Current EV owners: are you sticking with full-EV or switching to EREV Harvester Scout?

[M3_R2]

Without real world data, configurations, service center locations, final pricing etc. it's difficult to conclude much from a poll like this.

I would think that most current EV owners will first be looking at the important metrics of a vehicle purchase generally such as the actual real world range and service center locations and will be doing their due diligence to ensure their purchase is appropriate for their wants and needs.

For example, if the EV misses the target of 350 miles of range in real world testing by anything but a very small margin, much of that segment might change their mind to the Harvester version or a different vehicle entirely even though they are saying Full EV now. At 300 miles, it wouldn't be differentiating itself from the competition on that spec and with the AREV option available, would only push people more towards that if they really wanted a Scout.

I wonder what Scout would do if actual orders were more like 95% harvester and 5% EV and what effect that might have on potential EV buyers if they knew only 5% of a companies vehicles were pure EV. I think Scout needs to have good parity between these models for each to thrive.

 

[Mousehunter]

We are a long way out. I really don't want the headache of both a gas vehicle and an EV in one package. Sure you could use it primarily as an EV - but you will be cycling the battery over 2x as quickly.

I keep reading about battery longevity. Most companies say that the battery should last 1500-3000 cycles before going below 80% capacity. But then when individuals chime in, I hear more like only lost 10% in 100k miles. Even YouTube videos rarely cite vehicles that have gone over 200k miles. Seems to me like for a vehicle with a 300mile range, 1500 cycles should be 450,000 miles. But reports are showing it is probably closer to 200k miles. Now if you look at the harvester battery - if you run it primarily on EV mode, you are looking at 20% battery loss in 100k miles. That just seems a bit too quick for me. I guess on the flip side, what is the difference between a 120 mile range and a 150 mile range, if you have another 350 miles of range with gas. It's still almost as functional.

We are a long way out - so I will definitely be considering my choices as more production data becomes available. Likewise, in 3 years, there might be other competition.

 

[rfk]

We've got a Grand Highlander hybrid so planning Traveler BEV. FHEV + BEV is a great combo to have in your garage. If we were at just one vehicle, would likely do Traveler EREV.

 

[cptcolo]

Yes, but the Harvester option has a smaller battery, and the engine kicks in at 150 miles, meaning that if one gets Harvester, it will be used alot with the smaller battery. I wish they offered the full size battery and Harvester, but there's not room for it . . . And it would be pricey. Harvester design means that on trips over 150 miles, it will always be a partial gas vehicle . . . Begging the question, Why get electric at all? With a home charger and short trips, it's a battery car . . . But a typical (for me) 180 mile round trip day will always require the gas engine to work, unless I find a charger on a 100 mile trip . . . That's pretty inconvenient!

Outside of long work trips, road trips, off-roading, or towing, the Harvester gas engine won't get used. Even 100 miles of EV range (conservative low end real world estimate) will cover nearly all daily trips. The average American drives 37miles per day. 97.4% of all trips are under 100 miles. For a EREV more range is not needed (that is what the gas generator is there for) and it would just be dead weight. I would even argue they could potentially get by with a slightly smaller battery.

 

[panzer948]

Outside of long work trips, road trips, off-roading, or towing, the Harvester gas engine won't get used. Even 100 miles of EV range (conservative low end real world estimate) will cover nearly all daily trips. The average American drives 37miles per day. 97.4% of all trips are under 100 miles. For a EREV more range is not needed (that is what the gas generator is there for) and it would just be dead weight. I would even argue they could potentially get by with a slightly smaller battery.

Agreed. I’ve owned a Mach‑E GT for three years and had a Chevy Volt for eleven before that, so I’ve lived with both technologies for a long time. With the Scout EV offering nearly 100 miles more electric range than our current EV, the choice is pretty straightforward for us. We already rarely need public charging, only on longer vacation trips, and a 350‑mile range will easily cover all of our regular driving. Like a lot of families, most of our longer non-local trips are the classic 1.5–2 hour drives to see relatives, which fall well within that round‑trip range.

So people really need to ask themselves whether they truly need 500 miles. And when they do, is it worth giving up the extra EV performance and taking on the added maintenance that comes with an EREV platform? There’s also the entry cost factor. It's true that Hybrids give you the pros of both ICE and EV, but they also bring the cons of both. You still have all the maintenance of a gas vehicle and the battery considerations of an EV. As someone who’s been through it, the battery concerns are overblown, but new EV buyers will have to experience that for themselves.

Personally, I’d rather deal with the “cons” of just one technology and enjoy the full benefits of an EV. After living with the instant torque of the Mach‑E GT, I’m not interested in Camry‑level 0–60 times paired with its ICE complexity and maintenance. But that’s just me.

So take it from someone that has already had both techs as I now look at hybrid cars as nothing but a stepping‑stone for people who still have range anxiety or aren’t ready to trust a full EV yet. Believe me, I don't blame new perspective owners as I was once one myself as it took me following this same path before I went full EV. But the tech has come a long way, and for most drivers, especially those who aren’t racking up huge daily mileage, skipping the hybrid stage altogether makes a lot more sense today.

 

[mcm4ss]

I should get two votes.. HAHA.. anyway, I got a full EV Terra and a EREV Traveler. Just because I would use the Traveler to see my kids 420 miles away (also, off grid and VERY remote so there are NO chargers at all) and cannot get the range I need AT THIS TIME. I think by time these go into production in 27 that the battery tech will change enough that might not be an issue.

 

[joewilk45]

I'm all in on full EV original Erev order will be changing. Have a Cadillac VISTIQ love it no range anxiety me wifey dog and grandkids handles all our needs at a fraction of what our Tahoe cost. As to DTC if dealers only have to tie VW to Scout that's easy to do therefore I think I will be taking my neighborhood VW GM golfing in near future wonder when that will be decided.