Ineos Fusilier vs Rivian R3 vs Scout Traveler
Ineos Fusilier
$75,000
Rivian R3
$38,000
Scout Traveler
$60,000
AI Comparison Summary
Comparing Ineos Fusilier vs Rivian R3 vs Scout Traveler. Rivian R3 offers the strongest value on price. Scout Traveler leads on expert rating.
Category Winners
Overall Winner
Scout Traveler
Best Value
Rivian R3
Fuel Economy
Ineos Fusilier
Performance
Rivian R3
Visual Comparison
Category Radar
Price & Reviews
Model Year
Expert Rating
Ineos Fusilier
$75,000
Rating: 4.6/10
Rivian R3
$38,000
Rating: 4.6/10
Scout Traveler
$60,000
Rating: 4.8/10
| Specification |
Ineos Fusilier |
Rivian R3 |
Scout Traveler |
|---|---|---|---|
| Brand | Ineos | Rivian | Scout |
| Model | Fusilier | R3 | Traveler |
| Year | 2027 | 2027 | 2027 |
| Type | Ev | Ev | Ev |
| Body Style | SUV | Compact Crossover | SUV |
| Current Price | $75,000 | $38,000 | $60,000 |
| MSRP | $75,000 | $38,000 | $60,000 |
| Dealer Price | $72,000 | $37,500 | $58,000 |
| Engine | Dual Electric Motor / Range-Extender Option | Dual-Motor / Tri-Motor AWD | Dual-Motor Electric AWD |
| Horsepower | High-output electric configuration | Up to 450+ hp (estimated) | Approx. 500 hp |
| Torque | Instant high-torque delivery for crawling | 600 Nm | 1,035 lb-ft |
| 0–60 mph | Responsive off-the-line EV acceleration | Under 3.0 sec (0-60 mph for quickest config) | 3.5 sec (0-60 mph) |
| Top Speed | Electronically limited for highway efficiency | 180 km/h | 120 mph |
| Fuel Type | Electric / Petrol Range Extender | Electric | Electric |
| Mileage / MPG | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| Range (EV) | Optimized for daily utility and long-distance expedition variants | Over 300 miles EPA | Up to 350 miles EPA (Pure EV version) |
| Emissions | 0 g/mi (Pure EV mode) | 0 g/mi | 0 g/mi |
| Battery | High-capacity structural pack | Up to 80 kWh | 100+ kWh |
| Charging | High-speed DC capability | 250 kW DC (10-80% in 30 min via NACS) | 350 kW DC Fast Charging |
| Expert Rating | 4.6/10 | 4.6/10 | 4.8/10 |
| Community Reviews | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Performance Score | 8.8 | 9.0 | 9.5 |
| Comfort Score | 8.2 | 8.5 | 8.5 |
| Safety Score | 9.0 | 9.0 | 9.0 |
| Fuel Economy Score | 8.5 | 9.2 | 9.0 |
| Technology Score | 8.4 | 9.0 | 9.2 |
| Value Score | 8.3 | 9.0 | 8.9 |
| Pros | Uncompromising rugged off-road DNA; Choice of pure EV or range-extender powertrains; Dedicated steel ladder frame constr... | Distinctive retro-futuristic hatchback styling; Over 300 miles of estimated range with larger battery pack; Native NACS... | Stunning retro-modern heritage design; Massive torque and rapid 0-60 acceleration; True body-on-frame off-road capabilit... |
| Cons | Heavy curb weight inherent to robust off-road builds; Limited aerodynamic efficiency on highways; Niche market appeal co... | Production timeline stretches further out; Exact trim pricing and final configurations subject to change; High demand ma... | High demand may lead to delivery waitlists; Large physical footprint for tight urban spaces; Efficiency impacted signifi... |
