No Spare Tire on Tailgate!

[lefty]

I know I have mentioned this before but I saw an example this morning that reminded me of why Scout should not put the spare tire on the rear tailgate....
I was behind a new Land Rover Defender this morning that had a trailer hitch-style bike rack. The LR had its spare tire mounted to the rear door and, as a result, there wasn't enough room for the rack to fold back up neatly against the back of the car. The rack, a 1up, also happens to be one of the lowest profile racks on the market. It was jutting out at a 45 degree angle from the vehicle. Not only did it look awful but it's probably not the safest option as it's difficult for drivers to just the distance the rack sticks out without bikes on it.
Please, please do not make this mistake....

 

[Bodie]

I for one, would like a full size spare on the back. There's nowhere else to put a full size spare (I'd like 33-35" tires). I DO want a tailgate and not a swing gate so it needs to be attached to the quarter panel or preferably, bumper. They sell adapter pieces to extend the receiver to clear tires if necessary.

 

[cinder]

I for one, would like a full size spare on the back. There's nowhere else to put a full size spare (I'd like 33-35" tires). I DO want a tailgate and not a swing gate so it needs to be attached to the quarter panel or preferably, bumper. They sell adapter pieces to extend the receiver to clear tires if necessary.

I would agree. There are better work arounds for hauling your bike than locations for spare tire locations imo

 

[lefty]

There was general consensus, driven from a survey on this site, quite a while back where the majority agreed that not having a tire on the tailgate was preferable as it drove ease of use for many different reasons. For me, personally, it was for bike transport. I was providing a real life example of why having a tire on the drop gate is a bad idea.
With respect to hauling bikes another way, I'd be curious as to what suggestions you have? Roof rails are a popular way but not on an SUV that will likely be pretty high.

 

[cinder]

There was general consensus, driven from a survey on this site, quite a while back where the majority agreed that not having a tire on the tailgate was preferable as it drove ease of use for many different reasons. For me, personally, it was for bike transport. I was providing a real life example of why having a tire on the drop gate is a bad idea.
With respect to hauling bikes another way, I'd be curious as to what suggestions you have? Roof rails are a popular way but not on an SUV that will likely be pretty high.

Roof racks have always worked for me personally but aren't as convenient of course, you could take the spare off and mount it on the roof or in the frunk and attach your bikes to the back if that was too unwieldy. As was mentioned there are extended racks to get out past the spare, or spare tire mounted racks. If all else fails you could put your bike in the back seat I suppose.

I juat wonder where else they would put the spare that doesn't compromise ground clearance, battery capacity or valuable interior space? I'm no designer just stating my preference.

 

[sambown]

Roof racks have always worked for me personally but aren't as convenient of course, you could take the spare off and mount it on the roof or in the frunk and attach your bikes to the back if that was too unwieldy. As was mentioned there are extended racks to get out past the spare, or spare tire mounted racks. If all else fails you could put your bike in the back seat I suppose.

I juat wonder where else they would put the spare that doesn't compromise ground clearance, battery capacity or valuable interior space? I'm no designer just stating my preference.

I agree with everything you just said Cinder. Interior space is too valuable, below compromises ground clearance. If the new scout is anything like the old ones, fold down the back seats and throw the bikes back there. A spare tire is too valuable to not have as an option. Again, maybe the spare tire carrier is an option instead of standard, so people that prefer other attachments can go without it and get other accessories instead.

 

[lefty]

This goes beyond just bikes. In a new thread others are commenting on the ability to carry plywood, as an example. I haul large items all the time and love the fact that I can do so with my Grand Cherokee. Even having a swing up door sucks but I can still make it work. A roof doesn't always work depending on the weight and size of what your carrying. If you have a swing-out gate you cannot haul anything.
I don't offroad but perhaps Scout can come up with a very easy, convenient way to remove the tire from underneath so when offroaders are on the trail they can move the tire to cargo area? Alternatively, someone suggested having the swing-out tire carrier as an aftermarket option.

 

[sambown]

This goes beyond just bikes. In a new thread others are commenting on the ability to carry plywood, as an example. I haul large items all the time and love the fact that I can do so with my Grand Cherokee. Even having a swing up door sucks but I can still make it work. A roof doesn't always work depending on the weight and size of what your carrying. If you have a swing-out gate you cannot haul anything.
I don't offroad but perhaps Scout can come up with a very easy, convenient way to remove the tire from underneath so when offroaders are on the trail they can move the tire to cargo area? Alternatively, someone suggested having the swing-out tire carrier as an aftermarket option.

Yes I would like to be able to haul things too, and the bed area of a scout is too valuable. But tire mounted beneath would be far too inconvenient for people using the scout as an off-road vehicle, which will be a lot of the market. Plus, a battery pack beneath the car, with a 12.5-inch wide tire mounted below would likely be impossible. I would not be surprised to see them go with a swing out gate like bronco, even though I want a drop-down gate with a swing-out carrier. I also would not be surprised that if for the standard scout they offer the spare beneath the floorboard in the back, or in the frunk, which 31s or maybe a 33 could fit. But for the off-road package with 35's, they offer the rear-mounted spare. So for people using it for off-road can have that rear mount, and people using it on the pavement can have it in more concealed spots.

And looking back at the poll created in December, it looks like people prefer the drop-down tailgate for sure, with the spare under the floorboard if possible, or mounted to the back if not possible. Like I said, possible with 31 or maybe 33s, not with 35s. Please make the off-road version have 35's, with a rear-mounted spare as standard - a 35 12.5R17 tire would not fit under the floor, and belongs on the rear anyway.

Additionally, it seems like their goal is to create a rugged utility vehicle. Something that competes with Bronco, Jeep Wranglers, etc. If that is truly their goal, a rear-mounted spare is the only way to go for an off-road package. If this were competing with jeep grand cherokees, cherokees, bronco sports, blazers, etc. then I would say definitely do not put the spare on the back. But I do not think that is the market this vehicle is trying to enter.

 

[J Alynn]

This goes beyond just bikes. In a new thread others are commenting on the ability to carry plywood, as an example. I haul large items all the time and love the fact that I can do so with my Grand Cherokee. Even having a swing up door sucks but I can still make it work. A roof doesn't always work depending on the weight and size of what your carrying. If you have a swing-out gate you cannot haul anything.
I don't offroad but perhaps Scout can come up with a very easy, convenient way to remove the tire from underneath so when offroaders are on the trail they can move the tire to cargo area? Alternatively, someone suggested having the swing-out tire carrier as an aftermarket option.

I still think a slide out rack in the front for the spare as standard and option for rear carrier. If grill is big enough it could fold down then a rack can pull out with tire on it

 

[sambown]

I still think a slide out rack in the front for the spare as standard and option for rear carrier. If grill is big enough it could fold down then a rack can pull out with tire on it

A slide out rack in the frunk? That is a pretty good idea, and would be cool to see as standard with the option for the carrier. I just wonder about those 35's, if they would fit. But I think a slide-out with a drop-down grill is a super cool idea, could have the jack in there and maybe even an air compressor. Like an emergency kit area when off-roading. IF they could fit a 35 in there, I would go with this option, and I did not think I could be convinced otherwise. If they did this, the grill would have to drop down and be able to clear the front-bumper option if they offer that. But I think the bumper could maybe be mounted low enough where this is not an issue.

 

[J Alynn]

Yes I would like to be able to haul things too, and the bed area of a scout is too valuable. But tire mounted beneath would be far too inconvenient for people using the scout as an off-road vehicle, which will be a lot of the market. Plus, a battery pack beneath the car, with a 12.5-inch wide tire mounted below would likely be impossible. I would not be surprised to see them go with a swing out gate like bronco, even though I want a drop-down gate with a swing-out carrier. I also would not be surprised that if for the standard scout they offer the spare beneath the floorboard in the back, or in the frunk, which 31s or maybe a 33 could fit. But for the off-road package with 35's, they offer the rear-mounted spare. So for people using it for off-road can have that rear mount, and people using it on the pavement can have it in more concealed spots.

And looking back at the poll created in December, it looks like people prefer the drop-down tailgate for sure, with the spare under the floorboard if possible, or mounted to the back if not possible. Like I said, possible with 31 or maybe 33s, not with 35s. Please make the off-road version have 35's, with a rear-mounted spare as standard - a 35 12.5R17 tire would not fit under the floor, and belongs on the rear anyway.

Additionally, it seems like their goal is to create a rugged utility vehicle. Something that competes with Bronco, Jeep Wranglers, etc. If that is truly their goal, a rear-mounted spare is the only way to go for an off-road package. If this were competing with jeep grand cherokees, cherokees, bronco sports, blazers, etc. then I would say definitely do not put the spare on the back. But I do not think that is the market this vehicle is trying to enter.

I think the Scout has to compete with Bronco. But I see comments mixing grand Cherokee with Bronco sport and Blazers but I just don’t think those all compete based on sizes. If you are comparing off-road worthiness perhaps grouping as you did is fine. I think the two options are the way to go. I don’t want the extra 20” hanging off the back making my garage even tighter with space. I think there has to be a way to design it into the drunk.
Perhaps they could “notch” out batteries at the rear to accommodate the spare under and add the additional batteries back into the bottom of the drunk.

 

[sambown]

I think the Scout has to compete with Bronco. But I see comments mixing grand Cherokee with Bronco sport and Blazers but I just don’t think those all compete based on sizes. If you are comparing off-road worthiness perhaps grouping as you did is fine. I think the two options are the way to go. I don’t want the extra 20” hanging off the back making my garage even tighter with space. I think there has to be a way to design it into the drunk.
Perhaps they could “notch” out batteries at the rear to accommodate the spare under and add the additional batteries back into the bottom of the drunk.

I agree it has to compete with the full-size bronco. I like the frunk idea, with a jack and air compressor option as accessories in there too. Could be such a cool area to pop open and slide out in-case-of-emergency when on the trails. In my original post I was comparing those options for their off-road worthiness, not really their size, like you mentioned.

 

[J Alynn]

I wonder if the spare could bottom/flat mount somehow at frunk then have a tray/pan above so you’d still have some storage above for groceries, trail gear etc… that is accessed from top of frunk. That might be the ideal solution

 

[TaconicBear]

This goes beyond just bikes. In a new thread others are commenting on the ability to carry plywood, as an example. I haul large items all the time and love the fact that I can do so with my Grand Cherokee. Even having a swing up door sucks but I can still make it work. A roof doesn't always work depending on the weight and size of what your carrying. If you have a swing-out gate you cannot haul anything.
I don't offroad but perhaps Scout can come up with a very easy, convenient way to remove the tire from underneath so when offroaders are on the trail they can move the tire to cargo area? Alternatively, someone suggested having the swing-out tire carrier as an aftermarket option.

Well, if SM keeps the Scout small-ish and resists the current trends to bigger louder and higher it seems like Lefty's needs do not include a Scout, rather a full size PU with long bed. I'm hopeful that SM will give us a Scout that looks and feels, and drives similar to what our original Scouts did. They didn't carry plywood or large furniture either. For the 70 years I have been driving, every vehicle that has been introduced has gradually increased it's size (except the obvious total abandonment of style by Lincoln and Cadillac). Let's hope that SM can resist that; a 100" wheelbase is fine, and narrow enough to fit between the trees is great.

 

[Bodie]

I’d be happy with a “donut” spare in the bottom of a frunk under a panel with storage above. I’d still like to see a factory option for a bumper mount full size spare for the back. I think the Scout II looks great without a spare on the back.
I hope there is a good size frunk with the “grill” attached to the hood so when it opens, the sill is level with the top of the front bumper. I do NOT want a tilt forward hood like the Scout II, that’s about the only thing I dislike about it.

 

[TaconicBear]

I’d be happy with a “donut” spare in the bottom of a frunk under a panel with storage above. I’d still like to see a factory option for a bumper mount full size spare for the back. I think the Scout II looks great without a spare on the back.
I hope there is a good size frunk with the “grill” attached to the hood so when it opens, the sill is level with the top of the front bumper. I do NOT want a tilt forward hood like the Scout II, that’s about the only thing I dislike about it.

I agree fully that the front hinged hood on the Scout II is totally inappropriate for and EV Scout. Your suggestion about level loading in the frunk certainly makes for less backache. The mini-donut spare might be o.k. for the majority of sales which we anticipate will go to folks driving to the mall, church, and supermarket but for those of us who go off-road, whether gently or aggressively, a real-size totally functional spare is needed. I suppose that the choice could be an option at delivery depending on how the new Scout is ultimately delivered.

 

[LastDayScout]

A slide out rack in the frunk? That is a pretty good idea, and would be cool to see as standard with the option for the carrier. I just wonder about those 35's, if they would fit. But I think a slide-out with a drop-down grill is a super cool idea, could have the jack in there and maybe even an air compressor. Like an emergency kit area when off-roading. IF they could fit a 35 in there, I would go with this option, and I did not think I could be convinced otherwise. If they did this, the grill would have to drop down and be able to clear the front-bumper option if they offer that. But I think the bumper could maybe be mounted low enough where this is not an issue.

I think has been mentioned and I think it’s a good idea.

 

[Wyoscout]

Under the rig for the spare, whatever size we are running we do not need that size to limp off the trail or limp home, in limp mode any size will do.

 

[TaconicBear]

I think has been mentioned and I think it’s a good idea.

It is interesting to see comments about the grille. To my observation none of the electric vehicles have a grille, it's a necessity for ICE. I think we are asking that if the spare is in the frunk the compartment should open in a way that lets it slide out and that precludes having to lift the weight of tire/wheel combination.

 

[J Alynn]

We discussed early on that a functional grill isn’t necessary but A-it’s a great throw back and iconic as part of the vehicle and B-if compartment is utilized for generator or anything that air would be good for a manually controlled dampener could close off for 90% of time or have open if running generator or bring gas cans home to run the mower, etc…