EV mandate reversal.

[Scoutsie]

I hope you both stay but I definitely understand how you feel. It starts to feel a bit like I'm the enemy here after so many posts in a row of how the EPA is making people do this and that. I still love the car and if I can still afford it by the time it comes out I will be getting one. But I'm tired.

The EPA isn’t making anyone do *anything* and I don’t get this notion that They’re Up To Something. Up to what, making sure we have clean water and air? Not being able to do a better job of making sure we have clean water and air? Monsters, all of you. Just stop it with this protection of my health, would you? Let me drink oily, chunky water so I can have oily, chunky teeth and organs.

Fun aside: I went out a couple of times with a guy who worked for the EPA as a communications person pre-pandemic. The most monstrous thing about him was that he was utterly dry/humorless, although he did admit that he’d eat an entire bowl of pastry cream given the chance. He told me never to speak to him again after I sent him cookies made with beer (I thought I was doing something nice, he just said he’d ordered 4 cases of beer!). Read the room wrong, apparently. No cookie pollution for that guy.
Edit: I feel like it’s important to add that this was a post-lockdown ill-calculated move where I thought we were getting on better than we apparently were, not a weird Valentine’s Day BE MINE OR I WILL WEAR YOUR FACE AS A HAT move. I was really embarrassed, although the righteously indignant part of me thought he was a jerk to use cookies as the moment to signal “nope, not interested.” Just do what a reasonable man does and ghost if you don’t want the confrontation!

 

[Sshira]

The Dodge Charger is a perfect example of your second argument. Dodge is not an EV company. That car has been a complete and total disaster.

Dodge leadership was the biggest problem there. As an aside, I got to check out the new 2 door Charger this weekend and was pleasantly impressed with the car.

 

[Tyler88]

Assuming the president’s claim to abolish the 2032 zero emission EPA rule holds true, should we expect to see any changes in the long term plans of Scout Motors?

I don't think it really effects Scout that much, the only thing I could see is that Scouts with Harvesters are 90% of what is built or I know this would make people upset, the possible cancelation of the pure EV Scout depending on lack of government subsidies or EV credits etc. Just what I am thinking could happen not that it will.

 

[J Alynn]

I don't think it really effects Scout that much, the only thing I could see is that Scouts with Harvesters are 90% of what is built or I know this would make people upset, the possible cancelation of the pure EV Scout depending on lack of government subsidies or EV credits etc. Just what I am thinking could happen not that it will.

I can’t imagine them cancelling. In 2 years mid terms will happen and it will help identify directions of things to come. Not to mention EV has always been SM directive

 

[Tyler88]

I can’t imagine them cancelling. In 2 years mid terms will happen and it will help identify directions of things to come. Not to mention EV has always been SM directive

It is unlikely but it is just a possibility, but I don't care too much since I reserved a harvester Traveller anyway, but I would like both to be continued to be offered to give people the choice in what they want to buy.

 

[RebelliousPeasant]

EVs aren't going anywhere, incentives or not. ALL of the growth in the auto market since 2017 has been from plug-in vehicles. 2017 also marked the peak of combustion vehicle sales, they've been declining ever since. Car companies know this. These trends started well before the Inflation Reduction Act. These trends started before Trump's first term.

I'm more concerned about the Harvester version giving the brand a black eye if things don't go perfectly. If there are issues with it the damage to the brand will likely spill over to the much-more-reliable EV version. It's not a trivial task to add a combustion engine. They are far more complex and less reliable than a pure battery electric vehicle. SM will need to execute it perfectly for it not to risk damage to the whole brand. I wish them luck but I've opted for the simpler and more reliable EV version because I won't want to experience the teething problems that will no doubt happen with a gas engine stashed under the trunk floor.

 

[tree]

Honestly, not sure if MANDATES are in the best interest of the industry in the long term. Mandates may be cheered by some, but cause the others to virtually stop giving consideration to what they feel is being forced down their throat. Build a better product at a equal or better price - don't attack 1/2 the potential customer base - and learn to win on a level playing field.

In my life I have been told many things that the Science is settled on. Global warming, global cooling, global climate change - yet, at least in my memory - we have always had roughly the same weather, and it fluctuates every few years due to know weather patterns. All it has done to me is to make me extreamly skeptical that any mandate is actually in my best interest. Every one just seems to financially profit the backers. Follow the money seems to be far more accurate than "Science".

We are in a cold front right now - I am sure I could google and see someone posting how it is an example of either global cooling or global climate change. They will say this is the most extreme we have ever felt. Yet somehow I can easily recall 2 times in the 70's, 2 times in the 80's, a time in the 90's, the 2000's... Then they will say we are getting hotter, as it is not happening more often - and I can remember even more heat waves that were worse as well. But the internet is great - because you can say whatever you want to people who have not experienced the past and they will believe you.

I also remember almost 50 years of EV's. Why are they not more common now then - well to be honest, most were pretty awful. Now, finally, companies are starting to build a better product at least. If EV's need to tilt the playing field to be marketable - I guess they are not as good as I thought.

They aren't wrong tho, Florida just doubled it's record for snowfall. I don't know if you are misinterpreting the "Getting hotter" business, but consistently breaking heat records literally is telling you that whatever heat wave you experienced clearly wasn't as hot. It may be how you remember it, but by the numbers it was not. Think of it like the frog in a pot of water that is slowly having it's temperature increased. You are acclimating over time as the climate changes. Now are EVs the answer? IDK, that's not why Im buying it.

 

[tree]

Speaking for myself, I never would have considered an ICE Scout. There’s no way I’d pay for ~25 gallons of gas a couple of times a week, I don’t have that kind of disposable income. The only reason this is interesting to me is because it’s electric. EV = doesn’t destroy the planet with emissions and is also a lot cheaper to maintain and operate. Sign me up. Otherwise, hard pass.

Scouts are starting to lose their appeal to me because of the lack of other women (with my demographics) weighing into these conversations. That’s telling me something kind of vital about where I fit into this: I don’t. This is a bro space.

While the commenters on Facebook might be misinformed about fossil fuels and what’s used for what, they’re likely not policy makers. Homer Simpson had a line once where he said he was a white male from the age of 18-49 and everyone listened to him no matter how dumb his suggestions were. They’re who matters.

I really enjoyed some of the videos from CES, there one of the Scout designers is a woman furthered my interest in the vehicle.

 

[tree]

As others have said, getting rid of the Mandate probably actually helps companies like Scout. A lot of people don't like being told they HAVE to do something. They want to choose for themselves. A lot of people don't like EVs because they feel like they're being forced down their throats....so they're pushing back. Getting rid of a mandate that says "Thou shalt do" means that EVs are able to stand on their own and compete....and since no one one is telling people they have to buy them, the dislike should start to ease up and people can decide on the merits. On top of that, if we're honest with ourselves most EVs are luxury items. It's not like everyone in the country can afford to spend 40k, 50k, 60k or more on any car, regardless of what's powering it. How would you feel if someone told you that you HAD to buy something you couldn't afford? I'd think that was pretty unfair and I'd be mad about it.

Maybe few will agree with me, but competition is a good thing. EV companies will make the ICE companies up their game...and ICE companies will keep the EV companies honest by forcing them to make decent products. Everyone decides for themselves what works best for them, what they like the most, what they can afford, or any other number of factors. I'm sure the folks at Scout believe that they have an excellent product that can stand against any car company out there and they don't need any help from the Government.

That is all well and good and sounds perfect, but I have a feeling EV is about to have a boot on their neck and told to compete with 1 arm tied behind their back.

 

[Sisko99]

EVs aren't going anywhere, incentives or not. ALL of the growth in the auto market since 2017 has been from plug-in vehicles. 2017 also marked the peak of combustion vehicle sales, they've been declining ever since. Car companies know this. These trends started well before the Inflation Reduction Act. These trends started before Trump's first term.

I'm more concerned about the Harvester version giving the brand a black eye if things don't go perfectly. If there are issues with it the damage to the brand will likely spill over to the much-more-reliable EV version. It's not a trivial task to add a combustion engine. They are far more complex and less reliable than a pure battery electric vehicle. SM will need to execute it perfectly for it not to risk damage to the whole brand. I wish them luck but I've opted for the simpler and more reliable EV version because I won't want to experience the teething problems that will no doubt happen with a gas engine stashed under the trunk floor.

I think that has more to do with a generational shift. The younger generations seem to care less about cars than the generations before it. Not trying to paint with a broad brush here (or cast aspersions)....but it's been observed in a lot of enthusiast spaces as well as others. A lot of people aren't even getting their drivers licenses till later too. Many people don't care about actually going places when they can connect with people virtually.

As far as the Harvester giving the brand a black eye......I think you have little to worry about. Small engine generators have been around for a very long time. Unless they do something crazy, which I don't think they need to in this case, I think the generator will function just fine.

 

[farmerforever]

My view was the Scout didn't come back to life because they felt there was a need for an American auto maker that would fill the EV market. To me, they came back to service the people who love Scout and the type of vehicle it was back in the day.

So, politics isn't what any of this was about in the first place. Get the EV, get the Harvester, have all electric, or have gas and electric...you have a choice and that's it. Get a Scout because you have a connection with it in your own personal way...not politics.

 

[chucchinchilla]

My view was the Scout didn't come back to life because they felt there was a need for an American auto maker that would fill the EV market. To me, they came back to service the people who love Scout and the type of vehicle it was back in the day.

I respect your view however I have to disagree. Scout plans to build 200,000 vehicles a year. There aren't 200,000 people in the US who both remember old Scouts and would be in the market for a new vehicle like this.

 

[LastDayScout]

I respect your view however I have to disagree. Scout plans to build 200,000 vehicles a year. There aren't 200,000 people in the US who both remember old Scouts and would be in the market for a new vehicle like this.

Both points are good. More than one thing can be true at the same time.

 

[farmerforever]

And there aren’t 200k people who have ordered an EV…so, what do you you disagree with?

 

[oldgeeksguide]

And there aren’t 200k people who have ordered an EV…so, what do you you disagree with?

1.3 million EVs were sold in the US in 2024

 

[THil08]

Once Deliveries start and free advertising starts lol, and people and cops start pulling us over asking what car it is, they will be selling like hot cakes.

 

[61scout80]

I don't think it really effects Scout that much, the only thing I could see is that Scouts with Harvesters are 90% of what is built or I know this would make people upset, the possible cancelation of the pure EV Scout depending on lack of government subsidies or EV credits etc. Just what I am thinking could happen not that it will.

I think it might be an issue for the brand. EV demand has fallen recently, the resale prices of EVs are brutal.

Let’s say a defunct auto brand gets relaunched, Studebaker for example. Let’s assume it offers only electric and today’s market trends stay exactly the same. How willing would you be to buy a Studebaker new when you could get a well cared for used model at a big discount? Would you buy it new knowing in one year it’s worth half as much?

We’re going through this now. Looking for an electric commuter for my wife and it’s shocking how much value they are losing. Some are less than half the MSRP and under 2 years old. It’s a tough call to buy something that’ll lose most of its value in about 5 years. My truck and her jeep are both 5 years old now, and still have not lost half their value.

Why does this matter? We are the most dedicated enthusiasts of the brand and a lot of us will buy a Scout because we want it. We’re excited, we want to share the story. The rest of the details are pretty malleable.

For the other 99%+ of SUV buyers it will be just another to consider. One from a brand they never heard of with no track record of reliability, performance or resale and offering a product that was hot 6 to 7 years prior. If EV popularity continues to decline, it’s one more reason for the uninitiated to go elsewhere.

I think there’s a place for both fuel types and those who treat politics like a sport absolutely ruined the EV’s chance of finding its niche. Those for and against the emissions rules have both done irreparable damage to the fledgling EV market.

 

[Logan]

Personally, I am sort of between the user groups you described. I know enough about the brand to know its not new, but I've never driven/owned one. I'm interested in both the form factor/size, but also because its an EV/EREV.

Pricing though, you're not wrong. Used EV prices are definitely very low. Like, shockingly low. Enough that I've definitely thought about "uh, it might be the smart play to buy a used scout a year or two after they are released" (especially as I think I'm going to be on the bubble of "can I even afford this thing" already).

I think its a combination of a few things, personally. But primarily because:

1) EV's are changing rapidly (technologically), so a few year old EV is often (or just perceived) as being relatively further behind/older than an equivalently old combustion vehicle.

2) The MSRP of EV's is not usually what people are paying for them. So used EV prices of even barely off the lot models reflect that many are having to compete with MSRP - Incentive pricing

If the incentives/rebates go away, I could see this somewhat helping the used EV market. But at the same time, we're going to keep seeing huge numbers of lease return vehicles coming off lease (as the EV leases in the last few years have been a huge percentage of sales), so that glut of vehicles might further reduce used EV prices. Who knows really.