I would like a Turbo button, just like on computers in the 80s/90s.

[Shrink36s]

My first car topped out at 55 as along as I was going downhill with the wind at my back. I think 8s is going to be just fine.
Bonus if both Slate windows roll down and the a/c works.

 

[cadblu]

I would keep the windows rolled up and the roof closed (on the SUV) to reduce wind turbulence. The fact that the roof panel is removable on the SUV, although a nice feature, is somewhat concerning. I’m referring to the “coke bottle” effect. Also known as “Helmholtz resonance.” Feels like your eardrums are going to pop.

 

[KevinRS]

I would keep the windows rolled up and the roof closed (on the SUV) to reduce wind turbulence. The fact that the roof panel is removable on the SUV, although a nice feature, is somewhat concerning. I’m referring to the “coke bottle” effect. Also known as “Helmholtz resonance.” Feels like your eardrums are going to pop.

I think the open air version would be meant for relatively low speeds, not freeway so much. Just having one or more back windows open in my car and not the front I feel resonance that is very uncomfortable for my ears, but the wide open open air kit shouldn't have that much problem, at least at lower speeds.

 

[CorvusCorvax]

My first car topped out at 55 as along as I was going downhill with the wind at my back. I think 8s is going to be just fine.
Bonus if both Slate windows roll down and the a/c works.

Yeah, my 1978 VW Scirocco had all of 75HP. I had to flog it hard to get it up to highway speeds in any kind of reasonable time. As I recall, the 0-60 times were in the 11-12 second range. But driving a classic Porsche, a new BMW and a supercharged Audi have spoiled me with the flexibility that quick acceleration provides. Three things that make driving pleasurable - good steering, good brakes and good acceleration. And having driven farm trucks in my long-ago past, I'm not sure some of them even could get to 60mph with a full load on. But that doesn't imply that driving them was in any way fun. Utility and enjoyable aren't the same thing - one of the prime reasons I want to get rid of our F-150 at the soonest opportunity.

 

[Shrink36s]

Yeah, my 1978 VW Scirocco had all of 75HP. I had to flog it hard to get it up to highway speeds in any kind of reasonable time. As I recall, the 0-60 times were in the 11-12 second range. But driving a classic Porsche, a new BMW and a supercharged Audi have spoiled me with the flexibility that quick acceleration provides. Three things that make driving pleasurable - good steering, good brakes and good acceleration. And having driven farm trucks in my long-ago past, I'm not sure some of them even could get to 60mph with a full load on. But that doesn't imply that driving them was in any way fun. Utility and enjoyable aren't the same thing - one of the prime reasons I want to get rid of our F-150 at the soonest opportunity.

Mine was a 1980-something Buick Skyhawk. Basically, a Chevy Cavalier. It was beat-up, had passed through other family members. But it was wheels that got me around, and helped get to work at the grocery store to save money and buy the next thing. The engine on this thing would spit oil back into the carburetor and soak it choking the engine out. I kept a spare in the trunk and changed it rather regularly. I'm no mechanic and have no idea how that even could happen. Great first car. No thrills, strict utility to learn to earn my way.
The next car was a 1989 Ford Escort GT. Manual. It was much more fun to drive, but broke down all the time. That's when I learned a lot about the basic mechanics of a car and how to fix them.

 

[Driven5]

I also have been wondering if Slate, as the un-teSla, is initially under-stating their specs like range and 0-60... Or perhaps, reporting for their worst case scenario offered configuration, like a lifted SUV on oversize all-terrain tires, rather than a blank slate.

Consider that the Chevy Bolt, an EV with effectively the same weight, hp, and max speed, runs a 6.5-7.0 second 0-60. The only real advantage it has is better aero, which if anything probably does less to help than a FWD launch does to hurt for 0-60. It would also get 200+ and 320+ miles on the standard and long range Slate batteries respectively.

Only time will tell though...

 

[CorvusCorvax]

I also have been wondering if Slate, as the un-teSla, is initially under-stating their specs like range and 0-60... Or perhaps, reporting for their worst case scenario offered configuration, like a lifted SUV on oversize all-terrain tires, rather than a blank slate.

This is what I am hoping. Not so much that the range is under-stated, but that the acceleration is reported for the worst-case scenario.

 

[cadblu]

I admire automakers that publish conservative ratings for performance. Historically BMW has taken on this approach. Hoping that Slate follows this practice.