Range extender - please adjust spec to 250 miles of EV Range

[Variable430]

The range extender should get at least 50% of its 500 mile range in pure EV mode otherwise it would be pretty worthless with only 150 miles that you can only get in ideal conditions. In the winter this likely means sub 100 miles pure EV range - not acceptable

 

[J Alynn]

I’m not sure where 50 miles of range is normal. In Southern California many people’s commutes start at 30-50 miles each way and if you throw any curveballs into that it’s a problem. If you are engineering for 2027 launches the car needs to be ahead of where the market is currently. Don’t forget, the scout has poor aerodynamics so efficiency and range in other areas will be critical. As it is Rivian I think only get 2miles/kwhr, about half of what other EVs get. Skate where the puck is going not where it came from.

I’m sure when SM is talking 350 range they are factoring brick shape in to the equation-at least to some degree. That said, the only debate and argument for more daily commute miles is California. I haven’t heard anyone else from other locations say 150 isn’t enough for daily commute. And again, the harvester would be your solution-you just have to accept you’ll also be using some gas on occasion. Just the way it is. Increasing range to 200+ means considerably more cost on batteries that 80% of buyers will never need. I’ll still argue that 350 and 500 are the sweet spots SM found for range vs reasonable cost. And maximizing sales makes them strong enough to survive and grow

 

[Jkew]

I’m sure when SM is talking 350 range they are factoring brick shape in to the equation-at least to some degree. That said, the only debate and argument for more daily commute miles is California. I haven’t heard anyone else from other locations say 150 isn’t enough for daily commute. And again, the harvester would be your solution-you just have to accept you’ll also be using some gas on occasion. Just the way it is. Increasing range to 200+ means considerably more cost on batteries that 80% of buyers will never need. I’ll still argue that 350 and 500 are the sweet spots SM found for range vs reasonable cost. And maximizing sales makes them strong enough to survive and grow

According to the Dept of Transportation, the histogram of daily trip lengths looks a little like the first graph below as of April 2024. On their site, you can actually dig into the county level. The interesting thing to me is that if you play around with the data and move from state to state, you see that almost everywhere, we have a bi-modal distribution of trip lengths... that is... you can divide everyone into the really short-trip people ( 1-5 miles ) and the commuters ( 10-50 miles ), with a long tail for the super-commuters.

The second graph is LA County, and what is sort of interesting is that while it has about the same general distribution, it seems like LA actually has fewer super-commuters (by percentage) than nationally. The more rural you go the worse that commute looks... which is about the most obvious thing anyone can say, but LA is not rural. Texas is the land of really, really long commutes if you just go by visually inspecting the data, and anyone who has driven there knows why.

Anecdotal evidence is strong, and even I know someone with a daily 75-mile one-way commute. More battery is, of course, better, and if they can do it without making it a monster battery, I would love it - but you can see why they are targeting 150miles today.

https://www.bts.gov/browse-statistical-products-and-data/covid-related/distribution-trips-distance-national-state-and

National distribution, and LA country graphs:

 

[ThatOneRoadie]

While my average "Single Trip" is probably less than 25 miles (somewhere in the 20 range), My "time between chargers" is closer to 100-150 on some days. I know I'm certainly in the minority, but I have multiple work sites I have to go between -- sometimes all of them in a day, which can add up to 200+ miles -- but I understand that my "visit everyone" days are certainly rare and I'd be using the harvester on them. But here in Snowy Colorado, that "150 mile" EPA Rating on an EV can rapidly fall below 100 or even 80 with Winter Tires (-Efficiency), Cold Temperatures (-Efficiency and ---Cabin Heating), and Snowy/Icy Roads (-Efficiency due to Terrain/Stop Start/Slow traffic).

In an ideal world with the harvester, I'd like to see an EV-Only EPA range of 200-230 miles (2/3 of the 350-mile BEV battery, with 1/3 of Cell space sacrificed for the harvester, and some losses due to the weight of an engine/fuel tank). Honestly I think anything below 125-150 miles EV-Only and I'd have to reconsider my reservation (125 is definitely my bare-minimum number). At that point I'd be using gas a lot of winter days, and that's what I'd like to avoid in a new Scout.

 

[CarTechGeek]

According to the Dept of Transportation, the histogram of daily trip lengths looks a little like the first graph below as of April 2024. On their site, you can actually dig into the county level. The interesting thing to me is that if you play around with the data and move from state to state, you see that almost everywhere, we have a bi-modal distribution of trip lengths... that is... you can divide everyone into the really short-trip people ( 1-5 miles ) and the commuters ( 10-50 miles ), with a long tail for the super-commuters.

The second graph is LA County, and what is sort of interesting is that while it has about the same general distribution, it seems like LA actually has fewer super-commuters (by percentage) than nationally. The more rural you go the worse that commute looks... which is about the most obvious thing anyone can say, but LA is not rural. Texas is the land of really, really long commutes if you just go by visually inspecting the data, and anyone who has driven there knows why.

Anecdotal evidence is strong, and even I know someone with a daily 75-mile one-way commute. More battery is, of course, better, and if they can do it without making it a monster battery, I would love it - but you can see why they are targeting 150miles today.

https://www.bts.gov/browse-statistical-products-and-data/covid-related/distribution-trips-distance-national-state-and

National distribution, and LA country graphs:
View attachment 4910View attachment 4911

Thanks for digging into that. Was getting tired of the outrageous claims. I remember about a week ago someone was claiming normal commute in California was 70 miles - one way, or similar.

If they were going by this graph alone, it would be hard to see why they are going beyond 50 miles really, and you can see why Volt aimed for 50 miles. The goal of business and engineering solutions would normally be to serve a healthy majority of the market, not chase the extreme ends of the graph. 50 miles would serve a very large majority of either market.

If you were making a PHEV/EREV car, 50 miles looks just about ideal, but if you need that range for something extra... I still think the only reason the Scout has that much range is to aid towing.

I can go weeks without driving more than 40 miles in a day, so I would NOT want to pay more or carry around more battery than need for about 50 miles to have bit of cushion. More than that is just a waste of money/resources from my perspective. There is no free lunch here.

 

[BeerParty]

<snip>
I can go weeks without driving more than 40 miles in a day, so I would NOT want to pay more or carry around more battery than need for about 50 miles to have bit of cushion. More than that is just a waste of money/resources from my perspective. There is no free lunch here.

I am of the same mind as CarTechGeek. I don't want to pay more for or carry around more battery than needed. And the vast majority of people will not need more than 50 miles of pure EV range without recharging. I understand that there will be people that want more than 100 miles of pure EV range, but then a Scoot EREV is not your solution. Maybe someday a company will offer an EREV with 250 miles of EV range, but I doubt it - that vehicle would cost too much and would appeal to too small a segment of the population.

 

[ThatOneRoadie]

Thanks for digging into that. Was getting tired of the outrageous claims. I remember about a week ago someone was claiming normal commute in California was 70 miles - one way, or similar.

If they were going by this graph alone, it would be hard to see why they are going beyond 50 miles really, and you can see why Volt aimed for 50 miles. The goal of business and engineering solutions would normally be to serve a healthy majority of the market, not chase the extreme ends of the graph. 50 miles would serve a very large majority of either market.

If you were making a PHEV/EREV car, 50 miles looks just about ideal, but if you need that range for something extra... I still think the only reason the Scout has that much range is to aid towing.

I can go weeks without driving more than 40 miles in a day, so I would NOT want to pay more or carry around more battery than need for about 50 miles to have bit of cushion. More than that is just a waste of money/resources from my perspective. There is no free lunch here.

Bear in mind, these statistics from BTS are Single-Trip, i.e. One-Way distance:

Importantly: “A movement with multiple stays of longer than 10 minutes before returning home is counted as multiple trips.”

The statistics give a good idea for sure, but with so many of the trips being in the 5-25 range, that could easily give a 50-mile round-trip commute from home-work-home (I’d fall into that category). And if your work has no charger, well I hope you like using gas every day (which is exactly what I want to avoid).

 

[J Alynn]

Bear in mind, these statistics from BTS are Single-Trip, i.e. One-Way distance:

View attachment 4915

Importantly: “A movement with multiple stays of longer than 10 minutes before returning home is counted as multiple trips.”

The statistics give a good idea for sure, but with so many of the trips being in the 5-25 range, that could easily give a 50-mile round-trip commute from home-work-home (I’d fall into that category). And if your work has no charger, well I hope you like using gas every day (which is exactly what I want to avoid).

But if your round trip is 50 and battery range is 150 you should never have an issue assuming you plug it in at least every other day.

 

[pleasant tree]

The range extender should get at least 50% of its 500 mile range in pure EV mode otherwise it would be pretty worthless with only 150 miles that you can only get in ideal conditions. In the winter this likely means sub 100 miles pure EV range - not acceptable

I just read that Scout batteries would be provided by PowerCo from Canada. If that is so, it is quite possible (in fact likely) that that plant will be producing solid state batteries (quantumscape/PowerCo agreement). If the scout is equiped with these batteries, they will not need the fuel burning range addition because the solid state battery itself will provide about 500 mile range and be far less affected by cold temperatures and will weigh less than lithium ion. They will also be far safer.

 

[pleasant tree]

Well stated

This is all the more reason to have solid-state batteries rather than lithium-ion batteries. They have a range of about 500 miles, are less weight, are less affected by temperature, and are much less likely to catch fire. There is no need to burn fossil fuel to try and reach this range.

 

[pwrofgrayskull]

I believe PowerCo is still speculation at this point, no? Either way, wouldn’t solid state batteries make it impossible to meet the vehicle pricing that was presented at the reveal?

 

[J Alynn]

I believe PowerCo is still speculation at this point, no? Either way, wouldn’t solid state batteries make it impossible to meet the vehicle pricing that was presented at the reveal?

I’m pretty sure Jamie already stated first gens would not rely on solid state due to being too new. I suspect maybe any mid gen refresh or 2nd gen. And yes, solid state would add substantial cost to the base costs. The batteries alone will make up 25-30% of the material costs of the vehicles. I think as has been noted-Solid State is at least 5 years out until any legit company starts utilizing and even that might be generous. But will be nice when they get them working and get prices down to a reasonable number

 

[jamski]

I believe PowerCo is still speculation at this point, no? Either way, wouldn’t solid state batteries make it impossible to meet the vehicle pricing that was presented at the reveal?

This is what I am also worried about with solid state batteries. One idea would be to change the Harvester model to having a solid state battery instead of an Engine. While the regular Traveler has the Lithium battery.

 

[Logan]

I’m pretty sure Jamie already stated first gens would not rely on solid state due to being too new. I suspect maybe any mid gen refresh or 2nd gen. And yes, solid state would add substantial cost to the base costs. The batteries alone will make up 25-30% of the material costs of the vehicles. I think as has been noted-Solid State is at least 5 years out until any legit company starts utilizing and even that might be generous. But will be nice when they get them working and get prices down to a reasonable number

This is my understanding as well.

Right now it seems like Solid state batteries are a "mayyyyybe we might see them becoming available by 2028-2030" sort of thing. But Scout is designing the vehicles NOW. They have to lock in designs at some point, and can't perpetually wait for new stuff. So they're likely using the materials they have available now to do that.

I DO hope that they make the battery pack somehow designed to be swapped. I'd love to be able to do something like a "Solid State Upgrade" and "Harvester delete" option to my scout after 10 years (assuming infrastructure for charging is way better then, and that Solid State batteries deliver on their additional range).

Doubtful that it will happen, but I'd LOVE to see it happen. Would make me a lot less nervous about wanting to be "future proof".

 

[R1TVT]

Also, there's a 300+ miles pure BEV to choose if you live in CA. But they are designing for buyers from all states not just CA.

Maybe I missed something, but what does CA have to do with pure BEV?

 

[pwrofgrayskull]

I’m pretty sure Jamie already stated first gens would not rely on solid state due to being too new. I suspect maybe any mid gen refresh or 2nd gen. And yes, solid state would add substantial cost to the base costs. The batteries alone will make up 25-30% of the material costs of the vehicles. I think as has been noted-Solid State is at least 5 years out until any legit company starts utilizing and even that might be generous. But will be nice when they get them working and get prices down to a reasonable number

Yeah I thought at some point Jamie had addressed that. Makes sense.

 

[R1TVT]

Considering you can't buy or reserve ANY EV today with Solid State Batteries, it would be unreasonable to believe that we would see a solid state option for launch while Scout is actively lining up suppliers for initial production (and working with VW & likely PowerCo)

 

[CarTechGeek]

Bear in mind, these statistics from BTS are Single-Trip, i.e. One-Way distance:



Importantly: “A movement with multiple stays of longer than 10 minutes before returning home is counted as multiple trips.”

The statistics give a good idea for sure, but with so many of the trips being in the 5-25 range, that could easily give a 50-mile round-trip commute from home-work-home (I’d fall into that category). And if your work has no charger, well I hope you like using gas every day (which is exactly what I want to avoid).

You are reading it wrong. The graph is of daily trips. Note the "s". It's all the daily trips not just one trip.

 

[Variable430]

Thanks for digging into that. Was getting tired of the outrageous claims. I remember about a week ago someone was claiming normal commute in California was 70 miles - one way, or similar.

If they were going by this graph alone, it would be hard to see why they are going beyond 50 miles really, and you can see why Volt aimed for 50 miles. The goal of business and engineering solutions would normally be to serve a healthy majority of the market, not chase the extreme ends of the graph. 50 miles would serve a very large majority of either market.

If you were making a PHEV/EREV car, 50 miles looks just about ideal, but if you need that range for something extra... I still think the only reason the Scout has that much range is to aid towing.

I can go weeks without driving more than 40 miles in a day, so I would NOT want to pay more or carry around more battery than need for about 50 miles to have bit of cushion. More than that is just a waste of money/resources from my perspective. There is no free lunch here.

What I said was people can easily have commutes of 70-100 miles per day which is 35-50 miles one way. 50 miles is useless given the aero on Scout will result in much higher consumption at freeway speed and cold weather has another negative impact. Not sure how many people here have actually owned or driven an EV for any period of time to really understand the points being discussed.

 

[Variable430]

According to the Dept of Transportation, the histogram of daily trip lengths looks a little like the first graph below as of April 2024. On their site, you can actually dig into the county level. The interesting thing to me is that if you play around with the data and move from state to state, you see that almost everywhere, we have a bi-modal distribution of trip lengths... that is... you can divide everyone into the really short-trip people ( 1-5 miles ) and the commuters ( 10-50 miles ), with a long tail for the super-commuters.

The second graph is LA County, and what is sort of interesting is that while it has about the same general distribution, it seems like LA actually has fewer super-commuters (by percentage) than nationally. The more rural you go the worse that commute looks... which is about the most obvious thing anyone can say, but LA is not rural. Texas is the land of really, really long commutes if you just go by visually inspecting the data, and anyone who has driven there knows why.

Anecdotal evidence is strong, and even I know someone with a daily 75-mile one-way commute. More battery is, of course, better, and if they can do it without making it a monster battery, I would love it - but you can see why they are targeting 150miles today.

https://www.bts.gov/browse-statistical-products-and-data/covid-related/distribution-trips-distance-national-state-and

National distribution, and LA country graphs:
View attachment 4910View attachment 4911

Those are great statistics. Given I live and have grown up in LA this is complete BS. Also I don’t think Scout has indicated the 350 miles of range is highway mileage.

 

[Variable430]

I’m sure when SM is talking 350 range they are factoring brick shape in to the equation-at least to some degree. That said, the only debate and argument for more daily commute miles is California. I haven’t heard anyone else from other locations say 150 isn’t enough for daily commute. And again, the harvester would be your solution-you just have to accept you’ll also be using some gas on occasion. Just the way it is. Increasing range to 200+ means considerably more cost on batteries that 80% of buyers will never need. I’ll still argue that 350 and 500 are the sweet spots SM found for range vs reasonable cost. And maximizing sales makes them strong enough to survive and grow

I have an EQS and a BMW i4. If you drive on the freeway at 70mph+ the range of the car is heavily dependent on the aerodynamics. 350 miles could be achievable - your gonna need a very big battery which has its own issues in trying to charge on level 2. You also need to take 80% of the estimated range unless you want to torch your battery which means 280 miles of range - again that won’t be at freeway speed. I’m not trying to get into an argument it’s just the reality of EV ownership. I’ve put my deposit down so I love the concept, I just hope the Scout team is skating to where the puck is going and not where it is today.