Will the Scout EREV be obsolete by the time it gets here in 2027/28?

[jeremydunworth]

I took AI to mean "algorithm" in this case. But I too am not a fan of AI as the answer to everything. It can make a great wrench but almost always fails when used as a solution. AI aside, @ROMR_Casey 's idea is solid. Here is an emdash for your amusement — (not AI generated).

A colleague shared the best observation about AI as a tool. Even Harbor Freight sells more reliable tools than AI vendors.

Put that on your ratchet and torque it.

 

[Schmeegz]

35s from Factory will be the max as I'm guessing fitting 37s takes some trimming to stock setup, but no metal work. Scout just wanted to show off and hint that you CAN do it if you want to. I'm planning on 35s for the Terra and would love to have an 18" wheel option!

I run 35's on 18" wheels in my Jeep currently. Love that set up

 

[cyure]

I run 35's on 18" wheels in my Jeep currently. Love that set up

I love me 33s on 17s. I wish the Scout could run a 17 but understand why it can’t.

 

[speedrye]

I love me 33s on 17s. I wish the Scout could run a 17 but understand why it can’t.

Yeah, I've got 35's on my 17's, but I definitely want top-notch braking ability in a beast as heavy as the Scout will be.

 

[J Alynn]

Yeah, I've got 35's on my 17's, but I definitely want top-notch braking ability in a beast as heavy as the Scout will be.

Yeah-the sacrifice to 18” ILO 17” is worth it for the improved braking performance

 

[Variable430]

The information here, should be taken with a grain or two of salt as I asked Google AI for "Companies that are producing solid state batteries for automobiles" and "Which companies are closest to mass production of vehicles for the United States?" and; "of those companies, especially Volkswagen, what are the claims for range as compared to today's battery tech?
I really like the Traveler and have reserved one but I wonder if I'm looking at obsolete battery technology that will replaced almost as soon as it enters production in 2027/2028? Are solid state batteries a pipe dream? If these are real and soon to be available it might be worth the wait. Some are reporting extended range compared to today's batteries that look like game changers. I've always thought that I would be interested in an EV that took no longer to "refuel" as it does an ICE equipped vehicle...roughly 10 minutes. Proponents of the solid state batteries are claiming faster recharges that mirror petroleum fill-ups. Another advantage is no need for gasoline for the Harvester gas engine to extend range.

Key companies leading in solid-state battery development:

• Toyota: Plans to launch its first EVs with solid-state batteries between 2027 and 2028, aiming to be a leader in the technology.
• QuantumScape (USA): Develops solid-state lithium-metal batteries, with backing from Volkswagen, and is considered a leader in the field.
• Greater Bay Technology (China): Targeting a 2026 launch for a mass-producible all-solid-state battery, with tests suggesting over 621 miles of range.
• Solid Power (USA): Develops sulfide-based solid-state batteries and works with partners like BMW and Ford.
• ProLogium Technology (Taiwan): Focuses on next-generation solid-state batteries for automakers.
• CATL & BYD (China): Both major battery manufacturers are testing and planning for solid-state battery production around 2027.
• Factorial Energy (USA): Works with Mercedes-Benz, Stellantis, and Hyundai.
• Blue Solutions (France): Manufactures solid-state batteries for buses and other applications, with a long history in the market.
• Nissan: Developing a pilot production plant in Yokohama for a 2028 commercial launch.

What makes this interesting is that Volkswagen Group (via QuantumScape) are deploying real-world demonstration fleets. While true high-volume, mass-market production across the industry is projected for 2028 to 2030, these specific partnerships are leading the U.S. timeline with vehicle integration.

Volkswagen Group & QuantumScape

• Status: Closest to U.S. commercial deployment.
• Timeline: Commercial launch of their scaled "Eagle" manufacturing line is underway, with premium vehicle integration (likely targeting Porsche or Audi) slated to hit the market.
• Advantage: Volkswagen holds a massive equity stake and uses its captive cell-manufacturing arm, PowerCo, to bypass traditional supply chain delays.

If Volkswagen Group is close, could Scout be a part of that?

Of those companies, especially Volkswagen, what are the claims for range as compared to today's battery tech?

Volkswagen and its major technology partners—primarily QuantumScape and Gotion High-Tech—claim that solid-state batteries (SSBs) will deliver a 30% to 45% increase in driving range compared to today's premium lithium-ion technology. Crucially, they assert this range will experience virtually zero degradation over the vehicle's lifespan.

The specific range claims, lifecycle statistics, and comparisons to current EV tech break down as follows:

1. The Raw Range Increase

• The Baseline Comparison: A top-tier conventional EV utilizing liquid lithium-ion cells with an energy density of ~700 Wh/L typically yields around 350 miles of range on a single charge.
• The QuantumScape (VW) Claim: Dropping a QuantumScape lithium-metal cell pack into the same physical footprint bumps energy density to 800–1,000 Wh/L. This increases the vehicle’s single-charge range to 450–500 miles.
• The Gotion (VW Supplier) Claim: Volkswagen's primary battery partner in China, Gotion High-Tech, began testing its "Gemstone" all-solid-state cells in vehicles. Gotion claims its pack configuration can push specialized EV platforms to a maximum of 620 miles (1,000 km) on a single charge.

2. Zero-Degradation Lifespan (The True Differentiator)
Today's lithium-ion batteries lose substantial range over years of usage and DC fast-charging. Volkswagen's battery division, PowerCo, completed endurance testing on QuantumScape's cells and revealed historic lifecycle claims:

• The Test: The solid-state cells completed 1,000 charging cycles.
• The Result: The battery retained 95% of its original capacity.
• The Real-World Equivalent: For a consumer, this equates to driving over 310,000 miles (500,000 km) with zero noticeable loss in maximum driving range. Current lithium-ion standards target dropping down to 80% capacity after only 700 cycles.

3. Charging Speed vs. Range Trade-Offs

• Today's EVs require drivers to slow down charging past 80% to protect the battery chemistry.
• Volkswagen claims its upcoming solid-state packs will charge from 10% to 80% in just 12 to 15 minutes. Because the anode is solid lithium-metal instead of graphite, fast charging does not cause the catastrophic "dendrite" short-circuits that plague current liquid batteries.

4. Competitive Context (How VW Compares Globally)
While VW targets a highly stable 450–500 mile consumer pack, other global automakers are chasing outlier numbers:

• Factorial Energy (Stellantis/Dodge partner): Claims real-world testing ranges clearing 745 miles on highly optimized trial platforms.
• Toyota: Targets a baseline range of 621 miles by 2027–2028, with a future iteration capable of 745+ miles via a higher-performance solid electrolyte.

I saw a YouTube video (forgot the name, unfortunately), that claimed cold weather test do not impact range. I believe that same video claimed that the current battery tech the price per Kilowatt was dropping rapidly. Will the solid state battery be competitive in price and range, etc? I guess time will tell. The next few years could be really exciting for EV tech.

The ix3 is already a range monster. There is no excuse for not having a full BEV with close to 400 miles of range.

 

[Variable430]

I highly doubt any OEM would put a 900-mile range battery in an EV around here for the same reason most cars don't have 30+ gallon gas tanks. Ultimately, they'll just downsize the battery to a more normal 300-400 mile range.

The 2nd gen EQS has 925km wltp range

 

[J Alynn]

The 2nd gen EQS has 925km wltp range

But why? And at what cost? It just encourages people to drive longer segments at a time that they shouldn’t be doing. Eyes and body need a break occasionally.

 

[SpaceEVDriver]

The 2nd gen EQS has 925km wltp range

That's WLTP and km. In EPA miles, the range is 392 miles.
You don't want to use the EQS as your model for what any other manufacturer should do.

That 392 miles range is for a sedan with front dimensions of 75.8 x 59.6 inches, or 2.9 m^2. With a coefficient of drag of 0.20, its effective front surface area is 0.58 m^2.

The Traveler front surface area is 3.9 m^2. It would need an impossible 0.149 Cd to have the same effective front surface area in the drag equation and it STILL wouldn't get the same efficiency because 65% of the test is at low speeds where mass matters too. The Traveler might have a Cd of about 0.30. That gives it an effective front surface area of 1.17 m^2.

That's twice the surface area of the EQS. So at the same constant speed, the Traveler with be half as efficient, assuming they have identical drivetrain efficiencies. That would require a battery twice the size of the EQS to go the same distance when traveling at a constant speed.

The EQS has a mass of 2655 kg. The closest BEV SUV to the Traveler is the Rivian R1S, which has a mass of about 3175 kg. The traveler will probably be closer to 3000 kg. That's 13% more massive than the EQS, so 13% less efficient at stop & go traffic, assuming the same drivetrain efficiencies.

Given all of that, it would be reasonable to expect the Traveler to need a battery with a capacity of about 2.5x the EQS battery to achieve the same range. That would mean a battery with a capacity of 236 kWh.

BUT. Given the estimated range and guesses about the battery size, it's reasonable to expect the Traveler to have an efficiency of about 2.5 miles/kWh. That would mean the traveler would only need a 157 kWh battery to match the 392 miles range the EQS has. At 350 miles range, in efficiency to battery size, the Traveler will outperform the EQS by about 150%.

The EQS has a 118 kWh battery. That's an efficiency of 3.32 miles/kWh. The Mustang Mach-E is more efficient (3.48 mi/kWh). The R2 is more efficient (3.75 mi/kWh). The Lucid Air, the closest competitor in every measure to the EQS, has an efficiency of 5.0 mi/kWh.

The EQS is terribly inefficient for its drag coefficient and cost. Mercedes should probably bring in some Scout engineers to help them fix some of their issues.