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