So what does everyone think of the first new Scout designs...

[mybikeisred]

For me, I think the key ingredients are:
1. Removable top and doors
2. Offroad capable
3. Modern but capturing the distinct look of the Scout
4. Plenty of dealer options/packages
5. Aftermarket customization
6. Affordable base price

This list is exactly what drew people to the Broncos, and if they check all those boxes, I’ll be a buyer. I just hope that the rollout of these Scouts isn’t as much of a shit show as the bronco reboot.

 

[Beach_Bum]

One aspect that hasn't been mentioned so far is that the platform needs to body on frame (BOF) vs. unibody.

 

[Scott1911]

1. Removable Top/doors
2. 2-Door Option
Now comes the tough part. Finding places to stick batteries that will give the 2 door version enough range.

 

[broadicustomworks]

I echo the desire for a removable top. OR at least a panoramic removable center section that gives the feel and illusion of an open-air ride.
It is a large market with few contenders.
Having owned multiple Jeep Wranglers and now a new Bronco, it is a must for people like me to make the move to purchase a Scout branded vehicle.

In addition, the biggest single reservation people seem to have (and rightfully so) in an E-offroad vehicle is range.

They have plenty of torque and power, but if the range is a paltry few hundred miles, you'll get a fair share of token buyers, but the general public wanting to get away and off-grid for a longer trip or a multi-day camping excursion are not going to be among them.

It is a delicate and aspiring challenge/balance to have something off-road capable that has good CG, clearance, range, and prowess.
Jeep is in the fray with their version, Hummer is beginning to see some sales now, and Rivian is out there with their offering. None of them hit the sweet spot in ability and range combined. Each does a few things well, but none really get the "offroad" blood pumping for enthusiasts.
And then you have the Cybertruck is who-knows-now development. Bold love it or hate type of design cues on that one.

Weight is an issue, but inherent in our current tech. Something to consider.

Styling wise I like the above sneak renders.
Suggestion for the rear gate on the SUV model: Rear gate needs to be 2-piece with a flip up rear window and an actual tailgate.
I agree with @Bill Linsmayer on this. Having a camping/tailgating vehicle with an actual usable tailgate is also a must.
Even if it was dual-swing where you could have either a side-swing gate or a fold-down option would be a bullseye win.

The rear overhang on the truck version looks good here. Gladiators are an awesome idea and do a lot well for the camping/off-grid life, but the enormous rear overhang is a real deterrent for some trails.

Modularity is also the key to having something that rises above. Make it able to accept accessories easily. Meaning racks, awnings, winches, steps/rail sliders, drawer slides and cargo management for those who do that sort of thing.

Best of luck!
Looking forward to what comes about with the design, implementation, and eventual launch!

 

[HattoriHanzoAxleshaft]

While I'm excited for the new Scout & understand that an initial offering NEEDS to cast a huge net to generate interest in their brand, I don't see a whole lot of what IHC initially offered in the Scout 80. Here's what I'd like for my first new Scout.

Small and utilitarian... a two-door option with bare floors & drain holes.
Manual accessory options (windows, locks, actual buttons on the dash rather than only touchscreen interface)
Off-road capability & workhorse mentality-make it tough.

Give us a small, simple option for those of us with nothing to compensate for & just want a modern 800 Variant.

We're starting to save our pennies with our sights on 2027 for a new Scout... We've never bought a car brand new & drive what we have into the ground. A 4 door will suit us fine, but for a personal Daily Driver I'd prefer a 100" wheelbase & smaller footprint.

I also hope Scout is able to keep the weight down... my 800 is a featherweight compared to today's monoliths.

 

[HattoriHanzoAxleshaft]

1. Removable Top/doors
2. 2-Door Option
Now comes the tough part. Finding places to stick batteries that will give the 2 door version enough range.

I'm toying with the idea of electrifying my binder eventually... there's room for battery blocks in front of the rear tires where the saddle tanks are, more room under the bed & room under the hood for additional batteries.

I wonder if each axle will have its own motor & differential, or if each wheel will have a motor...

 

[ColeAK]

Please Smaller rims! >18” rims have no place on a truck, ever…. 17” rims with 33-35’s would be awesome.

I’ve been an avid off roader for >40 years. Not necessarily in the interest of off roading but to get access to all things backcountry (skiing, biking, hiking, camping, fishing, hunting,…). Grew up in norther Nevada, been in Alaska for 13 years. Over the last ~25 years my “trucks” have been a 80 series Land Cruiser, g500, and since 2014 a 2013 LX570 (200 series). In the last >10 years we have taken the stance where we rarely leave Alaska but take a vacation every weekend (and do some long 10-20 day stretches). This gets us 70-100 days a year camping in the back country of Alaska and NW Canada. Late summer when everyone is out scouting in preparation for caribou/moose/sheep/goat seasons it is not uncommon for me to see 2 or 3 trucks a weekend on a forest service road or trail on 20’s with a pinch flat. It just takes one rock…. In the summer we subsistence fish for sockeye on the beach, even 20’s with 34’s don’t give much room to air down appropriately for sand.

As an example I what I’m talking about watch this from ~11min

We have also owned 2 Teslas over the last 8 years (S and now 3). I was following Rivian closely almost since the beginning, outdoor oriented. The silly decision of them (being self proclaimed “off road” oriented) deciding to go with 20’s and make it so can’t go any smaller was the #1 reasons I canceled my reservation (that and air suspension, and it looks like 2-3 additional years before I would get the max pack). So I would have to buy a $90k truck, pull the rotors and calipers, void at least some of my warranty just to feel comfortable taking it on even mild off road trails.

Even on road, Larger wheels only hinder performance, they increase braking distance and decrease grip and acceleration. Heck even in the highest performance track cars, when F1 switched from 13” to 18” rims track times got slower across the board. Can we finally just accept the only place larger rims increase performance is video games and the fast and furious franchise and stop putting them on vehicles, especially trucks.

I have a reservation on a CyberTruck and Silverado EV. But have plenty of time to wait on the right fit for me and glad to see another brand putting thought in and asking the right questions.

Thank you for stepping into the EV truck/suv space and opening it up to a forum. Off my soap box

 

[solracer]

The renderings here are what I hope to see from the real deal: Scout Electric SUV And Pickup Teased By VW Speculatively Rendered though perhaps I would like to see the belt line slightly lower so there is a bit more glass.

 

[speedrye]

As an owner of an FJ Cruiser, I agree with the previous comment about the rear visibility in that back corner. Personally, the overall shape works for me, but I do not like the C-pillar to D-pillar area (or what appears to be one huge C-pillar. My preference would be a white/roof colored B-pillar behind the front door, a thinner D-pillar at the rear, also in white/roof color, and a longer glass expanse from the rear door to that D-pillar, hiding a thin C-pillar behind the glass at the rear of the back door. Keep a thin area of white/roof color under those rear windows, and I'd be good.

Personally, I have no use for a removable roof or doors, but I recognize a lot do. I suspect rollover crash worthiness with the ridiculous battery weight will prevent this being an option.

Beyond that, keep everything SIMPLE. Minimize electronics, no touchscreens, use simple large knobs to control HVAC, radio, etc. No power seats, etc. Keep costs down, keep it simple to work on/modify, and give me a spare tire carrier on the back. As a long-standing Rivian R1S order holder, I want simple, functional, reliable, not a friggin' cell phone on wheels like the Rivian turned out to be.

 

[P.S.Mangelsdorf]

Four points from me (an EV and truck and classic car guy):

1. The initial renderings have slight Land Rover vibes. Thats not a good thing. I'd like to see a crisper secondary belt line (for lack of a better term) like the Scout II had, where the side begins to angle in below the window line, and I'd like to see it uninterrupted by the wheel arches.
2. The face has got to look like a Scout.
3. This goes to details, not exterior design, but please for the love of God, use real tactile controls. Sure, some lesser used stuff can be in the screen, but most controls should be operable with gloves.
4. In terms of general goals and vibes, I think the Scout should be a rugged, simple, well built EV. There is a gaping hole in the market for any truck, let alone an EV, without all the frills.

 

[P.S.Mangelsdorf]

I don't need a truck that drives itself, I don't need a truck that tells me how to drive, I don't need the truck to drive itself offroad (a thousand off road modes), I don't need power seats and a perfect audio system, I don't need much built into the screens at all (just please be Apple Carplay compatible).

Give me a well-built, solid, electric truck. I'd like to be able to turn off stability control and (if using one motor per axle) turn on a locking differential.

 

[COSwilly]

Personally, I like the design direction but could do with seeing the front end of the SUV being elongated a bit. Would be great to have a massive frunk and in my opinion would make it look a little more “Scoutish”. Or maybe it’s “Scouty”?

When compared with the truck, the SUV looks very short. Would love to see a it slightly larger, so that it’s not confused with a Kia telluride type vehicle. Would increase storage space behind second row, give second row more space, or maybe best would be an optional third row.

I will buy as an off-roader with 2 rows just because, but would throw away my Rivian R1S reservation and use all the time if the scout is offered in 3 rows. Or I can always just leave my least favorite kid behind on road trips.

 

[HattoriHanzoAxleshaft]

Personally, I think if you want to keep it Funky and Retro looking, you should Ape the look of the 800 rather than the Scout II... there's a lot more character in the flares & swept upper rear 1/4... and the "Ballcap" overhang over the windshield is one of my favorite characteristics.

The Scout II looks like a Smooth Turd compared to the Sculpted lines of the previous model. The 60's were the Pinnacle of automotive aesthetics.

 

[IdahoJOAT]

For me, I think the key ingredients are:
1. Removable top and doors
2. Offroad capable
3. Modern but capturing the distinct look of the Scout
4. Plenty of dealer options/packages
5. Aftermarket customization
6. Affordable base price

I think this is spot on.

The other things I think that need to be done and ID'd are:

1. Who is this being marketed to? Jeepers? Broncos? Soccer moms? This is crucial, obviously, but I'll give examples anyway.
   1. The Avalanche is easily one of the most utilitarian vehicles ever produced. Those of us that have owned one, or even know someone who has, understand this. So why did it fail? It failed because it was marketed EXTREMELY poorly.
   2. Is the new Scout supposed to be a direct competitor to the Jeep Wrangler? Then it needs to compete in the rocks. It needs to be geared towards this appropriately.
   3. Is is the compete against the Bronco? Then it needs to... I don't even know what Ford is doing with it to be honest. It's selling because of blue-oval loyalty.
   4. The Chevrolet Blazer is another example of GM failing. They had a golden opportunity to compete against the Bronco and whoop Ford at it's own game, and they're stubbornly sticking to their modern run of the mill SUV. This is pissing off GM loyalists who desperately want to compete and can't. They loved their K5 blazers and can't partake in the retro revival.
2. What makes a Scout a Scout? I know for me, with the two I owned, I had criteria that made me choose it over a Jeep:
   1. Removable hard top. There really is no other feeling. And now that we've had 3 Wranglers, the removable doors. This is purely why Ford markets the Bronco against the Wrangler, and come up short. They're trying to say, "Look at us competing against the Jeep! We had a removable top and doors too!" when they fail at the off-roading. They SHOULD be marketing against the 4-Runner with, "We do everything Toyota does, but better. AND our top and doors come off."
   2. Power. I wanted it. The 4.0L, while great, just didn't tickle my fancy. I wanted a V8. Scout had it.
   3. Toughness. I wanted something that could haul stuff too. It could tow a trailer. It was overbuilt on purpose.

I think if these points are hit on, the Scout will fly off the production line, showroom floor, and car lots.

 

[HattoriHanzoAxleshaft]

I think this is spot on.

The other things I think that need to be done and ID'd are:

1. Who is this being marketed to? Jeepers? Broncos? Soccer moms? This is crucial, obviously, but I'll give examples anyway.
   1. The Avalanche is easily one of the most utilitarian vehicles ever produced. Those of us that have owned one, or even know someone who has, understand this. So why did it fail? It failed because it was marketed EXTREMELY poorly.
   2. Is the new Scout supposed to be a direct competitor to the Jeep Wrangler? Then it needs to compete in the rocks. It needs to be geared towards this appropriately.
   3. Is is the compete against the Bronco? Then it needs to... I don't even know what Ford is doing with it to be honest. It's selling because of blue-oval loyalty.
   4. The Chevrolet Blazer is another example of GM failing. They had a golden opportunity to compete against the Bronco and whoop Ford at it's own game, and they're stubbornly sticking to their modern run of the mill SUV. This is pissing off GM loyalists who desperately want to compete and can't. They loved their K5 blazers and can't partake in the retro revival.
2. What makes a Scout a Scout? I know for me, with the two I owned, I had criteria that made me choose it over a Jeep:
   1. Removable hard top. There really is no other feeling. And now that we've had 3 Wranglers, the removable doors. This is purely why Ford markets the Bronco against the Wrangler, and come up short. They're trying to say, "Look at us competing against the Jeep! We had a removable top and doors too!" when they fail at the off-roading. They SHOULD be marketing against the 4-Runner with, "We do everything Toyota does, but better. AND our top and doors come off."
   2. Power. I wanted it. The 4.0L, while great, just didn't tickle my fancy. I wanted a V8. Scout had it.
   3. Toughness. I wanted something that could haul stuff too. It could tow a trailer. It was overbuilt on purpose.

I think if these points are hit on, the Scout will fly off the production line, showroom floor, and car lots.

I'm going to stir up the pot a little, and say that I don't think the Scout needs to be overpowered... My 800 with 107/170 hp/tq does just fine with its gearing. While I'd like to pick up speed a little quicker than I do, anything over 60 mph starts to feel adventurous, depending on the road surface.

I see that part of Scout's Mission Statement is "To Show Our Land The Respect It Deserves"... That's hard to do when you've got 1000hp on tap to all 4 wheels of a heavy battery-laden vehicle. I Guaran-Goddamn-Tee you if Scout makes a vehicle possible to be extremely irresponsible in, there'll be one wrapped around a tree or stuck on the wrong side of a wash for the 'Gram or TikTok within hours of purchase... like the DB with the new Hummer who tanked it with the incorrect settings activated.

Give it power to spare, but also keep it in the realm of Quick and Powerful but Slow. If there's any off-road credibility, there's no reason for it to be able to drive even 90 mph.

 

[bcb1]

Look to the Ford Bronco as everything to try and emulate. They hit a home run. It’s very close in heritage to the original generation 1 Bronco, yet fully modern. And they did the critical thing of offering a two door and four door! Please don’t make the mistake of not offering a two door Scout! That’s where your heritage lies, even if it only has a 20-30% take rate versus a four door model. Offer both!

And stay in tune with the original Scout 80 body. No it doesn’t have to be exact, no one wants an exact copy, but like the Bronco there should be very strong heritage connection. Someone can instantly look at a new Bronco and tell it’s a Bronco. The same should be true for a Scout. Don’t make the body so different and modernized that one has to really think and squint and wish real hard in order to see the Scout that it came from.

Do those two things - and obviously make the engine (or EV system), 4WD system, and interior fully modern and you will have an absolute winner. And real competition for the Bronco, which the Wranger and their ancient solid axle system is not.

Good luck and if all goes well I will be a very early order for your Scout!

 

[HattoriHanzoAxleshaft]

Look to the Ford Bronco as everything to try and emulate. They hit a home run. It’s very close in heritage to the original generation 1 Bronco, yet fully modern. And they did the critical thing of offering a two door and four door! Please don’t make the mistake of not offering a two door Scout! That’s where your heritage lies, even if it only has a 20-30% take rate versus a four door model. Offer both!

And stay in tune with the original Scout 80 body. No it doesn’t have to be exact, no one wants an exact copy, but like the Bronco there should be very strong heritage connection. Someone can instantly look at a new Bronco and tell it’s a Bronco. The same should be true for a Scout. Don’t make the body so different and modernized that one has to really think and squint and wish real hard in order to see the Scout that it came from.

Do those two things - and obviously make the engine (or EV system), 4WD system, and interior fully modern and you will have an absolute winner. And real competition for the Bronco, which the Wranger and their ancient solid axle system is not.

Good luck and if all goes well I will be a very early order for your Scout!

Ford knocked the leather off the ball visually. I still haven't sat in a New Bronco, but everything I've seen looks great on the inside, although I'd like more physical switchwork & controls usable with gloves on.

Modern comfort is necessary these days... but a rugged throwback interior with things like physical vent levers near the footwell, manual seats, windows & locks, and panels you're not afraid to accidentally kick or risk breaking could start a trend to make interiors basic again, rather than the stark, empty, sterile wastelands the modern cockpit has become. It could really revolutionize how people see BEV's as a return to a personal vehicle as opposed to a numb rolling appliance with zero character.

 

[IdahoJOAT]

Look to the Ford Bronco as everything to try and emulate. They hit a home run. It’s very close in heritage to the original generation 1 Bronco, yet fully modern. And they did the critical thing of offering a two door and four door! Please don’t make the mistake of not offering a two door Scout! That’s where your heritage lies, even if it only has a 20-30% take rate versus a four door model. Offer both!

And stay in tune with the original Scout 80 body. No it doesn’t have to be exact, no one wants an exact copy, but like the Bronco there should be very strong heritage connection. Someone can instantly look at a new Bronco and tell it’s a Bronco. The same should be true for a Scout. Don’t make the body so different and modernized that one has to really think and squint and wish real hard in order to see the Scout that it came from.

Do those two things - and obviously make the engine (or EV system), 4WD system, and interior fully modern and you will have an absolute winner. And real competition for the Bronco, which the Wranger and their ancient solid axle system is not.

Good luck and if all goes well I will be a very early order for your Scout!

As a Jeeper, and talking to other people, the negative press about the Bronco isn't a home run. People are steering away from it.

 

[rthree]

I dig it, I'd love to see a big a** battery with bidirectional charging to get rid of these (small capacity) Powerwalls

 

[bcb1]

As a Jeeper, and talking to other people, the negative press about the Bronco isn't a home run. People are steering away from it.