AWD! Please!

[Mark Falls]

I think it has to be mandatory to have an option for a four-wheel-drive all-wheel-drive for a truck. I think I would be on the fence and would mostly like bail on my reservation without all-wheel-drive and I think there are many others that feel the same.

 

[GaRailroader]

I think it has to be mandatory to have an option for a four-wheel-drive all-wheel-drive for a truck. I think I would be on the fence and would mostly like bail on my reservation without all-wheel-drive and I think there are many others that feel the same.

They have hinted that 4WD will be coming down the road. For initial production it will be RWD.

 

[Letas]

I agree with the statement, but it seems to be a near zero chance we see one at release. This forum has lectured ad nauseam that "this truck (which has never been driven by any of us) will handle great in snow or offroad due to it's balanced weight"- but the fact of the matter is in some states, legal requirements make owning a non 4wd/awd vehicle a downright pain. California, Utah, Colorado, etc. all have chain control laws that heavily punish 2wd cars. It would take some serious convincing for me to but a 2wd car again, in my current state.

 

[Bayfire2441]

I think it has to be mandatory to have an option for a four-wheel-drive all-wheel-drive for a truck. I think I would be on the fence and would mostly like bail on my reservation without all-wheel-drive and I think there are many others that feel the same.

I think its far from mandatory to have some sort of 4wd on a vehicle. Its a nice peice of mind but I haven't once needed to use the 4wd in my SUV. I suppose it depends on what you do with the truck though.

 

[beatle]

Yeah, I'm not aware of too many places that require more than 2wd with chains. Some will let you by with 4wd and snow tires as a substitute, but we're talking a very small part of the population that travels on those roads anyway.

Snow tires and a balanced 2wd vehicle are even more capable than they were before, and an EV's ability to regulate torque a lot faster than an ICE vehicle makes it even more capable.

Nice to have, sure, but not required in all but the most remote mountains. You're more likely to see the road closed to all traffic more than you will see it restricted to 4WD. I think the initial Slate's relatively low stance will put it at more of a disadvantage in these areas than will its lack of a motor on the front axle.

 

[Letas]

Yeah, I'm not aware of too many places that require more than 2wd with chains. Some will let you by with 4wd and snow tires as a substitute, but we're talking a very small part of the population that travels on those roads anyway.

Snow tires and a balanced 2wd vehicle are even more capable than they were before, and an EV's ability to regulate torque a lot faster than an ICE vehicle makes it even more capable.

Nice to have, sure, but not required in all but the most remote mountains. You're more likely to see the road closed to all traffic more than you will see it restricted to 4WD. I think the initial Slate's relatively low stance will put it at more of a disadvantage in these areas than will its lack of a motor on the front axle.

Chaining up is bad for the car, bad for the road and a time suck. Not bad if you do it once a year, but frequent travel in these areas makes it a total drag. I drive i80 through Northern California a dozen+ times a winter. Not to mention the last two years I’ve spent 35+ days skiing.

I’ve done most of it in a FWD sedan. Which is the exact reason I’m not inclined to buy another 2wd car

 

[Johnologue]

I think the demand for AWD is almost always unreasonable. I won't rehash the rear-drive/balanced weight thing since someone has already mentioned it.

I can at least understand laws requiring/favoring AWD as a reason to demand it, though.

 

[Letas]

I think the demand for AWD is almost always unreasonable. I won't rehash the rear-drive/balanced weight thing since someone has already mentioned it.

I can at least understand laws requiring/favoring AWD as a reason to demand it, though.

I'd take it a step further and say just about every portion of buying a new (or new to you) car is unreasonable. This forum may be an unrepresentative sample of that, due to the "stripped down" basic nature of the car, plus the fact that it shows people are actually doing research on their purchase. But overall, people purchase for fringe needs as opposed to daily needs. Is it right or wrong? I'm not to say, but it is the truth of the matter.



Someone may make a trip up to Tahoe twice a winter, and decide that AWD is a need for that. They are not "wrong", that's just what they've decided. And if an OEM doesn't meet that requirement, they will purchase elsewhere.

 

[Luxrage]

But overall, people purchase for fringe needs as opposed to daily needs. Is it right or wrong? I'm not to say, but it is the truth of the matter.

I posted about this a while back during a similar discussion about 2 vs 4 doors, but I personally know someone who bought a 4-door pickup over an extended-cab two door for their dog. A 25lb labadoodle. "Well what if I have the dog AND a passenger? Then it'll be hard to load the dog in the back!" They already own another vehicle and it's a four door SUV...

Personally I don't see myself needing AWD. I managed well enough back in the day, will be curious how the torque of the EV system makes winter driving. I'm sure it's a lot peppier than the short cab '99 2WD Ranger I used to have to drive when I lived in Chicago.

 

[bartflossom]

The last time I drove on a dirt road was when I took a wrong turn in Arkansas in 2007. And I would never venture out on snow in Dallas. These drivers are morons.

 

[AZFox]

I think it has to be mandatory to have an option for a four-wheel-drive all-wheel-drive for a truck. I think I would be on the fence and would mostly like bail on my reservation without all-wheel-drive and I think there are many others that feel the same.

How much extra should the mandatory optional AWD cost?

 

[ScooterAsheville]

If Slate plans to survive, it's not about what people need. It's about what people want. And here are the facts about what people want (and are buying). For low rate initial production, sure, sell two wheel drive. But if you want to stay in business with a stripper vehicle that already lacks mass appeal, you don't do it by cutting yourself out of half the addressable market.

https://www.energy.gov/eere/vehicle...arly-60-light-duty-vehicles-produced-2022-had

PS: Senior bonus discounts to those of you who, like me, were driving before the left side of that chart.

 

[ScooterAsheville]

How much extra should the mandatory optional AWD cost?

In most mid-market vehicles AWD is currently around $1,500 to $3,000. But different OEMs have different pricing strategies.

 

[Sandman614]

Cool, go get your $50 back. The rest of us made a reservation knowing it was going to be RWD. If you want a more expensive, more complex drive train the good news is there are plenty of other options out there for you.

 

[beatle]

Someone may make a trip up to Tahoe twice a winter, and decide that AWD is a need for that. They are not "wrong", that's just what they've decided. And if an OEM doesn't meet that requirement, they will purchase elsewhere.

Yeah, but it's still not a need unless you literally are not allowed to drive to Tahoe in a 2WD vehicle, whereas you would if you had 4WD.

Similarly, I don't consider my desire for the extended battery pack a need. I want it because I don't want to charge every 45 minutes if I put my motorcycle in the bed and drive into the mountains. It might be a need if there were places I literally couldn't go due to a lack of charging infrastructure though. For people who won't take long trips or don't mind the frequent charging, you should still be able to make the standard pack work. It's still okay to buy something based on a want. This explains most vehicle purchases - maybe even to a large extent. Just look at all the empty F150s out there.

This thread started as AWD being "mandatory" but it really isn't mandatory for almost every use case.