Are you OK with Scout vehicles starting under $60K?

[J Alynn]

Really hoping they find a way to hold the line…

They’ve been holding their price under $60K to date. Can’t prevent the Gov’t from creating issues but beyond that I think they are committed. They know the release date so I’m sure all their pricing was projecting some reasonable amount of inflation, etc…

 

[dreamweaver]

They’ve been holding their price under $60K to date. Can’t prevent the Gov’t from creating issues but beyond that I think they are committed. They know the release date so I’m sure all their pricing was projecting some reasonable amount of inflation, etc…

Back in May of this year it was; Entry models starting as low as $50,000 with available incentives. Then we lost all those incentives. Now we are talking prices starting under $60,000. Still reasonable. I hope this will hold.

 

[maynard]

Are you a bot DW?

Because you have the same post twice without cause.

That's what they post to new members... plenty of other content that doesn't look bot-ish

 

[dreamweaver]

Are you a bot DW?

Because you have the same post twice without cause.

This is my welcome post for new members. Quite a few more times than twice.

 

[J Alynn]

Back in May of this year it was; Entry models starting as low as $50,000 with available incentives. Then we lost all those incentives. Now we are talking prices starting under $60,000. Still reasonable. I hope this will hold.

That was a day one thing as well so they had noted the 50K due to federal and state incentives. They were smart to only note “as low as” but at least they been transparent about it

 

[dreamweaver]

That was a day one thing as well so they had noted the 50K due to federal and state incentives. They were smart to only note “as low as” but at least they been transparent about it

Yes. As I said "Still reasonable. I hope this will hold." , and I would add transparent.

 

[jr91392]

As one of only two current "yes" votes, I would like to offer some countervailing thoughts. And this ended up much longer than I planned..

I understand everyone here is inherently enthusiastic about the car, and I am too, but when it comes time to spend $60k on a car, I will be putting my emotions out of the picture. I will be evaluating this car on its merits at the time of my purchase. And there are a couple hard realities.

One, $60k is a lot of money. I can afford it, sure, but that doesn't change the fact it's a lot of money that could be better spent. I've never spent that much on a car and really don't plan on it unless it offers some crazy value for my money or has some sort of set of features that I need. I don't do any offroading except for the occasional dirt road at a campsite. I, like many Americans, am someone who likes the idea of having offroad capabilities but don't really need them if I'm being honest with myself. The kind of roads I've gone down my Explorer has handled just fine. I don't really need locking differentials or a solid axle, as cool as I think they are.

Two, there could be competitors that will do similar things for less or similar money. Namely, the R2 and the iX3. And those are just the two I know about that will be out before the Traveler. That means availability for those will likely be far greater when I go to make my next car purchase. BEVs have horrible depreciation schedules, so buying a year or two used is the superior value proposition. I could buy a formerly-$65k iX3 in 2028 for maybe $40k or even a formerly-$50k R2 for something like $30k. That means a brand new (if I can even get one) Scout in 2028 for $60k would have to offer me better value, which I don't think is happening. And even if I wanted to buy new, discounts on readily-available R2s and iX3s may be more readily available.

Three, there are other compounding factors having to do with buying a brand-new vehicle from a brand-new company. While I don’t expect Scout, with VW’s backing, to have the same issues that, say, Rivian had when they first launched, I do expect there to be growing pains. The old adage of never buying the first model year of a car would hold especially true when that was the first car the company ever made. Not to mention, service centers are going to be an issue right off the bat. I live in a major city, but not a city that’s so big that it’ll certainly be in the first wave of service centers. Maybe I’d overlook all that at a lower price, but not at $60k.

You'll notice that some of this reasoning isn't wholly about the price. I can't look at a vehicle purchase and say that there's one deciding factor I use to determine what I get. But at the end of the day, if the Scouts were cheaper, I'd be much more likely to buy one when they first arrive. Since that's the crux of the question presented, I voted "yes."

 

[J Alynn]

As one of only two current "yes" votes, I would like to offer some countervailing thoughts. And this ended up much longer than I planned..

I understand everyone here is inherently enthusiastic about the car, and I am too, but when it comes time to spend $60k on a car, I will be putting my emotions out of the picture. I will be evaluating this car on its merits at the time of my purchase. And there are a couple hard realities.

One, $60k is a lot of money. I can afford it, sure, but that doesn't change the fact it's a lot of money that could be better spent. I've never spent that much on a car and really don't plan on it unless it offers some crazy value for my money or has some sort of set of features that I need. I don't do any offroading except for the occasional dirt road at a campsite. I, like many Americans, am someone who likes the idea of having offroad capabilities but don't really need them if I'm being honest with myself. The kind of roads I've gone down my Explorer has handled just fine. I don't really need locking differentials or a solid axle, as cool as I think they are.

Two, there could be competitors that will do similar things for less or similar money. Namely, the R2 and the iX3. And those are just the two I know about that will be out before the Traveler. That means availability for those will likely be far greater when I go to make my next car purchase. BEVs have horrible depreciation schedules, so buying a year or two used is the superior value proposition. I could buy a formerly-$65k iX3 in 2028 for maybe $40k or even a formerly-$50k R2 for something like $30k. That means a brand new (if I can even get one) Scout in 2028 for $60k would have to offer me better value, which I don't think is happening. And even if I wanted to buy new, discounts on readily-available R2s and iX3s may be more readily available.

Three, there are other compounding factors having to do with buying a brand-new vehicle from a brand-new company. While I don’t expect Scout, with VW’s backing, to have the same issues that, say, Rivian had when they first launched, I do expect there to be growing pains. The old adage of never buying the first model year of a car would hold especially true when that was the first car the company ever made. Not to mention, service centers are going to be an issue right off the bat. I live in a major city, but not a city that’s so big that it’ll certainly be in the first wave of service centers. Maybe I’d overlook all that at a lower price, but not at $60k.

You'll notice that some of this reasoning isn't wholly about the price. I can't look at a vehicle purchase and say that there's one deciding factor I use to determine what I get. But at the end of the day, if the Scouts were cheaper, I'd be much more likely to buy one when they first arrive. Since that's the crux of the question presented, I voted "yes."

I completely understand your points. I’ve noted we had reserved a Lexus GX 16 months ago. We could afford it but my wife being in banking had a lot of issue with $81K. Due to other vehicle issue, long delivery lead time and apprehension she opted for a loaded Honda Pilot for $44K and change. It suits her just fine. So I understand that. Out of fairness there are people like you and my wife who see it as a vehicle and you are both smarter for that outlook. I will say comparing an R2 to a Scout is an unfair comparison BUT if they both meet your needs then that is fair to you (GX vs Pilot wasn’t apples to apples either). But some people will buy due to being new/latest and greatest, others for capability and yet others for emotion-visual and/or historical but their will be buyers. I see it with my wife and fully respect that but it’s also hard to say it is an apples to apples comparison when looking at physical size/features/value and you can’t ask SM to drop their price on the Scouts to compare to a smaller vehicle-which you aren’t asking and/or challenging-you are just noting your stance. I traded an Audi TT for a TLX type S and they are comparable either but my emotions and practicality justified the change. Both had their place and one just called a bit more on my emotions.

 

[jr91392]

I completely understand your points. I’ve noted we had reserved a Lexus GX 16 months ago. We could afford it but my wife being in banking had a lot of issue with $81K. Due to other vehicle issue, long delivery lead time and apprehension she opted for a loaded Honda Pilot for $44K and change. It suits her just fine. So I understand that. Out of fairness there are people like you and my wife who see it as a vehicle and you are both smarter for that outlook. I will say comparing an R2 to a Scout is an unfair comparison BUT if they both meet your needs then that is fair to you (GX vs Pilot wasn’t apples to apples either). But some people will buy due to being new/latest and greatest, others for capability and yet others for emotion-visual and/or historical but their will be buyers. I see it with my wife and fully respect that but it’s also hard to say it is an apples to apples comparison when looking at physical size/features/value and you can’t ask SM to drop their price on the Scouts to compare to a smaller vehicle-which you aren’t asking and/or challenging-you are just noting your stance. I traded an Audi TT for a TLX type S and they are comparable either but my emotions and practicality justified the change. Both had their place and one just called a bit more on my emotions.

All entirely fair. I definitely don't begrudge anyone who buys a car more emotionally than I do (or for really any reason; it's their money). There will always be emotion in a purchase of that size, even for people like me and your wife, I just try my best to minimize it.

Part of the issue with comparisons among EVs is just the size of the market. R2, iX3, and Traveler are certainly not equal in all aspects, but there are very limited midsize SUVs in the EV market. The new Jeep Recon is the closest thing to the Traveler, but I'd never buy anything Stellantis except maybe a used Wrangler (plus the range on it is a nonstarter for me). Hopefully over the next decade we'll see a lot more options to where there aren't these niches that only have one car in them.

And as you noted, but I do want to emphasize.. I certainly understand Scout charging more than the R2 is supposed to cost. Every company has to find the balance between features and cost. They might have just found a balance that's a little too rich for my blood. We'll see, though. I love the car and pretty much everything about it. I wish I was uber rich and didn't have to make these choices lol.

 

[Gurble]

I don't think R2s will depreciate that fast.

 

[speedrye]

All entirely fair. I definitely don't begrudge anyone who buys a car more emotionally than I do (or for really any reason; it's their money). There will always be emotion in a purchase of that size, even for people like me and your wife, I just try my best to minimize it.

Part of the issue with comparisons among EVs is just the size of the market. R2, iX3, and Traveler are certainly not equal in all aspects, but there are very limited midsize SUVs in the EV market. The new Jeep Recon is the closest thing to the Traveler, but I'd never buy anything Stellantis except maybe a used Wrangler (plus the range on it is a nonstarter for me). Hopefully over the next decade we'll see a lot more options to where there aren't these niches that only have one car in them.

And as you noted, but I do want to emphasize.. I certainly understand Scout charging more than the R2 is supposed to cost. Every company has to find the balance between features and cost. They might have just found a balance that's a little too rich for my blood. We'll see, though. I love the car and pretty much everything about it. I wish I was uber rich and didn't have to make these choices lol.

I'm not sure I'd count the Traveler as mid-size since it's pretty large. With the spare, it's 8"-10" longer than an R1S, EV9, Ioniq 9 and only an inch or two shorter than an Expedition/Tahoe.

 

[cyure]

I'm not sure I'd count the Traveler as mid-size since it's pretty large. With the spare, it's 8"-10" longer than an R1S, EV9, Ioniq 9 and only an inch or two shorter than an Expedition/Tahoe.

Having seen them in person they are not midsized. You also have to take into consideration the width. The Traveler is as wide as an F150.

 

[jr91392]

I'm not sure I'd count the Traveler as mid-size since it's pretty large. With the spare, it's 8"-10" longer than an R1S, EV9, Ioniq 9 and only an inch or two shorter than an Expedition/Tahoe.

I think "with the spare" is doing a lot of heavy lifting there lol. Without the spare, it's about 10" shorter than the R1S. I'm not sure what the logic would be to include the size of the spare when determining class of vehicle. You could throw a hitch-mounted spare on the R1S and make it much longer. Although, I would concede it's tough putting the Traveler in the same class as the R2 and iX3. The latter two are on the smaller side of the "midsize" class, while the Traveler would be on the bigger side. The Traveler is similar in size to my Explorer, which is quintessential "midsize" and is tiny next to an Expedition.

Having seen them in person they are not midsized. You also have to take into consideration the width. The Traveler is as wide as an F150.

It's only 1" wider than the Explorer, but Explorer is 8" longer. I haven't seen the Traveler in person, so I'm just going by the actual dimensions. Maybe it does seem bigger in person. And not that it has to be determinative, but every full-size class SUV I can think of has three rows.

 

[pwrofgrayskull]

As one of only two current "yes" votes, I would like to offer some countervailing thoughts. And this ended up much longer than I planned..

I understand everyone here is inherently enthusiastic about the car, and I am too, but when it comes time to spend $60k on a car, I will be putting my emotions out of the picture. I will be evaluating this car on its merits at the time of my purchase. And there are a couple hard realities.

One, $60k is a lot of money. I can afford it, sure, but that doesn't change the fact it's a lot of money that could be better spent. I've never spent that much on a car and really don't plan on it unless it offers some crazy value for my money or has some sort of set of features that I need. I don't do any offroading except for the occasional dirt road at a campsite. I, like many Americans, am someone who likes the idea of having offroad capabilities but don't really need them if I'm being honest with myself. The kind of roads I've gone down my Explorer has handled just fine. I don't really need locking differentials or a solid axle, as cool as I think they are.

Two, there could be competitors that will do similar things for less or similar money. Namely, the R2 and the iX3. And those are just the two I know about that will be out before the Traveler. That means availability for those will likely be far greater when I go to make my next car purchase. BEVs have horrible depreciation schedules, so buying a year or two used is the superior value proposition. I could buy a formerly-$65k iX3 in 2028 for maybe $40k or even a formerly-$50k R2 for something like $30k. That means a brand new (if I can even get one) Scout in 2028 for $60k would have to offer me better value, which I don't think is happening. And even if I wanted to buy new, discounts on readily-available R2s and iX3s may be more readily available.

Three, there are other compounding factors having to do with buying a brand-new vehicle from a brand-new company. While I don’t expect Scout, with VW’s backing, to have the same issues that, say, Rivian had when they first launched, I do expect there to be growing pains. The old adage of never buying the first model year of a car would hold especially true when that was the first car the company ever made. Not to mention, service centers are going to be an issue right off the bat. I live in a major city, but not a city that’s so big that it’ll certainly be in the first wave of service centers. Maybe I’d overlook all that at a lower price, but not at $60k.

You'll notice that some of this reasoning isn't wholly about the price. I can't look at a vehicle purchase and say that there's one deciding factor I use to determine what I get. But at the end of the day, if the Scouts were cheaper, I'd be much more likely to buy one when they first arrive. Since that's the crux of the question presented, I voted "yes."

Well stated.

 

[pwrofgrayskull]

Having seen them in person they are not midsized. You also have to take into consideration the width. The Traveler is as wide as an F150.

Somehow this always shocks me. In my head these are still somewhere between a mid and full-size vehicle. I’m going to have to come to terms with the size one of these days.

 

[cyure]

I think "with the spare" is doing a lot of heavy lifting there lol. Without the spare, it's about 10" shorter than the R1S. I'm not sure what the logic would be to include the size of the spare when determining class of vehicle. You could throw a hitch-mounted spare on the R1S and make it much longer. Although, I would concede it's tough putting the Traveler in the same class as the R2 and iX3. The latter two are on the smaller side of the "midsize" class, while the Traveler would be on the bigger side. The Traveler is similar in size to my Explorer, which is quintessential "midsize" and is tiny next to an Expedition.


It's only 1" wider than the Explorer, but Explorer is 8" longer. I haven't seen the Traveler in person, so I'm just going by the actual dimensions. Maybe it does seem bigger in person. And not that it has to be determinative, but every full-size class SUV I can think of has three rows.

I think it’s the tires and height too. It definitely seems bigger in person.

 

[cyure]

Somehow this always shocks me. In my head these are still somewhere between a mid and full-size vehicle. I’m going to have to come to terms with the size one of these days.

I will post these pictures in my Chicago thread too but for scale I’m 5’7”. She’s a tall girl.

 

[pwrofgrayskull]

For sure, she is and the proportions are spot on. The height doesn’t concern me as much as the width. Really I know I’ll love the interior room that both will provide since I’m coming from a smaller vehicle, but out on the trails I just hope I can avoid scratching her up too bad. I’ll have to invest in some better trail saws and clippers to handle the new growth that happens each spring.

 

[cyure]

For sure, she is and the proportions are spot on. The height doesn’t concern me as much as the width. Really I know I’ll love the interior room that both will provide since I’m coming from a smaller vehicle, but out on the trails I just hope I can avoid scratching her up too bad. I’ll have to invest in some better trail saws and clippers to handle the new growth that happens each spring.

Being on this forum I learned what trail pin-striping is. I think I would cry.