Toyota to follow Ford in $30k small truck segment

[E90400K]

Of course it does. Don't be ridiculous.

If the Anvil of Obviousness hasn't bonked you yet, you must be wearing a helmet.

My Mechanical Buddy will explain it to you (again).

Yes, more moving parts in an internal combustion engine vehicle (ICEV) generally equate to lower reliability compared to electric vehicles (EVs), due to the increased complexity, higher potential for mechanical failure, and greater maintenance demands. This principle is rooted in engineering and systems reliability theory: as the number of components in a system increases, so does the probability of failure, assuming each component has a non-zero chance of malfunctioning.​

​

In the case of ICEVs, the engine and drivetrain contain hundreds to over two thousand moving parts, including pistons, valves, camshafts, crankshafts, fuel injectors, exhaust systems, timing belts, and complex transmissions.​

​

Each of these components is subject to wear, thermal stress, friction, and the need for lubrication, all of which contribute to degradation over time.​

Oh look. My bag of Troll Food just ran out.

Seriously, anvils don't bonk people on the head; cute imagery from you, though, Lol. But I need zero education on the subject of automotive design, manufacture, operation, and repair from you. Please stop trying. Lol.

 

[Letas]

I just don't understand this thought process. It's a truck, it has 4 wheels and a steering wheel, it hauls and tows stuff, it goes places. What does drivetrain architecture have to do with it?

The real answer is preference. Some customers will never buy an ICE again, some will never touch an EV. Most consumers are somewhere in the middle. This forum obviously sees an oversaturated segment of one side of that market.

 

[Letas]

Far Fewer Moving Parts

It's easy to comprehend.

While I agree overall the premise that EVs have lower maintenance schedules, lower total cost of ownership, etc- this over simplification ignores a pretty big part of an EV- the Battery.

Chevy has recalled more Bolt Packs than Slate plans to produce in a year. Each pack has hundreds of individual electrical connections, and an uncountable amount of "non-physical" movements of electrons and conversion of chemical potential energy into electrical energy. If SK On/Slate is a reliable battery without being plagued with issues, it is a non-conversation. But if this battery is a dud, the forum will be filled with threads about it.



The way I see it- ICEs are a relatively simple and barbaric transaction, filled with a ridiculous amount of moving parts (most of which can be fixed "DIY"- something we seem to ignore here). EVs are a complex and more difficult to understand process- less places to break, but when those places do break- a real pain! I hope we see improvement in the DIY space with EVs- but that is a real challenge.

Anyone capable of dropping a pack in an EV surely is capable of a full transmission rebuild. Neither of those are "front of driveway" jobs.

 

[cadblu]

You're (intentionally?) missing the point. Individual parts may be equally reliable, but the ICEV has WAY more of them.

Did a quick search for numbers. Looks like an EV has 20-25 moving parts where an ICEV has around 2,000. Big difference!

Important: The ICEV requires maintenance the EV doesn't require.

​

"With an EV, you don't have as many parts to replace on a regular basis, because there just aren't as many moving parts as in a gasoline-powered car," says Gabe Shenhar, associate director of CR's auto test program. "The oil changes and engine tuneups we all know from gas cars are rendered obsolete by the EV's relative simplicity."​

Source:

2020 Consumer Reports article: Pay Less for Vehicle Maintenance With an EV​

CR research shows that EVs cost less to maintain than gasoline-powered vehicles​

Hence, I would like to add to your point by quoting Elon….”the best part is NO part…”

 

[AZFox]

While I agree overall the premise that EVs have lower maintenance schedules, lower total cost of ownership, etc- this over simplification ignores a pretty big part of an EV- the Battery.

The federal mandate for EV battery warranties requires manufacturers to provide coverage for a minimum of eight years or 100,000 miles. In California, the warranty is extended to ten years or 150,000 miles.

 

[Letas]

The federal mandate for EV battery warranties requires manufacturers to provide coverage for a minimum of eight years or 100,000 miles. In California, the warranty is extended to ten years or 150,000 miles.

Well aware. My coworker went through 3 replacements on his EV before 100k mi. Not a dollar out of pocket, but a large headache nonetheless!

A warranty is only good if the company exists, however. And a car making it to 100k miles should not be a bar for "success".

 

[AZFox]

[...] a large headache nonetheless! [...]

A warranty is only good if the company exists

Large headaches! Company failure!

It seems like you're saying "if the Truck has major flaws and the company goes out of business, that would be bad".

You're promoting FUD. Is there a specific reason for that?

 

[Letas]

Large headaches! Company failure!

It seems like you're saying "if the Truck has major flaws and the company goes out of business, that would be bad".

You're promoting FUD. Is there a specific reason for that?

You're blatantly ignoring numerous points made to drive your own point.

Slate is a venture capital backed startup. ~75% of VC backed startups fail. It's not unrealistic to plan for that. EVs are new. They are complex. They have points that fail. Bolt had ~150k recalls for Iso faults. The Mach E recalled ~200k due to 12v failure. Those are not abstract parts- like some of the Tesla recalls were for. These are fundamental parts in an EV.

Slate is a capital-strapped new company. To think they will release a perfect vehicle with no issues is wildly optimistic. I am not promoting FUD- I am shining light on already-existing uncertainties.

 

[AZFox]

I am not promoting FUD- I am shining light on already-existing uncertainties.

Shining light on uncertainties promotes FUD.

To think they will release a perfect vehicle with no issues is wildly optimistic.

On this we agree.

 

[Letas]

Shining light on uncertainties promotes FUD.



On this we agree.

My apologies- I will morph into being an echo chamber for this car, ignoring any possible downsides, shooting down any objections, and ensuring nobody speaks bad of the Slate!

Speaking of which- I was thinking of a great market for the Slate to expand to after America... a little country just south of China and North of South Korea!

 

[sodamo]

Some portion of the market is going to cross shop the Slate with the ICEV Toyota, Nissan, Ford, and Chevrolet products.

Very true, but in no way does the existence of that portion diminish those purely interested in the Slate because it is an EV. Could I be interested should one of those alternatives offer a comparable EV truck? Sure, but another ICE variant, not on my radar.

My game, my challenge? Can I drive my Slate as my daily driver and NEVER pay for fuel. Intent is to recharge, at home, existing solar. That and only very occasional $100 fillups of my Tundra.