Why Scout?

[Kris K]

Why Scout?​

With the modernization and re-branding of a classic automobile many people can relate to, because of its unique design (for its time) and a forerunner in the class called Sport Utility Vehicles today. It also allowed the average person (family) to own one because of its price point and appeal to a non-segmented individual group of people. A similar relationship and correlation to what some may compare to the original philosophy of Volkswagen (People’s Car.) (Originally conceived by Germany which would allow for the average citizen to own one, including the Autobahns.)

It might be because you remember a friend, family member, or yourself owning one and the innovation for it’s day. I have seen many comments about the memories are in-tune with its ICE powertrain and the car enthusiasts of that day.

There are many *strategic reasons for and reasoning a BEV (Battery Electric Vehicle) (over ICE (Internal Combusting Engine)) was chosen and IMO is the correct decision for many reasons. It’s not to say there will be talented aftermarket groups who will perform this, but it’s essentially a completely different vehicle. In, fact the differences (and challenges) are heavily outweighed for the average (even Advanced) enthusiast to accomplish. To keep in the scope and context of this document, The more technical specifics are for another time, as mentioned.

So, with some generalized background and basic conceptual ideas presented, back to the original question. There are many reasons why this question may arise and what would you say/think.?

Scout (official name? “X1” (sounds cool) ?) has advantages over both in several major areas. IMO, these will separate the Scout Brand (name) from these and other start-up competitors (I’m discounting larger OEMs (Original Equipment Manufacturers) who are basically electrifying existing platforms.)

• Scout has a parent company in Volkswagen. Very important. Support and Investment concerns (lack of) is a platform for strategic focus on the product. Very important in this race, you can see how Rivian, Lucid, Fisker, Bollinger, Re-Car (mainly finding their Nitch)(Nitch: Place in the EV industry where their car would fit and have the best chance for success) needed to have that element of investor fulfillment and rush to achieve that.
• Scout has an established Brand already with a primarily targeted consumer base. That will evolve, but already having an established (at least conceptually) target consumer segment is another strategic hurdle addressed with increases time focused in other areas such as engineering, sales, manufacturing to name a few.
• Also, hiring team members who have worked at other start-ups and how they operate is also added experience. Especially, those who have been in those environments, and developed processes,
• Tactical usage of organized departmental traceability SW (Smartsheets, JIRA, Confluence, DOORS, etc.) (These are industry SW tool to track and document a programs progress)
• For access across departments as a centralized point of where to start (EE (Electrical &Electronics) lab WO system, vehicle testing schedules and checkout criteria, ICD (Interface Control Document: Used for engineering purposes related documentation used by engineers as a reference for Embedded controls variables and functions they control)EE integration for example),
• Suppliers bases who are proven and experienced in their respective areas that have worked with EV companies in covering source able items like Wiring Harness Prototyping, component sourcing, all relevant industry connections who are proven successful and have the resources needed for a faster and easier path.
• All these are proven out to an extent where a solid mechanism is in place to help new-hires navigate the new mixed world, but can also be tweaked to match specific Scout needs.
• Result: Better product quality (initial) delivered and the Scout portfolio is now realistically open for expansion, just like every other OEM)

So, this a quick initial approach to ask your self as a customer and/or provide in an interview within the company.

If I was a potential customer debating on slapping down a deposit for a Scout and saw how Rivian, Fisker, and other EVs are approaching their Vehicle Lifecycle Development (from the point where Customer requests are taken, through component, system and vehicle development up to Manufacturing) and Aftermarket service. I would feel much more confident not only in the initial product quality, but what was behind the scenes.

So Why Scout?

What is your response?

** I do not work for Scout, but, IMO is setup for success in areas others are not. **​

* A separate document (posting) will cover this topic in more specific detail to why EVs can and will be profitable and what needs to be done as Scout evolves as a company and expand off the initial success of this first Scout into the few remaining sectors untapped with a lot potential.

 

[Kris K]

Reserved

 

[Colt_44_magnum]

Let him cook. Kinda confused what this is all actually but will check back in for more conversation later.

Why not Scout?

 

[Kris K]

1. It basically describes a question proposed in an interview process. Why are you choosing Company X? What is your thought process behind it.
2. Why a customer should select Scout as their next vehicle purchase.

It's a completely positive response toward Scout and the position as a Start up EV has. I spent the last six years working in EVs also in Defense (Hybrid integration for the first time by a US Army land based combat vehicle.). These are just personal opinions why I think the company will succeed. Also my two proposed follow-up threads will address:
1. Architecture and feature content. Their are risks and coordination between groups (engineering, sales and marketing are important. For example, Rivian was completely off in their selected customer base. Some options were failures from the start (from a engineering, design perspective) and my cautions pertain to this. I saw this on one specific option, but it was so heavily marketed, there was nothing I could do to change it.

2. Strategy beyond the initial Scout model. The region (Global Location where EV are needed, but have little to no presence there) I'm targeting is very limited in FFs (Fossil Fuels: for example we use Octenol (hence Octane) which has eight carbon molecules linked with an OH attached to each: Our standard pump gas. Ethanol has only two Carbon chains. Simply put, less carbon, cleaner emissions) and have outlawed Diesel for over 30+ years. Leaving Ethanol, propane and natural gas as alternatives. of which I will describe in detail. Legislation is lifting Tariffs on imported components and like most OEMs, manufacturing sites would create jobs and local acceptance.

Finding a segment in EVs has become a challenge now. So, success is riding on a lot of upfront decisions from an architecture standpoint. I know the R1S/T (Rivian's initial vehicles) very well, it is a decent vehicle, but even with the initial investments from Ford & Amazon, they still lacked a parent company.

Nitro Methane: Methane has only one Carbon molecule, but other performance additives. A main contributor for engine rebuilds after every pass.

 

[J Alynn]

Kinda agree with @Colt_44_magnum. There also appears to be a lot of industry abbreviations you are using that make no sense to me because I don’t know the industry language. Can you edit your post to add the full words such as JIRA and EE, etc… (if I’m the only one who doesn’t understand -my apologies)
I feel like this is an over complicated review of many things already posted on the forum but I’m interested in understanding what your final thought is. Not being critical, just struggling to follow along with what the point is you are trying to convey.
As a general response I’m very open to new Scout. Not in it for EV but learning along the way and excited about a tie back emotionally to my very first car as a 16 year old driver (35 years ago). So speaking to your thoughts above that’s a lot of memories from 35 years ago as a naive 16 year old

 

[J Alynn]

1. It basically describes a question proposed in an interview process.
2. Why a customer should select Scout as their next vehicle purchase.

It's a completely positive response toward Scout and the position as a Start up EV has. I spent the last six years working in EVs also in Defense (Hybrid integration for the first time by a US Army land based vehicle.). These are just personal opinions why I think the company will succeed. Also my two proposed follow-up threads will address:
1. Architecture and feature content. Their are risks and coordination between groups (engineering, sales and marketing are important. For example, Rivian was completely off in their selected customer base. Some options were failures from the start (from a engineering, design perspective) and my cautions pertain to this. I saw this on one specific option, but it was so heavily marketed, there was nothing I could do to change it.

2. Strategy beyond the initial Scout model. The region I'm targeting is very limited in FFs and have outlawed Diesel for over 30+ years. Leaving Ethanol, propane and natural gas as alternatives. of which I will describe in detail. Legislation is lifting Tariffs on imported components and like most OEMs, manufacturing e would create jobs and local acceptance.

Finding a segment in EVs has become a challenge now. So, success is riding on a lot of upfront decisions from an architecture standpoint. I know the R1S/T very well, it is a decent vehicle, but even with the initial investments from Ford, they still lacked a parent company.

Having been on this forum for basically 1-1/2 years I must say IMHO, you are speaking WAY above the level I think many of us are thinking. Your follow up response has me more confused than your first. Admittedly I’m in the creative field for work but consider myself reasonable intelligent. That being said, my head is confused with your posts. Best of luck and hope others provide responses that satisfy your interests. I’m just to confused-Sorry!

 

[Kris K]

No worries. It's meant for certain people who know me and recognize it's importance and my thinking behind it.

1. It basically describes a question proposed in an interview process.
2. Why a customer should select Scout as their next vehicle purchase.

It's a completely positive response toward Scout and the position as a Start up EV has. I spent the last six years working in EVs also in Defense (Hybrid integration for the first time by a US Army land based vehicle.). These are just personal opinions why I think the company will succeed. Also my two proposed follow-up threads will address:
1. Architecture and feature content. Their are risks and coordination between groups (engineering, sales and marketing are important. For example, Rivian was completely off in their selected customer base. Some options were failures from the start (from a engineering, design perspective) and my cautions pertain to this. I saw this on one specific option, but it was so heavily marketed, there was nothing I could do to change it.

2. Strategy beyond the initial Scout model. The region I'm targeting is very limited in FFs and have outlawed Diesel for over 30+ years. Leaving Ethanol, propane and natural gas as alternatives. of which I will describe in detail. Legislation is lifting Tariffs on imported components and like most OEMs, manufacturing e would create jobs and local acceptance.

Finding a segment in EVs has become a challenge now. So, success is riding on a lot of upfront decisions from an architecture standpoint. I know the R1S/T very well, it is a decent vehicle, but even with the initial investments from Ford, they still lacked a parent company.

** I'm a 10mm fan. Very versatile round from 95gr fragmentable in drywall (in case you have to shoot in a undesired direction) up to 230gr. Personally, I like a 185gr carry round manufactured by Doubletap in Utah. Comparable in Kinetic Energy to a 41 magnum. 1911A1 Dan Wesson Titan 14+1 is my peroneal favorite. God created man, Samuel Colt made them equal.

 

[Kris K]

Having been on this forum for basically 1-1/2 years I must say IMHO, you are speaking WAY above the level I think many of us are thinking. Your follow up response has me more confused than your first. Admittedly I’m in the creative field for work but consider myself reasonable intelligent. That being said, my head is confused with your posts. Best of luck and hope others provide responses that satisfy your interests. I’m just to confused-Sorry!

No worries. Please ask for more clarification, if needed. The other two THREADS will be roughly the same, so I will try to clarify it as much as needed. Thank you for the input.

 

[JohnnyScout]

VW could have more easily just introduced a Type (insert any "thing" but 181) called it a VW and that's that.

However building on arguably (or not) the legacy of the first consumer SUV from the same company oft credited with first extended cab pickup (Travelette) albeit with only 3 doors makes perfect sense in the age of retro sells.

Or retro done right sells. (Chevy HHR should have been AWD)

Just like the buyers of Ineos Grenadier who perceive it as a truer descendant of the LR Defender than is the current Defender there is history and mystique and that wish that upper management had not turned IH to dust.

Scout has a history, mostly good and well deserved. You will find prior and current Scout owners biding their time always hoping for a revival. Some may be upset that the revival comes with a trip to the EV altar but such as it is, by the time in 2 years that we can actually buy these there may be hybrid or extended range versions (see Ineos Fusilier for extended range idea)

there will always be Early Adopters of any significantly new product willing to help work out the bugs. But recently thst is VWs motto "No more BUGS"

 

[JohnnyScout]

As a side note: Diesel engines themselves should not be banned but at worst the ubiquitous fuel being sold today. The original Diesel engines were designed to run on peanut or other renewable vegetable oils. It was JD Rockefeller's Standard Oil who led the promotion of excess product from refining gadoline that was oyltherwise being discarded or burned at the refinery.

If you could run an ICE engine on any of a number of non fossil fuels would you still need to ban the engine itself? I think not. But also, there are dangers to the ordinary driver of fueling up with 100% alcohol. And does cutting gasoline with 10% corn alcohol due to decreased mpg actually save any fossil fuel stock? Or is it just a gimmicky section of the Farm Bill designed to stabilize the corn market without direct federal funds

 

[Kris K]

Deleted

As a side note: Diesel engines themselves should not be banned but at worst the ubiquitous fuel being sold today. The original Diesel engines were designed to run on peanut or other renewable vegetable oils. It was JD Rockefeller's Standard Oil who led the promotion of excess product from refining gadoline that was oyltherwise being discarded or burned at the refinery.

If you could run an ICE engine on any of a number of non fossil fuels would you still need to ban the engine itself? I think not. But also, there are dangers to the ordinary driver of fueling up with 100% alcohol. And does cutting gasoline with 10% corn alcohol due to decreased mpg actually save any fossil fuel stock? Or is it just a gimmicky section of the Farm Bill designed to stabilize the corn market without direct federal funds

Is I mentioned, less carbon reduces engine life mainly because of the lack of lubrication Carbon has. I've interfaced with several people, specifically Brazil, and there is a very limited new part supply available (no autozone rewards) or U-Pull lots.) So they basically have to rebuild components, which sucks. At least they don't live in the rust belt. I'd almost trade positions, it beats breaking off a rusty 10 year old wheel bearing with a sledge hammer for at least a half hour)
I've also helped a lot of people in small shops understand how diagnostic tools are intended to work. Mostly, they are just changing customer configurable features and cannot understand why their vehicle is not an SRT now. SW and HW are not inside supporting those changes. I did find out my WK2 had headlamp washers after fixing my kids second accident. It wasn't configured, so I did activate them because they already were supported.

 

[JohnnyScout]

If that were the case (less carbon leading to engine failure due to reduced lubrication) then engines running Full synthetic oils would be dropping like flies.

And if you think carbon buildup on exhaust valves is a good thing you've never had a case of burned valves.

 

[Kris K]

)If that were the case (less carbon leading to engine failure due to reduced lubrication) then engines running Full synthetic oils would be dropping like flies.

And if you think carbon buildup on exhaust valves is a good thing you've never had a case of burned valves.

Probably, lubrication was the wrong word. I'm not a PT guy by any means ( except for Embedded Controls Powertrain Measurement and Calibration. My point derives from the aspect of metallurgy .
Carbon just is an interface material between two metals decreasing friction, from there the other aspects happen as they may.
Kinda like Pb fuel. I remember my dad showings me little puddles inside the block when I was a kid.
I don't deny the negative results in other areas you guys pointed out. In fact, I don't dive into it that far.

 

[R1TVT]