Harvester towing

[mbeadnell]

I would strongly suggest the harvester model towing more than 5k. This is going to be a deal breaker for most people and cause a lot of cancelled reservations. My opinion but I would not have announced something like this without all the details
In place to make a firm stance. This has created a lot of confusion and speculation and as a result many cancelled reservations. I would like to see the Terra at least able
To tow 7500 at minimum and the traveler at 5000k minimum. It makes no sense for both the tow the same with one able
To tow nearly 3k more on the pure ev models. This is just my suggestion. Keeping the price within the mentioned amount during announcement I hope is possible to have the towing range increased ( 7500 for Terra 5000 for traveler) that’s my suggestion and opinion.

 

[eddiet1212]

I'm also just adding my name to the general statement that 7500lbs should probably be the minimum. At only 5k, this thing wouldn't be able to tow a friend's cybertruck to a service center, lol.

If you are on this forum, then none of your friends own CT's....

 

[THil08]

If you are on this forum, then none of your friends own CT's....

Facts on top of facts.

 

[GrumpyG]

The only disappointing thing about that video with Jay Leno is the towing limitation of 5K for the Harvester model. Unfortunately, that would be a deal-breaker for me as well.

Same. I reserved the Harvester because I want to use this vehicle for truck things and with the Ramcharger advertising 14k towing, Rivian over 10k depending on configuration (even though its a BEV), Scout would be starting behind the eight ball sort to speak if that was the case. I would have to cancel if it was any less then the 10k that was floated at the beginning and be disappointed in doing so.

 

[bsddrake]

It is pretty likely that while Jay had that limitation in the prototype, the production vehicle will be better. Those prototypes cost a lot of money, are metaphorically brittle, and aren't easily fixed or replaced compared to a production vehicle. I'm holding out hope for the production traveller with the harvester to be on the level or slightly surpassing all the other vehicles in it's class.

 

[Munsterlander]

I came back to the forums hoping the 5k limit with the harvester was a joke. I for one will definitely cancel my Terra if that is the case. I was going this option thinking I would be able to tow near the 10k that was advertised at https://blog.scoutmotors.com/scout-traveler-and-scout-terra-revealed/. Nothing indicated that was battery only and it's detailed after the paragraph about the harvester.

I naively assumed that the harvester was there to keep the towing range up to par because many of the other EV trucks have great range until you tow and that has kept me away from them.

I know they have a ways to go and in this thread Jamie says 10k, I just hope they deliver.

 

[RL18]

I came back to the forums hoping the 5k limit with the harvester was a joke. I for one will definitely cancel my Terra if that is the case. I was going this option thinking I would be able to tow near the 10k that was advertised at https://blog.scoutmotors.com/scout-traveler-and-scout-terra-revealed/. Nothing indicated that was battery only and it's detailed after the paragraph about the harvester.

I naively assumed that the harvester was there to keep the towing range up to par because many of the other EV trucks have great range until you tow and that has kept me away from them.

I know they have a ways to go and in this thread Jamie says 10k, I just hope they deliver.

Well I think the tow rating being lower on the harvester model can be one of two things or maybe both…
So if we use one of tesla’s as an example… their battery packs are not just a single large battery, its multiple battery modules wired together in series. So each module for example is like 5.6kwh @22.2v and can put out a continuous 225amps. Times that by 16 modules in series and you get 3,600amps which is about 1,278kw or 1700 hp. Theoretically that’s how much you could pull from that battery pack although you would drain that battery very quickly if you did so there’s a balance of economy and usability in there, now cut the modules in half to 8 and now you get 318kw or 416hp. That’s a significant loss in available power. I suspect this might be the issue depending on what they are using for a battery pack.

You also are possibly cutting the frame in the rear to fit an engine in there which could also limit the frames ability to handle more than 5,000lbs now. If that were the case then I could care less about a frunk. Put the engine where it’s supposed to be in the front and balance the weight in the rear with the battery packs and add a couple more to get that tow rating up to 10k. But they also are probably trying to save cost by not redesigning the front end

 

[bsddrake]

Well I think the tow rating being lower on the harvester model can be one of two things or maybe both…
So if we use one of tesla’s as an example… their battery packs are not just a single large battery, its multiple battery modules wired together in series. So each module for example is like 5.6kwh @22.2v and can put out a continuous 225amps. Times that by 16 modules in series and you get 3,600amps which is about 1,278kw or 1700 hp. Theoretically that’s how much you could pull from that battery pack although you would drain that battery very quickly if you did so there’s a balance of economy and usability in there, now cut the modules in half to 8 and now you get 318kw or 416hp. That’s a significant loss in available power. I suspect this might be the issue depending on what they are using for a battery pack.

You also are possibly cutting the frame in the rear to fit an engine in there which could also limit the frames ability to handle more than 5,000lbs now. If that were the case then I could care less about a frunk. Put the engine where it’s supposed to be in the front and balance the weight in the rear with the battery packs and add a couple more to get that tow rating up to 10k. But they also are probably trying to save cost by not redesigning the front end

I think this is a pretty reasonable description of the challenges involved. I do think that the frame will be identical on both vehicles though. They would just loose too much economy of scale. Let's not forget the vehicles with the harvester are the default, the BEVs are the exception. One way around the issue of the limited battery in the Harvester'd vehicles is to tune the ICE engine for 2 RPMs. One would be at maybe 80KW for normal use, and the other would be at close to peak of the engine output. Yeah, it would rip through fuel and probably not even be able to keep the battery topped up while going up a long mountain pass, but I think (having done very little of the required math) that it could still surpass the other vehicles in its class/price-point. We'll have to see where this all goes, but these aren't n00bs building this truck.

 

[RL18]

I think this is a pretty reasonable description of the challenges involved. I do think that the frame will be identical on both vehicles though. They would just loose too much economy of scale. Let's not forget the vehicles with the harvester are the default, the BEVs are the exception. One way around the issue of the limited battery in the Harvester'd vehicles is to tune the ICE engine for 2 RPMs. One would be at maybe 80KW for normal use, and the other would be at close to peak of the engine output. Yeah, it would rip through fuel and probably not even be able to keep the battery topped up while going up a long mountain pass, but I think (having done very little of the required math) that it could still surpass the other vehicles in its class/price-point. We'll have to see where this all goes, but these aren't n00bs building this truck.

From the information they’ve provided and what they want to achieve you can make slight assumptions. If they want 150miles from the battery pack and 350miles from the generator then you can assume they would only need 23mpg from the gas generator, which is reasonable considering how heavy they will be. You have to balance run time with fuel efficiency, because too much run time isn’t fuel efficient and puts too much wear on the engine, but also to little run time does the same thing. Much better than the ramcharger gas generator which would only be estimated to get 20mpg however. That also assumes the electric motors are getting 4.1m/kwh however, which usually isn’t the case for the heavier evs, but I feel like any good ev now is getting that sort of efficiency from their motors pair with regenerative braking.
Then for them to get 150miles straight battery pack I’m really assuming here but if we took the tesla ev battery packs for example then 150 miles at 4.1m/kwh would equate to a 36.5kwh battery pack 7 modules in series, which could get 224kw continuous or just 300hp… which is blah

I hope that last part isn’t true and battery packs have come a long way in getting more continuous discharge amps from smaller battery packs. But I know the tesla battery modules are some of the best too. If they are doing the REEV by default then I would be throwing the engine in front and installing a larger battery pack to get atleast 500hp continuously, I feel like atleast 600hp wouldn’t be asking too much either.

 

[bsddrake]

From the information they’ve provided and what they want to achieve you can make slight assumptions. If they want 150miles from the battery pack and 350miles from the generator then you can assume they would only need 23mpg from the gas generator, which is reasonable considering how heavy they will be. You have to balance run time with fuel efficiency, because too much run time isn’t fuel efficient and puts too much wear on the engine, but also to little run time does the same thing. Much better than the ramcharger gas generator which would only be estimated to get 20mpg however. That also assumes the electric motors are getting 4.1m/kwh however, which usually isn’t the case for the heavier evs, but I feel like any good ev now is getting that sort of efficiency from their motors pair with regenerative braking.
Then for them to get 150miles straight battery pack I’m really assuming here but if we took the tesla ev battery packs for example then 150 miles at 4.1m/kwh would equate to a 36.5kwh battery pack 7 modules in series, which could get 224kw continuous or just 300hp… which is blah

I hope that last part isn’t true and battery packs have come a long way in getting more continuous discharge amps from smaller battery packs. But I know the tesla battery modules are some of the best too. If they are doing the REEV by default then I would be throwing the engine in front and installing a larger battery pack to get atleast 500hp continuously, I feel like atleast 600hp wouldn’t be asking too much either.

I agree with pretty much everything you're saying, so this is just adding to the conversation. No matter what they do, this vehicle will rip through fuel and battery going up a long mountain pass with a heavy trailer. The problem with the electric dive on these machines is that without variable gear reduction (gears), you can't just shift to a lower gear and go uphill slower, you have to have sufficient wattage to complete the task. Without the harvester piling on top of the battery that is a big ask on that smaller battery pack. I also don't think it's reasonable to expect 500miles range if you're on one of those "uphill both ways" kind of trips anyway (I'm not implying that you are expecting that). I personally would find it perfectly acceptable for the vehicle to have a "heavy towing" mode that gives up on being silent, reduces the expected range, and requires the battery to be charged to some minimum level along with fuel in the tank. When you tow something heavy, you already know that some concessions will need to be made compared to zipping around in an unladen vehicle.