Jay Leno drives Scout Hybrid Harvester - Towing Capacity, Gas Fuel Tank Capacity, More Specs Revealed

[Dive Bar Casanova]

In the 7th grade I did a Science Project on Solar Power.
I also constructed a solar water distiller that worked.
I mentioned one day our cars will be solar-powered electric.

That day has come at my home.

BTW: I got a C+

 

[elvis buys]

Since it looks like nobody else has noticed this, I've color-coded what *MAY* be an important distinction between "Hybrid mode" & "Heavy-Duty Towing Mode"

Summary of Performance Figures, Performance Metrics, and Technical Specs:

• ** Gasoline Range Extender:
  • High-output four-cylinder engine located on the rear axle
  • 15-gallon fuel tank capacity
  • Operates automatically or manually:
    • EV mode,
    • hybrid mode,
    • heavy-duty towing mode
• **? Towing and Payload Capacity:
  • Pure EV truck: 10,000 lbs towing, 2,000 lbs payload
  • SUV version: 7,000 lbs towing
  • Hybrid mode: Up to 5,000 lbs towing for both models
  • "heavy-duty towing mode" ???? lbs towing

Highlights include:
• Dual power modes:
Pure EV mode,
Hybrid mode,
and
Heavy-Duty Mode for towing

If the Harvester's trailer tow capacity is really only 5,000 lbs., the weight of the engine sitting behind the rear axle might have something to do with it. The BEV version has the entire weight of the (larger, heavier) battery pack forward of the rear axle.

But until the GCWR numbers are released, you still don't know what these will actually tow.
Plenty of 'half-ton' ICE pickups have inflated trailer towing ratings that turn out to only be within the GCWR if the truck is carrying just the driver and not even a full tank of gas. This is because the heavier the trailer, the more tongue weight is on the truck, reducing its payload accordingly.

At least the Scout is supposed to have a 2,000 lb. payload, which is upwards of 750 lbs. more than the F150 Lightning. You lose at least half that 2,000 lb. to the tongue weight if towing a 10k trailer.

2,000 lb. payload also means Scout will be above 8,500 lb. GVWR, which should mean that it won't have an EPA fuel economy rating (when running on gas in hybrid mode).

 

[Norville]

Honestly the towing capacity reduction for the Terra Harvester may be the deal killer for me. 5k puts it under my wife's Subaru Ascent. With our current configuration that number is fine with a tent trailer fully loaded coming in at around 4500, but we have been looking at upgrading to a larger trailer that when loaded would put it closer to 7500. Going all electric makes no sense as we take trips currently at up to 350 miles one way with towing. The Ramcharger is touted as having 14k of towing. This really hurts. I LOVE the Terra, but...

I'm in the same boat, no pun intended, about cancelling if I can't tow the 7k#.

 

[Hedrock]

Since it looks like nobody else has noticed this, I've color-coded what *MAY* be an important distinction between "Hybrid mode" & "Heavy-Duty Towing Mode"



If the the Harvester's trailer tow capacity is really only 5,000 lbs., the weight of the engine sitting behind the rear axle might have something to do with it. The BEV version has the entire weight of the (larger, heavier) battery pack forward of the rear axle.

But until the GCWR numbers are released, you still don't know what these will actually tow.
Plenty of 'half-ton' ICE pickups have inflated trailer towing ratings that turn out to only be within the GCWR if the truck is carrying just the driver and not even a full tank of gas. This is because the heavier the trailer, the more tongue weight is on the truck, reducing its payload accordingly.

At least the Scout is supposed to have a 2,000 lb. payload, which is upwards of 750 lbs. more than the F150 Lightning. You lose at least half that 2,000 lb. to the tongue weight if towing a 10k trailer.

2,000 lb. payload also means Scout will be above 8,500 lb. GVWR, which should mean that it won't have an EPA fuel economy rating (when running on gas in hybrid mode).

This is super informative. Which half tons have these gamed towing numbers?

A quick search indicates 2000lb payload is a bit lower than f-150 at 2400 lbs, but higher than Tahoe at 1700 lbs.

Somehow I hadn’t picked up on harvester being behind the axle rather than on top/slightly in front so that would make sense with the tongue weight reduction. I wonder if that’s the reason for the big bulge under the back of the vehicle on the prototype…if so I hope they armor the shit out of that area.

Low rear mounted VW engines don’t like hitting high rocky waterbars. Ask me how I know ??

 

[ocnsvl]

If the towing capacity is really only 5K with Harvester, that is a terrible disappointment and takes the truck off my list. Almost 100% of the towing we do is over 5k with towing distances & available travel times not suitable for a pure EV application.

I could make do perhaps at 8k but would be towing a bit more than that at times. There is so much I like about these vehicles, I hope the towing info in the video proves to be incorrect.

 

[elvis buys]

This is super informative. Which half tons have these gamed towing numbers?

Typically, it's the largest variant, i.e.: crew cab with the longest available bed, with a V8 engine & 4WD. Both F150 & Silverado have had this problem in the past, but both GM & Ford have cut out some of the weight & boosted the GVWR on the latest models.

This problem may now be more prevalent on big SUVs than pickups. Example:
A 2023 V8 Suburban has a GVWR of ~7,500 lbs. & is rated to tow up to 8,200 lbs, but it has a GCWR of 14,500 lbs., and a curb weight of upwards of 6,000 lbs (depending on options). So if towing a 8,200 lb. trailer, the GCWR limit leaves only 300 pounds of payload, barely enough for the driver & a tank of fuel.

The current Ford Transit is probably the most egregious example. The "350HD" (Dually) model is rated to tow up to 6,500 lb., but the curb weight is about 6,000 lb., the GVWR is 11,000 and the GCWR is only 13,000 lb.., so this "350HD Dually" can legally tow 6,500 lbs. only if it's nearly empty.

It's important to remember that tongue weight is *minimum* 10%.
It's recommended to be 10% - 15%
My rule of thumb is, at least 12% "just in case" the load distribution in the trailer changes. If the trailer is pretty fully loaded, where does any add'l stuff tend to get stowed? In the back.

Still, as an example, the 2022 Silverado 1500 has a *MAX* payload of ~2,000 lb. (in the smallest truck configuration, probably 2wd regular cab) & is rated to tow 13,300 lbs., so using 12% as conservative tongue weight, that's ~1,600 lbs. tongue weight, leaving a lot less than 400 lb. payload in a crew cab 4wd version. That trailer is also almost twice as heavy as truck's max gvwr, which violates my other rule of thumb that recreational drivers should not tow a trailer that's heavier (at least not by much) than the tow vehicle.

AFAIC, it's nuts to try to tow a 13,000 lb trailer with a half-ton truck. A load from Home Depot? Maybe, but not over any long distance.

 

[Mousehunter]

Tongue weight is important. Most (if not all) trucks require using either a 5th whee (or gooseneck) - or a load balancing hitch to do maximum tow weight. While the RV crowd has almost completely embraced load balancing hitches - the boat community has not.

I looked at the F150 lightning specs for a while - eventually saw 500lb max tongue weight (which honestly is in line with other Ford 1/2 tons). With 10% of your weight on the tongue - you can tow 5k lbs, not that total of 10k that it can do with load distributing (assuming you are not loading down the bed, or even the cab with cargo weight).

I tow a lot with a 3/4 ton. Sure - have towed a lot with a 1/2 ton - but if you go by the numbers, it is VERY easy to overload a 1/2 ton. Going onto towing forums - they will argue that even towing with a 3/4 ton is Russian roulette. There is a reason 1 tons have dual rear tires - an besides load carrying, it is to keep the people in the cab alive in case of a rear blowout.
----
It is one thing to ask the Scout to perform like a 1/2 ton. But Scout will probably need a different design if we keep asking it for 3/4 ton or 1 ton performance. Plus to be totally honest - 95% of us would hate driving it if it had those performance numbers. I love towing with my 3/4 ton - but it is a LOT harder on my back when driving it unloaded. I miss my 1/2 ton for doing light truck work. I tow well beyond 1/2 ton truck numbers way too much - so towing with a 1/2 ton was no longer a great options (and the 3/4 ton was the best current compromise). Once you go 1 ton, you start looking at possibly needing a CDL a lot sooner. In my case, if I am honest with myself - I am only getting out of the CDL already due to an agriculture wavier.

Anyway, something capable, but 1/2 ton or slightly less might fill the whole in my heart left when I traded in my 1/2 ton. 99% of the time I will care more about ride quality (especially since I am looking at a Traveler rather than a Terra). It just might be nice if I can tow my lightest ag trailer short hops - or moreover, a light boat or light utility trailer (something a full sized SUV can easily do).

 

[elvis buys]

…so after the initial 150 EV miles, 23 mpg for Harvester?

Yes, 15 gal. gas provides approx. 350 miles add'l range, which is 23.3 mpg

 

[elvis buys]

Anyone thinking that they are going to tow 10k for 350 miles with the EV should watch some reviews of towing with current EV pickups...

Yeah. TFL (on youtube) has tested all of them, both up the "Ike Gauntlet" (8 miles up a max 7% grade on I70 west of Denver), and on a somewhat hilly ~100-mile loop around Denver. Although they have a bad habit of not using the same trailer from one test to the next, the gist of it is, towing a cargo trailer (i.e.: fairly large frontal area) on relatively flat terrain cuts EV range to half or less of the normal range. Climbing steep grades (and going back down) drops it to more like one-third the normal range, and that's *with* regen on the downhill side. IIRC, the EV trucks expended more than 21 kwHr pulling an empty cargo trailer up the uphill segment. None of the EVs trucks they tested regen'd more than about half the "extra energy" (compared to what they would have expended on a level road)

 

[elvis buys]

I think everyone is assuming half the milage when towing, prob less than that if towing the full 10k, but now it sounds like if you are towing above 5k it's impossible for the engine to keep up, kinda depressing and I wish they were just honest about that from the start.

Yeah. Keogh's previous statements referred to 'full capability' with the Harvester.

I'm now thinking that most people who tow would be better off with a big*ss generator mounted on the triangular section in front of the trailer, IF only there was a way to allow it to charge the Scout's battery while you're driving. It would almost certainly be a lot cheaper than the Harvester option.

 

[ohseedee]

I think they over indexed on the harvester. I just wanted an high performing EV truck that allowed me to fuel up occasionally when towing. A 15 gallon tank and hundreds of miles of gas range is overkill and came at the cost of EV performance (towing, range, acceleration). 3-5 gallon tank would have been more appropriate as backup only system and that space could have been used for batteries.

No one really needs more than 300 miles of EV range for a road trip. Towing was Really what the harvester was supposed to solve For. At 5k lbs it will no longer appeal to those that tow.

still a cool EV, but unless something changes with the harvester (same 0-60, 10k lbs of towing, and 200+ miles EV only range) I’ll stick with Rivian.

 

[MannyG20]

Very different battery chemistries between the two, the EV gets nickel metal hydride? Is there another BEV using NMH?

The base model Mach-E uses NMH.

 

[MannyG20]

I think they over indexed on the harvester. I just wanted an high performing EV truck that allowed me to fuel up occasionally when towing. A 15 gallon tank and hundreds of miles of gas range is overkill and came at the cost of EV performance (towing, range, acceleration). 3-5 gallon tank would have been more appropriate as backup only system and that space could have been used for batteries.

No one really needs more than 300 miles of EV range for a road trip. Towing was Really what the harvester was supposed to solve For. At 5k lbs it will no longer appeal to those that tow.

still a cool EV, but unless something changes with the harvester (same 0-60, 10k lbs of towing, and 200+ miles EV only range) I’ll stick with Rivian.

What is Rivian’s towing range?

 

[MannyG20]

Not sure the surprise here.

Tow capacity is always a trade off for an off-road vehicle and 5000lb is in line with cross shopped vehicles IMO. The notable exception being the GX550.

While this forum likely has a concentration of folks wanting that tow capacity, the average customer regularly hauling 7500 lbs is buying a truck and the guy wanting to overland has a 3000lb teardrop not a 25ft glamping machine. The Venn on both is not a big market and makes a compromised vehicle for both IMO.

Truck I get the letdown, but harvester right in line with what id expected

^^^ This.

 

[Hedrock]

I think they over indexed on the harvester. I just wanted an high performing EV truck that allowed me to fuel up occasionally when towing. A 15 gallon tank and hundreds of miles of gas range is overkill and came at the cost of EV performance (towing, range, acceleration). 3-5 gallon tank would have been more appropriate as backup only system and that space could have been used for batteries.

No one really needs more than 300 miles of EV range for a road trip. Towing was Really what the harvester was supposed to solve For. At 5k lbs it will no longer appeal to those that tow.

still a cool EV, but unless something changes with the harvester (same 0-60, 10k lbs of towing, and 200+ miles EV only range) I’ll stick with Rivian.

I mean, I spend a month per year on the road driving 600-1200 miles a day (up to about 17 hours, and Nebraska through western Nevada really flies) but I’m an exception.

Keogh talked about this in his interview with inEVitable podcast. “Nobody really needs 300+ mile range” is true, but consumers buy waaaay more than they need constantly. Just look at truck sales - 90% of half ton owners don’t ever tow, and 70% of the remainder tow 2x a year and would be better served with a Home Depot rental.

Harvester is supposed to solve the range anxiety and 2x/year edge cases, which for sure aren’t *necessary* for buyers, but heavily influence their buying behavior.

Maybe Scout is misjudging consumers, but I don’t think so.