Scout Design Ideas

  • From all of us at Scout Motors, welcome to the Scout Community! We created this community to provide Scout vehicle owners, enthusiasts, and curiosity seekers with a place to engage in discussion, suggestions, stories, and connections. Supportive communities are sometimes hard to find, but we're determined to turn this into one.

    Additionally, Scout Motors wants to hear your feedback and speak directly to the rabid community of owners as unique as America. We'll use the Scout Community to deliver news and information on events and launch updates directly to the group. Although the start of production is anticipated in 2026, many new developments and milestones will occur in the interim. We plan to share them with you on this site and look for your feedback and suggestions.

    How will the Scout Community be run? Think of it this way: this place is your favorite local hangout. We want you to enjoy the atmosphere, talk to people who share similar interests, request and receive advice, and generally have an enjoyable time. The Scout Community should be a highlight of your day. We want you to tell stories, share photos, spread your knowledge, and tell us how Scout can deliver great products and experiences. Along the way, Scout Motors will share our journey to production with you.

    Scout is all about respect. We respect our heritage. We respect the land and outdoors. We respect each other. Every person should feel safe, included, and welcomed in the Scout Community. Being kind and courteous to the other forum members is non-negotiable. Friendly debates are welcomed and often produce great outcomes, but we don't want things to get too rowdy. Please take a moment to consider what you post, especially if you think it may insult others. We'll do our best to encourage friendly discourse and to keep the discussions flowing.

    So, welcome to the Scout Community! We encourage you to check back regularly as we plan to engage our members, share teasers, and participate in discussions. The world needs Scouts™. Let's get going.


    We are Scout Motors.
I was thinking about this yesterday as a new model Mustang convertible rolled by: Why doesn’t a Mustang, or literally any other convertible, require the same rollover concerns? The novelty of topless has worn off for me already after just about 3 years of Bronco ownership, so I don’t really care if the Scout is topless or not, but I am curious about the distinction between topless off roaders and convertible sports cars.
When I had my BMW I was told it had pop up roll brackets and if car sensors determined a certain angle off road surface (as in tipping) it would deploy the brackets from behind seat area. Still question whether that was true
 
  • Like
Reactions: J. Sweat
Some thoughts on interior and materials:

1) mycelium…..and the surrogate to leather textiles is coming down in cost AND we have a manufacturer IN South Carolina https://www.innovationintextiles.com/fibres-yarns-fabrics/

In no way is it “pleather”, and it is actually a Hyde-like material with excellent uniformity. No auto manufacturers use it to my knowledge.
YET.

2) Another option is rugged denim fabric as well (tan in particular, but really any color that won’t turn a white T-shirt the same color as the new seats.

3) Washable floors, or perhaps any newer truck bed lining that also acts as a sound deadener, AND rust proofing, plus has drain points that can be used without tools to remove or install, yet stay in place.

4) the steering wheel will have to be thick to make the scout feel strong, or it will absolutely feel like driving a school bus. This can also be another area for mycelium leather. People will drive a Scout in cold weather, so of any creature comforts…a heated steering wheel is certainly more critical than heated seats.

5) the sound in the interior…..separate and distinct from the audio system (which I feel should be of marine quality waterproof speakers) will be quiet besides road noise.

Have a microphone on the the gears, or the motors to give auditory feedback.

Otherwise there will be no palpable heartbeat, or “soul to the machine”.

It shouldn’t be loud, but the fact the Mustang Mach -E has external waterproof speakers that mimic a power plant (not just ICE) means it’s something people want.

If the microphoned gear noise from the drivetrain/transmission (that would be the NEW sound of acceleration or deceleration) is not pleasant it can be tweaked if needed but should not be artificial, and could be as unique to the brand as perhaps a Harley Davidson V twin engine…..

Finally there is a “Soul to the Machine”.

Externally some suggestions:

1) if it’s off road capable, mirrors are less important, as cameras are inexpensive and small, along with even waterproof screens for viewing what the camera puts out (mounted on a small stalk, and the screen mounted in the cabin.

2) mount the spare (please God be a spare that is a direct replacement) as low as engineering can allow to still afford ground clearance, and keep the center of gravity optimal. Keep rollovers minimal.

3) please no cloth tops, as a well engineered multiple panel roof can go on and off quickly.

4) top roof can be solar paneled like Fiskar, yet still be light and strong like the composites used on lightweight auto lexan, but this is only an option on the roof with solar panels on top, as it would otherwise not be as clear after a number of car washes (that cause swirl marks) unless covered in paint protection film. The issue is solved if it’s solar panels anyway.

Some thoughts on power:

If it isn’t outperforming a Wrangler 4Xe 0-60, unfortunately Scout can NOT emote the feeling necessary for me to buy one.

However, if it is faster to 60 than most ICE cars today….say sub 4.5 seconds TODAY in 2024 (it may need sub 4 in 2026), I will find a way to own one.

Some thoughts on pricing and financing:

1) sell directly to the customer, Jeep Wrangler has been gouging $5k-$10k from their customers through stealer-ships for years, and direct sales would cut down on predatory dealers.

2) Give a discount….something simple on the folks most inclined to buy one, around $500-$1000 for Veterans, active duty, healthcare, law enforcement (this could even be a squad vehicle at some point), firefighters, nurses, …….FARMERS (unsure how to help small farms, and not just agribusiness) and others.

3) Financing……people that work hard generally speaking have money in this country. They will want a hard working Scout to help them work hard.
That stated, well qualified buyers with strong credit should be offered better rates than credit unions through Scout financing. While financing is always based off Prime, it could be win/win for Scout to get buyers that would otherwise go with a credit union by marginally beating the best credit unions rates.

Aftermarket:
This is what really can get a human to love a machine, when they help create it, to tastefully make it theirs.

Encourage off road aftermarket company communication, and collaboration…..but only if it makes the Scout stronger, or last longer….or potentially become more efficient.

I am of the thought that efficiency doesn’t exclude power, so let’s do both.

Scout ideals are that it will be a “worker” of a vehicle, but it can NOT do that on an impotent 300HP/TQ when most EV’s by then will easily have 500. So shoot for that, and beyond.

I hope these items many people say:

“Holy shit, what has no one thought of that before….but in a lot of ways they have, just in underwhelming platforms.
 
I was thinking about this yesterday as a new model Mustang convertible rolled by: Why doesn’t a Mustang, or literally any other convertible, require the same rollover concerns? The novelty of topless has worn off for me already after just about 3 years of Bronco ownership, so I don’t really care if the Scout is topless or not, but I am curious about the distinction between topless off roaders and convertible sports cars.
I believe its because an off-road truck, even driving on road has a better chance of roll overs than a car.

It gets a bit trickier still, with most EV’s weight is at the floor, if it does roll over, unlike the ICE convertible that has a heavy engine up front, that heavy weight would assist in crush injuries.

Many convertible cars are light enough that the windshield reinforcement keeps it from going completely pancaked.
 
Just curious… how does this jive with #47’s statements last night of “DRILL DRILL DRILL” and
“…I will end Govt subsidies on meaningless new green scam ideas…. And I will end the Electric Vehicle Mandate on DAY ONE…”
Hovering around politics here 😲! Would love to comment but who knows which Cliff ending path we will end up on come mid November
 
There is no federal mandate (States are another story). In fact, after the Inflation Reduction Act passed, even the tax credits became much harder to get based on price and battery sourcing.

Unfortunately, the amount of hyperbole, misinformation, and mudslinging is at the highest level I have ever seen in my lifetime, and it is disappointing and just causes further division.

That said, we in the car industry have to look 10 years into the future beyond whoever is currently in office. Historically (which we all tend to forget) this is nothing new - new EPA standards, new crash standards, new safety features and on and on. The ball gets moved and it sometimes comes back. Yet the auto industry keeps moving forward. It is technology at the end of the day. I don't know too many people that want to go back to corded drills. :D

Let's leave the politics out of it and keep it level - best we can.

Thanks!

Jamie
 
Car companies that do not produce vehicles running fully on alternative power do face a California deadline prohibiting sales or even importing from other states if I read it correctly. It just happens to one state. Other states in many cases adopt CARB restrictions above and beyond DC but are not required to.

Remember the separate 49 state vs 1 state ICE vehicles from 50 years ago?

I will try to avoid politics here but for every new vehicle to be 100% EV will require a vastly expanded electrical grid and if we can eventually eliminate fossil fuels from all powerplant generation then there will never be a truly 100% renewable auto fleet.

It is akin to certifying food as organic. If one ingredient is not organic then the entire food chain is non organic
 
Car companies that do not produce vehicles running fully on alternative power do face a California deadline prohibiting sales or even importing from other states if I read it correctly. It just happens to one state. Other states in many cases adopt CARB restrictions above and beyond DC but are not required to.

Remember the separate 49 state vs 1 state ICE vehicles from 50 years ago?

I will try to avoid politics here but for every new vehicle to be 100% EV will require a vastly expanded electrical grid and if we can eventually eliminate fossil fuels from all powerplant generation then there will never be a truly 100% renewable auto fleet.

It is akin to certifying food as organic. If one ingredient is not organic then the entire food chain is non organic
I want a burrito.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: J Alynn
Car companies that do not produce vehicles running fully on alternative power do face a California deadline prohibiting sales or even importing from other states if I read it correctly. It just happens to one state. Other states in many cases adopt CARB restrictions above and beyond DC but are not required to.

Remember the separate 49 state vs 1 state ICE vehicles from 50 years ago?

I will try to avoid politics here but for every new vehicle to be 100% EV will require a vastly expanded electrical grid and if we can eventually eliminate fossil fuels from all powerplant generation then there will never be a truly 100% renewable auto fleet.

It is akin to certifying food as organic. If one ingredient is not organic then the entire food chain is non organic
We won't actually have to replace 100% of the energy currently consumed from fossil fuels. Fossil fuels are so inefficient that when we electrify everything we'll only need about a third of the energy currently produced from them. Around 70% of the energy in a given unit of gasoline is just thrown away as waste heat. That's fine if you're heating something but not great if you're trying to do other stuff like move a heavy steel box down a road. The grid will not need to be expanded as most people seem to think. Thankfully grid operators already know this and the electric transition is not news to them. The other factor is time, It will take many years for the entire vehicle fleet to transition to electric. Even when all new vehicle sales are 100% electric it will take about 15 years for the fleet of existing vehicles to become electric. This is plenty of time to adjust generation capacity and improve the grid where needed.

We've already gone through a much bigger increase in electricity demand before. In the 1970's and 80's there was a large scale movement to get air conditioners which more than tripled electricity demand in about a decade and everything worked out fine. The EV transition is a much smaller increase and utilities are well aware it is coming and are already making preparations.

As for removing fossil fuels from powerplants, it's already less expensive to build an entirely new wind farm from scratch than to keep an existing methane gas plant running. Even if the entire grid is coal powered, EVs are so much more efficient than gas vehicles that from a pollution and climate perspective they are still a better option than gasoline.

And it's not just one state. About a dozen states follow California's lead and adopt the same rules, plus all of Canada and most of Europe. The few states clinging to fossil power will increasingly find themselves left behind economically and socially. It would like insisting on staying with horses when cars first appeared, sure it might work for a bit in the short term but eventually society moves on and those places become backwards with lower investment and lower economic growth.
 
I’m all for electric vehicles because they’re better vehicles in many ways but the derision of fossils is misplaced. Let’s stop pretending that we’re going 100 electric any time soon, that’s just silly. If you think I’m wrong, take this bet: If the percentage of new car sales in 2030 is greater than 25% electric, I buy you a new Scout; if not, you buy me a new (second) Scout.
 
You probably don't actually want to take that bet with me. Even the pessimistic linear industry estimates from groups like Deloitte have the US at 30% market share by 2030.

I'm a data analyst for my day job and in my spare time for fun back in 2017 I made a market share prediction model for Canadian and US plug-in vehicles because I was curious and that's just how I roll. I've been plotting real world data against my model's predictions ever since and so far so good! My model has been consistently - if slightly - under-estimating actual Canadian plug-in vehicle market share since 2017 and for the US the only two years it was overly optimistic were 2019 and 2020 (COVID was not foreseen by the model for obvious reasons).

Since 2021 my model has been slightly under-estimating market share (by design, I built it to be slightly conservative). I'll spare you the nerdy data science stuff behind why and how the model works and why it has so far held up pretty well but based on the model's predictions I expect around 69% of new vehicle sales in Canada to be plug-ins by 2030 and just over 40% of sales in the US to be plug-ins. I expect the US to hit 25% of sales around 2027 (Canada will hit that mark sometime late next year or early 2026) so we won't have long to wait to see who's closer. The US is already over 11% market share with no signs of slowing down (despite what the media seems to be reporting) and is actually just starting the exponential phase of the curve. Canada already hit one in ten sales last year and is on track for over 15% of new cars this year with at least one in five new cars having a plug next year (20%).

In Canada it will be game over for gas-powered vehicles by the mid-2030s and I expect the US to hit that point about five years later so around 2040 or so, maybe a bit earlier. This is assuming of course the US doesn't see any drastic policy changes after November as it flirts with theocratic authoritarianism. If Project 2025 happens next year all bets are off.
 
Hahaha no. As fun as it would be getting a free truck from a dumb internet bet I really don't need two trucks. You can keep your money.

I am confident in my model though, but it assumes stable policy and economic situation in the US. What I'm less confident in is the US rejecting the choas and economic disaster that Trump and MAGA would create. Maybe if adults prevail in November we can come back and revisit this wager but the world already underestimated Trump once.
 
PHEVs could be 100% of market share if that were all that were produced. But since every manufacturer I see couples them with the smallest engines, Ford included, there is still no push in that direction.

And if/ when it comes to a time when zero ICE vehicles are allowed to be produced then sales of ICE will hit zero.

As far as timing, your model fails to account for the inherent difference between the US and Canada. You invariably will hit 50 and we will still be at 31. (If anyone actually believes my joshing that market share differs between metric and inch measurements then they should not get behind the wheel of any vehicle, EV or not)
 
  • Like
Reactions: RebelliousPeasant