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

[J Alynn]

My apologies if I came across as brusque. The history I have with the vintage vehicles draws deep emotions from me. The old vintage IHC's are everything today's bland and overpriced appliances aren't, and the chance of seeing a finalized vehicle I'll be able to both modify and maintain myself in any way as personally or as enjoyably as my current binder, gets more slim with every concession to the "modern standard BEV" that Scout Motors needs to take in order to appeal to the masses and conform to standards that (to many) seem unnecessary and inhibiting to a vehicle aimed to Make You Feel More Free.

IIRC the original scout went for $1,800 out the door in 1961, with inflation that's about $17k in current dollars, and you could find a rusted hulk in a field & glom any working parts that were left for a song. Ignition quit working? Wire in a push-button and carry on.

I guess a conversion for my current rig is the best overall answer to my particular gripes. Our newest family vehicle is an 07. I've had the displeasure of driving quite a few newer vehicles whether loaners or rentals, and I found that driver engagement and overall enjoyment when behind the wheel was just... gone, and it got worse as time went on.
I can tell what RPM my 800 is hitting by what particular interior part is rattling or buzzing... I can feel the road & driving conditions in the wheel, shifter, and unboosted brake pedal. It's a driving experience that takes all of my attention the way no modern transport does, and it's exhilarating to still learn new things as I drive it two years and 7k miles later. 30mph in my 800 on a twisty, Redwood-dappled and neglected Tarmac with my wing windows (closed) whistling in the crosswind, knowing I could go anywhere and back reliably (and we always got ours ridiculously cheap, so I really can't compare what we've paid for our three over their life spans) is what driving a Scout has always been. From Falling through a frozen beaver pond in the Smoky Bear MN State Forest, to family trips to the Big City as a kid, ours truly went everywhere.

I hear what you are saying and appreciate your point of view but challenge your thinking based on the new Broncos. Here is an example of a modem take on a similar heritage based vehicle. I’m on the bronco6G forum on a regular basis and don’t believe I’ve ever seen debates over the use of modern day electronics/CPUs to make the vehicle better or worse based on the success the Bronco has had. To me it’s a great balance. I do agree that basic functions like volume and heat heat could be manual controls-or at a minimum a one-touch feature to operate on a touch screen. Going 2 levels into a tablet to get basic functions is really annoying. Maybe the trick is things like heat/cool is on the haptic screen but the graphic is a traditional slide bar so you touch and slide rather than just touching the haptic screen. More interactive. Also tie it to voice command so those who don’t want to fidget can just voice the commands.
For me it’s finding the easiest pathways to make various commands tolerable and if tactile can be made I prefer it.
Jamie mentioned in another thread about accelerator pedal feeling manual/physical while it is still all electronically controlled. Traditional pedals keep us happy as drivers because we aren’t thinking “electronic”. Again-I think it comes down to a balance and giving us an experience that feels like we want. Ultimately there will be buyers who like the retro and have no ties to the original scouts and they will probably expect electric and modern like Tesla and Scout needs to consider that as well.

 

[luakgc]

Snap. I've read Bios of some of the Scout team... I'm not too worried about their abilities and intention in regards to designing this vehicle. I think Scout has a real opportunity to redefine what a Utility is. If you do the opposite of what literally every other automaker is doing right now you'd knock the leather off the ball. There's been nothing exciting aside from the new bronco to come down the pike in decades... aside from the wrangler (and to a small extent the Renegade) Jeep's product line is mournful. People are tired of dull, boring appliances in their grayscale colors. It's hard to even differentiate between interiors now unless there's an obvious badge showing.

I'll say one thing... after seeing a couple vids of teslas losing contol/ability to brake... it would be nice to have a physical disengagement/true neutral akin to having a clutch. I like being able to freewheel sometimes.

The idea of some wild colors would be amazing. International offered some funky choices from what I have read. Hopefully some oranges, blues, yellows, greens, and IH red!

 

[JPNess]

I really like the concept. I wonder if a actual lift gate / tail gate would be welcomed by the customers. A one piece lift gate does make it easier to load / unload items in the cargo area, however the tail gate is much welcomed for actual "tailgating", camping, gathering, etc. .. that said I admit to taking shelter from gentle rains by standing under the opened liftgate of a Scout Traveler. As far as the drive line... well let's see what direction it starts to go. Lots of options with electric powered platforms -- central motor driving individual wheel hydro motors, more traditional set-ups that are on the market now but more substantial and durable with better water forging capabilities.... All very interesting. Thanks for taking the legacy seriously while looking to the Future. The original Scout had several "first" along the way. It looks as if perhaps that part of the legacy may continue going forward as well. I hope there is some contributions to design and manufacturing from Navistar as that will go along way in making some of us feel more secure with the platform. With all the current and ongoing future designs with the larger trucks and Navistar Defense programs one can't help but think that some of that knowledge could be useful in bringing together the needed talent and experience for the all new Scout. Wishing the new scout team every success!!

I agree with the idea of the tailgate on both models. And also recommend a full sliding rear window on both models to better open up the cabin.

 

[Dogman]

I’m very excited about the initial designs. I’m partial to the suv version in particular.

I do want to ask: is there plans to open dedicated dealerships for this line? - or can we expect to see them sold and serviced at vw dealerships?

 

[IdahoJOAT]

I’m very excited about the initial designs. I’m partial to the suv version in particular.

I do want to ask: is there plans to open dedicated dealerships for this line? - or can we expect to see them sold and serviced at vw dealerships?

Great question.

 

[LastDayScout]

I’m very excited about the initial designs. I’m partial to the suv version in particular.

I do want to ask: is there plans to open dedicated dealerships for this line? - or can we expect to see them sold and serviced at vw dealerships?

Nothing has been confirmed from what I’ve read. But, the rumor is the Scouts might be sold direct like Tesla.

 

[Chris@ScoutMotors]

I agree with the idea of the tailgate on both models. And also recommend a full sliding rear window on both models to better open up the cabin.

I really like the concept. I wonder if a actual lift gate / tail gate would be welcomed by the customers. A one piece lift gate does make it easier to load / unload items in the cargo area, however the tail gate is much welcomed for actual "tailgating", camping, gathering, etc. .. that said I admit to taking shelter from gentle rains by standing under the opened liftgate of a Scout Traveler. As far as the drive line... well let's see what direction it starts to go. Lots of options with electric powered platforms -- central motor driving individual wheel hydro motors, more traditional set-ups that are on the market now but more substantial and durable with better water forging capabilities.... All very interesting. Thanks for taking the legacy seriously while looking to the Future. The original Scout had several "first" along the way. It looks as if perhaps that part of the legacy may continue going forward as well. I hope there is some contributions to design and manufacturing from Navistar as that will go along way in making some of us feel more secure with the platform. With all the current and ongoing future designs with the larger trucks and Navistar Defense programs one can't help but think that some of that knowledge could be useful in bringing together the needed talent and experience for the all new Scout. Wishing the new scout team every success!!

The rear access is something that's actually been a heavy focus when it comes to designing the functionality and ergonomics of the vehicles, while also keeping in mind the heritage and original designs of the tailgate. However, at the moment, the way access to the rear will open hasn't been fully locked in yet, so there's still room to bring back some input and feedback on this.

At the moment, we haven't yet announced the driveline direction but will be dropping some new information here soon for the forum and community to be weighing in on, so stay tuned!

And appreciate the appreciation. The team here is a huge fan of the Scout, its heritage and legacy, and has been hyper-focused on how to maintain that heritage and legacy while still pushing the brand into the future. As you guys know, just re-building the Scouts from the '60s & '70s isn't realistic in today's world, a lot has changed in 40+ years of automotive manufacturing, legislation, and safety. But that doesn't mean maintaining and carrying on the essence of the vehicles isn't something we aren't heavily focused on, just figuring out how to best carry it forward while pushing the rest of the industry forward as well. As you mentioned, the original Scout had several "firsts" along the way and was a pioneer that essentially set the bar for a new class of vehicles, and we see an opportunity with these vehicles to keep that reputation alive.

 

[Chris@ScoutMotors]

Make a two-door available as an option please.

At the moment, a 2-door isn't in the plans. However, that's not to say that it isn't something that could be brought to the table for consideration in the future.

 

[Chris@ScoutMotors]

I hear what you are saying and appreciate your point of view but challenge your thinking based on the new Broncos. Here is an example of a modem take on a similar heritage based vehicle. I’m on the bronco6G forum on a regular basis and don’t believe I’ve ever seen debates over the use of modern day electronics/CPUs to make the vehicle better or worse based on the success the Bronco has had. To me it’s a great balance. I do agree that basic functions like volume and heat heat could be manual controls-or at a minimum a one-touch feature to operate on a touch screen. Going 2 levels into a tablet to get basic functions is really annoying. Maybe the trick is things like heat/cool is on the haptic screen but the graphic is a traditional slide bar so you touch and slide rather than just touching the haptic screen. More interactive. Also tie it to voice command so those who don’t want to fidget can just voice the commands.
For me it’s finding the easiest pathways to make various commands tolerable and if tactile can be made I prefer it.
Jamie mentioned in another thread about accelerator pedal feeling manual/physical while it is still all electronically controlled. Traditional pedals keep us happy as drivers because we aren’t thinking “electronic”. Again-I think it comes down to a balance and giving us an experience that feels like we want. Ultimately there will be buyers who like the retro and have no ties to the original scouts and they will probably expect electric and modern like Tesla and Scout needs to consider that as well.

I think you hit a solid point here, and something that's been a focal point when working on the interior: How to blend forward-looking tech with an intuitive and haptic approach. Having physical touch points is something we want in the vehicles, as well as making the features intuitive to use. The last thing you want to be doing when on a trail, or while driving in general, is navigating through a ton of menu layers or searching to find key features and controls, so we're keeping that as a focus when working on the interior here. It's all about the balance of new tech and features to keep moving forward, but also keeping it intuitive and maintaining some manual control.

 

[HillCountryCam]

The rear access is something that's actually been a heavy focus when it comes to designing the functionality and ergonomics of the vehicles, while also keeping in mind the heritage and original designs of the tailgate. However, at the moment, the way access to the rear will open hasn't been fully locked in yet, so there's still room to bring back some input and feedback on this.

At the moment, we haven't yet announced the driveline direction but will be dropping some new information here soon for the forum and community to be weighing in on, so stay tuned!

And appreciate the appreciation. The team here is a huge fan of the Scout, its heritage and legacy, and has been hyper-focused on how to maintain that heritage and legacy while still pushing the brand into the future. As you guys know, just re-building the Scouts from the '60s & '70s isn't realistic in today's world, a lot has changed in 40+ years of automotive manufacturing, legislation, and safety. But that doesn't mean maintaining and carrying on the essence of the vehicles isn't something we aren't heavily focused on, just figuring out how to best carry it forward while pushing the rest of the industry forward as well. As you mentioned, the original Scout had several "firsts" along the way and was a pioneer that essentially set the bar for a new class of vehicles, and we see an opportunity with these vehicles to keep that reputation alive.

As for the driveline, there isn't much to the "E" configuration. Currently there is three platforms in the works, one has few mechanical components compared to the traditional platform. Therefore, several parts will be eliminated, such as the following- transfercase, driveshafts, slip yoke connections, U joints and carrier bearings.

As of today the E-Beam is the best fit for the rear. However, more testing is needed to determine the right gear setup to propel the "e" platform as Magna and ZF need a few improvements.

 

[jtorre4272]

Good points and something we've talked about quite a bit (and continue to talk about!)

Cars were already increasingly becoming software-driven beyond just the engine CPU and transmission. A modern car typically has more than 10 different CPUs (sometimes far, far more) controlling everything from the engine parameters to the ABS braking system to the climate control system and on and on. This has been happening for the last 20 years and continues to happen at an even faster rate.

EVs in particular largely function on a software-based system. When the control systems on modern cars started to become mechanical devices that feed electronic systems (drive-by-wire) over the last 10-15 years, we've continued to move more and more towards software "involved" vehicles (right or wrong). So in the typical EV (and most ICE vehicles these days) when you press the accelerator pedal, it feeds electronic signals to a computer that not only determines how far you pressed the throttle but takes into consideration the rate of speed at which you press the throttle to try and determine exactly what you are asking for. This all happens in milliseconds, but it is the "fuzzy logic" the computer uses to figure out whether you want rapid maximum acceleration or a normal calm drive away from a stop sign. Same thing with braking as it helps the computer figure out whether the braking you are doing is "normal" or "panic" braking and reacts accordingly.

When it comes to controls on the interior it is the same thing. It logically makes sense that an offroad vehicle used in harsh conditions should probably have larger mechanical/old-school knobs that can be operated with gloves and such. Keep in mind those controls may still be electronic in nature and feed computer signals. That's just the way it is today. Moving controls to a screen give manufacturers the ability to simply redesign the controls if people aren't happy with them and it's a software update just like your phone. The same thing with any screen-based control system, anything you see on the screen could be changed and improved with just a software update whereas if the haptic buttons aren't going over well with customers, you can't really change them. So everything has its tradeoffs. I'm more old school and like a tradeoff between simple mechanical things to quickly change the heat or fan speed and also having the ability to do it through screen controls if I want.

Anyway, long post but hopefully that helps shed some light on what's going on when looking towards the future with new vehicle products.

Be careful with large touch screens, Jamie. Lets just say I have experience in this area and how they would work in an off road environment. Burying functions multiple layers deep in a big fancy screen may look good in publications, but does not bode well on an off road oriented product unless the user can configure their off road screen themselves, and have large portions of the display be dedicated to functions that support a driver's bouncing hand as they traverse obstacles and are trying to pay attention to the road...not the display. Some automakers like Tesla and Rivian have taken displays too far, and have eliminated the user friendliness of physical knobs and buttons. Those people clearly don't understand off road driving habits. It wouldn't surprise me if a possible electric bronco would ALWAYS have locker switches front and center on the dash, like they do today, for example. Some customer interface features just don't belong in a big screen. Tesla's implementations especially are way off the mark....no reason why a glove box opening button should be buried in a multi-layer control system, as an example...Rivian is a little better, but still in my opinion, a solution in search of a problem.

 

[jtorre4272]

As for the driveline, there isn't much to the "E" configuration. Currently there is three platforms in the works, one has few mechanical components compared to the traditional platform. Therefore, several parts will be eliminated, such as the following- transfercase, driveshafts, slip yoke connections, U joints and carrier bearings.

As of today the E-Beam is the best fit for the rear. However, more testing is needed to determine the right gear setup to propel the "e" platform as Magna and ZF need a few improvements.

While beam eAxles are relatively new to the retail sector, they are not new to the medium duty commercial sector. ZF and Magna are just two of a large number of manufacturers who have a considerable amount of resources developing the technology (I don't think Scout Motors would only ever consider a german supplier, unless they had a local plant, especially if Scout mfg is US based.) Don't forget Dana. The original axle supplier for Scouts, and a very well respected American axle company among automakers. Their portfolio of electrification solutions is very impressive, including solutions for steerable beam axles. But eAxles bring new challenges...The unsprung and offset mass for instance, is something to be very careful of as it can affect ride quality in a major way. You also have to design a reduction set with the motor to be as efficient as possible, yet still provide adequate ground clearance, suspension mounting points, etc. I can think of a half dozen other suppliers with electrification of beams front and center. The thing the suppliers are scared of is the desires by automakers to develop in house motor/inverter/gearbox systems just as they do today with the internal combustion engine. With Scout Motors having the VAG backing, I can't see why they wouldn't attempt to explore an in house solution either. It depends on the annual sales volumes they are targeting. Most OEM's have a breakpoint for what they call TARR analysis.

 

[jtorre4272]

I’m not sure that a discussion about why electronics are so commonplace should automatically lead to condemnation of a product that isn’t even built yet.

Truthfully (and realistically) there are very few “revolutionary” products in the automotive space. On one hand you are asking for full manual controls and cheap and rugged, yet expect the vehicle to be revolutionary and presumably competitive in the market from a features standpoint. Base models can be far more basic than higher trim levels. But given that this will be a BEV there are additional limitations in terms of what can be done. There is also an opportunity to do something new or different in the AWD BEV space as it is evolving technology. We’ve seen how Rivian and Hummer have done it and we will soon see how Jeep plans to do it with the Recon BEV. Meanwhile teams here are moving forward with our own idea on how to do it.

Let’s see how this goes. The new Scout can’t make everyone happy and we understand that. We will do our best to try though. One thing the team understands completely is the heritage and history of the brand and the pressure to live up to the name. We are excited.

The truth is, Jamie, you are right. This is a whitespace product, with Tesla and Rivian sharing their own ideas, Jeep doing soul searching on EV DNA, and your team of designers and engineers going down their own path of what makes an EV off road vehicle good. There is no true correct answer here. It's kind of like the beta vs vhs wars of the early 80s. In the auto industry, I have learned one universal truth...you can't make everyone happy. And while a minority of scout owners basically want a '76 Terra with an electric motor instead of an engine, the realities of the modern industry simply do not allow for it. We have to pick our battles.

 

[ColeAK]

The truth is, Jamie, you are right. This is a whitespace product, with Tesla and Rivian sharing their own ideas, Jeep doing soul searching on EV DNA, and your team of designers and engineers going down their own path of what makes an EV off road vehicle good. There is no true correct answer here. It's kind of like the beta vs vhs wars of the early 80s. In the auto industry, I have learned one universal truth...you can't make everyone happy. And while a minority of scout owners basically want a '76 Terra with an electric motor instead of an engine, the realities of the modern industry simply do not allow for it. We have to pick our battles.

Well said. I’m a Land Cruiser enthusiast (like mentioned earlier in the thread). On the Land Cruiser forums enthusiasts constantly mention how they want a solid F/R axle, diesel, with cloth seats, manual roll windows, analog controls,…. For <$40k Land cruiser brought to the US. Or mention how great it would be if Toyota would bring the 70 (still available in Africa, Asia, and Australia) to the US. And the counter point is always that approaching zero of those trucks would sell to US consumers.

 

[Jamie@ScoutMotors]

Be careful with large touch screens, Jamie. Lets just say I have experience in this area and how they would work in an off road environment. Burying functions multiple layers deep in a big fancy screen may look good in publications, but does not bode well on an off road oriented product unless the user can configure their off road screen themselves, and have large portions of the display be dedicated to functions that support a driver's bouncing hand as they traverse obstacles and are trying to pay attention to the road...not the display. Some automakers like Tesla and Rivian have taken displays too far, and have eliminated the user friendliness of physical knobs and buttons. Those people clearly don't understand off road driving habits. It wouldn't surprise me if a possible electric bronco would ALWAYS have locker switches front and center on the dash, like they do today, for example. Some customer interface features just don't belong in a big screen. Tesla's implementations especially are way off the mark....no reason why a glove box opening button should be buried in a multi-layer control system, as an example...Rivian is a little better, but still in my opinion, a solution in search of a problem.

I probably wasn’t clear enough in my response, but we are looking for balance on our end. Mechanical controls (as opposed to haptic touch sensitive) you can operate while bouncing around and with gloves on. Logical secondary controls as well.

In other words not so completely dependent on large screens. That said, decent off-road map integration with way finding tracing would be a nice feature to have as part of a screen package. Altitude measurements, grades, exportable data to share would all be neat features.

 

[OleScout]

At the moment, a 2-door isn't in the plans. However, that's not to say that it isn't something that could be brought to the table for consideration in the future.

If this is a poll, I veto this idea. Look at the market for the 2-DR Bronco. While many opt for the 4DR, the 2DR has a huge demand. In 2021, ~54k brinco were produced, ~11k which were 2DR. This accounted for ~20% of that market share. Keep in mind, a commodity restraint was present for the 2DR due to the hard tops so this may have resulted in a lower production volume for the 2DR.

One idea I think that give the two door look it duplicate the FJ Cruiser design, looks like a 2-door but serves as a 4 door.

 

[Chris@ScoutMotors]

Be careful with large touch screens, Jamie. Let’s just say I have experience in this area and how they would work in an off road environment. Burying functions multiple layers deep in a big fancy screen may look good in publications, but does not bode well on an off road oriented product unless the user can configure their off road screen themselves, and have large portions of the display be dedicated to functions that support a driver's bouncing hand as they traverse obstacles and are trying to pay attention to the road...not the display. Some automakers like Tesla and Rivian have taken displays too far, and have eliminated the user friendliness of physical knobs and buttons. Those people clearly don't understand off road driving habits. It wouldn't surprise me if a possible electric bronco would ALWAYS have locker switches front and center on the dash, like they do today, for example. Some customer interface features just don't belong in a big screen. Tesla's implementations especially are way off the mark....no reason why a glove box opening button should be buried in a multi-layer control system, as an example...Rivian is a little better, but still in my opinion, a solution in search of a problem.

For sure @jtorre4272. One thing the team has been prudent on is the intuitive nature and working function of the vehicle, both as a daily but also in the sense of an off-roader.

While the interior is still in the design phase so I can’t say too much on it for the moment (also don’t want to spoil everything up front), making sure it works well in both arenas is front of the mind. Will definitely take these notes back to the team in this week’s forum report.

 

[Chris@ScoutMotors]

Well said. I’m a Land Cruiser enthusiast (like mentioned earlier in the thread). On the Land Cruiser forums enthusiasts constantly mention how they want a solid F/R axle, diesel, with cloth seats, manual roll windows, analog controls,…. For <$40k Land cruiser brought to the US. Or mention how great it would be if Toyota would bring the 70 (still available in Africa, Asia, and Australia) to the US. And the counter point is always that approaching zero of those trucks would sell to US consumers.

For sure, I want to manage expectations that the new generation won’t be ‘60s and ‘70s era remakes/Restos, but rather a new generation of the Scout that aim to push the future of electric trucks and rugged SUVs, and define a new generation of vehicle, the same way the historic Scouts did in their time.

That being said, as @jtorre4272 mentioned, the electric truck and off-road arena is a bit of the Wild West right now, with no real playbook, which opens the possibilities up to how we can approach. We’re fortunate over here to be starting from the ground up, with the backing of a massive automotive group, which is giving us the opportunity to build these cars from the platform up, with all of the input we’ve been getting, in mind.

Getting this kind of feedback from our community and future customers so early on, gives us a solid chance to see what everyone is really pumped for. And while maybe not every feature can be added, it definitely provides some solid direction on what people are looking for and how we can engineer the best vehicles to cater to our community, customers, and the market.

 

[difficulTT]

One idea I think that give the two door look it duplicate the FJ Cruiser design, looks like a 2-door but serves as a 4 door.

Sounds like Scout should have at least 1 Honda Element on hand as a reference vehicle.

2 doors with 4 door usefulness - CHECK	Split tailgate - CHECK
Interior switchgear you can operate with a glove - CHECK	Even available as a manual - CHECK!

Not to mention the ridiculously good use of space inside and the funky orange color.

Honestly, I believe it would be a strong competitor in the "ruggedized" CUV category if Honda brought it back today.

 

[Jamie@ScoutMotors]

If this is a poll, I veto this idea. Look at the market for the 2-DR Bronco. While many opt for the 4DR, the 2DR has a huge demand. In 2021, ~54k brinco were produced, ~11k which were 2DR. This accounted for ~20% of that market share. Keep in mind, a commodity restraint was present for the 2DR due to the hard tops so this may have resulted in a lower production volume for the 2DR.

One idea I think that give the two door look it duplicate the FJ Cruiser design, looks like a 2-door but serves as a 4 door.

I think I mentioned it before but it is worth repeating. The conundrum manufacturers face right now is that we need the wheelbase of the 4-door for batteries. If we offer a two-door we couldn't reduce the wheelbase without sacrificing battery range or greatly reducing interior space by stacking batteries (has it's own separate issues). So do you offer a two-door with the same wheelbase as the 4-door? Are most that want a two-door also looking for a shorter wheelbase to go with it? What is the market potential for such a vehicle and how much investment is necessary to support it? Could battery technology improve enough to reduce battery size and make a two-door feasible? In the future it is likely, but how far into the future?

So while the team is in favor of a two-door and penciled it in, it won't be in the mix at least initially. Things could change of course, but let's see how this goes over the next couple years. The plan is to expand the model lineup in the future. This is just the beginning.