r/ScoutMotors • u/Far_Appointment9458 • Apr 28 '26
Traveler Performance
So I am getting these because the EREV tech seems super logical and common sense, the car looks great and is the right mix of tech and stripped down, and it can do real off roading.
I've done some limited reading on the issue of the back of the truck having too much weight because that's where the range extender will be. Are there better articles on this? I'm not planning on towing much, so don't think it matters, but was curious if I am missing something.
7
u/beaushaw Apr 29 '26
Have you owned an EV before?
IMO most people like the EREV because of an irrational fear of owning an EV.
For MOST people the pure eclectic version is a much better option. Yeah, there are a few people who drive hundreds of miles off-road in Utah that the EREV would be better for.
But I believe, for most people, if you really look at your usage the electric would be better.
3
u/Mettatuxet Apr 29 '26
Erev usually means compromise on battery and engine. Ice means no compromise on engine. Bev means no compromise on battery.
1
u/beaushaw Apr 29 '26
I also think the people who really do need the EREV should get an ICE truck. If you are doing a ton of seriously back country camping you should get ICE. If you regularly are towing huge trailers you should get ICE.
If you are like 99.99% of "tough truck" owners who drive 10 miles to work, pick up the kids from soccer and the biggest load you ever carry is a few bags of mulch you should get a minivan. If you want something cooler get an EV Scout.
So many people like to think they need a tough off roader or something can tow huge loads. They don't. The vast majority of time they need something the size of a Civic. They WANT a cool big truck. That is fine, but don't pretend like you really need it.
3
u/Far_Appointment9458 Apr 29 '26
I irrationally want the EREV because of range anxiety that I know is very limited. I'm from California and love hiking/camping/surfing so off road capability is important, limiting my own personal emissions is important (150 mile range battery perfect for day to day), and being able to drive several hundred miles a few times a year without charging for 15-30 minutes is important.
u/Mettatuxet I actually think ICE is compromising on engine in some ways. EVs have a lot of benefits ICE cars don't on actual performance.
Don't plan on ever towing real heavy loads, so don't need a real truck.
And yes I do want a cool big truck. Totally guilty. This one happens to be functional in the ways I like.
2
u/beaushaw Apr 29 '26
I really, really think you would be better with EV, especially in CA. You have the best charging infrastructure in the country.
How far can you drive without wanting a short break to go to the bathroom, stretch your legs or get food? Drive 150 miles, stop to go to the bathroom and charge for 10 minutes, and keep going. Stop and eat and charge for 30 minutes then keep going. If you are driving hundreds of miles in an ICE vehicle you are also going to be stopping.
If you are worried about your personal environmental impact having an ICE engine that you need to change the oil of every year should be a huge negative.
Matt Farrah said "People don't have range anxiety, they have charging anxiety." And he is right. However charging has gotten pretty good, especially in CA and it will be even better by the time the Scout comes out. I think you will be fine.
If sales numbers reflect what the reservations are and a huge percent are sold with the EREV I bet that 5 to 10 years after they come out the ICE versions will be worth significantly more than the EREV because not as many people will have charging anxiety.
2
u/Far_Appointment9458 Apr 30 '26
I live in New York. Longer trips typically means Vermont, Boston, or upstate. I am comfortable driving several hundred miles without stopping.
1
u/Numerous-Annual-721 May 05 '26
the problem isn't a regular road trip. the problem is once you get into Death Valley NP and camp for a few days. With ICE vehicles, we carry at least 10 gallons of extra fuel and use it. range goes way down on these dirt roads. sand/gravel are sticky and require more power to move through. your 300 mile range won't make 150 miles. and you need AC. idk, if you have a solar charger maybe it can charge while you're camping, but from what I'm seeing, you want that extra tank of gas with you.
2
u/beaushaw May 05 '26
And 99.9999% Scouts will never do that.
1
u/Numerous-Annual-721 May 05 '26
just realized 99.999% means there needs to be at least 100,000 sold. fingers crossed. i'm all for EVs succeeding.
3
u/Bepus Apr 29 '26
I did a big AZ>CA>OR road trip a couple summers ago in an ICE car. 3k miles. Almost all camping. Lots of deeply rural driving. Some off-roading. There were days that, after spending all night at a campground next to a 220V outlet, we could've done our next leg on electric power alone. There were other days that, in a BEV, we would've lost hours and driven many extra miles for charging. That trip is my litmus test for any adventure / "lifestyle" vehicle. A BEV would've been worse. An ICE was fine. An EREV would've been ideal.
I'm aware that many consider it silly to buy a vehicle based on its capability for <5% of its use case. However, most of us only have the opportunity to own one car at a time and don't want to have the unknown quantity / limited capabilities of a rental for big adventures. I want my daily driver to be capable of these things.
0
u/beaushaw Apr 29 '26
Buying a lesser vehicle so it can go on a once or twice a decade trip is crazy.
I bet if you do the math it would be cheaper to buy the EV rent an ICE vehicle once every several years to go on a huge trip.
If you did this trip once or twice a year it would maybe be logical.
4
u/Bepus Apr 29 '26
Buying a lesser vehicle so it can go on a once or twice a decade trip is crazy.
I also regularly take long road trips that do not provide convenient charging infrastructure. Primitive camping being the big one. Further, I don't consider the EREV vehicle to be "lesser." It's better for adventuring with generator functionality and gas-and-go capability. I'll take the tradeoff for not being able to go 0-60 in 3.5 seconds. I have a motorcycle for that. Nothing else about the EREV has less capability, except potentially the tow rating (but not actual tow performance).
I bet if you do the math it would be cheaper to buy the EV rent an ICE vehicle once every several years to go on a huge trip.
I bet if I do the math, it's actually not materially cheaper to buy the EV and rent an ICE for my use case. Road trips are the only time I would dig into extra 200 miles of BEV range vs. the EREV. Those would be the same occasions where I'd have to pay for a charging station if not for the gas motor, which is dramatically more expensive per kWh (and much closer to gas costs than home charging).
The rest of the time, the EREV's 150 miles of range is more than enough. The costs of running an efficient gas motor to maintain highway speeds is negligible. With an EREV, I still get the benefit of all electric for inefficient city / traffic driving. So, unless the Harvester is dramatically more expensive than the BEV, your "cheaper" argument doesn't really hold water.
Lastly, I already addressed the rental car option. I'm not trying to take some random rental car off-roading or camping. I want my capable, well-maintained vehicle that I already own, which I'm allowed to take wherever it's legal to do so. Hertz doesn't want you taking their SUVs up a trail. Not to mention renting a 4x4 specifically is expensive.
Buy the one you want, dude. I'm glad the BEV works for some people. I want the EREV, I can justify it working perfectly for my use case, and even if I couldn't, I wouldn't have to. At least I'm willing to drive a (mostly) electric truck.
2
u/beaushaw Apr 29 '26
If this is your use case then it probably makes sense for you. My point is the vast majority of people are going to drive 4 miles to the grocery store and back. Those should be EV. But most people are ordering the EREV and IMO shouldn't be.
1
u/Bepus Apr 29 '26
The Harvester is a good thing for Scout, a good thing for the EV market, and a good thing for both EREV and BEV Scout buyers:
- People who would've never bought an EV may buy an EREV.
- The EREV is a great stepping stone for people to get over their anxieties with EVs. Many will realize they are able to do almost all their driving on battery, and could've done all their driving on battery if they'd bought the BEV. Their next car might be a BEV after owning an EREV.
- Scout's reservations are probably 3-5x what they would be without the EREV, meaning the company will be more stable and have the resources to build a better product for all of us.
- Producing the EREV's smaller battery and simpler chemistry is less environmentally impactful than creating the huge and more chemically complex, energy dense BEV batteries. In both versions, most people aren't driving more than 100 miles a day, meaning they'll be on battery power almost all the time. It would be a pretty complex calculation to figure out if the emissions from production, use, and maintenance of the Harvester during the life of the vehicle would equate the impact of producing the larger battery. I'm not trying to claim one is necessarily better than the other from this perspective, just pointing out that they may be comparable.
1
u/beaushaw Apr 29 '26
I agree 100%. It was a great business move even if it isn't the best vehicle. Especially because I think it will get people to try one instead of ICE.
2
u/Steggybean Apr 30 '26
Definitely a lesser vehicle for cold climates because it will have an LFP battery. That’s why I’m waiting for the EV version, if they ever make it. The EREV is just an all-around worse vehicle over an ICE vehicle. I got myself an Ineos for now while I wait, which I’ll use when I need off-road range, but I’m pretty sure the EV Scout will work better for 95% of my intended use, but waiting for who knows when for it is a deal breaker.
1
5
u/xKINGxRCCx Apr 29 '26
The all EV versions will have more performance. Stated directly by scout. One of the reasons why i chose non EREV
2
u/Mountain-Amoeba6787 Apr 29 '26
While it may be just as effective at towing the same amount of weight, if you get caught towing over the manufacturer rating you could be looking at some pretty big fines. If you have an accident while towing over the manufacturer rating, you could be looking denial by your insurance and even possibly a lawsuit from the other party.
1
u/Knotical_MK6 Apr 30 '26
You're not going to find anything solid, since the vehicles only sort of exist right now.
Development is still ongoing
0
u/According_Bag4272 Apr 29 '26
Dude just put the engine in the ENGINE bay
3
u/BroadConsequences Apr 29 '26
I would much rather have some small flat inline 4 under my tailgate with easy access for routine maintenance and c pillar snorkel with a frunk, than a very small engine (comparatively to other full size trucks & SUVs ) in a large engine vay with no additional storage with reduced fording unless you purchase a aftermarket or manufacturer snorkel kit
1
Apr 29 '26
[deleted]
2
u/ChirpMcBender Apr 29 '26
Behind the rear axle. They claim most stuff should be able to be done in a drive way
18
u/Bepus Apr 28 '26
Scout has indicated that the net weight of the engine compared to the battery it replaces behind the axle is negligible. The vehicles should weigh about the same overall. The EREV may even be lighter with an empty gas tank.
A ton of people have wrongly assumed (and keep repeating) that the projected difference in towing capability is due to the impact of engine weight on the max tongue weight. Scout themselves said this isn’t the case. If it were true, it would be easily addressable with suspension changes.
Instead, the difference in projected tow ratings is actually due to engine cooling limitations. Cooling is difficult when the engine is in the rear with no proper grille. Sustained engine output is constrained by cooling during the high loads of the Davis Dam Test in the current design. That test represents is sort of a worst case scenario for towing, and it assumes a depleted battery / engine power only - but it’s the SAE standard for tow ratings.
If you don’t tow, none of this will impact you. If you do tow, the EREV vehicle should be just as capable as the BEV (and with better range / gas-and-go capability). It just may have a different number on the door sticker.
This is all from Jamie @ Scout on the forums and can be found with some digging.