The videos are just arriving now. "98% the size of a Grand Cherokee".
Loaded launch edition about $72,000 including destination.
Loaded launch edition about $72,000 including destination.
Last edited:
With the statements elsewhere that the launch Scout will be the size of an F150 which equates to Expedition in suv even which would exceed the dimensions of a Grand WagoneerNot horrible but it could’ve been better with a more classic Wagoneer design instead of the space-age spoiler and overall design/shape that looks like every other car on the road. The wheels on that green one in the video look like they copied Rivian. Jeep should be better than that. And I hope this isn’t a direct competitor because that thing is a behemoth.
Funny you mention boxy design. My daughter got home from college with her Bronco and told us she doesn’t want it because gas mileage sucks (that’s fair). So my wife decides to trade her Acura MDX for a car for my daughter and she was going to drive Bronco. 9 days later she flips out and tells me she hates the Bronco. (My wife is in banking so getting her to spend money is like taking raw meat from a tiger’s mouth). So being a car guy I say go get whatever you want you deserve it but you need to test at least 5-6 vehicles otherwise she would buy another Acura. I had her onboard for a Toyota sequoia but she hated the feel. Too truck like. Ultimately she started looking at Lexus, Toyota and Honda and I said screw it. Told her she could have my accord hybrid (which I’ve grown to love and get tons of complements on) and I’ll drive the Bronco. I realized I HATE nearly every SUV on the market because they lack character. I now look at a range of 20.1mpg rather than 49.4-50.6 which sucks but I LOVE the Bronco because it’s different. It’s got flaws, it has 3-4 repairs that need to happen next week and I’d really like vinyl or leather seats instead of cloth-(working on Katzkin covers by end of summer) but it just reminds me of my first vehicle-my 10 year old rusted out Scout with dual glass pack mufflers and butter yellow paint.I agree with the Jeep comments. Terrible design, more of the same, sort of surprising! This is why Scout will be SO MUCH BETTER... They are building a modern version of the Box on wheels. Boxy is the best for these types of vehicles!
On the tires, I would think that the Jeep w/ 18's (with proper tires) would ride just fine. My R1T has the smallest wheel available (20's) and it rides great on both AT and Snows. Really a function of wheel + tire + suspension settings and air pressure... The R1T on 21's or 22's is def more of a look thing, although there are also range considerations, and the 21' in the R1T gets the best mileage. Lots of variable there. Of course for pure off-road, smaller being better with more rubber wrapped around it.
I should add that Boxy isn't always that much less efficient when it comes to coefficient of drag. Of course if you have handles, winches, racks, lightbars, RTT's, or other accesories sticking out, it isn't going to help any vehicle - EV or ICE...
I would consider my Rivian to be boxy - one reason I like it, but it has a LOW drag coefficient of .30!
![]()
Five Most Aerodynamic Electric Trucks Currently On Sale
From the uber-cool Cybertruck to the underrated Rivian R1T, these electric trucks carve through the air like a hot knife through butter.www.topspeed.com
I hope that's true. I'm really looking for a Bronco/Wrangler-type vehicle more than a three-row SUV. I want four doors but I don't want the thing to be a land-yacht.Jamie just noted the other day that the SUV would be comparable to others in the off-road segment which I interpret as Bronco or Cherokee or 4-Runner size which is considerably smaller than an Expedition.
That's not exactly true. Maybe US companies do that, but even then I don't think that's accurate. GM's first real EV was the Chevy Bolt which has a 300 or so mile range and is a tiny little hatchback. Tesla's first EV was the Roadster which was also a 300 mile range small car. Even Ford has the Mach E which you can't call a full sized truck and gets well over 300 miles.Here is a thought to explain some things.
Companies at least US cpanies introduce their first EVs on full size truck platfos because it is thd only way without new from ground up architecture or battery tech that they can come close to providing a 300 mile range. They need the extra wheelbase and width for battery space which is also a catch22 since the bigger and heavier the beehive the greater mass and power needed from on board batteries.
Which begs another question, why do hybrids have such small batteries that only a mere 30iles on electric is all they can do
Knowing my growth here the cross shopping will be ICE drivers WANTING to be greener but uncomfortable going full EV. That worries me because if the Scout SUV isn’t a show stopper in looks/function and features I suspect it will lose buyers who go hybrid. I’ve learned a ton this far on this forum but my comfort level is still hybrid because getting 44-52 mpg on hybrid accord is still a huge improvement from my 35 years of driving experience and “conditioning”. Still hoping the Scout WOWs me because I want to take the leap.Hybrids are not competition in my mind. But understood that they could be for others, and that the Scout will be cross-shopped with hybrids. Just such a different vehicle when using up all that valuable space for 2 systems in one vehicle.