What kind of tech do you expect enabled in the car or interface?

[absentEE]

An awning like that in solar would weight at least 350-400 lbs more than the fabric one. So at least 500 lbs.

Did some rough math and it would be equivalent to about sixteen of those below or around ~100lbs in total for solar alone, the awnings referenced are between 44lbs-50lbs.




Though I may have overlooked something or erred somewhere, let me know.

 

[ColeAK]

The awnings May only weight ~50 lbs but the safari base racks (front runner, prinsu, ARB,…) are more like ~60-70 lbs. so to attach the bat wing to the truck is an additional >100 lbs.

A few things with solar panels. They give rated output only when the sun is at a 90 degree angle to the panel anything other than that you lose efficiency. The flexible panels must be mounted completely flat for them to give optimal output and they are only about 70-80% efficient at best, if they are curved at all can lose more then half the rated wattage. I considered them on my camper but went with ridged movable panels. Also Each group of panels on a different angle need their own string and charge controller or you lose major output. For example if you have 2x 400w (800w) panels to a controller, one is under full sun the other is shaded you will be getting 200w at best.



With limited real estate I was thinking using a traditional ridged as efficiency would be much better as they have a wider production angle that is the angle of the sun that they lose efficiency. For this I was thinking 125 ft^2 is ~6 400w panels at 47 lbs each. 2.4kw, ~282 lbs, just in panels, will need to wire as 3-4 strings with 3-4 charge controllers and a frame structure to support the weight. With the flexible ones they would weigh a lot less but would still need a ridged frame. So with the ones references same real estate gives 1.9 kw with more like 1.2 kw in the real world and you lose a ton when the sun is off the 90degree line (narrow production angle). So with the flex ones in the best sun conditions and optimal mount you would likely only make 3-4 kWh a day where with ridged could get up to 10-12kwh.

I’m not an electrician or electrical engineer, by bachelors is in engineering (structural/materials) but I never worked as an engineer. In the last 7 years I’ve self installed 3 solar systems on my stuff (9kw hybrid with battery bank on my house, and a 1.2 kw off grid with battery bank on my cabin, 900w on my camper, 600w for non camper camping ). Have also helped friends with 5 other installs.

 

[absentEE]

The awnings May only weight ~50 lbs but the safari base racks (front runner, prinsu, ARB,…) are more like ~60-70 lbs. so to attach the bat wing to the truck is an additional >100 lbs.

A few things with solar panels. They give rated output only when the sun is at a 90 degree angle to the panel anything other than that you lose efficiency. The flexible panels must be mounted completely flat for them to give optimal output and they are only about 70-80% efficient at best, if they are curved at all can lose more then half the rated wattage. I considered them on my camper but went with ridged movable panels. Also Each group of panels on a different angle need their own string and charge controller or you lose major output. For example if you have 2x 400w (800w) panels to a controller, one is under full sun the other is shaded you will be getting 200w at best.



With limited real estate I was thinking using a traditional ridged as efficiency would be much better as they have a wider production angle that is the angle of the sun that they lose efficiency. For this I was thinking 125 ft^2 is ~6 400w panels at 47 lbs each. 2.4kw, ~282 lbs, just in panels, will need to wire as 3-4 strings with 3-4 charge controllers and a frame structure to support the weight. With the flexible ones they would weigh a lot less but would still need a ridged frame. So with the ones references same real estate gives 1.9 kw with more like 1.2 kw in the real world and you lose a ton when the sun is off the 90degree line (narrow production angle). So with the flex ones in the best sun conditions and optimal mount you would likely only make 3-4 kWh a day where with ridged could get up to 10-12kwh.

I’m not an electrician or electrical engineer, by bachelors is in engineering (structural/materials) but I never worked as an engineer. In the last 7 years I’ve self installed 3 solar systems on my stuff (9kw hybrid with battery bank on my house, and a 1.2 kw off grid with battery bank on my cabin, 900w on my camper, 600w for non camper camping ). Have also helped friends with 5 other installs.

To avoid hijacking the whole thread I’ll just say although from a technical perspective I don’t see anything particularly challenging, I do think price could be an obstacle without solar coming down more.

 

[Chaparral]

CarPlay - The new CarPlay that Apple previewed that allows manufacturers to customize the interface with their own style and branding.

CarPlay is a must because it allows people to use various apps and services that they already have. It also allows people to use hundreds of apps, some made by small indy developers. No manufacturer could possibly integrate all these apps themselves.

CarPlay also gets updated regularly and will become more powerful as users upgrade their phones in the future.

It also enables a seamless transition between in-car and out-car life. For example, you can start directions when in the house to see how long it will take to get to destination, then when it is time to leave just get in the car and the phone connects and there is nothing to do, directions just show up in the car.

CarPlay also offer interactions with HomeKit. So for example, it puts a button on screen for the user to open their garage door when the user is approaching their home.

 

[ColeAK]

I have rented cars with CarPlay and the Google similar and don’t see the point of all the fuss. Yes it works, but isn’t life changing or anything I couldn’t live without. Didn’t really do anything my iPhone connected via Bluetooth to my 2013 LX570 doesn’t do.

 

[R1TVT]

The number one thing I love CarPlay for, is WAZE mirroring directly to the infotainment screen. The Nav is better than the native Nav in the Rivian and other vehicles I have driven. Hands-free ACP is the best of anything I have experienced in a car. I hope Rivian enables it. It would be really nice on the big screen too. The OEM still gets all the driver data, and consumers aren't ditching their phones. Not to mention reducing the burden on the OEM from a SW perspective. I say give the consumers choice. Let them have it, and then decide if they want to use it.

 

[lefty]

Completely agree with one caveat. Ensure that whatever design Scout comes up with has a way to disable CarPlay's autoplay from the inbound device. CarPlay in my wife's X5 is a NIGHTMARE as the phone overrides whatever she's doing once bluetooth is connected.

 

[Chaparral]

The technology I expect is this - actual switches and buttons for every function of the car that might be controlled whilst driving. These switches and buttons should as far as possible indicate state through there position so that the driver can know their state and operate them blindly, just by touch and feel. If it’s not possible to indicate state through position the physical tactile controls should indicate state visually. Preferably both.

The only controls accessed only through the main touchscreen should be
1) settings usually accessed when parked
2) switching between different data display screens
3) navigation
4) entertainment
5) Carplay/Android Auto

What ever you do, don’t follow Tesla and Rivian in adding stuff to the touchscreen that should be a physical switch or knob.

 

[JohnBills]

800-volt architecture or equivalent tech that allows for fast charging. I went from a Chevrolet Bolt EUV (one of the slowest charging) to a Genesis GV60 (one of the fastest charging) and I cannot stress the difference it makes on a road trip. It feels like a gas stop now! I want a Scout that let's me spend more time exploring and less time charging.

 

[JohnBills]

Physical buttons for primary functions. The reason I went with a GV60 over an Ioniq 5 is because the Genesis had a greater variety of physical buttons. Touch screens have their place and advantages but vehicle operation should be able to happen mostly by feel.

 

[JohnBills]

Cup holders that actually fit today's water bottles. I don't know why automakers stubbornly stick with tiny cupholders. If I'm exploring, I'm going to have a large bottle—something from Hydro Flask, Yeti, or Stanley. Too many vehicles can't accommodate these containers, especially for the rear passengers.

 

[JohnBills]

AC outlets on the interior and exterior of the vehicle. The great advantage of EVs is their ability to power a campsite or worksite. Would love to see easy access to power and perhaps even a 240V outlet like the F-150 Lightning has for job sites.

 

[JohnBills]

I'd love a sophisticated trip computer that handles range estimates, charging along my route, and battery conditioning to increase charging speed. If this could work alongside the map/routing apps from Apple and Android, that would be a huge plus. They make beautiful, easy to read maps. Stock nav systems just don't look and work as well.

 

[J Alynn]

Cup holders that actually fit today's water bottles. I don't know why automakers stubbornly stick with tiny cupholders. If I'm exploring, I'm going to have a large bottle—something from Hydro Flask, Yeti, or Stanley. Too many vehicles can't accommodate these containers, especially for the rear passengers.

100% agree on this. Make an insert as OEM aftermarket for those who need narrow fit for skinny items. Along with that, just rented a Subaru Ascent and car was underwhelming but one cool feature was second row doors had a bottle/cup holder at the top of door trim near hinge/back of front seat. This was really convenient vs reaching down next to the seat. That said, I was only using to-go cups and small bottles of water. Not sure if a hydro flask or Yeti would have fit but ergonically it was the perfect position.

 

[JohnBills]

100% agree on this. Make an insert as OEM aftermarket for those who need narrow fit for skinny items. Along with that, just rented a Subaru Ascent and car was underwhelming but one cool feature was second row doors had a bottle/cup holder at the top of door trim near hinge/back of front seat. This was really convenient vs reaching down next to the seat. That said, I was only using to-go cups and small bottles of water. Not sure if a hydro flask or Yeti would have fit but ergonically it was the perfect position.

That sounds brilliant. I love this!

 

[JohnBills]

This idea hit me this morning: with many owners customizing, aftermarket parts are going to make things tough for the range estimator and trip computer. I'm not an engineer, so I don't know how difficult this would be, but if a driver can easily input modifications—such as tire size, wheel size, suspension/body lifts, popular roof racks, etc.—that would be amazing. I don't know if a formula that calculates how range is affected by these things is possible, but that would be very cool, and is a feature no one has right now. It would be huge signal that Scout is truly behind the community.

I'd also love Scout to provide a tool online or in the app where you can see estimates of range impact based on the modifications an owner is looking into. That way you can decide what tradeoffs you're willing to make before you invest in aftermarket parts.

 

[Bodie]

An online tool/range estimator is a great idea to be able to know beforehand when considering modifications (or towing!) and trip planning.
In my experience with a PHEV, the estimator is pretty good at learning how you drive and adjusting the estimate to you and after any changes are made. The estimate will be pretty accurate after a few trips. I lost about 8% range when I switched to a non-ev tire (same brand, size and design, just not low resistance compound).
Assuming you don't change your driving style (or drivers) between trips, the big variables are weather (cold = worse, rain = worse) and terrain (more = worse, unless you're starting at the top).
Since my current car is a PHEV, I don't worry too much about it because when it runs out of trons, the engine comes on. If I only have a battery though, I'm going to need to be confident of the range based on where I'm going, how fast I want to go - speed kills range, and the weather along the route.
It would be nice if the vehicle was loaded with (or had access via smartphone connection) terrain maps to improve range estimates based on where you are going. I think BMW has something like this. A weather input would be nice too.
My car on a dry, 70 degree day and the original tires could go 53 miles on the battery roundtrip to my office (some terrain). The new tires cut it to 45 miles tops. 40 degrees and rain - 30 miles and that was mostly the downhill part.

 

[Chaparral]

The 360 degree camera system in the Defender looks like it would occasionally be useful for off road. You can see precisely where all your wheels are with respect to obstacles. This would be a nice option. But this type of technology can raise prices a lot for something that might only is useful on occasion, if that’s the case keep it out of the regular configurations and make it an optional add on.

If the spare is going to end up on the back (let’s face it there won’t be room under the car) the interior rearview mirror needs to show a camera feed that provides a view unhindered by the spare. This is a very practical use of technology and people that have used this in the Defender adore it. Even though it might add some $$ to the BOM, it should probably be included as standard because it is such an excellent practical solution and is something used very frequently whilst driving.

 

[Rustic_father]

The 360 degree camera system in the Defender looks like it would occasionally be useful for off road. You can see precisely where all your wheels are with respect to obstacles. This would be a nice option. But this type of technology can raise prices a lot for something that might only is useful on occasion, if that’s the case keep it out of the regular configurations and make it an optional add on.

Rivian also has multiple cameras specially used for off-road spotting. Some in this forum do not want any cameras. so i think a "happy middle" is to have these extra cameras as apart of an off road package/option.

If the spare is going to end up on the back (let’s face it there won’t be room under the car) the interior rearview mirror needs to show a camera feed that provides a view unhindered by the spare. This is a very practical use of technology and people that have used this in the Defender adore it. Even though it might add some $$ to the BOM, it should probably be included as standard because it is such an excellent practical solution and is something used very frequently whilst driving.

Rivian has space for their spare tire underneath both of their models, the battery doesn't extend past the wheels so there could be space behind the rear wheels (at the sacrifice of extra under floor storage.)

Also if the spare is mounted outside Jeep Wrangler incorporates their rearview camera with the spare holder and it sticks out the middle hub where the spare mounts to.

 

[J Alynn]

Rivian also has multiple cameras specially used for off-road spotting. Some in this forum do not want any cameras. so i think a "happy middle" is to have these extra cameras as apart of an off road package/option.



Rivian has space for their spare tire underneath both of their models, the battery doesn't extend past the wheels so there could be space behind the rear wheels (at the sacrifice of extra under floor storage.)

Also if the spare is mounted outside Jeep Wrangler incorporates their rearview camera with the spare holder and it sticks out the middle hub where the spare mounts to.

My daughter’s Bronco is similar. The spare doesn’t interfere. I’m sure if setting up for overlanding/of-roading with extra gear packs it may start to hinder but that’s just an effort of planning your set up