If the Slate PU came only as an ICE, I would buy one.

[Letas]

Maybe the reason I'm ICE-cautious is because of a past experience with an unproven new engine design.

My '89 Dodge Raider had a Chrysler 3.0L V6 engine with a valve guide defect that, years into ownership, caused the engine to consume oil.

More importantly, there was a looming possibility of catastrophic engine failure if the engine was left un-repaired.

That sucked.

Well, good thing the Slate's drivetrain is well documented and proven!

 

[AZFox]

Well, good thing the Slate's drivetrain is well documented and proven!

...with something like 25 moving parts instead of 2,000.

 

[Sparkie]

My previous car was a 2000 ford focus, had the engine replaced, piston knock, took extra time, once they got the right engine, and got it installed, the computer wouldn't work with it despite getting if flashed by the dealer a few times, so that had to be replaced too, at that point would have been better to have just swapped to the "wrong" engine which was the upgraded option on a new vehicle, because that also would have required the same computer work. Then a couple years later that base engine had the valve seat problem, repairable without replacing the whole engine at least, but a known issue with that engine. A while later I started looking at what vehicles were supposed to have lowest total cost of ownership, because with the mileage, either I was going to have more valve seats fail, or transmission fail or something eventually.

Yikes!
Rust was the biggest problem I had -- but that's a problem for all cars in New England.

 

[B1050]

Slate would probably have to buy an ICE engine from another manufacturer because the machining tools needed to make a gas engine would be very expensive. That being said I'd vote for a Subaru 2.5 engine. I think startups from here on out will either buy engine/trans from known suppliers or be EV.

 

[Dorbiman]

Well, good thing the Slate's drivetrain is well documented and proven!

The e-motor isn't built in house, so we can look at the reliability, right? The JJE SD180 looks to have been used in commercial fleets of EV vans. Outside of the e-motor, there's halfshafts and u-joints. Not much complexity there. The gearbox is built into the drive unit, there's no intermediary driveshaft or carrier bearing, no transmission, etc.

 

[E90400K]

Slate would probably have to buy an ICE engine from another manufacturer because the machining tools needed to make a gas engine would be very expensive. That being said I'd vote for a Subaru 2.5 engine. I think startups from here on out will either buy engine/trans from known suppliers or be EV.

I think that is obvious (other than selecting a crap-ass Subie 4-cylinder). But why would any new automotive producer startup as an ICEV manufacturer in this day and age, other than as a boutique offering? There is zero business case for it.

 

[E90400K]

The e-motor isn't built in house, so we can look at the reliability, right? The JJE SD180 looks to have been used in commercial fleets of EV vans. Outside of the e-motor, there's halfshafts and u-joints. Not much complexity there. The gearbox is built into the drive unit, there's no intermediary driveshaft or carrier bearing, no transmission, etc.

It will have a differential.

 

[Dorbiman]

It will have a differential.

That's part of the drive unit

 

[E90400K]

My previous car was a 2000 ford focus, had the engine replaced, piston knock, took extra time, once they got the right engine, and got it installed, the computer wouldn't work with it despite getting if flashed by the dealer a few times, so that had to be replaced too, at that point would have been better to have just swapped to the "wrong" engine which was the upgraded option on a new vehicle, because that also would have required the same computer work. Then a couple years later that base engine had the valve seat problem, repairable without replacing the whole engine at least, but a known issue with that engine. A while later I started looking at what vehicles were supposed to have lowest total cost of ownership, because with the mileage, either I was going to have more valve seats fail, or transmission fail or something eventually.

Just as a counter point. I've owned 5 BMWs with a total of just over 1.016M miles driven and 1.126M chassis miles. All the cars reached well past 100,000 miles, but specifically, (1) 426,000, (2) 256,000, (3) 200,000, (4) 135,000, and (5) 122,000 miles. I'm still running the 200,000 and 122,000 milers. Two of the BMWs I bought used one with 23,000 miles and one with 100,000 miles on them at the time of purchase to account for the total driven miles vs. total chassis miles.

All have had just regular maintenace per BMW schedules. I've never had any engine failures. Some oil gaskets required replacement, that's it.

I've also owned 8 Fords. Never an engine failure to date.

 

[E90400K]

That's part of the drive unit

Agree, but it will be subject to the most wear and possible failure, is my point.

 

[E90400K]

Having owned both, I'll never go back to ICE. I have two remaining ICE vehicles: My RV, and the car that I pull behind my RV. I'm hoping the Slate will replace the car (assuming their plan to make it flat-towable comes to fruition). Someday I'm sure something will come along for the RV, and I'll be right there waiting. I replaced my ICE boat motor with an all-electric setup using an Elco motor and 19kWh of battery capacity this past summer.

Do the marina's charge more for electrons because it's charged on the water?