tow.

 

[TPL]

Have worked extensively with those with various impairments, I find your dismissal highly offensive. To completely dismiss people with disabilities and replace their concerns with your perceived corporate greed is appalling. Yeah, late stage capitalism sucks, and disabilities are real and those with them deserve just as much right to navigate the world safely as you.
Why do there have to be so many terrible humans out there?

As an impaired person, my intersectionality trumps yours.

Tire noise was considered sufficient for decades, and it is considered sufficient now for ICE vehicles, many of which are quieter than the mandated pedestrian warning noises for EVs. If quiet EVs were actually a problem for blind people, quiet ICE vehicles are also, but there are no laws mandating noisemakers for those. It is thus reasonable to conclude that existing vehicle noises are sufficient to allow blind people to avoid accidentally stepping in the way of moving vehicles.

Moreover, regardless of vehicle noise, it is against the law for drivers to hit pedestrians, regardless of those pedestrians' level of ability. If the pedestrian is in a crosswalk, they have the right of way. Visually impaired people know to look both ways before jaywalking, and if their impairment is sufficient to prevent that, they know not to jaywalk. They're not idiots or children.

Objecting to excessive volume (in excess of 100 dB on our Leaf -- we measured it) is not dismissing people with disabilities. (Most cars are not that loud.)

Noise pollution is real, and is worth opposing. Bad laws are real, and are worth opposing. Regulatory capture is real, and is worth opposing.

Adding noisemakers to EVs did not affect the pedestrian collision rate.

Studies have shown that adding noisemakers to commercial/construction vehicles actually conditions people who work around them to tune out the noise, not actually improving safety in the long run. Construction workers still absentmindedly walk behind backing up dump trucks all the time.

Regardless of all this, as to the topic of this thread, Slate is going to comply with all applicable laws, including those involving noisemakers, and that's not going to change my purchase decision. Though if they have a rear facing backup speaker that does not exceed 100 dB it will increase the odds that I will purchase. My worry is that like our Leaf, they'll have one front-facing speaker and just turn it up extra loud for the backup noise.

 

[NMNeil]

They had the ultimate pedestrian safety back in 1894, when Vermont required the owner of a steam-propelled vehicle to have a “person of mature age … at least one-eighth of a mile in advance of” the vehicle, to warn those with livestock of its approach. At night this person was required to carry a red light.
It was modeled after the UK 'Red flag Act'
https://www.oceansplasticleanup.com..._Cars_Speed_Limits_Man_Running_Carrying_A.htm

 

[Shrink36s]

As an impaired person, my intersectionality trumps yours.

Tire noise was considered sufficient for decades, and it is considered sufficient now for ICE vehicles, many of which are quieter than the mandated pedestrian warning noises for EVs. If quiet EVs were actually a problem for blind people, quiet ICE vehicles are also, but there are no laws mandating noisemakers for those. It is thus reasonable to conclude that existing vehicle noises are sufficient to allow blind people to avoid accidentally stepping in the way of moving vehicles.

Moreover, regardless of vehicle noise, it is against the law for drivers to hit pedestrians, regardless of those pedestrians' level of ability. If the pedestrian is in a crosswalk, they have the right of way. Visually impaired people know to look both ways before jaywalking, and if their impairment is sufficient to prevent that, they know not to jaywalk. They're not idiots or children.

Objecting to excessive volume (in excess of 100 dB on our Leaf -- we measured it) is not dismissing people with disabilities. (Most cars are not that loud.)

Noise pollution is real, and is worth opposing. Bad laws are real, and are worth opposing. Regulatory capture is real, and is worth opposing.

Adding noisemakers to EVs did not affect the pedestrian collision rate.

Studies have shown that adding noisemakers to commercial/construction vehicles actually conditions people who work around them to tune out the noise, not actually improving safety in the long run. Construction workers still absentmindedly walk behind backing up dump trucks all the time.

Regardless of all this, as to the topic of this thread, Slate is going to comply with all applicable laws, including those involving noisemakers, and that's not going to change my purchase decision. Though if they have a rear facing backup speaker that does not exceed 100 dB it will increase the odds that I will purchase. My worry is that like our Leaf, they'll have one front-facing speaker and just turn it up extra loud for the backup noise.

I'll agree that 100db is excessive, and I'll agree some ICEV are very quite too. I'll agree noise pollution is a real thing.
I stand by my statements about being dismissive. But whatever, people will people.

 

[thespacecowboy]

If y’all are this worried about the noise it makes I’m sure it won’t be long before someone figures out how to flash a different (or no) noise into whatever small amount of firmware they needed for basic operation and regulatory requirements. Or just pull out the speaker.

 

[Letas]

Can’t imagine Slate itself will get involved with trade-ins, not without physical dealer presence.

Tesla and Rivian do. Slate is a little different with the lack of storefronts, or whatever they call their physical buildings, but it is not out of the realm of possibility.

Those trucks have to go somewhere once they drop off their Slates...