I really didn't think I'd like it at all without a removable top. But I like what you came up with, even if it's not a Scout to me. I like it so much I put a deposit in since we were planning to get my wife a new commuter in the expected delivery time frame. We're both Scout fans and long-time owners of Scouts, Jeeps, a samurai and others. What we saw last night was a great-looking SUV that slots right into a class of vehicles with a wide variety of existing competition.
It seems like you brought back the Travelall and light line pick up, the naming convention even matches. That's understandable as the Grand Cherokee, 4Runner, GX series, Explorer, Pathfinder, and many others sell well. During the event we heard about profits well ahead of a single characteristic of the vehicle, so we know which is more important to Scout Motors. Get a predictably profitable product on the market with the widest possible buyer pool and hope it makes money. That's what I took away from the beginning of last night's release at least.
What about the classic Scout? What about us who have decades of Scout ownership and have carried the torch that you were able to ignite a new business from? Scout was aimed at the Jeep and the genesis of the Bronco, not so much the other hard top station wagons of the time. The top and doors need to come off, it should be offered as an optional two-door and it should be able to do anything and go anywhere, just like the original. I personally know a lot of Jeep and Bronco owners who won't consider a Scout because it's not in the class of vehicle they desire. I was hoping we could replace my wife JLUR wth a Scout, but it seems like we'll be adding to the fleet instead of swapping with the Traveler. Not everyone who may have considered the Scout can do so.
I'm hoping this is like Ford did with the Bronco. They released the one that appeals to the masses first with the otterbox Escape they deceptively named Bronco sport. Then the real Bronco came later.
Has the chassis been designed to be a base under multiple bodies? Are there plans to develop a vehicle that goes head-to-head with the Bronco and Jeep? Should I stay hopeful that there will be a third option in the rugged off-road category?
It seems like you brought back the Travelall and light line pick up, the naming convention even matches. That's understandable as the Grand Cherokee, 4Runner, GX series, Explorer, Pathfinder, and many others sell well. During the event we heard about profits well ahead of a single characteristic of the vehicle, so we know which is more important to Scout Motors. Get a predictably profitable product on the market with the widest possible buyer pool and hope it makes money. That's what I took away from the beginning of last night's release at least.
What about the classic Scout? What about us who have decades of Scout ownership and have carried the torch that you were able to ignite a new business from? Scout was aimed at the Jeep and the genesis of the Bronco, not so much the other hard top station wagons of the time. The top and doors need to come off, it should be offered as an optional two-door and it should be able to do anything and go anywhere, just like the original. I personally know a lot of Jeep and Bronco owners who won't consider a Scout because it's not in the class of vehicle they desire. I was hoping we could replace my wife JLUR wth a Scout, but it seems like we'll be adding to the fleet instead of swapping with the Traveler. Not everyone who may have considered the Scout can do so.
I'm hoping this is like Ford did with the Bronco. They released the one that appeals to the masses first with the otterbox Escape they deceptively named Bronco sport. Then the real Bronco came later.
Has the chassis been designed to be a base under multiple bodies? Are there plans to develop a vehicle that goes head-to-head with the Bronco and Jeep? Should I stay hopeful that there will be a third option in the rugged off-road category?
