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

[TaconicBear]

This recent revival of this thread prompted another look at those sketches. Unfortunately, having looked at the marketplace and having owned seven Scouts I see a real conundrum. The sketches do not say Scout to me. The say something like crossing a Rivian with a Ford Flex - with futuristic detailing. But what else can we expect? The Feds definition of what makes a SUV and relating that to meeting fleet mileage goals pretty much pushed automotive design to a place where almost everything looks pretty similar. That, plus the agreed knowledge that our early Scout designs were copied and modified by most of the competition pretty much dictates the outcome. Form can hardly follow function anymore because of all the restrictive rules. As I have said before, I believe there is an unmet market for a real utility vehicle; that's what I bought my Scouts for. Yes, design has to please the marketplace -- the American market where the current fads are bigger and wider and taller. The Sketches show lift well above what those tires would require. Predictably those will eventually end. Remember, the practical world of warfare depends on the simplicity of the Hilux.

 

[Jamie@ScoutMotors]

I wouldn't read too much into the initial sketches that were released. Those are intentionally very broad strokes done well before our head of design came on board. Since then the vehicles have evolved and I think there is no question that there is Scout II influence but in a modern package. If you think about it, if IH had continued the Scout lineup we would be at Scout 7 by now. After the 80s, 90s and 2000s the design likely would have changed quite a bit from what we all think of as Scouts today. Even IH's drawings of future Scouts were headed in a radical new direction before they stopped production.

In essence, we are picking up where the Scout II left off in 1980. For anyone that loves the designs of the old Scouts, that is the best possible place we could start from.

 

[OleScout]

I wouldn't read too much into the initial sketches that were released. Those are intentionally very broad strokes done well before our head of design came on board. Since then the vehicles have evolved and I think there is no question that there is Scout II influence but in a modern package. If you think about it, if IH had continued the Scout lineup we would be at Scout 7 by now. After the 80s, 90s and 2000s the design likely would have changed quite a bit from what we all think of as Scouts today. Even IH's drawings of future Scouts were headed in a radical new direction before they stopped production.

In essence, we are picking up where the Scout II left off in 1980. For anyone that loves the designs of the old Scouts, that is the best possible place we could start from.

Jamie,
I was listening to a podcast on Classic 4x4 and Ryan Duvall who leads Harvester Homecoming shared that Navistar was in the phase of designing a future Scout. Navistar had the vision to one day revive the Scout but of course this never came to fruition. Per the Podcast, Navistar shared these design with WV. If this is the case, is this something you can expand on and if so will these designs be incorporated to the current product being developed?

 

[J Alynn]

Jamie,
I was listening to a podcast on Classic 4x4 and Ryan Duvall who leads Harvester Homecoming shared that Navistar was in the phase of designing a future Scout. Navistar had the vision to one day revive the Scout but of course this never came to fruition. Per the Podcast, Navistar shared these design with WV. If this is the case, is this something you can expand on and if so will these designs be incorporated to the current product being developed?

Would love to see those concepts if SM now owns rights since theoretically it should be part of buying Navistar. That would be cool to see what their take was -if nothing more than curiosity

 

[TaconicBear]

Would love to see those concepts if SM now owns rights since theoretically it should be part of buying Navistar. That would be cool to see what their take was -if nothing more than curiosity

In a parallel story I was told that Mahindra was all lined up to take on the Scout line but some banking or political interests scuttled the project. I wonder if any new designs or changes were part of that deal that fell through?

 

[Bodie]

I wouldn't read too much into the initial sketches that were released. Those are intentionally very broad strokes done well before our head of design came on board. Since then the vehicles have evolved and I think there is no question that there is Scout II influence but in a modern package. If you think about it, if IH had continued the Scout lineup we would be at Scout 7 by now. After the 80s, 90s and 2000s the design likely would have changed quite a bit from what we all think of as Scouts today. Even IH's drawings of future Scouts were headed in a radical new direction before they stopped production.

In essence, we are picking up where the Scout II left off in 1980. For anyone that loves the designs of the old Scouts, that is the best possible place we could start from.

Love this but....does the top come off?

 

[Jamie@ScoutMotors]

Going to have to wait and see.

 

[R1TVT]

Best possible answer right there at this stage in the game!

 

[SanDoggScout]

The lines on the SUV look good with the approach and departure angles, not yuge on the 4door concept unless we're gonna bring the TravelAll into the game. The Terra/ Wagonmaster with the Scout II roof line just looks odd. I would not try for a Travellete that thing was quite large with 4 doors and a full bed though maybe down the line.

The Traveller had a liftgate though the tailgate from the Scout II was a direct match. The liftgate poses a problem when the roof is removed due to everything behind the rear seat blowing down the highway. As well the roof and bulkhead to the Terra was a direct fit into the scout/traveller. I've seen many Scout VIN's with the Terra Top and Bulkhead conversions. This would be possible in the concept drawings only if both vehicles maintained the same door count (2 or 4 for both).

I think if the SUV goes liftgate then the tailgate from the truck should be a direct fit for those that just discarded the hardtop after a few years of ownership. The LESS you put into the Scout the lower the buy in cost which will reach the people who will actually take it off the asphalt. I would suggest a very BARE but affordable platform that customers can build as they go, like a rolling project.

 

[TaconicBear]

The lines on the SUV look good with the approach and departure angles, not yuge on the 4door concept unless we're gonna bring the TravelAll into the game. The Terra/ Wagonmaster with the Scout II roof line just looks odd. I would not try for a Travellete that thing was quite large with 4 doors and a full bed though maybe down the line.

The Traveller had a liftgate though the tailgate from the Scout II was a direct match. The liftgate poses a problem when the roof is removed due to everything behind the rear seat blowing down the highway. As well the roof and bulkhead to the Terra was a direct fit into the scout/traveller. I've seen many Scout VIN's with the Terra Top and Bulkhead conversions. This would be possible in the concept drawings only if both vehicles maintained the same door count (2 or 4 for both).

I think if the SUV goes liftgate then the tailgate from the truck should be a direct fit for those that just discarded the hardtop after a few years of ownership. The LESS you put into the Scout the lower the buy in cost which will reach the people who will actually take it off the asphalt. I would suggest a very BARE but affordable platform that customers can build as they go, like a rolling project.

I like your ideas of direct-fit modularity, allowing certain items like tailgates, bulkheads, tops to be swapped in/out or refitted as the needs of the owner change. Those big clamshell rear doors definitely have limited purpose and appeal. As you state going topless with one of them leaves you very exposed in the rear. They may be fine for camping with one of those attachable tents, but get in the way seriously on a run to the lumber yard. The tailgate/lift gate works best for the lumber yard, and I can think of times I would really have liked a split tailgate that swings out to the side. Not every owner will want to invest in an alternative back doors, but for those who find them useful having them as easily swappable modules (a few bolts and a wire connector) would make life easier. The same concept likely could be applied elsewhere, doors, long/short tops, and seats come to mind.

 

[prattm1964]

The problem I see is, this is 2023 and we're looking at a design that will come out in 26 probably 27. The average customer, not IH Scout customer, the normal people they will have to sell to, to make is a success. Those people are not going to want all the old design elements from the previous life. Unfortunately, the masses will have to be entertained with all the gadgets and need things (air bags and other safety elements) that weren't around back in 1960 through 1980. By the time the design is confined with all of it, you won't see removable doors or roof. Not sure how they would build a bare but affordable Scout that you can modify on an EV platform. I hope they can, but modern customers being what they are, I doubt it.

 

[R1TVT]

Yes, sales of the new Scout will be key. This might sound harsh, but I was born in 1969, so I can say it. SM would not survive catering solely to an audience of aging 1960-1980 former Scout owners with limited buying power and a severely restricted number of future purchases. The key will be to retain elements of the old Scout in the new truck iterations, and not build replicas. SM is also mandated by regulations (NHTSA) that exist for the protection of all occupants and passengers. So, it is not so much the modern customer, but modern safety requirements that may influence how things like doors and roofs may be implemented (for the safety of drivers and occupants, as well as for the protection of SM as an OEM). I agree with your point - and it is a given that the new Scout will be a daily driver for many Scout buyers based on the initial drops and everything you read here. I would characterize this as an "opportunity" not a problem.

 

[TaconicBear]

Yes, sales of the new Scout will be key. This might sound harsh, but I was born in 1969, so I can say it. SM would not survive catering solely to an audience of aging 1960-1980 former Scout owners with limited buying power and a severely restricted number of future purchases. The key will be to retain elements of the old Scout in the new truck iterations, and not build replicas. SM is also mandated by regulations (NHTSA) that exist for the protection of all occupants and passengers. So, it is not so much the modern customer, but modern safety requirements that may influence how things like doors and roofs may be implemented (for the safety of drivers and occupants, as well as for the protection of SM as an OEM). I agree with your point - and it is a given that the new Scout will be a daily driver for many Scout buyers based on the initial drops and everything you read here. I would characterize this as an "opportunity" not a problem.

I fear you R1TVT and prattm1964 are all too correct. But if you are building a vehicle specifically sold for off-roading shouldn't there be concessions from the nanny state like a kill switch on the air bags (maybe it would come back on at >10mph). And other accommodations to the use? I expect the folks who would take then to Moab and such places will find and share the work-arounds soon enough - unless things are too integrated in the computer. Remember, three years from now, Scout Motors will not be bringing out what we would call a new SUV and Pickup, they will be bringing out two new computer models equipped with seats, wheels, and a steering wheel -- in essence a very elegant tablet. That's what my 2023 Tundra is already.

 

[R1TVT]

Does your 2023 Tundra have a nanny state kill switch? I would guess that this may be something frowned upon when it comes to safety standards.

 

[TaconicBear]

Does your 2023 Tundra have a nanny state kill switch? I would guess that this may be something frowned upon when it comes to safety standards.

No but I believe there is a real difference - despite the advertizing. The Tundra has the "off road package" and a "crawl mode" which does fit it better for construction sites and mountain forest roads, etc. But certainly not the kind of "off-road" Jeff Ismail does with his vehicles. It all depends on whether the SM vehicle is going to hit in the "off road" definition. If the use is rock crawling I'd definitely want a kill switch because having the bags go off would be a greater hazard than getting jostled when dropping off a rock. That's why I suggest that the kill switch be reset when speed went over 10mph -- my former Tundra locked the doors at 15mph sorta for the same reason.

I watched a fellow load vehicles in an enclosed transport van last week. Believe me you have to be small, skinny, and agile for that job. Lots of time driving with the door slightly open or him hanging out the window to get exact placement. Especially with $million cars. Some newer cars slam on the brakes the instant he leans over far enough to look out the window, not enough weight in the seat. And the extra time to put on the seatbelt every time he gets in because it won't move without (even at <1mph). || I was always taught that you never wear your seatbelt when backing down a boat ramp. A precaution that allowed quicker escape if something goes wrong. Some vehicles won't move without seat belt latched. Or you can't put your tools, of duffle bag on the back seat because the weight sensor demands the seat belt be extended and fastened. Most of the Nanny controls are fine for average citizen doing average things, but there are numerous special tasks and conditions in which they are either unhelpful or actually dangerous. There needs to be a method or mechanism that will individually and temporarily disable some of them for the limited instance to get a job done.

 

[J Alynn]

No but I believe there is a real difference - despite the advertizing. The Tundra has the "off road package" and a "crawl mode" which does fit it better for construction sites and mountain forest roads, etc. But certainly not the kind of "off-road" Jeff Ismail does with his vehicles. It all depends on whether the SM vehicle is going to hit in the "off road" definition. If the use is rock crawling I'd definitely want a kill switch because having the bags go off would be a greater hazard than getting jostled when dropping off a rock. That's why I suggest that the kill switch be reset when speed went over 10mph -- my former Tundra locked the doors at 15mph sorta for the same reason.

I watched a fellow load vehicles in an enclosed transport van last week. Believe me you have to be small, skinny, and agile for that job. Lots of time driving with the door slightly open or him hanging out the window to get exact placement. Especially with $million cars. Some newer cars slam on the brakes the instant he leans over far enough to look out the window, not enough weight in the seat. And the extra time to put on the seatbelt every time he gets in because it won't move without (even at <1mph). || I was always taught that you never wear your seatbelt when backing down a boat ramp. A precaution that allowed quicker escape if something goes wrong. Some vehicles won't move without seat belt latched. Or you can't put your tools, of duffle bag on the back seat because the weight sensor demands the seat belt be extended and fastened. Most of the Nanny controls are fine for average citizen doing average things, but there are numerous special tasks and conditions in which they are either unhelpful or actually dangerous. There needs to be a method or mechanism that will individually and temporarily disable some of them for the limited instance to get a job done.

The on/off option is great in theory as you seem to be a logical person but the first idiot that turns it off, does something stupid (simply tipping over doing rock crawling as a novice) will be suing SM until they are out of business. Remember there is a reason McDonalds has a hot warning label on their coffee cups and some dumb-ass is childless but living large off his millions from the Golden Arches.

 

[Lake]

Place your bets on the market you want. There are already enough Jeeps and Broncos with their $80K price tags. There are already enough trucks to haul the Empire State building up Mt Everest (while watching your favorite series on the 32" entertainment screen that takes up the entire dashboard (which also run $80K+) Choose the Scout heritage. Choose the practical performance that will build a new generation of fans that will tell their grandchildren about their iconic ride.

Take a page from the Jeep Wrangler camp. I've owned three Wranglers over the decades (CJ, TJ, JK) and the "charm" of the Jeep is the ability to make it your own. I suspect that a good portion of Jeep Wrangler owners will modify their ride in some way or another. While I'm not advocating for that level of "mods", I would think that the development of a "modular Scout" base would be helpful for both development (build a base model unit that you can add your frills to if you want), but also the die-hard fans (and future fans!!) who would love to see this as a platform play.

For example, two models (2-door, 4-door) with a single base powertrain which is beefy enough to allow for ACTUAL off-roading but perhaps not beefy enough to challenge your neighbor to a race in his Tesla or challenge your neighbor to a tug-o-war in his F150. The Scout brand screamed practicality for decades and that allowed its charm and utility to win the hearts of so many. Start with the basics and build something aftermarket-friendly to allow those 16 year-olds (and those who are still 16 at heart) to build their off-roading monster with lights, tents, winches, and massive tires, while still allowing the mass-market to enjoy a sturdy, stylish, and practical vehicle.

 

[IdahoJOAT]

Place your bets on the market you want. There are already enough Jeeps and Broncos with their $80K price tags. There are already enough trucks to haul the Empire State building up Mt Everest (while watching your favorite series on the 32" entertainment screen that takes up the entire dashboard (which also run $80K+) Choose the Scout heritage. Choose the practical performance that will build a new generation of fans that will tell their grandchildren about their iconic ride.

Take a page from the Jeep Wrangler camp. I've owned three Wranglers over the decades (CJ, TJ, JK) and the "charm" of the Jeep is the ability to make it your own. I suspect that a good portion of Jeep Wrangler owners will modify their ride in some way or another. While I'm not advocating for that level of "mods", I would think that the development of a "modular Scout" base would be helpful for both development (build a base model unit that you can add your frills to if you want), but also the die-hard fans (and future fans!!) who would love to see this as a platform play.

For example, two models (2-door, 4-door) with a single base powertrain which is beefy enough to allow for ACTUAL off-roading but perhaps not beefy enough to challenge your neighbor to a race in his Tesla or challenge your neighbor to a tug-o-war in his F150. The Scout brand screamed practicality for decades and that allowed its charm and utility to win the hearts of so many. Start with the basics and build something aftermarket-friendly to allow those 16 year-olds (and those who are still 16 at heart) to build their off-roading monster with lights, tents, winches, and massive tires, while still allowing the mass-market to enjoy a sturdy, stylish, and practical vehicle.

I will say it would be amazing to see a stripped down, vinyl floor, Bluetooth only radio, manual seat, bare bones SM Scout for like $35K brand new...

There'd be Bronco, Jeep, Ram, Chevy, Toyota fans all clamoring for one.

They'd all say, "Too affordable not to. I go to dinner in the truck. I do everything else in the Scout."

 

[OleScout]

I will say it would be amazing to see a stripped down, vinyl floor, Bluetooth only radio, manual seat, bare bones SM Scout for like $35K brand new...

There'd be Bronco, Jeep, Ram, Chevy, Toyota fans all clamoring for one.

They'd all say, "Too affordable not to. I go to dinner in the truck. I do everything else in the Scout."

There's probably a reason the demand was high for the base Bronco which Ford recently discontinued because demand exceeded supply.

 

[Bodie]

I don’t think it was because demand for the base was so high. It’s because the demand for more expensive (profitable) trims was high enough to drop it. Why offer a $30k model when you can’t build enough $50k+ models?