Last night, the International Scout’s long-dead corpse, which had been spirited into a laboratory funded by Volkswagen a few years ago, was re-born and presented to the world as the new Scout Motors Traveler (an SUV) and Terra (a pickup). So far, everyone seems pretty thrilled with what they saw. Our own Editor-In-Chief David was absolutely smitten with the body-on-frame construction, solid axle, and series-hybrid (or range-extended electric) drivetrain. The design is, of course, hugely important, too, and while some of the design was inspired by the original incarnations of the Scout, there’s plenty of new ideas here, and it’s all worth talking about. So let’s do that!
Oh, and if you’re dismissing it as a Rivian knockoff, I just don’t think that’s right.
I suppose first we should talk a bit about the design of the original Scout, which was designed by International Harvester chief designer Ted Ornas on a scrap of mat board, a last-ditch attempt to convince IH management that a competitor to the Jeep in the then-small recreational vehicle market made sense. It worked.
The IH bigwigs took the bait, and the Scout – which was originally intended to be made of fiberglass– was born. It went on to become an iconic off-roader and do-anything machine, never achieving the numbers or fame of the Jeep, but developing a strong following of its own.
There were two main generations of Scout – the original very boxy scout went from 1961 to 1970, and then a full redesign happened in 1971 with the Scout II. This new interpretation of the Scout seems to have most of its heritage visual elements taken from the Scout II, as you can see here, where I’ve tried to call out the more obvious design cues:
There’s some pretty obvious ones, like that rear window kick-up, and some more subtle ones, like the general design of the corner chamfers and the shoulder line, the “masks” at front and rear, and, of course, the overall proportions with the minimal overhangs, long hood, and visual weight shifted to the rear.
Scout themselves definitely wants us to notice the graphic elements of the DLOs (Day Light Openings, that’s designer-talk) and the front and rear masks, because they made this whole slide about them:
One exception to the Scout II design cues is the inclusion of this incised character line on the Terra pickup’s bedside, cribbed right from the first-generation Scout 80:
It’s an overall quite clean and relatively unadorned vehicle, but there’s a lot going on in the details. Let’s take a closer look at the front “mask” area that fills in where a grille would be on a conventional combustion car; there’s a lot going on here:
The Scout logo badge is almost unchanged from the original 1960s script, and the contrast between the curvy forms and the more slab-sided body is visually compelling. Plus, I just like a truck or SUV logo that uses typography that doesn’t look like it was beaten out of a slab of granite.
I’d have been tempted to include round headlamps like the original Scout, but if you think about it, the original only had round lights because there was literally no other option, so maybe it makes sense to try something else in this age of radical illumination freedom. The quad-per side lights are interesting, but lighting-wise, more interesting are the DRLs, the horizontal bands of light that wrap around the corners and appear to disappear under the bodywork at the sides, revealed by those little cut-outs, where they reference the Scout II’s side marker lamps.
Yes, side markers! I’m not the only one who gives a rat’s rectum about the aching, utilitarian beauty of those amber and red lights, Scout mentions it in their press release, too:
The daytime running lamps (DRL) form clean, horizontal lines. They continue from the mask, into the body and mimic the visual of the side markers on the original Scout II™ SUV. The front and rear DRLs are drawn in one line that sweeps around the vehicle like the equator sweeps around the earth, creating a subtle but proudly present grounding line for the vehicles.
I can’t really vouch for that whole equator business, which feels like something of a reach, but I do appreciate the side markers, front and rear.
Speaking of rear lighting, the taillight design on the truck is especially striking:
I’m not sure I’ve ever seen a pickup truck with a taillight graphic that circumscribes the entire tailgate area of the truck, but I think it works beautifully here. The illuminated logo provides a nice bit of visual interest as well, though I am curious about the locations of the turn indicators and reverse lamps, which are not obvious.
The Traveler SUV takes a different approach, especially with the rear-mounted spare tire:
The rear-mounted spare provides plenty of visual interest of its own, and the swing-out arm provides the primary rear graphic, punctuated with a red script Scout badge.
It’s not a radically-different vehicle, it’s just a very straightforward and clean take on a pickup and SUV. It’s clearly body-on-frame, the overhangs are quite minimal, and it’s worth noting that the bumpers are differentiated from the body, and are black plastic and metal instead of a stupid painted plastic bumper cover. These bumpers may actually work, which is a pleasant change.
Looking at the profile here, I can’t help but think a two-door version of both Traveler and Terra would look great, too.
I already mentioned this in the headline, so it’s worth comparing the Scout to another VW joint venture and maker of electric trucks and SUVs, Rivian:
They seem similar at first glance, and while basic shape and proportions are close, there are vast differences in details and design vocabulary when you really look at them. The suspension and solid rear axle of the Scout gives it a very different stance, the overhangs are shorter, the pillar/window graphics are radically different, the lighting design isn’t even close, and it does feel overall a bit more rugged, a bit less techy/sleek, which I suspect was the intent.
The Rivian’s prominent body-colored C-pillar is a huge design element that defines the window graphic, and is quite different from the Scout, which leans heavily on that angled cargo area window to define the window graphic. The body undercuts front and rear make the Scout feel like a leaner vehicle, and the shape of the wheelarches – rounder on the Scout, flattened on the Rivian, along with the more pronounced flare of the Scout’s wheelarches give it a very different look as well.
Plus, at the front end, the Rivian’s distinctive oblong vertical headlamps make it pretty unmistakable. Yes, they’re both big electric SUVs of roughly the same shape, but I don’t think the Scout was looking to Rivian for design cues, and besides, once that range extender got in the Scout, they’re completely different animals.
[Ed Note: Beyond the obvious design differences, to call the Scout just a rebadged Rivian when the former offers a range extender and the latter doesn’t is silly. The range extender completely transforms the vehicle’s capabilities and audience. -DT]
I’ll be very curious to see one in person, to see how the thing feels when you’re standing right next to it. So far, though, I think the design is successful, and I’m excited to see how the production version ends up looking. What compromises will have to be made? What’s going to disappoint everyone, and what will delight? I guess we’ll have to wait and see until, ugh, 2027? Oy.
It’s the pickup trucks- Not the SUVs- That share nearly identical silhouettes and window lines.
I don’t blame Scout for styling these the way they did…. But comparisons to the Rivian are trending for a reason. These trucks only look about as a different as the CUVs everyone complains share the same profile and styling cues.
I do think this vehicle is a step in the right direction, especially the range extender and the efforts apparently made towards repairability. I’m curious if this means the base model truck could serve a legitimate work/fleet vehicle, competing with the Lightning Pro, in the way the Rivian just can’t- Due to it’s expensive integrated body.
I do also wonder if this is another expensive luxury SUV that seemed like a great idea 4 years ago when credit was cheap.
Styling wise, I do find the slavishly retro body + rectangular LED projectors and trendy extended DRLs a bit disjointed and underdeveloped. These vehicles look more like a high-end restomod of an original Scout, than an original take on what a modern Scout should look like.
Obviously a vehicle designed in the 2020s isn’t going to have sealed beams, but this thing should evoke more of a rock’n’roll/KC Daylighters vibe than cyberpunk/ Blade runner.
Rivians have always looked stupid because of the headlights
Now compare the Terra to the R1T.
It’s like one is a photocopy of the other x1.2.
I think people (me included) were hoping for an EV Bronco/Wrangler competitor when this is clearly targeted at the R1S/T (and probably also Land Cruiser). That’s where I come from with the Rivian comparison. Obviously, the broad strokes are going to be the same and the differences will be in the details just as in any segment. But you cannot deny that they are gunning for potential/existing Rivian buyers with this thing.
I am so glad to NOT see acres of black plastic cladding all over the sides and wheel wells like some crossovers out there.
For what it is, it looks pretty good.
The only real issue I have is… do we need yet another truck/SUV option in a market already oversaturated with truck/SUV options?
There are many many many 4×4 pickup and SUV options, but really there are no signs of market saturation yet. They keep coming out with Broncos and Rivians and Ranger Raptors and Mavericks and all of them sell. Thus far, it seems like a bottomless demand for more 4x4s.
The thing is, the offroad capable SUV market is not really saturated, there are only a few main players. Wanting a vehicle with a fixed roof lowers that number even further.
One can argue the Rivian copied the Travel-all
My very first impression of these was “Rivian”, but if you look one iota closer than the basic silhouette you realize that’s not correct.
Also, I happen to think the Rivians are pretty cool looking so it’s not exactly a bad comparison to draw either way.
I really like these and the choices they’ve made with the engineering, but I’ll echo what others have said and hope they can eventually offer a smaller vehicle as well. Absolute best case scenario is they can create something with the versatility of the original Scouts. See my profile picture. I could never expect an exact re-creation, but the spirit of that would go a long way.