Ev Delay

[J Alynn]

Timelines:
Rivian revealed the R1T and R1S in December 2017. They delivered the first ones in October 2021. (46 months)
Scout revealed the Terra and Traveler in October 2024. Adding 46 months to that gets us to August 2028. Scout is on track for that timeframe, and likely will deliver before August 2028.
Rivian had to build its factory, spin up a company, and do all the same sort of things Scout has to do.

Ford revealed the Lightning in May 2019 and delivered its first trucks in April 2022, 11 months. BUT Ford used an existing platform, didn’t have to build a new factory, and had an objectively successful business already running.

Just verifying your Lighting timing. I’m getting 2 years and 11 months-not 11 months-is a date off or your timeframe? Not nitpicking you-just trying to understand which is correct. Thanks

 

[SpaceEVDriver]

Just verifying your Lighting timing. I’m getting 2 years and 11 months-not 11 months-is a date off or your timeframe? Not nitpicking you-just trying to understand which is correct. Thanks

My mistake.

I mixed the announcement of plans for a BEV pickup (2019) with the reveal of the truck (2021).
I went back and edited the post.

 

[J Alynn]

My mistake.

I mixed the announcement of plans for a BEV pickup (2019) with the reveal of the truck (2021).
I went back and edited the post.

Thank you sir. Helps it make a bit more sense.

 

[J Alynn]

As additional reference Ford announced the current Bronco in early January 2017 and didn’t go to production until early-ish 2021 so that’s 4 years and Ford was established with plant/production space so I do t think Scout is off at all

 

[R1TVT]

I’m so confused about what ball was dropped.

Agreed - whatever ball was dropped is a giant mystery to me. Some people seem to be buying-in to the SPAM articles all over the internet - most of which are just pay-to-play click-baiters looking for eyeballs... That is the only thing I can think of. I will believe what Scout tells me (not a poorly sourced article with nothing official from SM).

Keep in mind that we don't even have a working factory yet. It is still very early days for Scout Motors, and Scout (like any company would do prior to releasing actual production specs and product information) has always said the following:

• Initial production targeted to start in 2027 based on current projections, and is subject to change. The anticipated production date is an estimate and may be affected by various factors. Actual availability may differ.
• Simulated models and concept vehicles with options shown throughout. Animations shown are for illustrative purposes only and do not depict the actual product. Production model may vary and reflect market differences.

A little patience with a little critical thinking tell me that nothing has really changed. You can still reserve either variant in either configuration (and per the above, things could always change), but Scout has not made any changes yet.

Lastly, I think Scout is aiming for authenticity with the brand and the company. I see an ethos of trust and accountability in all that they are doing - that seems front and center. That doesn't mean that they won't change anything. I believe that if they do decide to make any material shifts, they will be forthright with any changes to the production plans (if / when any changes may be decided upon). Why? They have a playbook, they have seen what has worked and what won't work, they want to build trust not take it away. Scout is under the microscope for sure, and there's too much at stake for them to act like they are launching a Cybertruck.

 

[rfk]

A little patience with a little critical thinking tell me that nothing has really changed. You can still reserve either variant in either configuration (and per the above, things could always change), but Scout has not made any changes yet.

New vehicle + factory + brand - must be patient with that scenario regardless of BEV vs. EREV launch timing. Production start already took a delay from 2026 to 2027, wouldn't surprise me if one/both models slip into 2028. I mean, our kitchen renovation took twice as long as promised - just sayin'.

If your buying window is tight then yes, you'll want to survey the market when your time comes. I can be flexible and wait for BEV, but that could mean wife might get her next car before me... sigh...

 

[Scoutsie]

*snip*

Lastly, I think Scout is aiming for authenticity with the brand and the company. I see an ethos of trust and accountability in all that they are doing - that seems front and center. That doesn't mean that they won't change anything. I believe that if they do decide to make any material shifts, they will be forthright with any changes to the production plans (if / when any changes may be decided upon). Why? They have a playbook, they have seen what has worked and what won't work, they want to build trust not take it away. Scout is under the microscope for sure, and there's too much at stake for them to act like they are launching a Cybertruck.

This guy, right here. Scout has put a lot of money into building a brand and has a lot of seasoned people working behind the scenes. They're not dummies. They're not going to pickle the bed writing checks with their mouths that their asses can't cash unless there's a good reason for it. I've been really impressed by everything I've seen so far. They seem like realists who just want to do the best job that they can. Economic and manufacturing uncertainties are probably a hassle for everyone right now, not to mention our radioactive political climate. It is what it is.

(Although my mom's car chose today to die, and as my home is a multigenerational home, I sure do wish there was some clarity on production time if only because the purchase of a new car seems to be more imminent than it was this morning)

 

[cyure]

This guy, right here. Scout has put a lot of money into building a brand and has a lot of seasoned people working behind the scenes. They're not dummies. They're not going to pickle the bed writing checks with their mouths that their asses can't cash unless there's a good reason for it. I've been really impressed by everything I've seen so far. They seem like realists who just want to do the best job that they can. Economic and manufacturing uncertainties are probably a hassle for everyone right now, not to mention our radioactive political climate. It is what it is.

(Although my mom's car chose today to die, and as my home is a multigenerational home, I sure do wish there was some clarity on production time if only because the purchase of a new car seems to be more imminent than it was this morning)

Ugh. Sorry about the car.

 

[J Alynn]

This guy, right here. Scout has put a lot of money into building a brand and has a lot of seasoned people working behind the scenes. They're not dummies. They're not going to pickle the bed writing checks with their mouths that their asses can't cash unless there's a good reason for it. I've been really impressed by everything I've seen so far. They seem like realists who just want to do the best job that they can. Economic and manufacturing uncertainties are probably a hassle for everyone right now, not to mention our radioactive political climate. It is what it is.

(Although my mom's car chose today to die, and as my home is a multigenerational home, I sure do wish there was some clarity on production time if only because the purchase of a new car seems to be more imminent than it was this morning)

Glad to see you back up and posting

 

[MountainDad]

Timelines:
Rivian revealed the R1T and R1S in December 2017. They delivered the first ones in October 2021. (46 months)
Scout revealed the Terra and Traveler in October 2024. Adding 46 months to that gets us to August 2028. Scout is on track for that timeframe, and likely will deliver before August 2028.
Rivian had to build its factory, spin up a company, and do all the same sort of things Scout has to do.

Ford revealed the Lightning in May 2021 and delivered its first trucks in April 2022, 11 months. BUT Ford used an existing platform, didn’t have to build a new factory, and had an objectively successful business already running.

[EDITED to clarify: Ford announced the intention to build a BEV pickup in 2019, but their reveal was in 2021; this is similar to Rivian and Scout’s history as well.]

Ford absolutely did have to build a new factory for the Lightning, as did GM for the Silverado EV. Ford's is in an existing facility, but the factory is entirely separate from the standard F-150 factory and was build from the slab up as a brand new production line. The platform is also not the same as the standard F-150 despite having similar dimensions.

You get all of this information when you tour the standard F-150 factory. Ford will not let you enter the F-150 Lightning factory.

 

[SpaceEVDriver]

Ford absolutely did have to build a new factory for the Lightning, as did GM for the Silverado EV. Ford's is in an existing facility, but the factory is entirely separate from the standard F-150 factory and was build from the slab up as a brand new production line. The platform is also not the same as the standard F-150 despite having similar dimensions.

You get all of this information when you tour the standard F-150 factory. Ford will not let you enter the F-150 Lightning factory.

Interesting!
I had only skimmed the history and didn't realize the Rogue plant was ground-up new.
Thanks for the correction.

 

[mbeadnell]

I am hoping the BEV does not get delay. I am unfortunately one of the 20 percent who want the BEV version and not the Harvester.

 

[BartMan Terra Total EV]

Don't mean to beat a dead horse and I realize this subject is based on rumors but....

Like I mentioned before my fear of SM "alleged " plan to dely the BEV means the range and battery size will not get over 400. I also wonder how many Harvester reservation will switch or get canceled if the towing capacity stays so low. My guess is SM will keep the towing capacity on the down low as long as possible. All that weight south of rear axel its just plane old physics right?

 

[cyure]

Don't mean to beat a dead horse and I realize this subject is based on rumors but....

Like I mentioned before my fear of SM "alleged " plan to dely the BEV means the range and battery size will not get over 400. I also wonder how many Harvester reservation will switch or get canceled if the towing capacity stays so low. My guess is SM will keep the towing capacity on the down low as long as possible. All that weight south of rear axel its just plane old physics right?

All I can say is we have no information on what’s coming first. The one video I saw recently stated they are being worked on in parallel.

I’m just continuing on with faith and patience.

As for physics, I’m the wrong girl for that. MATH, but I have an idea of who will respond to that question. Now who could that be??

 

[BartMan Terra Total EV]

All I can say is we have no information on what’s coming first. The one video I saw recently stated they are being worked on in parallel.

I’m just continuing on with faith and patience.

As for physics, I’m the wrong girl for that. MATH, but I have an idea of who will respond to that question. Now who could that be??

I can think of a couple of people. Hope I am not bumming said people out by beating the dead horse. My hope is SM devolps a max pack battery that will keep all the trailer folks in the beloved SM fold.

 

[SpaceEVDriver]

I can think of a couple of people. Hope I am not bumming said people out by beating the dead horse. My hope is SM devolps a max pack battery that will keep all the trailer folks in the beloved SM fold.

I fully expect Scout to get 350 miles on the BEV. That’s such a well-known number by now that they have to have a trim that gets at least 350 miles or they will disappoint everybody. I think this is likely more important than base price.

Can they get 400 miles? Absolutely. How much money do you want to spend?
Will they get 400 miles? How much money do they want to spend?

They could “easily" decide to offer an upgraded battery, low-rolling-resistance All-season, 31” or 32” tires on 22” wheels, and a requirement to use “eco mode" to get 400 miles. The frame has plenty of space for a bigger battery, the GAWR of their axles will easily be able to handle a little extra weight (a few % more). The question is whether they can get the higher asking price if they offer it and whether they need to offer a lower towing capacity with that higher range. They would have to do a fair amount of engineering and testing to be sure they could consistently get that extra range. That’s not free.

The towing capacity of the Harvester is at least partially dependent on where they put the Harvester engine. If it’s over the rear axle or aft of the rear axle, then tongue weight becomes a limiting factor. If it’s between the rear axle and the front axle, GAWR matters more than tongue weight (but you increase noise, vibration, and harshness by moving the engine nearer the passengers).

I’ve done the math elsewhere in this forum. The basic idea is that for every 100 pounds of extra weight over or aft of the rear axle, you lose about 1000 pounds of towing capacity. To get the numbers exact, you would need to know the real weight and distance from the rear axle. Some of that can be mitigated, of course. All it would take is various upgrades to suspension, frame, axle GAWR, brakes, tires (LTs instead of softer tires) etc. I suspect the Harvester is already going to cost more than the BEV, and if it does some people are going to be unhappy—imagine even more cost related to the upgraded parts.

And if you’re upgrading parts, why not upgrade them on the BEV too so Scout only has to purchase one set of parts that are interchangeable between the BEV and the Harvester. But then you’re talking an HD/2500/3500 truck instead of a 1500 truck, you’ve harshed the ride beyond acceptability, and you’ve added $20k to the base price.

There’s also the concern about thermal management. With the massive amount of waste heat coming from the Harvester that needs to be managed, Scout’s thermal management system will probably have to be upgraded on the Harvester. If they separate the engine from the battery/motor thermal management, then it might allow DIYers to upgrade to higher tow capacities (see below).

I think the compromise is:
Harvester: max 7500 pounds
BEV: max 10,000 pounds.

Note that they will almost certainly use the same frame and axles for the BEV and Harvester. If that’s the case, and you know for a fact that the Harvester engine doesn’t push you beyond a safe GAWR, braking capacity, or thermal capacity it might be "simply" a matter of upgrading the suspension, switching to LT tires, beefing up the sway bars, increasing brake size, and a few other upgrades to push the Harvester to 10,000 pounds towing ability. But you’ll still have the lower towing capacity rating on the official VIN and door jamb sticker.

 

[cyure]

I fully expect Scout to get 350 miles on the BEV. That’s such a well-known number by now that they have to have a trim that gets at least 350 miles or they will disappoint everybody. I think this is likely more important than base price.

Can they get 400 miles? Absolutely. How much money do you want to spend?
Will they get 400 miles? How much money do they want to spend?

They could “easily" decide to offer an upgraded battery, low-rolling-resistance All-season, 31” or 32” tires on 22” wheels, and a requirement to use “eco mode" to get 400 miles. The frame has plenty of space for a bigger battery, the GAWR of their axles will easily be able to handle a little extra weight (a few % more). The question is whether they can get the higher asking price if they offer it and whether they need to offer a lower towing capacity with that higher range. They would have to do a fair amount of engineering and testing to be sure they could consistently get that extra range. That’s not free.

The towing capacity of the Harvester is at least partially dependent on where they put the Harvester engine. If it’s over the rear axle or aft of the rear axle, then tongue weight becomes a limiting factor. If it’s between the rear axle and the front axle, GAWR matters more than tongue weight (but you increase noise, vibration, and harshness by moving the engine nearer the passengers).

I’ve done the math elsewhere in this forum. The basic idea is that for every 100 pounds of extra weight over or aft of the rear axle, you lose about 1000 pounds of towing capacity. To get the numbers exact, you would need to know the real weight and distance from the rear axle. Some of that can be mitigated, of course. All it would take is various upgrades to suspension, frame, axle GAWR, brakes, tires (LTs instead of softer tires) etc. I suspect the Harvester is already going to cost more than the BEV, and if it does some people are going to be unhappy—imagine even more cost related to the upgraded parts.

And if you’re upgrading parts, why not upgrade them on the BEV too so Scout only has to purchase one set of parts that are interchangeable between the BEV and the Harvester. But then you’re talking an HD/2500/3500 truck instead of a 1500 truck, you’ve harshed the ride beyond acceptability, and you’ve added $20k to the base price.

There’s also the concern about thermal management. With the massive amount of waste heat coming from the Harvester that needs to be managed, Scout’s thermal management system will probably have to be upgraded on the Harvester. If they separate the engine from the battery/motor thermal management, then it might allow DIYers to upgrade to higher tow capacities (see below).

I think the compromise is:
Harvester: max 7500 pounds
BEV: max 10,000 pounds.

Note that they will almost certainly use the same frame and axles for the BEV and Harvester. If that’s the case, and you know for a fact that the Harvester engine doesn’t push you beyond a safe GAWR, braking capacity, or thermal capacity it might be "simply" a matter of upgrading the suspension, switching to LT tires, beefing up the sway bars, increasing brake size, and a few other upgrades to push the Harvester to 10,000 pounds towing ability. But you’ll still have the lower towing capacity rating on the official VIN and door jamb sticker.

I knew you would have an answer. And I knew that answer would involve lots of number.

 

[J Alynn]

All I can say is we have no information on what’s coming first. The one video I saw recently stated they are being worked on in parallel.

I’m just continuing on with faith and patience.

As for physics, I’m the wrong girl for that. MATH, but I have an idea of who will respond to that question. Now who could that be??

Bob Nye the Science Guy?

 

[J Alynn]

All I can say is we have no information on what’s coming first. The one video I saw recently stated they are being worked on in parallel.

I’m just continuing on with faith and patience.

As for physics, I’m the wrong girl for that. MATH, but I have an idea of who will respond to that question. Now who could that be??

The Count from Sesame Street-that’s gotta be it!

 

[J Alynn]

Don't mean to beat a dead horse and I realize this subject is based on rumors but....

Like I mentioned before my fear of SM "alleged " plan to dely the BEV means the range and battery size will not get over 400. I also wonder how many Harvester reservation will switch or get canceled if the towing capacity stays so low. My guess is SM will keep the towing capacity on the down low as long as possible. All that weight south of rear axel its just plane old physics right?

Considering they’ve announced 350 I’m not sure how people can be upset that it doesn’t get 400. It has never been stated to be higher than 350