What will the Range be of Blank Slate ($24,950 version)

[Jasman]

Thank you for driving home my point.

Tesla is run by a mad man who was already wealthy at the time. They could do stupid where Slate cannot. Being backed by Bezos is not the same as owned and operated by wealth.

EDIT: Additionally, Tesla was solely a luxury brand at the time with much higher per-vehicle profit margins than the Slate has to play with. They could take a hit on the cost of the extra cells to get more vehicles on the road to build up more brand recognition.

Elon was perhaps a tenth as wealthy as Bezos before Tesla Shares soared before the pandemic hit. Until around 2021, Tesla only saw sporadic quarterly profits, and those came from selling carbon credits, not cars. If he were truly that wealthy at the time, why would he admit that Tesla was weeks away from collapse during the Model 3 production hell? The idea that they always enjoyed profit margins on cars they sold is an illusion, just because their cars were categorized as luxury. Those margins didn't materialize until much later when production finally scaled. Back then, using a single battery software-locked to a lower kWh capacity would have made sense for bulk procurement and driving down costs. Again, only a small portion of the customers are going to buy the lower range car.

Given that Slate's ethos is "the best part is no part," and their philosophy revolves around having a single component serve multiple functions, producing two differently sized batteries contradicts their approach. Also, the landscape has shifted once the ZEV tax credit was canceled, meaning they can now source LFP batteries globally. Also, I think the reason they state on the FAQ that the batteries are not upgradable from the factory is to have more people choose the extended battery

The lower range may have been announced in 2024 to have a lower starting price. I remember Elon hyping about a $35000 model 3 (they almost got to the price point after a while) and now RJ/Rivian touting a 45k Rivian R2 that they really do not want anyone to buy. See the video below.



They may indeed come out with two batteries on June 24th, and I may have to eat my words, but I would be very surprised if they did.

 

[ElectricShitbox]

I could see them switching to offer only a ~70kwh LFP battery before doing the "software locked capacity" thing. If we assume that 84kwh is the maximum amount of NMC cells they can cram into the available space, and that only nets you 240 miles of range, I don't think you're gaining any customers with a version that locks out some of that range.

 

[bloo]

EPA range tests start from a 100% SOC and run the battery to the point where the vehicle can no longer continue the test protocol. The ability of LFP to handle frequent 100% charging with less SOH degradation wouldn't have any bearing on the official range number (though it has obvious benefits in practical use).

I wasn't accounting for degridation.

 

[waggy]

Everything I read about Slate seems to consistently indicate most potential buyers or reservation holders want he extended range battery. The term “base” doesn’t have to apply strictly to range. It does appear that Slate has a very clever marketing team. I’m hoping they are clever enough to be teasing another under-promise over-deliver moment in that the initial model offered is the base extended range for just under 25k with the even cheaper base standard range to. One later even cheaper. Im sure everyone working at Slate is smarter than me so none of my speculation matters. If you are trying to achieve economies of scale let’s hope that means more range for less than expected cost To drive up demand.

 

[Jasman]

I could see them switching to offer only a ~70kwh LFP battery before doing the "software locked capacity" thing. If we assume that 84kwh is the maximum amount of NMC cells they can cram into the available space, and that only nets you 240 miles of range, I don't think you're gaining any customers with a version that locks out some of that range.

That is a possibility. Offer a single version with over 200 miles of range. Given its lighter weight and being smaller, the truck may even hit 240 miles on a 70 KWH LFP battery (using the 5 cycle EPA test which is more generous).

 

[ElectricShitbox]

That is a possibility. Offer a single version with over 200 miles of range. Given its lighter weight and being smaller, the truck may even hit 240 miles on a 70 KWH LFP battery (using the 5 cycle EPA test which is more generous).

A 70kwh LFP battery would be similar size/weight as a 84kwh NMC battery. Also weight has less of an effect on range than you would think.

 

[Jasman]

A 70kwh LFP battery would be similar size/weight as a 84kwh NMC battery. Also weight has less of an effect on range than you would think.

I didn't mean the car would weigh less by switching to a lower-kWh LFP battery. The car itself is already lighter than most EVs and is much narrower and does not seem to have sharp edges. Accounting for the pickup truck, I believe it is more slippery than it seems.

 

[GaRailroader]

I wouldn’t discount any of these ideas being offered up. I just don’t think Slate put all of their cards on the table 1 week before the big day. All of the really good EV unveilings had surprises at the event that no one expected. Slate knows this and they are holding something or some things back.

There is only 1 vehicle available today that has a range comparable to the hypothetical standard range Slate and that is a Fiat 500e that sold 626 units in Q1 2026. The 500e is not a compelling car I am just making a point how rare 150 mile range is these days. Slate needs this vehicle to sell in healthy volume to be successful. Bolt EV sold a little more than the Fiat 500e and the Equinox sold under 10k units. Slate needs to be selling 25-40k per quarter to be successful.

 

[Shrink36s]

Elon was perhaps a tenth as wealthy as Bezos before Tesla Shares soared before the pandemic hit. Until around 2021, Tesla only saw sporadic quarterly profits, and those came from selling carbon credits, not cars. If he were truly that wealthy at the time, why would he admit that Tesla was weeks away from collapse during the Model 3 production hell? The idea that they always enjoyed profit margins on cars they sold is an illusion, just because their cars were categorized as luxury. Those margins didn't materialize until much later when production finally scaled. Back then, using a single battery software-locked to a lower kWh capacity would have made sense for bulk procurement and driving down costs. Again, only a small portion of the customers are going to buy the lower range car.

Given that Slate's ethos is "the best part is no part," and their philosophy revolves around having a single component serve multiple functions, producing two differently sized batteries contradicts their approach. Also, the landscape has shifted once the ZEV tax credit was canceled, meaning they can now source LFP batteries globally. Also, I think the reason they state on the FAQ that the batteries are not upgradable from the factory is to have more people choose the extended battery

The lower range may have been announced in 2024 to have a lower starting price. I remember Elon hyping about a $35000 model 3 (they almost got to the price point after a while) and now RJ/Rivian touting a 45k Rivian R2 that they really do not want anyone to buy. See the video below.



They may indeed come out with two batteries on June 24th, and I may have to eat my words, but I would be very surprised if they did.

We all have opinions, and we simply have differing opinions based around what we know and a believe to be true.

I would not be surprised if they are only one battery at the time of launch in a few days. Not at all. It makes sense on a lot of levels. I content that it is absolutely asinine, in any context, to software lock a battery to lower kW usage for the customer at a lower price. I don't care if Tesla did it, I would say it was moronic of them then as well.

If a company can eat the cost of parts they then prevent the customer from using, then I contend they can give those parts to the customer at the lower price and still be profitable. Assuming, they are still profitable after eating those costs. If they are not making profits at that lower pricing, and are going into the red, then they are choosing failure from the start.

If we take computers components as an example. This would be like nVidia or AMD software locking their GPU chips to less usable cores for the cheaper models. If they are still making profits on those lower models, then it's just dumb not to put out one single type of GPU at a reasonable cost maybe somewhere in the middle of the options they provide and increase profits overall. They also reduce the costs through the marketing and branding of various model types and focus on one. They can order housing with fancy graphics rather than 3, etc. Paying one price for a component and charging two different prices just makes no rational or economic sense.

In the auto industry, the only parts that make any sense to order one type and use it differently would be something like wiring. You pay for one set of wiring harnesses for the platform that can manage all options it has to offer. You just don't add the hardware on the other end without the up sell. That reduces costs overall because you only have to order one SKU and buying in bulk for one will give you a hell of a lot better price than having to order dozens of types of wiring harnesses to match the dozens of options autos offer today.

 

[sodamo]

Pretty sure whatever the $24950 battery is, that’s the one I’m getting.

 

[Kopsis]

A 70kwh LFP battery would be similar size/weight as a 84kwh NMC battery. Also weight has less of an effect on range than you would think.

Not sure how you figure that. Gravimetric energy density of LFP is typically 160 Wh/kg while NMC is typically 250 Wh/kg. Volumetric for LFP is 350 Wh/L while NMC is 700 Wh/L. So for a given capacity, LFP will be both larger and heavier than NMC.

 

[ElectricShitbox]

Not sure how you figure that. Gravimetric energy density of LFP is typically 160 Wh/kg while NMC is typically 250 Wh/kg. Volumetric for LFP is 350 Wh/L while NMC is 700 Wh/L. So for a given capacity, LFP will be both larger and heavier than NMC.

Yes, for the same capacity LFP will be heavier and larger than NMC. Read my post again.
I'm saying you can get about 80% of the capacity from LFP in the same size pack as NMC. That's a rough guess from EVs that have both chemistries.