Skip to content 
A Deep Dive into the Instrument Panel of the Imperium Skywell
The Imperium Skywell, a Chinese electric SUV not sold in North America, became a recent teardown subject at Munro & Associates. Though this vehicle won’t show up in your local dealership anytime soon, its instrument panel offers valuable insight into global EV design practices—particularly when it comes to manufacturing tradeoffs, cost decisions, and structural efficiency. The Skywell dashboard teardown offers a case study in engineering intentions clashing with execution.
Milling Madness: When Design Dictates Cost
Early in the teardown, the top surface of the Skywell’s instrument panel raised eyebrows. Specifically, a floating corner detail revealed that several sections of the panel had been milled—requiring expensive tooling and manual intervention. Milling four distinct locations (the main fascia, air vents, and defroster cutouts) may provide a certain aesthetic, but it’s a red flag from a lean manufacturing perspective. Milling adds cost, complexity, and time—especially when simpler design changes could avoid these steps entirely.
As if that weren’t enough, the surface material used for this portion had the texture and pliability of tire rubber—an odd choice for a vehicle that aspires to luxury status.
Cross Car Beam Comparison: Steel, Magnesium, or Hybrid?
The instrument panel teardown led to a close examination of the Skywell’s cross car beam—the structural support behind the dashboard. The vehicle uses a welded steel beam. While this is a common and relatively inexpensive choice, the cost advantage depends heavily on volume and tooling.
Each piece of the steel beam requires individual stamping. If each piece uses a different tool, the cumulative tooling cost climbs quickly. Plus, the beam’s rounded shape introduces fixture tolerance challenges. A slight misalignment during welding, and components may no longer sit correctly—compromising the whole system.
Alternatives like a cast magnesium beam—used in some premium vehicles—reduce part count and tool volume, theoretically consolidating everything into one mold. But this design can backfire if teams begin attaching brackets post-casting. One such magnesium beam featured 27 additional brackets, undermining its initial cost and weight advantages.
Tesla and Rivian take another route: a hydroformed aluminum tube coupled with injection-molded plastic extensions. This hybrid offers high strength, lighter weight, and drastically reduced tooling—only two main tools. However, even this can spiral if last-minute changes require add-on brackets.
In Munro’s analysis, the ideal solution might be a stamped steel core over-molded with plastic—keeping structure and aesthetic functions separate, and eliminating costly dual-duty components.
Air Ducts: Over-Engineering a Simple Solution
Air ducting in the Skywell shows a similar story of promising concepts executed poorly. The vehicle uses two types of ducts: traditional blow-molded plastic (cheap, effective) and thermoformed flexible ducts (lightweight but less robust).
The flexible version looked promising until its weak connections forced engineers to add zip ties and welded tabs—defeating the purpose of using lightweight, integrated parts. A simple, properly sealed blow-molded duct would have performed better at lower cost and with less complexity.
Faux Wood That Works—In Moderation
One area where the Skywell impresses is its use of in-mold film for faux wood grain trim. This film mimics open-grained wood convincingly and avoids the cost and inflexibility of real wood veneers. Better still, since it’s a printed film, styles can be changed without modifying the injection mold—enhancing customization while keeping costs down.
Mood Lighting: Light Pipes Done Right
Ambient lighting in the Skywell uses a familiar light pipe system. A chrome trim conceals the light source, while the pipe evenly diffuses LED output through carefully tuned internal hash marks.
Munro notes this as a rare example of good execution: the distance and density of the hash marks vary along the tube to maintain even light distribution—a lesson learned from earlier failures where light pooled or dissipated unevenly.
Air Vents: A Costing Nightmare
Instrument panel air vents have long been a pain point for teardown engineers, and the Skywell is no exception. The linear air vent effect is mostly visual; the decorative surface is heat-staked and painted with chromed accents. But behind that surface lies a nightmare of labor-intensive assemblies: rubber-coated diverters, two-shot parts, loose-fitting components that require precise alignment—all driving up cost and complexity.
In this teardown expert’s words: “I hate air vents.”
Piano Black Trim and Snap-Fit Failures
A decorative trim piece made from painted PC-ABS wraps the instrument cluster area. While it contributes to the panel’s aesthetics, its fragility during removal and assembly is a concern. The thin, flexible material is prone to cracking or snapping—a challenge for both factory workers and repair techs.
Screens: Custom vs. Off-the-Shelf
The Skywell features two display screens: a central iPad-style unit and a driver-facing cluster. Critics often compare these to off-the-shelf tablets in terms of cost—but there’s more beneath the surface.
Automotive-grade screens must endure a decade of usage, vibration, and temperature cycling. Unlike consumer tablets that update every few years, a dedicated automotive screen must offer durability and long-term parts availability. Startups may flirt with generic screens, but proprietary components—while costly—usually make more long-term sense.
That said, the Skywell’s driver display was unusually heavy and complex compared to other vehicles, suggesting inefficiency that warrants deeper costing analysis.
Final Thoughts: The Skywell’s Design Balancing Act
The Skywell instrument panel is a mixed bag. Some parts—like the in-mold wood grain and ambient lighting—show thoughtful, cost-conscious execution. Others—like the milled components, zip-tied ducts, and overengineered air vents—signal a lack of integration between design and manufacturing.
At its core, the vehicle reflects a common issue: good ideas undermined by poor follow-through. As EV manufacturers push for leaner, more modular solutions, the lessons from the Skywell teardown serve as a cautionary tale.
Takeaways for Automotive Engineers
- Avoid multi-tool milling unless absolutely necessary—design for moldability.
- Don’t overload structural components like magnesium beams with aftermarket brackets.
- Keep ducting simple—overengineering lightweight solutions defeats the purpose.
- Design for assembly: minimize fragile snap-fits and labor-intensive alignments.
- Favor modular screen systems designed for automotive longevity over flashy consumer-grade parts.
Explore More from Munro
Curious how other EVs stack up in teardown performance? Check out our Tesla, Rivian, and Mach-E analyses for lean design insights, expert cost analysis, and engineering commentary that cuts through the hype.
And don’t forget to watch the full Skywell teardown on Munro Live!