Battery only or harvester.. starting to rethink it.

[mastertroll]

I've switched from a Tesla to a Ford F-150 Lightning. I miss the superior software experience and smoother ride quality of the Tesla, but I really appreciate a few standout features on the Lightning—like its full-size proportions, onboard power outlets, and the ability to illuminate the area around the truck with its lighting setup.

That said, if Scout Motors can combine those practical advantages into something even better, then I'd switch to the Scout Terra for that reason alone.

I'm skeptical about whether the added weight of the onboard generator (the "Harvester" range extender) will be worth it for me personally, but I could be proven wrong. I really need to get behind the wheel and drive it to see how it handles in real life.

From what I've seen so far, though, I'd lean toward the pure battery-electric Terra model that delivers a genuine 450–500 mile range without the generator—assuming they can actually achieve that kind of efficiency and capacity in the final production version (current projections are around 350 miles for the BEV, but I'm hopeful for improvements or a higher-spec option).


I know Scout hasn't promised 4-500 mile range in a battery only model so take this as feedback. You need to offer bigger battery like the Silverado EV so it does(it realistically gets 450 real miles). And you need to offer closer specs to the upcoming Lightning's 700 mile range for the harvester model.

I've seen way too many EV makers claim ranges like 320 miles only for real-world driving to knock off 20–40% depending on conditions—highway speeds, cold weather, towing, you name it. I've done extensive range testing myself with both my old Tesla and the current Ford F-150 Lightning, and while Ford does a somewhat better job of delivering closer to their EPA numbers in many scenarios, the gap is still there for trucks especially. I've driven without AC or heat and there's just no way to hit those numbers.

So when Scout announces their pure electric Terra with an estimated 350 miles of range (based on current projections for the ~120–130 kWh battery pack).. you'll have another EV truck that does 250 miles.

My straightforward advice: Match what the Chevrolet Silverado EV does with its higher-capacity battery options in the EV-only models. The Silverado EV offers packs up to around 205 kWh (in the Max Range versions), delivering EPA estimates of 440–493 miles depending on the trim—real-world results are often solid in the high 300s to low 400s for many owners under mixed conditions. No more of this sub-350-mile "false advertising" nonsense that leaves people stressed on longer trips.

Honestly, if an EV truck can genuinely deliver around 400 miles of usable real-world range (factoring in typical losses), that solves a ton of the range anxiety problems for most people—daily commutes, weekend getaways, even some road trips without constant charging stops. That's the benchmark Scout (or anyone else) should aim for in a pure BEV configuration.

Scout Motors' New Range Extended EV Truck Doesn't Have Great Towing Capacity, But Neither Do Most EV Trucks https://share.google/WTlBxhuAMKWksaOjy

 

[J Alynn]

Awh that’s terrible but seats are so important. We had a Miata RF and that seat bothered my husbands back so much we only had it 600 miles and traded it in.

It sucks because rest or car and experience was probably one of best cars I ever owned

 

[J Alynn]

Did you have sport seats?

No, sadly it was the standard. At the time I was biking a lot and it was prior to me having a “professional” bike fitting so I think that was causing pain. Few years ago we spent a week in Canada in a rental X3 and I had a bit of issue but not nearly as bad so not sure if biking was part of issue or if X3 seats were less bolstered. Either way I guess I should rent one for a day sometime and see if things changed but it’s an expensive proposition to buy one to figure out if it still bothers me

 

[strider]

It's not just Tesla. Show me one EV besides the SEV that achieves it rated range (let alone highway speeds).

You have been jaded by Tesla. They use the maximum allowed "factor" from EPA to calculate range. They are always WAY off.

The Germans are generally quite conservative. Everyone else inflates. Here is data from 2023:

Tested: How EPA EV Range Figures Compare with Reality

In our real-world highway testing, we're seeing big differences in the relative performance of EVs versus gas-powered vehicles. What gives?

www.caranddriver.com

 

[SpaceEVDriver]

I run a regular road trip from northern Arizona to Los Angeles and back about one or two times a month, sometimes less, sometimes more. No fewer than six times a year. The one-way distance between my departure and destination is 474 miles. I drive at 72-73 mph unless I get stuck behind a truck for a few miles (slower) and then overtake the truck (faster than 75 mph). The trip includes two stops for restroom, charge, and meals. It takes me between 7 and 8 hours every time, and the 8 hours is usually due to traffic, sometimes due to weather. I usually do 100-300 miles around the LA valley when I’m there, and then I drive home. The usual total distance is 1100-1200 miles round trip.

Since buying the Lightning, I’ve almost exclusively driven it on this trip. Its size sucks for in-town driving, but it’s the most comfortable vehicle I’ve owned.

On that trip, my median range while driving down to LA in the Lightning is 330 miles, or just over 2.5 miles/kWh. The only time it’s been less is when there are snowstorms at high elevations and in the springtime when the Santa Ana winds come up. (These are 30 mph to 40 mph steady winds with higher-speed gusts. Looking back at the post in this thread by @R1TVT, you add those winds to your travel speed to get the power requirements, which goes as the cube of the sum of the speeds, so it’s like driving 100+ mph). For most of the year, I can comfortably travel 255 miles on the freeway to my first charging stop with enough reserve to make it to a backup charger, if necessary, but I always know if I need to stop early. When the Santa Ana winds are blowing, I’ll usually stop a little earlier to charge up, eat, and relax before going into the maelstrom.

In LA traffic, my median range is more than 1,000 miles. That’s not a typo. I drive several regular routes that allow me to keep a steady speed of 35 mph for 40-100 miles round trip. At 35 mph, minimal stopping and just flowing, I can easily get 8-9 miles/kWh. I will never realistically get 1000 miles range on one charge because I’m never driving 35 mph for 28 hours. But when I drive off-highway, through the desert, on forest service roads, etc., I can often get 4-5 miles/kWh.

On the way home, I climb from near sea level to ~7300 feet elevation, still fight the Santa Ana winds (they’re crosswinds, so their impact is actually greater than if they were headwinds, and they’re usually not helpful as a tailwind). The return trip is, obviously more energy expensive. I typically get around 2 miles/kWh for the entire return trip when it’s windy in the desert and cold on the mountain.

Overall for the freeway portions of the trip—down off the high elevation, through the windy desert, to city, then back up through the windy desert (against the wind both ways because they’re crosswinds), up the high elevation climb—I get an average of about 2.25 miles/kWh (288 miles range on my 131 kWh battery). The 2.25 miles/kWh doesn’t include the outlier range driving around town in Los Angeles.

Some things I do differently from maybe some other drivers: I did the calculations of what’s the optimal speed for getting where I’m going in a reasonable time vs energy use vs the overhead cost of stopping, and 72-73 mph is the optimal speed; faster and I just have to charge for longer, and slower means I don’t save enough to justify unless there’s an issue like especially strong winds. I run with 45-48 PSI in my tires, despite the Ford recommended pressure of 39 PSI; I don’t have significantly faster tire wear, but the ride is rougher. I don’t feel the need to rush. I don’t eat in the vehicle. I’ve been doing this trip for decades and it’s always taken me 7-8 hours depending on weather and traffic. It still does in the BEVs.

The ABRP route planner suggests it takes about 8 hours, but it’s conservative. It’s conservative for good reason, but its conservative models mean people assume take that as gospel and that you can’t do better than their model.

Even so, there are two short stops in ABRP, and if I wanted I could reduce it to one stop. Notice the large distances between charging stations along most of the route. The longest distance between chargers is 122 miles and they are highlighted as the two stops in the map below. Between those stops is also where the winds are the worst and there’s a lot of elevation loss and regain and loss. I don’t usually stop at the 17 minute stop; I usually stop earlier because I like good food for lunch and the indicated stop doesn’t have decent food. I also like clean restrooms, and that stop doesn’t have clean restrooms.

 

[mastertroll]

I run a regular road trip from northern Arizona to Los Angeles and back about one or two times a month, sometimes less, sometimes more. No fewer than six times a year. The one-way distance between my departure and destination is 474 miles. I drive at 72-73 mph unless I get stuck behind a truck for a few miles (slower) and then overtake the truck (faster than 75 mph). The trip includes two stops for restroom, charge, and meals. It takes me between 7 and 8 hours every time, and the 8 hours is usually due to traffic, sometimes due to weather. I usually do 100-300 miles around the LA valley when I’m there, and then I drive home. The usual total distance is 1100-1200 miles round trip.

Since buying the Lightning, I’ve almost exclusively driven it on this trip. Its size sucks for in-town driving, but it’s the most comfortable vehicle I’ve owned.

On that trip, my median range while driving down to LA in the Lightning is 330 miles, or just over 2.5 miles/kWh. The only time it’s been less is when there are snowstorms at high elevations and in the springtime when the Santa Ana winds come up. (These are 30 mph to 40 mph steady winds with higher-speed gusts. Looking back at the post in this thread by @R1TVT, you add those winds to your travel speed to get the power requirements, which goes as the cube of the sum of the speeds, so it’s like driving 100+ mph). For most of the year, I can comfortably travel 255 miles on the freeway to my first charging stop with enough reserve to make it to a backup charger, if necessary, but I always know if I need to stop early. When the Santa Ana winds are blowing, I’ll usually stop a little earlier to charge up, eat, and relax before going into the maelstrom.

In LA traffic, my median range is more than 1,000 miles. That’s not a typo. I drive several regular routes that allow me to keep a steady speed of 35 mph for 40-100 miles round trip. At 35 mph, minimal stopping and just flowing, I can easily get 8-9 miles/kWh. I will never realistically get 1000 miles range on one charge because I’m never driving 35 mph for 28 hours. But when I drive off-highway, through the desert, on forest service roads, etc., I can often get 4-5 miles/kWh.

On the way home, I climb from near sea level to ~7300 feet elevation, still fight the Santa Ana winds (they’re crosswinds, so their impact is actually greater than if they were headwinds, and they’re usually not helpful as a tailwind). The return trip is, obviously more energy expensive. I typically get around 2 miles/kWh for the entire return trip when it’s windy in the desert and cold on the mountain.

Overall for the freeway portions of the trip—down off the high elevation, through the windy desert, to city, then back up through the windy desert (against the wind both ways because they’re crosswinds), up the high elevation climb—I get an average of about 2.25 miles/kWh (288 miles range on my 131 kWh battery). The 2.25 miles/kWh doesn’t include the outlier range driving around town in Los Angeles.

Some things I do differently from maybe some other drivers: I did the calculations of what’s the optimal speed for getting where I’m going in a reasonable time vs energy use vs the overhead cost of stopping, and 72-73 mph is the optimal speed; faster and I just have to charge for longer, and slower means I don’t save enough to justify unless there’s an issue like especially strong winds. I run with 45-48 PSI in my tires, despite the Ford recommended pressure of 39 PSI; I don’t have significantly faster tire wear, but the ride is rougher. I don’t feel the need to rush. I don’t eat in the vehicle. I’ve been doing this trip for decades and it’s always taken me 7-8 hours depending on weather and traffic. It still does in the BEVs.

View attachment 14145


The ABRP route planner suggests it takes about 8 hours, but it’s conservative. It’s conservative for good reason, but its conservative models mean people assume take that as gospel and that you can’t do better than their model.

Even so, there are two short stops in ABRP, and if I wanted I could reduce it to one stop. Notice the large distances between charging stations along most of the route. The longest distance between chargers is 122 miles and they are highlighted as the two stops in the map below. Between those stops is also where the winds are the worst and there’s a lot of elevation loss and regain and loss. I don’t usually stop at the 17 minute stop; I usually stop earlier because I like good food for lunch and the indicated stop doesn’t have decent food. I also like clean restrooms, and that stop doesn’t have clean restrooms.

View attachment 14152

I always plan to charge around 250. I think the Lightning is the best full sized electric truck on the road right now. Let's see what Scout can come up with.

 

[Variable430]

There are a fair number of places reviewing EV's like that.

CR’s Real-World EV Range Tests Show Which Models Beat EPA Estimates - Consumer Reports

Consumer Reports' real-world electric car range tests show how far an EV can go on a highway road trip before the battery runs out.

www.consumerreports.org

View attachment 14129

70 mph range test — Out of Spec Studios

outofspecstudios.com

View attachment 14130


The more premium brands seem to do quite well. BMW, Mercedes, Porsche, Audi.

But its not just those. And historically, Tesla has been particularly bad in this area. But they had a lawsuit against them a while ago IIRC, and they had to update/reduce the EPA ranges, and its a bit closer now.

As someone who daily drives an eqs580 it’s a range monster on the freeway. The aero is a huge advantage for efficiency at highway speeds. Wish they had put in the two speed transmission coming in the glc which would give it an additional boost

 

[ritterf]

Harvester skeptic here too — but I think the fix is the architecture, not the powertrain choice itself.


The issue I keep coming back to isn't gas vs. electric — it's that a conventional EREV design makes you haul 1,200–1,500 lbs of low-C-rate lithium just to get range. That weight spiral is what kills the towing dynamics and off-road feel we're all actually buying this thing for.


What I think Scout should seriously consider is a High-Rate Buffer architecture — a 15–20kWh LTO (Lithium Titanate) pack paired with a purpose-built turbo generator instead of the conventional large-capacity battery approach.


For the generator, the EA211-ERV — just put into production by VW for the ID. Era 9X — is the right engine. 1.5L, VTG, Miller cycle, ~105kW sustained output. Real production engine, already deployed.


Why LTO over conventional lithium?

• 20,000+ verified charge cycles (Toshiba SCiB cells). This pack outlasts the chassis.
• Full regen absorption on mountain descents without thermal gating — braking feel stays consistent
• Shed ~800–1,000 lbs of pack mass vs. a conventional EREV — real payload and towing headroom back
• Cost math works — LTO is ~3–4x per kWh but you're buying a fraction of the cells. That delta funds a better generator and suspension.

Already sent this to Scout directly. Got the "thanks, noted" from a Support Trailguide. Figured the people actually thinking about this are in here.


Preorder #3933623624 — e90 M3 / Jeep LJ Rubi owner, replacing an X5 with this.

 

[cyure]

Harvester skeptic here too — but I think the fix is the architecture, not the powertrain choice itself.


The issue I keep coming back to isn't gas vs. electric — it's that a conventional EREV design makes you haul 1,200–1,500 lbs of low-C-rate lithium just to get range. That weight spiral is what kills the towing dynamics and off-road feel we're all actually buying this thing for.


What I think Scout should seriously consider is a High-Rate Buffer architecture — a 15–20kWh LTO (Lithium Titanate) pack paired with a purpose-built turbo generator instead of the conventional large-capacity battery approach.


For the generator, the EA211-ERV — just put into production by VW for the ID. Era 9X — is the right engine. 1.5L, VTG, Miller cycle, ~105kW sustained output. Real production engine, already deployed.


Why LTO over conventional lithium?

• 20,000+ verified charge cycles (Toshiba SCiB cells). This pack outlasts the chassis.
• Full regen absorption on mountain descents without thermal gating — braking feel stays consistent
• Shed ~800–1,000 lbs of pack mass vs. a conventional EREV — real payload and towing headroom back
• Cost math works — LTO is ~3–4x per kWh but you're buying a fraction of the cells. That delta funds a better generator and suspension.

Already sent this to Scout directly. Got the "thanks, noted" from a Support Trailguide. Figured the people actually thinking about this are in here.


Preorder #3933623624 — e90 M3 / Jeep LJ Rubi owner, replacing an X5 with this.

Welcome to the community!

 

[ritterf]

Started a new post with more details about my ideas..

Thread 'What If the Harvester Shed 1,000 lbs and Got Better? The Case for LTO + EA211-ERV'

Yesterday at 8:28 PM

e90 M3 / Jeep LJ Rubi owner · Preorder #3933623624 · replacing an X5 with this

I've been sitting on this for a while. Already sent it to Scout directly — got a very polished "thanks, noted" from support. So I'm bringing it here, where the people who actually care about this stuff are.

The Harvester has a real shot at being the most capable EREV ever built. But I think the current architecture direction is about to repeat the same mistake every other EREV has made. Here's what I mean — and here's the fix.

---

THE PROBLEM: EREVs ARE JUST BLOATED EVs WITH A GENERATOR BOLTED ON

Every...

• ritterf

• 

 

[ritterf]

I run a regular road trip from northern Arizona to Los Angeles and back about one or two times a month, sometimes less, sometimes more. No fewer than six times a year. The one-way distance between my departure and destination is 474 miles. I drive at 72-73 mph unless I get stuck behind a truck for a few miles (slower) and then overtake the truck (faster than 75 mph). The trip includes two stops for restroom, charge, and meals. It takes me between 7 and 8 hours every time, and the 8 hours is usually due to traffic, sometimes due to weather. I usually do 100-300 miles around the LA valley when I’m there, and then I drive home. The usual total distance is 1100-1200 miles round trip.

Since buying the Lightning, I’ve almost exclusively driven it on this trip. Its size sucks for in-town driving, but it’s the most comfortable vehicle I’ve owned.

On that trip, my median range while driving down to LA in the Lightning is 330 miles, or just over 2.5 miles/kWh. The only time it’s been less is when there are snowstorms at high elevations and in the springtime when the Santa Ana winds come up. (These are 30 mph to 40 mph steady winds with higher-speed gusts. Looking back at the post in this thread by @R1TVT, you add those winds to your travel speed to get the power requirements, which goes as the cube of the sum of the speeds, so it’s like driving 100+ mph). For most of the year, I can comfortably travel 255 miles on the freeway to my first charging stop with enough reserve to make it to a backup charger, if necessary, but I always know if I need to stop early. When the Santa Ana winds are blowing, I’ll usually stop a little earlier to charge up, eat, and relax before going into the maelstrom.

In LA traffic, my median range is more than 1,000 miles. That’s not a typo. I drive several regular routes that allow me to keep a steady speed of 35 mph for 40-100 miles round trip. At 35 mph, minimal stopping and just flowing, I can easily get 8-9 miles/kWh. I will never realistically get 1000 miles range on one charge because I’m never driving 35 mph for 28 hours. But when I drive off-highway, through the desert, on forest service roads, etc., I can often get 4-5 miles/kWh.

On the way home, I climb from near sea level to ~7300 feet elevation, still fight the Santa Ana winds (they’re crosswinds, so their impact is actually greater than if they were headwinds, and they’re usually not helpful as a tailwind). The return trip is, obviously more energy expensive. I typically get around 2 miles/kWh for the entire return trip when it’s windy in the desert and cold on the mountain.

Overall for the freeway portions of the trip—down off the high elevation, through the windy desert, to city, then back up through the windy desert (against the wind both ways because they’re crosswinds), up the high elevation climb—I get an average of about 2.25 miles/kWh (288 miles range on my 131 kWh battery). The 2.25 miles/kWh doesn’t include the outlier range driving around town in Los Angeles.

Some things I do differently from maybe some other drivers: I did the calculations of what’s the optimal speed for getting where I’m going in a reasonable time vs energy use vs the overhead cost of stopping, and 72-73 mph is the optimal speed; faster and I just have to charge for longer, and slower means I don’t save enough to justify unless there’s an issue like especially strong winds. I run with 45-48 PSI in my tires, despite the Ford recommended pressure of 39 PSI; I don’t have significantly faster tire wear, but the ride is rougher. I don’t feel the need to rush. I don’t eat in the vehicle. I’ve been doing this trip for decades and it’s always taken me 7-8 hours depending on weather and traffic. It still does in the BEVs.

View attachment 14145


The ABRP route planner suggests it takes about 8 hours, but it’s conservative. It’s conservative for good reason, but its conservative models mean people assume take that as gospel and that you can’t do better than their model.

Even so, there are two short stops in ABRP, and if I wanted I could reduce it to one stop. Notice the large distances between charging stations along most of the route. The longest distance between chargers is 122 miles and they are highlighted as the two stops in the map below. Between those stops is also where the winds are the worst and there’s a lot of elevation loss and regain and loss. I don’t usually stop at the 17 minute stop; I usually stop earlier because I like good food for lunch and the indicated stop doesn’t have decent food. I also like clean restrooms, and that stop doesn’t have clean restrooms.

View attachment 14152

Great real-world data SpaceEVDriver — and honestly it makes the case for the architecture I'm proposing better than I could.


You've optimized everything — tire pressure, speed, routing — and you're still working around the pack's limitations in wind and elevation. At 72mph into a 40mph crosswind you're effectively pushing 100mph+ aerodynamic load. That's where the Harvester's generator becomes the game changer. With a sustained 105kW EA211-ERV running, the state of charge becomes almost irrelevant — the generator covers cruise load and the LTO buffer handles surge. You never recalculate your stop because the tank is the range.


The LTO architecture isn't trying to beat your Lightning's city efficiency — it can't and doesn't need to. It's solving the exact scenario you described: sustained highway load, elevation, crosswinds, where a big pack just depletes faster no matter how well you manage it.


Full writeup in my thread if you want the deeper dive — curious what you think about the generator-sustain model for that AZ-to-LA run specifically.

 

[SpaceEVDriver]

Great real-world data SpaceEVDriver — and honestly it makes the case for the architecture I'm proposing better than I could.


You've optimized everything — tire pressure, speed, routing — and you're still working around the pack's limitations in wind and elevation. At 72mph into a 40mph crosswind you're effectively pushing 100mph+ aerodynamic load. That's where the Harvester's generator becomes the game changer. With a sustained 105kW EA211-ERV running, the state of charge becomes almost irrelevant — the generator covers cruise load and the LTO buffer handles surge. You never recalculate your stop because the tank is the range.


The LTO architecture isn't trying to beat your Lightning's city efficiency — it can't and doesn't need to. It's solving the exact scenario you described: sustained highway load, elevation, crosswinds, where a big pack just depletes faster no matter how well you manage it.


Full writeup in my thread if you want the deeper dive — curious what you think about the generator-sustain model for that AZ-to-LA run specifically.

I don't think I'm working around any limitations in the Lightning because it's a BEV.

We switched to driving at approximately 72 mph with the Tacoma and a Golf Alltrack after I ran a series of tests and calculations to establish the optimization of travel time vs energy cost. It's a limitation of large vehicles moving at high velocities. The optimal speed for best time vs energy cost is 70-ish mph.

I have no interest in a gas engine of any sort. All it would do is create all kinds of complex issues I would have to constantly deal with.

I'll try to find some time to look at that thread.

 

[mastertroll]

I don't think I'm working around any limitations in the Lightning because it's a BEV.

We switched to driving at approximately 72 mph with the Tacoma and a Golf Alltrack after I ran a series of tests and calculations to establish the optimization of travel time vs energy cost. It's a limitation of large vehicles moving at high velocities. The optimal speed for best time vs energy cost is 70-ish mph.

I have no interest in a gas engine of any sort. All it would do is create all kinds of complex issues I would have to constantly deal with.

I'll try to find some time to look at that thread.

I'll never go back to gas.. just need more real world range.

 

[ritterf]

I hear the nightmares of my buddy and his Rivian and his 5 hour drive to come visit us.
$70 to charge halfway broken chargers. crazy routes..
he loves it around town though.


whow... just ran some numbers since it made no sense to me...

To cover 1,200 miles, a Rivian (averaging ~2.1 miles per kWh at highway speeds) will consume roughly 570–600 kWh of energy.

Membership Savvy	$190 – $230	Mix of home start, Tesla Supercharger membership ($0.37/kWh), and some L2 destination charging.
Standard Public	$250 – $310	Using "Guest" rates at Electrify America or EVgo ($0.48–$0.55/kWh) without a plan.
Gas Comparison	$240 – $280	Based on a similar SUV (18 MPG) with Oregon gas at ~$4.00/gal.

For a 1,200-mile trip in a Scout equipped with the "Harvester" (EA211 range extender) system, your total cost would be approximately $145 – $175.
This setup significantly undercuts the Rivian's road trip cost because it swaps expensive "Premium" fast charging for standard gasoline and cheap home electricity.
1,200-Mile Cost Comparison

Scout Harvester (EREV)	$145 – $175	~150 mi on home electric ($15), plus ~1,050 mi on gas (at ~23 MPG / $4.00 gal).
Rivian (All-Electric)	$200 – $300	Requires multiple high-cost DC Fast Charging stops ($0.48–$0.60/kWh).
Gas SUV (ICE)	$240 – $280	~18–20 MPG for a full-size SUV at $4.00/gal.

Why the Scout Harvester is Cheaper for Road Trips

1. Avoids the "Fast Charging Tax": In an all-electric Rivian, you often pay 4x your home electricity rate to charge on the highway. With the Scout, you "recharge" with gas, which—at 2026 prices—is currently 30–50% cheaper per mile than public fast charging.
2. Home Charging Advantage: You start the trip with 150 miles of range for about $3–$5 (based on a 60–70 kWh battery at home rates).
3. High-Efficiency Generator: The EA211 engine acts as a high-efficiency generator, not a drive engine. By running at a constant, optimized RPM, it can maintain roughly 23–25 MPG while generating power, which is better than most traditional full-size gas SUVs.
   Reddit +5

The "Scout Advantage" for SE Oregon
A trip to the SE corner of Oregon (like the Alvord Desert) is much easier with this setup:

• Infrastructure Independence: You don't have to hunt for working 350kW chargers in rural areas. You can refuel at any small-town gas station.
• Jerrycan Backup: You can carry extra gas cans to extend your range even further into the wilderness, something an all-electric Rivian cannot do.

 

[ritterf]

I don't think I'm working around any limitations in the Lightning because it's a BEV.

We switched to driving at approximately 72 mph with the Tacoma and a Golf Alltrack after I ran a series of tests and calculations to establish the optimization of travel time vs energy cost. It's a limitation of large vehicles moving at high velocities. The optimal speed for best time vs energy cost is 70-ish mph.

I have no interest in a gas engine of any sort. All it would do is create all kinds of complex issues I would have to constantly deal with.

I'll try to find some time to look at that thread.

who drives 70? that is right lane territory.
you draft big rigs to get the extra 3 miles ?

what complex issues ? ERV maintenance schedule.
I mean... its obviously more than BEV, but... don't get the flexibility.

Oil & Filter Annually 10,000 Miles
Engine Air Filter Every 4 Years 40,000 Miles
Spark Plugs Every 4–6 Years 40,000–60,000 Miles
Water Pump Belt Every 10 Years 120,000 Miles

you're right that can be annoying.. if I didn't live in a place where 8-12 hour drives are easy to do... I'd probably be with you..
but the thought of having to stay at 70mph for 8 hours and charging at $50 and having to sit there for 45 minutes...

Cost Breakdown (800 Miles)

Rivian R1T/R1S	2.1 mi/kWh (at 70 mph)	~380 kWh	$135 – $175
Gas Vehicle	25 mpg (at 85 mph)	32 gallons	$105 – $140

Cruising Speed	70 mph	85 mph
Driving Time	11 hours 26 minutes	9 hours 25 minutes
Refuel/Charge Stops	3–4 stops (avg. 35-40 min each)	3 stops (avg. 10-15 min each)
Total Stop Time	~2 hours 15 minutes	~35 minutes
Total Trip Time	~13 hours 41 minutes	~10 hours 00 minutes

 

[R1TVT]

I hear the nightmares of my buddy and his Rivian and his 5 hour drive to come visit us.
$70 to charge halfway broken chargers. crazy routes..
he loves it around town though.

I own a 2022 Rivian R1T Quad Motor Launch Edition with a Large Pack battery. I have yet to experience a broken RAN charger since 2022. But, I also charge mostly at home for peanuts compared to GAS (or, I can charge for FREE at work).

The math is pretty simple. 5 hours of driving at an AVG of 75mph (and paying a premium for charging at a RAN DCFC) would actually cost more than $70.00. At price of .45 / cents kWh it would cost: 191.25 kWh × $0.45/kWh = $86.06 to drive for 5 hours.

For comparison, and in my old ICE Silverado assuming $4.00 / Gal., that cost would be almost identical to gas.

Perhaps your buddy is comparing charging his TRUCK to putting gas into a sedan? Right now, charging at a DCFC is about equivalent to putting gas in a tank in many cases - NOT SURPRISING.

DCFC is the most expensive form of charging.

The real-world reality that some like to conveniently forget is that most people don't road trip their trucks everyday and charge at DCFC's. Owners have much cheaper charging options at their disposal. With gas? Not so much.

 

[Logan]

I hear the nightmares of my buddy and his Rivian and his 5 hour drive to come visit us.
$70 to charge halfway broken chargers. crazy routes..
he loves it around town though.


whow... just ran some numbers since it made no sense to me...

To cover 1,200 miles, a Rivian (averaging ~2.1 miles per kWh at highway speeds) will consume roughly 570–600 kWh of energy.

Membership Savvy	$190 – $230	Mix of home start, Tesla Supercharger membership ($0.37/kWh), and some L2 destination charging.
Standard Public	$250 – $310	Using "Guest" rates at Electrify America or EVgo ($0.48–$0.55/kWh) without a plan.
Gas Comparison	$240 – $280	Based on a similar SUV (18 MPG) with Oregon gas at ~$4.00/gal.

For a 1,200-mile trip in a Scout equipped with the "Harvester" (EA211 range extender) system, your total cost would be approximately $145 – $175.
This setup significantly undercuts the Rivian's road trip cost because it swaps expensive "Premium" fast charging for standard gasoline and cheap home electricity.
1,200-Mile Cost Comparison

Scout Harvester (EREV)	$145 – $175	~150 mi on home electric ($15), plus ~1,050 mi on gas (at ~23 MPG / $4.00 gal).
Rivian (All-Electric)	$200 – $300	Requires multiple high-cost DC Fast Charging stops ($0.48–$0.60/kWh).
Gas SUV (ICE)	$240 – $280	~18–20 MPG for a full-size SUV at $4.00/gal.

Why the Scout Harvester is Cheaper for Road Trips

1. Avoids the "Fast Charging Tax": In an all-electric Rivian, you often pay 4x your home electricity rate to charge on the highway. With the Scout, you "recharge" with gas, which—at 2026 prices—is currently 30–50% cheaper per mile than public fast charging.
2. Home Charging Advantage: You start the trip with 150 miles of range for about $3–$5 (based on a 60–70 kWh battery at home rates).
3. High-Efficiency Generator: The EA211 engine acts as a high-efficiency generator, not a drive engine. By running at a constant, optimized RPM, it can maintain roughly 23–25 MPG while generating power, which is better than most traditional full-size gas SUVs.
   Reddit +5

The "Scout Advantage" for SE Oregon
A trip to the SE corner of Oregon (like the Alvord Desert) is much easier with this setup:

• Infrastructure Independence: You don't have to hunt for working 350kW chargers in rural areas. You can refuel at any small-town gas station.
• Jerrycan Backup: You can carry extra gas cans to extend your range even further into the wilderness, something an all-electric Rivian cannot do.

I've been doing a lot of this style of math right now. I'm trying to decide if we take our ~30mpg Tucson PHEv on our anual road trip this year (830 miles in one day, one way. A week or so there, then the 830 return trip also in one day), or our Ioniq 9.

Currently, it seems like they are pretty close in price.

1) you can get better deals on charging through memberships with the charging companies. Usually the price is low enough per month, that you have paid for the whole subscription monthly cost, with the discount you got on your first charging session.

Which means that locally, we're looking at going from ~$0.48/kwh, to ~$0.32 -$0.42. And that has a big impact on the cost of the EV in this calculation.

2) Gas prices. They suck right now, and look like they'll be worse come summer time. Our gas prices locally are $5.10, to $5.80 right now. Given I'm in WA with high prices, but even on all the other states I'd touch on the road trip (OR/ID/UT), the prices will likely be well into the $4's.

3) The efficiency of the Ioniq 9 is better than the Rivian. We're realistically looking at 2.2 - 2.7miles/kwh for the 70-80mph range.

4) The Charging time of the Ioniq 9 is better than the Rivian (~24min 10-80%), but slower than gassing up (10-15min on avg for our stops the last few years). It looks like we'd need 5 stops, averaging ~135-180 miles at a time, and maybe an hour or so more stoppage time (vs the Tucson with ~3 stops, around 220 miles between stops, only 3 stops).

And it seems that so far, the crossover point seems to be if its ~2.4miles/kwh or better, the Ioniq 9 will be cheaper than the Tucson, assuming gas is into the $4.xx range.

But yeah, I feel you on this.

Right now we're leaning towards trying the Ioniq 9. There is a chance we'll have a 5th passenger back home, so that alone would almost necessitate the swap to the 7 passenger vehicle from the 5 passenger. But even without... road tripping with kids is more comfortable with more space between them.

Plus maybe it would help me figure out if I want the harvester or not .

 

[cyure]

I've been doing a lot of this style of math right now. I'm trying to decide if we take our ~30mpg Tucson PHEv on our anual road trip this year (830 miles in one day, one way. A week or so there, then the 830 return trip also in one day), or our Ioniq 9.

Currently, it seems like they are pretty close in price.

1) you can get better deals on charging through memberships with the charging companies. Usually the price is low enough per month, that you have paid for the whole subscription monthly cost, with the discount you got on your first charging session.

Which means that locally, we're looking at going from ~$0.48/kwh, to ~$0.32 -$0.42. And that has a big impact on the cost of the EV in this calculation.

2) Gas prices. They suck right now, and look like they'll be worse come summer time. Our gas prices locally are $5.10, to $5.80 right now. Given I'm in WA with high prices, but even on all the other states I'd touch on the road trip (OR/ID/UT), the prices will likely be well into the $4's.

3) The efficiency of the Ioniq 9 is better than the Rivian. We're realistically looking at 2.2 - 2.7miles/kwh for the 70-80mph range.

4) The Charging time of the Ioniq 9 is better than the Rivian (~24min 10-80%), but slower than gassing up (10-15min on avg for our stops the last few years). It looks like we'd need 5 stops, averaging ~135-180 miles at a time, and maybe an hour or so more stoppage time (vs the Tucson with ~3 stops, around 220 miles between stops, only 3 stops).

And it seems that so far, the crossover point seems to be if its ~2.4miles/kwh or better, the Ioniq 9 will be cheaper than the Tucson, assuming gas is into the $4.xx range.

But yeah, I feel you on this.

Right now we're leaning towards trying the Ioniq 9. There is a chance we'll have a 5th passenger back home, so that alone would almost necessitate the swap to the 7 passenger vehicle from the 5 passenger. But even without... road tripping with kids is more comfortable with more space between them.

Plus maybe it would help me figure out if I want the harvester or not .

Let us know what you decide.

 

[ritterf]

I've been doing a lot of this style of math right now. I'm trying to decide if we take our ~30mpg Tucson PHEv on our anual road trip this year (830 miles in one day, one way. A week or so there, then the 830 return trip also in one day), or our Ioniq 9.

Currently, it seems like they are pretty close in price.

1) you can get better deals on charging through memberships with the charging companies. Usually the price is low enough per month, that you have paid for the whole subscription monthly cost, with the discount you got on your first charging session.

Which means that locally, we're looking at going from ~$0.48/kwh, to ~$0.32 -$0.42. And that has a big impact on the cost of the EV in this calculation.

2) Gas prices. They suck right now, and look like they'll be worse come summer time. Our gas prices locally are $5.10, to $5.80 right now. Given I'm in WA with high prices, but even on all the other states I'd touch on the road trip (OR/ID/UT), the prices will likely be well into the $4's.

3) The efficiency of the Ioniq 9 is better than the Rivian. We're realistically looking at 2.2 - 2.7miles/kwh for the 70-80mph range.

4) The Charging time of the Ioniq 9 is better than the Rivian (~24min 10-80%), but slower than gassing up (10-15min on avg for our stops the last few years). It looks like we'd need 5 stops, averaging ~135-180 miles at a time, and maybe an hour or so more stoppage time (vs the Tucson with ~3 stops, around 220 miles between stops, only 3 stops).

And it seems that so far, the crossover point seems to be if its ~2.4miles/kwh or better, the Ioniq 9 will be cheaper than the Tucson, assuming gas is into the $4.xx range.

But yeah, I feel you on this.

Right now we're leaning towards trying the Ioniq 9. There is a chance we'll have a 5th passenger back home, so that alone would almost necessitate the swap to the 7 passenger vehicle from the 5 passenger. But even without... road tripping with kids is more comfortable with more space between them.

Plus maybe it would help me figure out if I want the harvester or not .

terrified another AI data center goes in and PGE decides to bump rates 10% because... Profits...
not easy to go to another electricity provider or charging station... or maybe their is competition I don't know about..

again.. I need solar panels before I buy an pure EV

 

[Logan]

terrified another AI data center goes in and PGE decides to bump rates 10% because... Profits...
not easy to go to another electricity provider or charging station... or maybe their is competition I don't know about..

again.. I need solar panels before I buy an pure EV

Yeah, its definitely on the list of things I'm thinking about too.

We did just get a electricity rate increase notification this year (first one in a few years). But it was like 1/3 of a cent. So now we're up to ... $0.010613/kwh or something like that.

And its constant rate. They have been piloting time of use stuff, but so far its very limited. And also, the pricing is horrible. Its almost double the price during the day, and like 1 cent cheaper during off peak.

I've been looking at battery backup solutions for power outages here. The annoying thing with where I live, is that for my use case, solar panels almost don't help at all with power outages, as almost all of them are at night. And even if they continue to the next day, its winter time, in the PNW, which means its unlikely to add much meaningful output.

During the summer time, I'm sure I could offset a fair bit, but given our cheap electricity the money just doesn't make sense to spring for a system yet (or design my own, which was looking sort of fun ).

 

[R1TVT]

I've been doing a lot of this style of math right now. I'm trying to decide if we take our ~30mpg Tucson PHEv on our anual road trip this year (830 miles in one day, one way. A week or so there, then the 830 return trip also in one day), or our Ioniq 9.

Currently, it seems like they are pretty close in price.

Yes, and even if charging were more expensive for me, I also think about the experience of driving all day as a completely separate factor (in my own personal equation)...

Even if my charging stops turn out to be longer than fuel stops, I much PREFER to drive my R1T. Its just not even a comparison when considering what to take. ICE vs EV? The R1T always wins for me.