Higher Range

[ejwl]

I saw the expected range is 350 miles and up 500 with the range extender. I would be nice to have a higher base range like 400 or 450. The rivian r1s range is 410 and the lucid gravity range is estimated at 450. In order to keep up with the competition the amount of range should be matched or exceeded. 400 base range and 500 with the extender is a good start.

 

[cyure]

The big consideration (beyond capability) here is COST $$$$

Scout is designing a truck to a "projected" estimated range of 350 miles, and cost for that is an important variable since we have a pricing projection as well.

From Scout:

RANGE
Scout Motors estimates the Traveler™ SUV and Terra™ pickup will have up to 350 miles (563 km) of all-electric range or more than 500 miles (804 km) for gas-powered range extender-equipped versions. These are manufacturer's projected estimate based on internal targets. EPA estimates will be provided when available.

PRICING
Retail prices are targeted to start under $60,000 for both the Traveler™ SUV and Terra™ pickup. This pricing target is for U.S. market only and is subject to change. We'll be sharing more details about pricing as we get closer to production.

BATTERY
While final specifications for the production models have not been released, we expect the capacity of the battery packs to be in the ranges below:
Scout full-electric models: 120-130 kWh
Scout Harvester™ range extender models: 60-70 kWh
We’ll be sharing more details about battery sizes as we get closer to production. Stay tuned for updates.

Everything above is still subject to change, because there are NO FINAL SPEC's available, and until they are, we won't know anything. Its quite simple actually - if Scout settles on 350 miles as the EPA number, they may need to bump up the full-electric kWH in red to achieve that. That is what we will need to wait and see, and that is where the rubber will hit the road with all the testing that will be taking place.

In the meantime, if you want a super heavy truck with less capability than a Scout, but with longer range, it is going to cost you:



View attachment 14390

$97,000!!

 

[Scout_Lookout]

The big consideration (beyond capability) here is COST $$$$

Scout is designing a truck to a "projected" estimated range of 350 miles, and cost for that is an important variable since we have a pricing projection as well.

From Scout:

RANGE
Scout Motors estimates the Traveler™ SUV and Terra™ pickup will have up to 350 miles (563 km) of all-electric range or more than 500 miles (804 km) for gas-powered range extender-equipped versions. These are manufacturer's projected estimate based on internal targets. EPA estimates will be provided when available.

PRICING
Retail prices are targeted to start under $60,000 for both the Traveler™ SUV and Terra™ pickup. This pricing target is for U.S. market only and is subject to change. We'll be sharing more details about pricing as we get closer to production.

BATTERY
While final specifications for the production models have not been released, we expect the capacity of the battery packs to be in the ranges below:
Scout full-electric models: 120-130 kWh
Scout Harvester™ range extender models: 60-70 kWh
We’ll be sharing more details about battery sizes as we get closer to production. Stay tuned for updates.

Everything above is still subject to change, because there are NO FINAL SPEC's available, and until they are, we won't know anything. Its quite simple actually - if Scout settles on 350 miles as the EPA number, they may need to bump up the full-electric kWH in red to achieve that TBD but likely to move upward a little). That is what we will need to wait and see, and that is where the rubber will hit the road with all the testing that will be taking place.

In the meantime, if you want a super heavy truck with less capability than a Scout, but with longer range, it is going to cost you:



View attachment 14390

Only thing you forgot was the "mic drop"

 

[J Alynn]

$97,000!!

For a Chevy

 

[Chaz26]

Shows the price of the battery, looking at their website now, LT Standard Range (283 miles) is showing at $63,495, LT Extended Range is at $71,695 (410 miles) LT max range is at $91,795 (478 miles).

 

[Mousehunter]

Shows what they think they can ask for the battery. Cells themselves have come down a LOT. Last I looked, the cheapest Lithium for home backup was about 15kwh for $2k. So sure the entire pack is still expensive - but 30k more for extended range, not so much. The Silverado has 119, 170, and 205kwh packs. The $8k for 51kwh more battery is fair enough (it would get you 60kwh with just cells). The $20k for another 35 is mostly market segmentation with the extra trim level just to order it, not just the battery addition - and is still quite steep.

 

[Logan]

Saw this yesterday, seemed relevant.

https://insideevs.com/news/790449/epa-range-estimation-test-results/

Looks like about as many brands under report, as over-report their EPA range. And given, this is based on a 70mph highway range test (not mixed like EPA). Although, I don't think they were all done at the same time (which means weather could change things too).

 

[R1TVT]

"Brand" is pretty broad in my mind...

Very hard to tell what was aggregated underneath each "brand" - what models did they test? model year, tires, wheels, drive trains, battery packs? Hard to say looking at a brand chart.

This is an example of a better perspective when considering range data relative to a test result (because it actually denotes the Model & Year) and provides additional context in the write up:

10 EVs with More Range than Advertised in Real World Tests

Are you shopping for an electric vehicle this season? These models can help ease your range anxiety.

www.autoweek.com

 

[Logan]

"Brand" is pretty broad in my mind...

Very hard to tell what was aggregated underneath each "brand" - what models did they test? model year, tires, wheels, drive trains, battery packs? Hard to say looking at a brand chart.

This is an example of a better perspective when considering range data relative to a test result (because it actually denotes the Model & Year) and provides additional context in the write up:

10 EVs with More Range than Advertised in Real World Tests

Are you shopping for an electric vehicle this season? These models can help ease your range anxiety.

www.autoweek.com

View attachment 14404

The link has more details broken down, but I couldn't embed it.

Here is a screenshot though.

 

[R1TVT]

Remember - these rags all have biases too... I would take all of this data with a grain of salt and consider sources and do much more exhaustive research if you don't know actual owners that can verify claims made by OEM's. Of course with Scout, we will be beholden to trusting 3rd parties. The best one I have found personally is Edmunds for car stuff.

 

[RodorW]

Shows the price of the battery, looking at their website now, LT Standard Range (283 miles) is showing at $63,495, LT Extended Range is at $71,695 (410 miles) LT max range is at $91,795 (478 miles).

The one thing I’ll say about GMs price is that with Ultium (or whatever it’s called now) it’s supposed to be capable of having cells replaced if they fail instead of the entire battery, wether that’s true or not or if it adds value I can’t really say

 

[mastertroll]

Based on what we have available from the manufacturer(s) one can only go on what is advertised.
Maybe the ranges should be listed as average. My Accord hybrid, if I recall is listed as annual average of 42-44 mpg. In the winter I get 36-40, if I baby it. Peak of summer I get 50-52 mpg so end of year two I’ve averaged 44 mpg. That to me is the safer way to do it.
But back to the point, SM is building vehicles for the majorities and not the outliers and this far into it I don’t see it changing. Continuing to hope for something beyond what has been advertised is unlikely so perhaps that is the better choice, by PR ranges that seems to be the best bet for what you seem to want. But maybe over next two years Scout will figure out how to add another 50-100 miles and charge $9K for it. I’m sure there are a few people willing to pay fo

Figuring out how to add those miles either comes down to a larger battery, a smaller/more aerodynamic vehicle (that would be a shame), or newer lighter/denser technology(not gonna happen) You want the base price to stay honest, but are you willing to accept it won’t deliver a real 350 miles? Once you load yourself, family, gear—whatever—those numbers stack against you fast.

I find it interesting you view people who expect advertising to match reality as “outliers.” What happens after a couple of years? What’s the range guarantee? There has to be clear, fixed expectations—no moving goalposts. The gap between 350 and 250 is huge. After 4–5 years when range inevitably drops, what then? Because it was never truly 350 to begin with, the real-world number falls even lower from a false starting point. This is why capacity matters to me. If they claim 450, I know for the next 5 or so years I should be able to count on 350-400 (depending) but 400 casual.

Most buyers expect a vehicle to simply work and perform as promised—that’s not an outlier; it’s the core of marketing and could haunt Scout if it backfires. It seems to me they aren't wanting to be a Tesla. They could PR and say the realistic range and that would be commendable, people would have real expectations.

Back to the truck: solo, no AC/heat, tailwind—maybe you hit it. But drive it like any normal vehicle? Very few ICE vehicles fail to deliver a real 325-350 miles. When an EV makes range claims... Real-world range typically drops 20–40 miles per 100 miles of advertised figure, depending on conditions.

Test it. Charge 100 miles (no reserve kw) and drive it.

 

[Scoutsie]

Figuring out how to add those miles either comes down to a larger battery, a smaller/more aerodynamic vehicle (that would be a shame), or newer lighter/denser technology(not gonna happen) You want the base price to stay honest, but are you willing to accept it won’t deliver a real 350 miles? Once you load yourself, family, gear—whatever—those numbers stack against you fast.

I find it interesting you view people who expect advertising to match reality as “outliers.” What happens after a couple of years? What’s the range guarantee? There has to be clear, fixed expectations—no moving goalposts. The gap between 350 and 250 is huge. After 4–5 years when range inevitably drops, what then? Because it was never truly 350 to begin with, the real-world number falls even lower from a false starting point. This is why capacity matters to me. If they claim 450, I know for the next 5 or so years I should be able to count on 350-400 (depending) but 400 casual.
Most buyers expect a vehicle to simply work and perform as promised—that’s not an outlier; it’s the core of marketing and could haunt Scout if it backfires. It seems to me they aren't wanting to be a Tesla.

Back to the truck: solo, no AC/heat, tailwind—maybe you hit it. But drive it like any normal vehicle? Very few ICE vehicles fail to deliver a real 325-350 miles. When an EV makes range claims... Real-world range typically drops 20–40 miles per 100 miles of advertised figure, depending on conditions.

Test it. Charge 100 miles (no reserve kw) and drive it.

I don’t think it’s cynical to expect that claims made in advertising is skewed to give you the best stats legally allowable because they want to make a sale. How those claims stack up in the real world is sometimes in line with reality and sometimes it’s not. You rely on stuff like reputation to boost the chances that your mouth is writing checks that your ass will be able to cash. All that said, I have always taken claims like that with a grain of salt. Your mileage may vary.

I regret that I no longer have direct daily access to the world’s foremost experts on batteries to ask about expectations. All I know is that it depends on a zillion variables. I don’t think it’s advisable to make claims about range that could be interpreted by a layperson to mean something when the facts of the matter are more nuanced and the typical real-life experience is something else.

In the case of Scout, not a one of us on the outside knows what to expect yet. That’s kinda just how it is. The facts that we do know is that a certain company had a real big problem with making claims about their diesel engines that didn’t pan out. It’s not in their best interests to do that.

 

[Mousehunter]

Sad thing - their diesel engines were very good. Virtually every other US small diesel manufacturer was playing the same game - but only VW got crucified.

Ok, I am sore about my Golf being targeted and VW being targeted. But my soreness was helped a lot by VW paying me over 1/3 of the price of my vehicle back and allowing me to keep it (after it's performance and fuel efficiency was castrated).

 

[mastertroll]

I don’t think it’s cynical to expect that claims made in advertising is skewed to give you the best stats legally allowable because they want to make a sale. How those claims stack up in the real world is sometimes in line with reality and sometimes it’s not. You rely on stuff like reputation to boost the chances that your mouth is writing checks that your ass will be able to cash. All that said, I have always taken claims like that with a grain of salt. Your mileage may vary.

I regret that I no longer have direct daily access to the world’s foremost experts on batteries to ask about expectations. All I know is that it depends on a zillion variables. I don’t think it’s advisable to make claims about range that could be interpreted by a layperson to mean something when the facts of the matter are more nuanced and the typical real-life experience is something else.

In the case of Scout, not a one of us on the outside knows what to expect yet. That’s kinda just how it is. The facts that we do know is that a certain company had a real big problem with making claims about their diesel engines that didn’t pan out. It’s not in their best interests to do that.

I'm giving you a pretty good idea what to expect if specs remain the same. Here's to hoping for some improvement.

 

[Mousehunter]

At least with most other EV's you either have the real world tests done both others, or at least the history of the companies prior EV's to give you an indication. I am not sure how extensive the real world data will be before reservations will need to be converted to orders.

 

[Variable430]

Shows what they think they can ask for the battery. Cells themselves have come down a LOT. Last I looked, the cheapest Lithium for home backup was about 15kwh for $2k. So sure the entire pack is still expensive - but 30k more for extended range, not so much. The Silverado has 119, 170, and 205kwh packs. The $8k for 51kwh more battery is fair enough (it would get you 60kwh with just cells). The $20k for another 35 is mostly market segmentation with the extra trim level just to order it, not just the battery addition - and is still quite steep.

The ix3 is launching now and should be in at a similar price point as scout, obviously a different segment of vehicle but it has 450-500 miles of range so the problem scout will have is keeping up w the coming 2026 and later EVs that have 400-500 miles of range at a reasonable price point.

 

[Variable430]

Figuring out how to add those miles either comes down to a larger battery, a smaller/more aerodynamic vehicle (that would be a shame), or newer lighter/denser technology(not gonna happen) You want the base price to stay honest, but are you willing to accept it won’t deliver a real 350 miles? Once you load yourself, family, gear—whatever—those numbers stack against you fast.

I find it interesting you view people who expect advertising to match reality as “outliers.” What happens after a couple of years? What’s the range guarantee? There has to be clear, fixed expectations—no moving goalposts. The gap between 350 and 250 is huge. After 4–5 years when range inevitably drops, what then? Because it was never truly 350 to begin with, the real-world number falls even lower from a false starting point. This is why capacity matters to me. If they claim 450, I know for the next 5 or so years I should be able to count on 350-400 (depending) but 400 casual.

Most buyers expect a vehicle to simply work and perform as promised—that’s not an outlier; it’s the core of marketing and could haunt Scout if it backfires. It seems to me they aren't wanting to be a Tesla. They could PR and say the realistic range and that would be commendable, people would have real expectations.

Back to the truck: solo, no AC/heat, tailwind—maybe you hit it. But drive it like any normal vehicle? Very few ICE vehicles fail to deliver a real 325-350 miles. When an EV makes range claims... Real-world range typically drops 20–40 miles per 100 miles of advertised figure, depending on conditions.

Test it. Charge 100 miles (no reserve kw) and drive it.

Range, like fuel economy, has so much variability to driving style. There is also a temperature component that impacts EVs and tire size and aero matters. It’s one of the reasons I’m eager to see what the real efficiency stats for about are for the pure ev

 

[LastDayScout]

The ix3 is launching now and should be in at a similar price point as scout, obviously a different segment of vehicle but it has 450-500 miles of range so the problem scout will have is keeping up w the coming 2026 and later EVs that have 400-500 miles of range at a reasonable price point.

I like the iX3 and its i3 sedan sibling quite a bit. The ix3 achieves that range with a big battery for the size of the vehicle. Yes, it charges fast and has has good aero, but only gets around 3.4 mi/kWh efficiency. Yes, that is good but not Lucid level. I get 3.4 mi/kWh regularly in my iX which is much larger and slightly older technology. BMW often underestimates their specs.

All of that said, for the Scout to get that sort of range the battery would have to be over 150kw. That would put the price well over their target price. I have heard that Scout aero is surprisingly good. So, maybe by launch there will be some tweaks in other areas that allow you to achieve between 350-380 in perfect conditions. But, with the estimated battery capacity, 450-500 is just not possible.

 

[SpaceEVDriver]

I like the iX3 and its i3 sedan sibling quite a bit. The ix3 achieves that range with a big battery for the size of the vehicle. Yes, it charges fast and has has good aero, but only gets around 3.4 mi/kWh efficiency. Yes, that is good but not Lucid level. I get 3.4 mi/kWh regularly in my iX which is much larger and slightly older technology. BMW often underestimates their specs.

All of that said, for the Scout to get that sort of range the battery would have to be over 150kw. That would put the price well over their target price. I have heard that Scout aero is surprisingly good. So, maybe by launch there will be some tweaks in other areas that allow you to achieve between 350-380 in perfect conditions. But, with the estimated battery capacity, 450-500 is just not possible.

This is the thing. A 500 mile vehicle is a waste of 50%--90% of the battery for the vast majority of use cases. Having lived with BEV only for almost 90,000 miles, half on road trips in the charging desert of the Southwest, I would prefer a 300 mile range and a couple more DCFC stations in a few far-out places.

 

[6-ScoutFamily]

This is the thing. A 500 mile vehicle is a waste of 50%--90% of the battery for the vast majority of use cases. Having lived with BEV only for almost 90,000 miles, half on road trips in the charging desert of the Southwest, I would prefer a 300 mile range and a couple more DCFC stations in a few far-out places.

You make it hard to be whiny about being stuck in the boonies!