Agreed. Chassis tuning would be a lot simpler with a similar weight. 90KWh of battery weighs 1,000+lbs though. The 6.2L V8 in my sedan weighs 400lbs, and I have to suspect the peripherals supporting it weigh less than 600lbs. With a notably smaller ICE in the Harvester, I'm curious what balance Scout tries to take, easier chassis tuning or weight savings.
Speculation Alert - possible Harvester Engine Choices
- Thread starter mike_scout
- Start date
-
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.
This space is a bit more compact because it also has to provide part of the departure angle and the thickness of the rear skid plate. there also needs to be a gap between the engine and the floor of the vehicle/truck bed.
Yeah, that is tight. Unfortunately we are unlikely to get answers soon, since production is so far off.
It would be nice to at least get a ballpark KW output because below 40 KW will definitely be a big turnoff for a lot of people.
I don't think many people really want something with relatively more limited output than a BMW i3 Rex.
This is NOT necessarily true and probably not. Electric motors don’t care whether current is coming from a battery or from a generator.
Just throwing another wrinkle into this.
The Edmunds youtube video about it, the guy talking said he spoke with the some of the Scout employees at the event, and it doesn't even sound like they're hard set on a location for it yet. So we all might be just tilting and windmills so to speak.
About the weight.
All we "know" is the minimum, and maximum ranges for the Harvester, and pure BEV versions of the Scouts. And if we work with those, we can give upper/lower boundaries for battery size, and then weight.
Harvester has "up to 150 miles of EV range". If we assume 2miles per KW, that means the smallest (effective, not gross) battery has to be at least ~75kw. It could also be larger, as we don't know how low the battery gets in that "up to 150 miles" condition (like if thats down to 5% battery, but it could also kick in much earlier like ~50%)
BEV has "up to 350 miles of EV range". If we assume 2 miles per KW, that means the effective size of the pack must be at least ~175kw.
That means that the maximum difference between the harvester battery pack, and largest battery pack, has to be about 100kw (again, ballpark).
According to the internets, a 100kw battery pack can weigh ~700-1300lbs (the 99.8KW one in the Kia EV9 is ~1250lb). So ~1000lbs worth of battery pack weight savings between the Harvester and largest battery pack option.
The VW engine everyone keeps talking about ( the EA-211) weighs about ~215lbs. And gas weighs 6.3lbs per gallon. Easy math puts ~15 gallons at ~100lbs. With those two portions weighing ~315lbs, I'd guess that the whole 3 cylinder setup would weigh close to 500lbs. Which means I do think that the Harvester will weigh less than the largest BEV version, likely by 500lbs or so.
The Edmunds youtube video about it, the guy talking said he spoke with the some of the Scout employees at the event, and it doesn't even sound like they're hard set on a location for it yet. So we all might be just tilting and windmills so to speak.
About the weight.
All we "know" is the minimum, and maximum ranges for the Harvester, and pure BEV versions of the Scouts. And if we work with those, we can give upper/lower boundaries for battery size, and then weight.
Harvester has "up to 150 miles of EV range". If we assume 2miles per KW, that means the smallest (effective, not gross) battery has to be at least ~75kw. It could also be larger, as we don't know how low the battery gets in that "up to 150 miles" condition (like if thats down to 5% battery, but it could also kick in much earlier like ~50%)
BEV has "up to 350 miles of EV range". If we assume 2 miles per KW, that means the effective size of the pack must be at least ~175kw.
That means that the maximum difference between the harvester battery pack, and largest battery pack, has to be about 100kw (again, ballpark).
According to the internets, a 100kw battery pack can weigh ~700-1300lbs (the 99.8KW one in the Kia EV9 is ~1250lb). So ~1000lbs worth of battery pack weight savings between the Harvester and largest battery pack option.
The VW engine everyone keeps talking about ( the EA-211) weighs about ~215lbs. And gas weighs 6.3lbs per gallon. Easy math puts ~15 gallons at ~100lbs. With those two portions weighing ~315lbs, I'd guess that the whole 3 cylinder setup would weigh close to 500lbs. Which means I do think that the Harvester will weigh less than the largest BEV version, likely by 500lbs or so.
I appreciate your perspective, Bodie, but stating that "This is "NOT necessarily true and probably not" is your opinion.
What I am stating (and what was actually & factually verbalized by Scott) is not opinion:
" The other critical thing, its still an EV. it's got the packaging of an EV, you still have the frunk, you still have all the packaging. The battery WILL DRIVE BOTH OF THE AXLES, and of course the engine (meaning the gas harvester engine) will power the battery. So this gives you the proper EV experience, with of course, the generator"
-Minute 39 from Scott Keough
You can choose not to listen to what was said, or try to twist it into something that it is not somehow, but given the space restrictions and size of the Harvester gas engine (also shown by Scout in the diagram), I would probably tend to err on the side of Scout as opposed to speculation.
What I am stating (and what was actually & factually verbalized by Scott) is not opinion:
" The other critical thing, its still an EV. it's got the packaging of an EV, you still have the frunk, you still have all the packaging. The battery WILL DRIVE BOTH OF THE AXLES, and of course the engine (meaning the gas harvester engine) will power the battery. So this gives you the proper EV experience, with of course, the generator"
-Minute 39 from Scott Keough
You can choose not to listen to what was said, or try to twist it into something that it is not somehow, but given the space restrictions and size of the Harvester gas engine (also shown by Scout in the diagram), I would probably tend to err on the side of Scout as opposed to speculation.
Yes, it is my opinion. Never said it was known fact but what Scott said does not mean current from the harvester never goes to the motors and only goes into the battery 100% of the time. That is your opinion. Also, he’s a CEO, not the propulsion engineer, and getting into all the possible operating modes is probably not what he wanted to do during the intro.
I stated nothing of my opinion, I only reiterated and DIRECTLY quoted what was said above by Scout & Scott, while attempting to inform the OP's of the way a generator would work to provide energy (to a battery pack).
My opinion doesn't matter anyway, I just wouldn't want to mislead anyone based on misinformation or speculation. That is why I wrote the quote above in his exact words and what was stated live, and I provided reference to where it was stated, and I provided reference to when it was stated in the video.
Sorry, but that is not "opinion".
My opinion doesn't matter anyway, I just wouldn't want to mislead anyone based on misinformation or speculation. That is why I wrote the quote above in his exact words and what was stated live, and I provided reference to where it was stated, and I provided reference to when it was stated in the video.
Sorry, but that is not "opinion".
Again. He's just bending over backwards to explain to a general audience that it still functions like an EV, and the Gas Engine is NOT physically driving the wheels. People get so easily confused by Hybrids, PHEVs, EREVs, Series, Parallel, etc...
They hear it has a gas engine and suddenly they think Prius.
At the end of the day the Harvester will enable 500 miles of range. And for the entire 500 miles we’ll have the awesome performance of two electric motors that can give you a 3.5 sec 0-60. That’s more than enough torque for towing, although the distance between charges will obviously be shorter. It might even be possible to run the Harvester and slowly charge while parked at a camp site in the middle of nowhere.
If all this is accomplished with a smaller engine, the vehicle can keep all its storage space!
If they were to use a bigger engine that takes up all the frunk space (or rear storage space) the vehicle would be much less useful to me. Thankfully that’s not what they are doing.
Correctly me if I’m wrong, but you’re saying any generator with less power than is needed to replace all the electricity used in driving is unacceptable to most people? The requirement is that the vehicle must be able to run indefinitely and at full speed just off the power from the gas engine? So just keep stopping for gas and you can just keep going?
Would you give up the frunk for a much bigger generator? Because at that point you more-or-less have a gas vehicle with a bit of electric. Scout say they are making an electric vehicle with a bit of gas.
If the engine is small and squeezed into the tiny space they have shown it squeezed into, I think it is the right balance, because the storage space adds utility and that little engine will be worth its weight in gold when it is needed. Utility, practicality and versatility are everything.
In an off-roading scenario, where the vehicle is moving very slowly and covering short distances, the Harvester (if it’s running) could probably be adding charge. So if you have a few jerry cans you could probably explore a wilderness area for weeks and leave with a battery that’s fully charged! All with a small engine tucked behind the rear skid plate! I think it’s potentially awesome.
I think it's a hard sell when they can get a Ramcharger, that could drive 80 MPH all day with just putting in gas, after the battery is flat without a care in the world.
In the tradeoff between Frunk vs Full use on gasoline, I'd bet most would choose the latter.
I'm thinking they need to get around 50 KWh out of their genset, to not make it feel too much like a penalty, when they exhaust the battery. You don't want to lower the bar below the i3 Rex.
It seems there is a split on opinions about how they want the vehicle to perform, and I'm curious which direction Scout will take.
Group 1: Wants an EV around town with 150 miles of range, that functions roughly like a gas vehicle when on the open road (yes, I know the difference between the hybrid types). This group wants a generator that can keep up with electricity demands (capable of keeping the battery state of charge more or less at the same level at least). Which means the use case while on the freeway is stopping to fill a tank with gas, as charging wouldn't be necessary.
Group 2: Wants an EV that operates like an EV at all times, where the generator is not meant to keep up with the electricity demands (ie, it fills the battery, but slower than the battery is being emptied). This means on a long road trip you would primarily be stopping to charge (and likely refill with fuel as well).
We won't know which way Scout is planning to implement this for a while. And as long as we get details about how it will work with enough advance time to think about it (ie, if people would want to cancel their order, or switch from Harvester to BEV, or BEV to Harvester), that is fine.
I will say that personally, all the people I know who are interested in the harvester range extender (buddies, parents, just other people I've spoken with about it... not like a poll or anything official) are all in group 1. I believe most of them are cross shopping it with the Ramcharger, and Ram has already stated that the engine is intended to keep up with electricity demands while on the highway. But I also totally understand group 2's perspective. The difficulty is we have little data to go on, which means we're all trying to dissect exactly what was said/shown, with our own takes/perspectives on top of it.
I'm in this camp. I just would find it hard to believe that they intend to put a smaller generator in it than the i3 REX or Volt.
I'd guess between 40-80kw or thereabouts. Not enough to tow up a perpetual grade (uphill both ways right?
), but enough to drive at the flow of traffic on the highway in most conditions. Smaller than that would require me to think a bit more, and see how I'd handle road trips. Mostly I'd worry about the annoyance/logistics of charging and fueling up each stop (getting kids in/out of the car multiple times could be a pain). Not saying its a hard no, just... would have to make sure it works before I commit.
I wouldn't even say that is what they want. It's more that they expect that's all Scout can do with available space and are willing to accept it.
I find it hard to understand why you keep comparing to the i3 Rex, since the performance will be nothing like the i3 Rex...
I have no dog in the hunt though, since I will most definitely choose a pure EV over a hybrid anything, any day of the week - particularly with an 800V architecture and all of the recent battery improvements
Ugh! New guy here that just went through this whole thread and now my head's spinning. Okay, simply put:
An Engine is not the same thing as a motor. ALL variants of the Terra and Traveler are 100% Electric Motor driven. A motor is a device that converts electrical energy into mechanical motion. The batteries provide the electrical energy to power the motor. I'd be so inclined to say that the motors driving all 4 variants (Terra EV and Terra REV and Traveler EV and Traveler REV) are all exactly the same (front/rear differences aside.)
So, all things being equal on the motor front, the batteries are your performance point. Larger/higher capacity batteries have the potential to store greater amounts of energy. That translates to better performance. So, we know the REV will have a smaller battery to accommodate the engine and tank. Hate to be the bearer of bad news, but the 3.5sec 0-60 is the EV only. The REV will have reduced performance.
Now, the aforementioned engine mentioned in taking up that battery space? It converts chemical energy (fuel) into mechanical energy that drives a generator that makes the electricity to charge the "smaller" battery. That's all. It does nothing more. But the REV is still at the smaller battery disadvantage. There is no mechanical connection to the drivetrain like in a hybrid.
We've all seen the memes of the Tesla's with a Honda generator strapped to the back, plugged in to the car. Well, that's essentially what we have here. The engine size and output effect the rate at which you produce electricity, which effects the rate that batteries charge. Bigger doesn't always mean better however, because there are laws of diminishing return in effect here: Added weight reduces efficiency and requires additional chemical energy, which offsets its purpose, so finding that sweet spot is crucial.
And yes, technically it's a REEV but that just reads weird so I'm sticking with REV
An Engine is not the same thing as a motor. ALL variants of the Terra and Traveler are 100% Electric Motor driven. A motor is a device that converts electrical energy into mechanical motion. The batteries provide the electrical energy to power the motor. I'd be so inclined to say that the motors driving all 4 variants (Terra EV and Terra REV and Traveler EV and Traveler REV) are all exactly the same (front/rear differences aside.)
So, all things being equal on the motor front, the batteries are your performance point. Larger/higher capacity batteries have the potential to store greater amounts of energy. That translates to better performance. So, we know the REV will have a smaller battery to accommodate the engine and tank. Hate to be the bearer of bad news, but the 3.5sec 0-60 is the EV only. The REV will have reduced performance.
Now, the aforementioned engine mentioned in taking up that battery space? It converts chemical energy (fuel) into mechanical energy that drives a generator that makes the electricity to charge the "smaller" battery. That's all. It does nothing more. But the REV is still at the smaller battery disadvantage. There is no mechanical connection to the drivetrain like in a hybrid.
We've all seen the memes of the Tesla's with a Honda generator strapped to the back, plugged in to the car. Well, that's essentially what we have here. The engine size and output effect the rate at which you produce electricity, which effects the rate that batteries charge. Bigger doesn't always mean better however, because there are laws of diminishing return in effect here: Added weight reduces efficiency and requires additional chemical energy, which offsets its purpose, so finding that sweet spot is crucial.
And yes, technically it's a REEV but that just reads weird so I'm sticking with REV
Nice summary. I’m Group 1 because a Group 2 vehicle seems pointless to me. Who would want a vehicle you have to find charging for and still have to put gas in? I would just get the full BEV to avoid all the extra complexity of the generator.It seems there is a split on opinions about how they want the vehicle to perform, and I'm curious which direction Scout will take.
Group 1: Wants an EV around town with 150 miles of range, that functions roughly like a gas vehicle when on the open road (yes, I know the difference between the hybrid types). This group wants a generator that can keep up with electricity demands (capable of keeping the battery state of charge more or less at the same level at least). Which means the use case while on the freeway is stopping to fill a tank with gas, as charging wouldn't be necessary.
Group 2: Wants an EV that operates like an EV at all times, where the generator is not meant to keep up with the electricity demands (ie, it fills the battery, but slower than the battery is being emptied). This means on a long road trip you would primarily be stopping to charge (and likely refill with fuel as well).
We won't know which way Scout is planning to implement this for a while. And as long as we get details about how it will work with enough advance time to think about it (ie, if people would want to cancel their order, or switch from Harvester to BEV, or BEV to Harvester), that is fine.
I will say that personally, all the people I know who are interested in the harvester range extender (buddies, parents, just other people I've spoken with about it... not like a poll or anything official) are all in group 1. I believe most of them are cross shopping it with the Ramcharger, and Ram has already stated that the engine is intended to keep up with electricity demands while on the highway. But I also totally understand group 2's perspective. The difficulty is we have little data to go on, which means we're all trying to dissect exactly what was said/shown, with our own takes/perspectives on top of it.
I'm in this camp. I just would find it hard to believe that they intend to put a smaller generator in it than the i3 REX or Volt.
I'd guess between 40-80kw or thereabouts. Not enough to tow up a perpetual grade (uphill both ways right?
I'm hopeful they use something large enough to provide enough charge capacity to keep power to the wheels as long as there's fuel in the tank. i.e. Ramcharger rex or Edison motorsSpeculation Alert!
As we eagerly await more details on the new Scout, there’s plenty of buzz around potential engine configurations. Kicking off this thread with two likely contenders for powering this rugged compact’s battery pack:
Three-Cylinder from the VW Parts Bin: With VW’s reputation for efficient, punchy engines, a three-cylinder variant could deliver solid torque and fuel economy as a compact generator, perfect for off-road adventures.
4-Cylinder Flat Engine, Possibly a Boxster Derivative: This compact, flat design would be ideal for a rear-engine setup, optimizing balance and efficiency. Known for its punchy performance in the Boxster, a naturally aspirated version could be a perfect engine generator for the battery pack – blending classic VW engineering with Scout heritage!
Imagine the Scout with the heart of a Boxster supporting the battery pack – a true mix of rugged utility and sporty dynamics!What’s your bet on the Scout’s engine for use in the Harvester optioned rigs?
If you undersize the generator as some are suggesting will happen, then you will have similar downsides as the undersized Generator in the Rex, which could be limited to 45 MPH on long uphill grades, or trouble maintaining highways speeds on the flat with a strong headwind, with an exhausted battery.
The output of the generator is a critical spec, that will determine how capable the RE mode is.
Similar threads
- Sticky
