Traveler vs. Terra - Targeted Technical Questions

[BeerParty]

Terra will have a larger battery pack because there is more room between the wheel base thus adding more weight

Where are you getting that from? I have not seen anything that indicates the Traveler and Terra would have different battery sizes.

Just because the Terra has more space between the wheels doesn't mean they will put a larger battery in. IMHO, it would be better for Scout to keep the battery sizes the same, so they can use the same battery management hardware and software in both vehicles.

 

[RodorW]

Where are you getting that from? I have not seen anything that indicates the Traveler and Terra would have different battery sizes.

Just because the Terra has more space between the wheels doesn't mean they will put a larger battery in. IMHO, it would be better for Scout to keep the battery sizes the same, so they can use the same battery management hardware and software in both vehicles.

The Terra also seems to have a space allocated under the bed for a spare, so that could be the things that takes up the extra space, the wheel base and body add

 

[J Alynn]

Where are you getting that from? I have not seen anything that indicates the Traveler and Terra would have different battery sizes.

Just because the Terra has more space between the wheels doesn't mean they will put a larger battery in. IMHO, it would be better for Scout to keep the battery sizes the same, so they can use the same battery management hardware and software in both vehicles.

I’m pretty sure Jamie said it somewhere along the line. Maybe I inferred more from it than what was meant. He just said more room for battery flexibility to I took that at face value. Maybe he meant room to push and pull battery location along with other components for better weight distribution, etc…

 

[dreamweaver]

New here, been lurking. To the extent they can be answered now, interesting questions.
The one question I think I know the answer to based on my EV experiences (I also live at altitude) is that you shouldn’t expect any change at altitude on power output (not talking grade, just elevation).

Scout Motors. “People. Connections. Community. Authenticity." Welcome to the Scout community. Enjoy the ride.
Remember the built in search on the forums is a great place to start getting answers to your many questions.

 

[dreamweaver]

New here, been lurking. To the extent they can be answered now, interesting questions.
The one question I think I know the answer to based on my EV experiences (I also live at altitude) is that you shouldn’t expect any change at altitude on power output (not talking grade, just elevation).

Yes, electric vehicles (EVs) can be affected by altitude, primarily due to reduced battery efficiency in cold temperatures at higher elevations. Not on elevation alone.

 

[oldgeeksguide]

New here, been lurking. To the extent they can be answered now, interesting questions.
The one question I think I know the answer to based on my EV experiences (I also live at altitude) is that you shouldn’t expect any change at altitude on power output (not talking grade, just elevation).

Electric motorcycle sets new world record… on top of an active volcano

Electric motorcycles are already known for their instant torque and quiet performance, but now one electric dirt bike has proven...

electrek.co

 

[THil08]

Yes, electric vehicles (EVs) can be affected by altitude, primarily due to reduced battery efficiency in cold temperatures at higher elevations. Not on elevation alone.

Similar to the old Carburetor. How come EVs are setting us back in time, when they are supposed to be the future? lol.

 

[TheManchot]

Similar to the old Carburetor. How come EVs are setting us back in time, when they are supposed to be the future? lol.

Yes, electric vehicles (EVs) can be affected by altitude, primarily due to reduced battery efficiency in cold temperatures at higher elevations. Not on elevation alone.

Agreed, temperature at any elevation.

 

[SpaceEVDriver]

I’m pretty sure Jamie said it somewhere along the line. Maybe I inferred more from it than what was meant. He just said more room for battery flexibility to I took that at face value. Maybe he meant room to push and pull battery location along with other components for better weight distribution, etc…

I found what was said. I didn’t interpret that as “there will be a larger battery in the Terra,” but rather, “we have options with the Terra.”

That might mean that at some point in the future there will be an Extended or Max or Extra or Survey battery size offered for the Terra that’s not available on the Traveler. But I don’t think that’s certain and to me it seems unlikely for the first offering.

Just to clarify, the Traveler wheelbase is shorter and the battery space is more limited than that of the pickup truck. That said, throwing more batteries at the pickup truck adds weight and cost and may not be the best solution for the market. The larger point is that we have more space to work with in the Terra and that gives us options.

I can’t get the link to go to the proper comment.
It’s comment #148 in the EREV to BEV thread.

Thread 'Is there anything SM could offer to get you to switch from EREV to BEV?'

Nov 4, 2025

With all I have learned on this forum, looking at my driving use cases, and the fact that EVs are a lot less maintenance I have officially switched my reservation to a BEV. I’m on the EV bandwagon!

Now there’s been lots of discussion about which will come first, EREV or BEV. Let’s say the BEV comes out first could Scout offer something to entice EREV reservation holders to take the leap and buy a BEV.

What would it take to get you EREV reservation holders to purchase the BEV? A free home charger? Money towards the installation? Buy a BEV and get moved to the front of the line for an...

• cyure
• Replies: 224
• Forum: GENERAL DISCUSSION

• 

 

[J Alynn]

I found what was said. I didn’t interpret that as “there will be a larger battery in the Terra,” but rather, “we have options with the Terra.”

That might mean that at some point in the future there will be an Extended or Max or Extra or Survey battery size offered for the Terra that’s not available on the Traveler. But I don’t think that’s certain and to me it seems unlikely for the first offering.



I can’t get the link to go to the proper comment.
It’s comment #148 in the EREV to BEV thread.

Thread 'Is there anything SM could offer to get you to switch from EREV to BEV?'

Nov 4, 2025

With all I have learned on this forum, looking at my driving use cases, and the fact that EVs are a lot less maintenance I have officially switched my reservation to a BEV. I’m on the EV bandwagon!

Now there’s been lots of discussion about which will come first, EREV or BEV. Let’s say the BEV comes out first could Scout offer something to entice EREV reservation holders to take the leap and buy a BEV.

What would it take to get you EREV reservation holders to purchase the BEV? A free home charger? Money towards the installation? Buy a BEV and get moved to the front of the line for an...

• cyure
• Replies: 224
• Forum: GENERAL DISCUSSION

• 

Thank you sir. Back to that assuming notion. You know-the one @cyure wouldnt explain to me

 

[geekswrath]

As SpaceEVDriver talks about in his earlier post regarding the reduced towing capacity of the Traveler vs Terra, I have to assume the the placement of the Harvester in the frame will affect towing as well. I "know" that increased weight behind the axle affects available tongue weight, but I never seem to realize how much it is affected until I the numbers are run.

I'm sure this was discussed somewhere else but I miss so much and wanted to call this out since it was an ah-ha moment for me.

 

[Michael Gary Scout]

If you wind up landing on a truck (Terra instead of Harvester), this Out of Spec vid might help with your towing questions & with performance at altitude. The F-150 Lightening and Rivian R1T are good representative real-world, production examples to compare to the Terra for benchmarks now, but consider that you will also enjoy better architecture, BMS and thermal management with potentially better all around batteries in the Terra with 3-4 extra years of advancements in the bag since these trucks were launched:

Thanks for sharing this – that Out of Spec Rockies tow test is a really solid reference, especially for seeing how elevation and sustained load expose the real limits of EV trucks.

After watching that video, I agree it’s one of the better real-world examples we have right now. The Lightning and R1T aren’t perfect stand-ins for the Terra, but they do a good job illustrating where the thermal management and sustained power delivery start to matter more than the headline specs once you’re climbing at altitude with a trailer.

What I’m especially interested in with the Terra – particularly in Harvester form – is how Scout approaches those known constraints. Newer architecture and better BMS logic should help, but things like cooling stack sizing, battery thermal headroom, and how the range extender behaves on long, steady grades feel like they’ll ultimately define the experience more than peak output numbers.

One thing that stood out to me in that test was how quickly some platforms shifted from power-limited to thermally limited despite having plenty of capacity left on paper. That’s where I’m hoping Scout meaningfully differentiates.

Out of curiosity, do you think the Terra’s advantage will come more from improved thermal design, or from how aggressively (or conservatively) it manages derating sunder sustained load?

 

[Michael Gary Scout]

I can’t answer questions directly since I don’t work for Scout and even then I very likely couldn’t answer questions directly either...



We don’t really know. But my guesses are:

The Traveler will likely be slightly heavier than the Terra but they’ll have the same GVWR, based on having the same axles and tires. That means there will be slightly less weight available for load in the Traveler than the Terra. I’m guessing the Traveler will weigh a couple hundred pounds more.

*IF* all of the extra weight were on or just aft of the rear axle and the Traveler weighs 300 pounds more than the Terra, that would account for a 300 pound lower tongue capacity, which would translate to a 3,000 pound lower towing capacity. We know that won’t be the case, but a lot of the extra weight will be rear of the center of gravity.

The extra weight of the spare hanging way off the end, well beyond the tongue, will certainly decrease available tongue weight and thus tow capacity. The weight of the spare tire carrier plus a 35” tire on a 20” wheel will likely be around 150 pounds. Its position a couple feet aft of the tongue will account for 1500-1700 pounds reduced towing capacity. The rest of the extra weight of the Traveler compared with the Terra could account for the remaining reduced towing capacity.

The Traveler will have a shorter wheelbase. Shorter wheelbases typically mean lower towing capacity, but that’s not necessarily a guarantee and the SAE standards don’t require the towing capacity to be reduced—they dictate maximum understeer and maximum hitch deflection, which aren’t directly/only dependent on wheelbase.

I don’t think there will be much difference, if any, in the cooling systems between the truck and the SUV.

I expect the suspension will be the same.
I expect the frame will be essentially the same, just scaled.

You’ll probably need a WDH to go above 5,000 pounds towing on either vehicle.


You didn’t say whether you’re considering the Harvester or the BEV.

With the Harvester, there will be some minor reduction in performance at altitude, but it will mostly be mitigated by the fact that the engine will only drive a generator-motor, which means reduced engine performance will not as directly impact vehicle performance. It will have an impact, just not as dramatic as an ICE-only vehicle experiences at 7000-10,000 feet. We don’t know if it’ll be 1%, 5%, 15%, or something entirely different.

With the BEV, there will be improvements to range at altitude, but no difference in performance in the realm of torque or HP.
I live at about 7,000 feet elevation; I get about 10-20% better range at home than I do at sea level. I don’t see acceleration or towing capability performance differences between 7000 feet and sea level.

However.

Thermal management becomes more difficult at elevation—given the same temperature, humidity, etc. This is for the same reason we get better range at elevation: lower density air. Lower density air creates less drag (which only matters above about 35-45 mph), but lower density air also moves heat less efficiently. In the Lightning, I slow down while towing, so my truck’s overall performance towing at altitude is about the same as at lower elevations and I don’t see much change in thermal behavior while towing vs while not towing.

On long (500+ mile) towing trips with 2.5-3 hour legs, while climbing from sea level to 7000 feet, I do see temperatures start to creep up while towing and that leads to reduced performance based on the manufacturer’s software. But it’s not noticeable to me as the driver. It means there’s a bit less hard acceleration available to me. I very rarely feel the need to floor it while towing and climbing in elevation. Even passing slow semis doesn’t require that I floor it.

Climbing up in elevation of course has the same efficiency impact for the BEV as for an ICE that weighs the same. This is almost entirely dependent on weight and tire inflation.

Regen will be increased while towing. But you always spend more energy to get the weight to the top of the climb than you recover bringing it down.




The Harvester's genset will very likely require an additional cooling loop. And there will be quite a bit more residual heat build up with the Harvester than the BEV. Performance will probably begin to suffer earlier in the Harvester while towing (and climbing) at high ambient temperatures.

Lower temperatures are the biggest bummer for BEVs and it will translate to the Harvester as well. However, the Harvester will likely have better range response to low temperatures. A good engineering team would shunt the Harvester’s thermal loop to warming the battery and motors in the cold, so the Harvester will likely behave quite well in the very cold. Especially if they program the vehicle to pre-warm the Harvester when its plugged into a 240 volt Level 2 charger: You might not have the benefit of being able to remote start the Harvester if it’s in your garage, but you could at least pre-warm the engine’s antifreeze so when it is started, there’s a much shorter time before it’s up to optimal temperature. Doing that would allow its excess heat to be dumped back into warming the battery once you’re on the move much earlier than waiting for the engine to come up to temperature from normal operations.

Honestly, this last one is the biggest argument I would make for the Harvester. I’m all-electric and will stay that way. For places like Wyoming, MT, ND, IL, etc., the range during the summer isn’t so bad that I would hesitate to drive across several states on a road trip. But in the winter, an ICE-driven genset to warm (and charge) the battery would be the reason I would advise friends in that area to go with the Harvester if they were at all leaning toward it in the first place. I personally wouldn’t find it necessary, but I understand others might.

This is a phenomenal response – thank you for taking the time to walk through your reasoning in this level of detail. I really appreciate how you framed most of this as informed hypothesis rather than speculation presented as fact. That’s increasingly rare on forums and exactly why this thread has been so valuable.

Your breakdown of weight distribution as the primary driver of the tow-rating delta makes a lot of sense, particularly the point about mass found aft of the rear axle on the Traveler. The spare tire + carrier example is especially compelling – 150 lbs. hanging that far behind the axle translating into a disproportionately large reduction in allowable tongue weight feels very plausible, and it aligns well with how conservative SAE J2807 outcomes tend to be when deflection and stability limits are approached. That explanation alone probably accounts for more of the 7k vs 10k gap than most people realize.

The wheelbase point is also well taken. I agree that while shorter wheelbase correlates with lower tow ratings in the real world, it’s often not the hard limiter people assume – it’s the downstream effects on understeer, hitch deflection, and overall stability that ultimately constrain certification. Your clarification there helps separate myth from standard.

I also appreciate the reality check on the cooling and suspension. It’s tempting to assume “truck = heavier-duty everything,” but your take that the frame, suspension, and cooling stack are likely fundamentally the same architecture – with ratings driven by geometry, loading, and validation rather than unique hardware – feels consistent with how modern OEMs manage platform complexity and cost.

Your altitude insights were particularly helpful. The distinction between BEV vs Harvester behavior at elevation – especially the generator-only role of the ICE in the Harvester - adds important nuance. The point that reduced engine output at altitude matters far less when it’s decoupled from the driveline is something I think gets overlooked in a lot of comparisons. Likewise, your real-world observations on thermal behavior over long climbs mirror what I’ve seen other EV platforms: software-managed derating that’s perceptible on paper but rarely dramatic from the driver’s seat unless you’re truly pushing the envelope.

The cold-weather angle you raised may be the most compelling argument for the Harvester that I’ve seen articulated so far. Using the genset not just for the range extension but as a controllable heat source for batter conditioning – especially when pre-warmed on shore power – feels like a very intentional advantage for certain geographies and use cases. Even if not everyone needs it, it’s a thoughtful design lever.

At this point, I’m increasingly convinced that the Traveler vs Terra decision – at least from a towing and thermal perspective – is less about “capability vs incapability” and more about where the margins live and how conservative Scout chooses to be with certification early on. As you said, a lot of this may tighten or evolve once these trucks see real-world duty cycles and software revisions.

Thanks again for such a grounded, experience-backed reply. If others here have towed heavy with BEV’s or hybrids over long grades – especially at elevation or in winter – I think layering in more of those real-world data points would make this an even stronger reference thread for future buyers trying to decide between platforms.

 

[R1TVT]

Out of curiosity, do you think the Terra’s advantage will come more from improved thermal design, or from how aggressively (or conservatively) it manages derating sunder sustained load?

When you say that they Terra will have an advantage, I'm not sure that it will have any advantage other than being able to take advantage of years of advanced Battery & BMS innovation in thermal management, HW & SW (since the trucks in the video have tech that will be at least 8 years old by the time Scout launches). I never tow in the winter, never tow over mountain passes and am never at any altitude high enough to make any difference. My only use case for heavy towing with an EV truck is locally in the summer (and not at elevation), so I have zero concerns in my case.

 

[Moates442]

I'm currently deciding between the Traveler and Terra and want to isolate the true engineering differences that matter for real-world-use - specifically towing, altitude performance, thermal management, and chassis behavior. Both vehicles share the same body-on-frame platform, solid rear axle, ~ 2,000 lbs payload, and 35-inch tire capability, so the distinctions that do exist are meaningful.

Before getting into the technical side, I want to acknowledge upfront that I fully understand that the Scout engineering team can't release final data, calibration details, or structural specifics this early in development. That's completely fair and to be expected. The purpose of this post isn't to press for confidential information - it's to open a conversation that I think many serious off-road enthusiasts will eventually want to have, even if they're not asking these questions yet.

Here's exactly what I'm trying to understand:

1. Tow Rating Logic (7,000+ vs 10,000)

Both platforms share the same core architecture, which raises the question: what mechanical or structural elements give the Terra an additional 3,000 lbs of tow capacity?

I'm trying to determine whether the difference is driven by:

• frame reinforcement or crossmember geometry
• hitch integration
• cooling system size or layout
• suspension spring rates or damper tuning
• powertrain calibration or range-extender behavior under load

2. High-Altitude Towing (5,000 - 10,000 ft)

I live in Colorado, so altitude performance isn't theoretical - it's a constant.

I'm looking for any insight into:

• expected power output at elevation
• how sustained mountain-grading towing affects thermal load
• regen braking behavior with a trailer attached
• any anticipated derating under prolonged climbing

3. Thermal & Battery Management Under Heavy Load

Towing plus elevation equals heat, and I'm trying to understand each blatform's thermal envelope.

Specifically interested in:

• differences (if any) in cooling stack capacity between Traveler and Terra
• how the battery is managed under near-max tow loads
• generator/battery load balancing on long climbs
• cold-weather strategies for maintaining range and performance while towing

4. Suspension Architecture Differences

Scout confirmed te shared platform, but it's unclear where the Terra actually diverges.

I'm trying to identify whether the Terra receives:

• heavier-duty spring rates
• revised damper tuning
• higher squat tolerance under tongue weight
• any changes in rear torsional stiffness due to the truck bed structure
• differences in bump stops or jounce bumpers

If any of this detail comes off as intense, that's definitely not my intention. I'm approaching this from a place of enthusiasm and respect for the brand. And if it's helpful, I'd be more than happy to take some of these questions offline and start an email dialogue with the appropriate Scout team members. My goal here is simply to spark a meaningful, informed discussion around the design choices that make Scout such an exciting entry into the offroad space.

Hold on. Before we get into anything, you can't decide between an SUV and a truck?

 

[BartMan Terra Total EV]

I'm currently deciding between the Traveler and Terra and want to isolate the true engineering differences that matter for real-world-use - specifically towing, altitude performance, thermal management, and chassis behavior. Both vehicles share the same body-on-frame platform, solid rear axle, ~ 2,000 lbs payload, and 35-inch tire capability, so the distinctions that do exist are meaningful.

Before getting into the technical side, I want to acknowledge upfront that I fully understand that the Scout engineering team can't release final data, calibration details, or structural specifics this early in development. That's completely fair and to be expected. The purpose of this post isn't to press for confidential information - it's to open a conversation that I think many serious off-road enthusiasts will eventually want to have, even if they're not asking these questions yet.

Here's exactly what I'm trying to understand:

1. Tow Rating Logic (7,000+ vs 10,000)

Both platforms share the same core architecture, which raises the question: what mechanical or structural elements give the Terra an additional 3,000 lbs of tow capacity?

I'm trying to determine whether the difference is driven by:

• frame reinforcement or crossmember geometry
• hitch integration
• cooling system size or layout
• suspension spring rates or damper tuning
• powertrain calibration or range-extender behavior under load

2. High-Altitude Towing (5,000 - 10,000 ft)

I live in Colorado, so altitude performance isn't theoretical - it's a constant.

I'm looking for any insight into:

• expected power output at elevation
• how sustained mountain-grading towing affects thermal load
• regen braking behavior with a trailer attached
• any anticipated derating under prolonged climbing

3. Thermal & Battery Management Under Heavy Load

Towing plus elevation equals heat, and I'm trying to understand each blatform's thermal envelope.

Specifically interested in:

• differences (if any) in cooling stack capacity between Traveler and Terra
• how the battery is managed under near-max tow loads
• generator/battery load balancing on long climbs
• cold-weather strategies for maintaining range and performance while towing

4. Suspension Architecture Differences

Scout confirmed te shared platform, but it's unclear where the Terra actually diverges.

I'm trying to identify whether the Terra receives:

• heavier-duty spring rates
• revised damper tuning
• higher squat tolerance under tongue weight
• any changes in rear torsional stiffness due to the truck bed structure
• differences in bump stops or jounce bumpers

If any of this detail comes off as intense, that's definitely not my intention. I'm approaching this from a place of enthusiasm and respect for the brand. And if it's helpful, I'd be more than happy to take some of these questions offline and start an email dialogue with the appropriate Scout team members. My goal here is simply to spark a meaningful, informed discussion around the design choices that make Scout such an exciting entry into the offroad space.

1. Wheelbase being 2+ feet longer is one aspect that would increase towing capacity.

 

[JoMar]

If you wind up landing on a truck (Terra instead of Harvester), this Out of Spec vid might help with your towing questions & with performance at altitude. The F-150 Lightening and Rivian R1T are good representative real-world, production examples to compare to the Terra for benchmarks now, but consider that you will also enjoy better architecture, BMS and thermal management with potentially better all around batteries in the Terra with 3-4 extra years of advancements in the bag since these trucks were launched:

That video was quite interesting. Thanks for sharing