We still don't know what the motor consumption and what the generator will be out putting. It could be that the generator will be able to run the wheel and charge the battery considering they had an “Max” option for the harvester modes.
Questions about the Harvester
- Thread starter BartMan Terra Total EV
- 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.
I expect ranges to go up over time too.
That said, I'm not expecting the average to jump by that much.
There was an article about this just today actually. You can see the average today is 283 miles for all EV's in the US. And... when I look at that trend line, I"m not thinking that in the next 2-3 years, the average will be 350-400 miles.
But yes, I mean, Scout was guessing on a lot of things, and trying to predict things years down the line. So, it is possible that the mileage numbers will be somewhat different than what they stated at the reveal event (could go up or down, hopefully up). I just won't be holding my breath for 600 miles.
EV tech is always advancing. Scout's numbers could be better by the time they're for sale. I expect continuous improvements, whether they're year-to-year, mid-cycle, or Gen2. However, rugged vehicles like Scout will never reach the efficiency of a $110k Lucid sedan. SUVs and pickups will always give up efficiency for utility. It comes with the territory.
I’d be shocked if they intro new tech mid cycle. Imagine we all reserve, get the first 38,000 out then SURPRISE-we changed tech and now it’s standard with an additional 175 mile range. As a gen 2 I can understand the change and by then SS batteries may be mainstream enough to warrant the change but SM will walk a thin line of hatred if they push out first year models then turn around 1-1/2 years later and just increase. My guess they’d introduce the advancement as an upgrade purchase price with a nice profit that way early buyers do t get screwed and long rangers can pay for the extra. Just my thinking
Last edited:
Just caught up on this thread, and I'm thrilled to learn that the Harvester has a smaller battery and larger gas tank.
Almost all charging stations are in parking spots, not pull-through setups, so you'd have to unhitch and re-hitch your trailer if you're doing a roadtrip. Ain't no way I'm gonna do that, and it's why I still have an ICE tow vehicle. 150miles EV covers the vast majority of the driving I'm gonna be doing outside of camping trips. Heck, a couple years ago my first EV had about that range on it (TOTAL!) and we drove that thing all over for 3yrs.
I think a whole lot of people who are interested in the harvester option want it because they don't want to worry about charging station access (either pull-through like I'm mentioning for towing, or straight-up rural availability). All the other RV-types I know with trailers want it or the RAM Charger because the ideal TV has gas for roadtrips, EV for local trips , and can also provide 240v to run the AC in the trailer when you're camping in the desert. So if you're putting the range extender in at all, might as well cover both use-cases, not just the "got a jerry can for overlanding" use-case.
Almost all charging stations are in parking spots, not pull-through setups, so you'd have to unhitch and re-hitch your trailer if you're doing a roadtrip. Ain't no way I'm gonna do that, and it's why I still have an ICE tow vehicle. 150miles EV covers the vast majority of the driving I'm gonna be doing outside of camping trips. Heck, a couple years ago my first EV had about that range on it (TOTAL!) and we drove that thing all over for 3yrs.
I think a whole lot of people who are interested in the harvester option want it because they don't want to worry about charging station access (either pull-through like I'm mentioning for towing, or straight-up rural availability). All the other RV-types I know with trailers want it or the RAM Charger because the ideal TV has gas for roadtrips, EV for local trips , and can also provide 240v to run the AC in the trailer when you're camping in the desert. So if you're putting the range extender in at all, might as well cover both use-cases, not just the "got a jerry can for overlanding" use-case.
It's really not changing that fast, and you really can't compare a designed exclusively for efficiency sedan (Lucid) with a body on frame, serious 4x4 truck.
Also new battery technologies which are really the only thing with any significant room left to advance, won't translate mostly to range, they will translate mostly to smaller and lighter weight battery packs.
Once you cross 300 mile range, that will be plenty for the vast majority of people, so future battery advancements will mostly lead to lighter weight packs.
Also when next generation batteries do arrive in volume, they will likely be quite expensive for a while, so will head into premium segments first.
If everything goes perfect at Quantumscape, PowerCo, and Scout, maybe in 5 years (~2030) we could see a premium priced next gen battery to provide 500 mile range option... Maybe.
I wouldn't expect much change in the interim. People that want extreme range, or piece of mind, or whatever they think a 500 mile range battery will deliver are likely better served by the Harvester.
There was never much reason to believe otherwise. Just some people here speculating since the engine space was smaller than under the hood, the engine would be inadequate (for Gas and Go).
But IMO, that's a non starter, there would be too much negative press/reviews/customer experience if they have an inadequate (for Gas and Go) generator.
Please give us a clearer definition around what you see as "Gas and Go". This is not a term in my vernacular, not something that I (personally) use in dialog ever. I'm guessing some people here are also wondering the same thing.
Theoretically:
Whenever I hear the term "Gas and Go" on this board, I envision that the truck had reached a critically low SOC and that the gas tank for the generator is fully depleted... Basically, the power sources are BOTH on "E", and the driver (for the purposes of this exercise) has limped into a gas station. Now the truck still has a critically low SOC. So, the driver fills the tank for the generator and the Harvester kicks back on and starts producing electricity. Are the "Gas and Go" people saying that simply filling the tank allows a driver to suddenly tear off into the sunset with a 0% SOC on the battery, at full performance because the Harvester suddenly has gas? Does "Gas and Go" = "no wait time"?
That would not be my expectation with a small generator & a big truck, and based upon what I have heard so far. I would envision that you would need to run the Harvester (once filled) for some defined amount of time to reach at least a 10%-20% SOC before departing (for example) after the filling the Harvester tank. Isn't that the entire point of having a DEFINED range? If the truck were able to take gas and simply drive away immediately with ZERO battery, then how is a Scout any different from a HYBRID Truck or PHEV?
Not sure where you get negative press from such a capable off-road worthy TRUCK if the implementation allows for a 500 mile range. If you have gone 500 miles, then you want to go another 500 miles (without stopping sooner), I would think that you would have to re-charge the battery and you would need to re-fill the tank.
This is what I’ve been saying as well in my head based on comments at the reveal. This subject will continue to be debated until SM actually tell the public what the intent is but I see it same as you.
I envision "Gas and Go" as not waiting for critically low SOC and the Harvester kicks in and is able to keep the battery around the same charge level in standard driving conditions. If both sources are delepted I don't think anyone should expect a zero wait time to get back on the road.
Yes and No.
Yes:
Gas and Go = No Wait time.
No:
You don't get full performance.
When you have ample state of charge, you can drive 100 MPH down the highway, while it lasts.
If you deplete everything, and then only gas up. You will be limited to something less than that, but you will still be able to average 70 MPH down the highway, at minimum. Less than that, and it's going to get too much bad press/review/word of mouth.
The point of listing range is the same as every other car/truck. The max range starting out with full tank and/or battery. Every other car/truck has this number, why wouldn't this one be different?
Why would you want it to be worse than than all the other EREV/PHEVs?
Literally no other vehicle has ever had this limitation.
You don't want your point of differentiation to be that it's worse.
It's a fantasy the think that a more limited drivetrain, won't be more negatively received.
Last edited:
Gas and go is a term that has definitely been used with EREV's. Not sure where I heard it first, but since I heard it, I have been using it. It means exactly what it sounds like. Essentially where the generator can generate enough electrical output for the vehicle to continue driving while maintaining a state of charge.
You get gas, and you keep driving. I envision it working it very similarly to how most PHEV's operate. Where the SOC drops to some specified point, and the generator kicks on.
That point for the ramcharger is apparently 16%. But in "Tow mode" they increase the buffer to 35%, to help on mountain passes/etc.
FWIW, the Harvester UI on the scouts from CES had a user selectable "when does the harvester turn on" point, where it appeared you could drag/drop the point anywhere you wanted, presumably up to "turn on at 100%".
For the purpose of clarity, the Harvester models ARE HYBRIDS. They are SERIES hybrids (that is the definition of an EREV), not a PARALLEL hybrid (PHEV).
If the harvester battery pack was actually at zero (actual zero, not the lowest point where the generator usually kicked on), then there might be some performance loss when the generator output alone isn't able to keep up. Now, if they'll let you do that or not is a different question. In that case, I could see them either preventing you from leaving until you get up to some percentage SOC (or do a notification of potentially reduced performance/top speed, or a recommendation that you let it charge or something like that).
But, given we're talking about it generating enough electrical energy to drive at 70-80mph, that would mean its generating something with at least 25-35kw of output, which should be more than enough power to move around even at very low/critically low SOC, which is "gas and go" to me.
The Ramcharger does this too. I read this as the battery size + fuel tank size personally.
It is supposed to do ~142miles on EV range alone, then up to 690 miles using gas, and features a ~27 gal gas tank. Which means that it does ~548 miles of range on the gasoline generator alone (which coincidentally works out to ~20mpg, which sounds about right).
The Harvester has 150 miles of EV range, and 500 total mile range, for ~350 miles of range on gasoline. If we assume the same ~20mpg as the Ramcharger, that works out to a ~17.5gal tank, which seems like a reasonable guess.
And yes, I do keep mentioning the Ramcharger, as it is the closest competitor to the Scout models, and it is one that is releasing before the Scouts, and as the first EREV in the category, and the first EREV in the US market in general for quite a while, I do think it will functionally set the expectations for what an EREV is in the USA. And personally, I think Scout will be heavily benchmarking the Ramcharger (keep in mind that the Ramcharger is rated for a 40-100% higher tow rating than the Scouts, at 14k lbs, so it does need a bigger generator).
Well, there are no other EREV/PHEV off-road capable trucks on the market that I am aware of, so it would only be better than what exists today.
Not having full performance is likely a non-starter for people that tow, live in the mountains, have racks and load their trucks, etc... To me, this is where bad press might come from. Why??? Mainly b/c that is where a lot of the bad press has come from on EREV in cars (not even talking about big, heavy trucks & SUV's on 35" AT's).
I see your point and understand why people keep alluding to the Ramcharger, BUT the Ramcharger doesn't exist, and is a completely different configuration that seems to be targeted at a different audience (just my take).
My guess is that MPG would fall more in line with 15MPG or so on AT's with a heavier SUV that sits up high on the road, so maybe we call it a 20 gallon tank and split the difference and say~17MPG. The big CAVEAT is that this 350 miles of range without charging the battery pack would have to be very "performance limited" in my mind... I only call this out b/c I do not see 350 miles of "performance-limited" range as very attractive.
I agree that Scout should try to avoid decreased performance situations especially seeing as how the i3 and Volt got massacred for this and they were “econo”vehicles. Having that situation in a truck would absolutely kill it’s rep
Perhaps some sort of warning once the gas is depleted, something along the lines of “refuel now or you may experience decreased performance”
One would hope that a person interested in owing an EREV would realize this limitation and avoid dipping into the battery’s bottom buffer. The problem is that it’s not what users are accustomed to.
Perhaps some sort of warning once the gas is depleted, something along the lines of “refuel now or you may experience decreased performance”
One would hope that a person interested in owing an EREV would realize this limitation and avoid dipping into the battery’s bottom buffer. The problem is that it’s not what users are accustomed to.
Not that off road capability should be an excuse for lacking Gas and Go capability, but Jeep has 4XE PHEV models like the Wrangler. Which is essentially the benchmark for off road capability.
Which having a weak generator only makes worse. The more powerful the generator the, the less limited the capability. So a Harvester doing serious towing, will likely need to be treated like many of think it will when just regular driving.
When towing, Harvester will need to recharge and gas up together in order to have enough power. That's bad enough IMO, that anyone with serious tow needs will look elsewhere.
OTOH, The Ramcharger EREV will likely not only have Gas and Go, but Gas and Tow capability, due to a a very powerful generator.
The Ramcharger was announced first and is coming to market first. So it has a reasonable place in this discussion.
It is a different audience, but it is still the closest competitor.
As long as the generator can keep up with the expected electrical output (on average), there will be no performance degradation. And the buffer is there for the times when the peak exceeds the average.
With even the Chevy Volt having a ~50kw generator, I doubt we'll see anything smaller than that (even if its not a ~130-190kw generator like the ramcharger is using). And even 50kw of output, should give you the ability to drive on the highway at relatively normal speeds (unladen at least) without performance loss (assuming the efficiency is ~2miles per khw, 70mph driving should be ~35kwh of energy used, give or take).
The mpg/range stuff is definitely all guesswork. But ballpark, I think its close. I can see the fuel tank size going up or down ~5 gal from there, and the mpg going up or down ~5mpg. But the ~20mpg range is about right for a rough baseline. For what its worth, the offroad package I can surely see worse mpg on with the big tires (not sure about 15mpg, but I get your point, and agree). But the 33in tire that are more road oriented, I can see being more efficient than that. I think the low 20's range of mpg is likely attainable, but, as always, we'll see
.
Hahaha! I forgot about the 4XE... Probably b/c it has a battery range of 21 miles and 2.0 liter 4 banger.
Agree, that based on the EREV part, it is likely the closest to compare to (at least for the Harvester Terra).
The part about "keeping up" takes me back to Gas and Go... I was (maybe incorrectly) assuming that most people buying the EREV versions were concerned about longer / multi-leg road trips, and had opted for the Harvester to give them more confidence. When you are at a critically low SOC and have no fuel, you are essentially starting around ZERO. This is where I was thinking the performance losses would be noticeable (without charging), since you aren't "keeping up" with losses (theoretically).
FWIW, I am thinking of the harvester for long multi-stop road trips. The appeal of "gas and go" in this context for me is definitely for faster/more convenient road trips. It does give more confidence (ie, I have more confidence that I'll be able to find gas, than a working charger in backwater/middle of no where rural American west, at least for the next 3-5 years), but the speed of filling ~15-20gal of gas vs charging 175kw of battery (for the longest range BEV version) is also a thing.
I also do think that for people road tripping an EREV, the game plan is definitely not to allow the battery SOC to get to "critically low" levels in the first place. So while there could be a possibility for degraded performance while at super low battery levels, I think it should be relatively minimal for normal use (the most likely situation is towing on mountain highways).
But TBH, "save the battery" is how I use my PHEV right now too. Around town, yes, use all the EV range possible first, but when I go to road trips, I almost immediately switch to "Hybrid mode" (which makes it act like a traditional non-plug in hybrid), and conserve that battery range for the off highway portions of travel, or things like sitting in heavy traffic, etc. This is because I prefer to keep the buffer of EV range as emergency range should a fuel stop somehow not work, or to make sure I've got the extra EV power for mountain passes, etc.
Anyway, curious what we'll end up getting
.And I'll be really curious to see how the Ramcharger is configured as well.
There are a lot more sophisticated answers here than what I can probably produce.
For me "Gas and Go" would mean when the battery itself has been depleted, and the gas tank on the Harvester is around 1/4 tank, I'd be able to get gas and keep going at highway speeds on the gas motor itself. I don't imaging running both the battery and the gas to empty and then just putting a few gallons of gas in the Scout and then going again (the battery has to charge somehow).
For me "Gas and Go" would mean when the battery itself has been depleted, and the gas tank on the Harvester is around 1/4 tank, I'd be able to get gas and keep going at highway speeds on the gas motor itself. I don't imaging running both the battery and the gas to empty and then just putting a few gallons of gas in the Scout and then going again (the battery has to charge somehow).
Similar threads
