Anyone else considering returning their Ineos Grenadier?

[Trialmaster]

That said they don’t appear to be on their own. There are reports of circa 5000 land rover owners waiting on parts for repairs at the moment, some for considerable time, and also reports that dealers have been told to use second hand parts for repairs to deal with the backlog.

Autocar said this, which was refuted by JLR, who do you believe. Too much misinformation on the "net"

Anyway, isn't the item of this thread:

Anyone else considering returning their Ineos Grenadier?​

So are there any people?

 

[AnD3rew]

… I left AWo’s biggest question alone though. Can they service their debt?
I have no idea, and Ineos is not a typical, or a listed company, so it’s harder to know what their attitude and debt strategy is.
But it’s a bloody good question…

Have a read through this. Despite the negative rating primarily due to acquisitions, their liquidity is described as “robust” If INEOS decided to ditch IA it won’t be because they have to I don’t think. Barring disasters in the group.
https://www.fitchratings.com/resear...look-to-negative-affirms-idr-at-bb-21-07-2023

 

[Lord Ripon USA]

I worked bringing the electric Hummer to life for about 18mos.
Bare concrete to vehicles being driven away.

It doesn’t take that long to create an electric vehicle anymore.
Design, suppliers, testing, etc.
there are so many fewer parts, and the vehicles are so modular, then it’s like putting together tinker toys.
Hambach will have no trouble producing ev’s with little effort.

The regulatory environment in the EU is so complex that it will Be the controlling force on their production.

My gut cause feeling is that they will follow the Nissan model, and will make whatever the absolute minimum in the regulatory requirements is, and then will put the rest of the effort into more profitable endeavors.

 

[255/85]

@255/85 Do I? Where?

AWo

Oops! So sorry. It was klarie. It was a valid reply and his points were well made. I wasn't offended or anything so...all good, brother?

​

 

[255/85]

My gut cause feeling is that they will follow the Nissan model, and will make whatever the absolute minimum in the regulatory requirements is, and then will put the rest of the effort into more profitable endeavors.

Agreed. Why would they do any more than that? I don't think BEVs are why IA was conceived and are only being considered to sell more Grenadiers.

 

[AWo]

I also understand and agree that software in an electric car is a MASSIVE deal, and completely unlike normal cars. I wasn't talking about that software. (There are rumours they have already partnered in that space, SW/HW combo. You probably know more than me about it....?)

No, I don't. But maybe my wife when she returns today from her six day Grenadier trip. The German product manager drove a few miles and times with her, having time for a chat.

INEOS have chosen not to rent software for lots of standard automotive business running functions, and to write their own. This software will require re-configuration (to some extent) for any new vehicle, but is a capital cost that will start to yield increasing benefits over time, and more so with a broader product range. I understand that they have avoided something in the region of 12 packages, and the attendant costs for licenses, but more so the costs for dealing with the difficulties of data communication between them, and on-going cost and inefficiency in their business from package compatibility problems (these afflict most large businesses, and are usually underestimated in terms of their negative effects).

I still need to understand this (maybe reading slowly), I apologize, my English...

The comment on planned obsolescence:
I was thinking around your comments about their brand and its positioning in the market.
A big part of that positioning, so far, is rugged durability and longevity. This runs counter to the current auto industry, which (since the lovely W123 Mercedes) has moved towards the inkjet printer model of high portion of profits from parts, and declining lifespan of product, leading to shorter second hand product life, and therefore increased new car sales.
It is very difficult to prosper doing otherwise, as a mainstream player, in any market where this model dominates. However, INEOS is not aiming to be a mainstream player, and I think that their position will sustain a product that does not rely on short lifespan high margin spares*, mostly because they are at the upper end of the value proposition, low volume, and likely unable to satisfy enough demand to meet the really price conscious market soon.

As I said, it will be interesting how it unfolds....despite all the good ideas and intensions, they are part of the global market and have to follow legislations. The question is, will they have enough models with a customer demand to generate income. There are some challenges ahead and you can see other manufacturers positioning themself, taking strategic decisions, not tactical ones. Legislation makes it even harder for them, like with the e-fuels. Should they invest in that or not? BMW keeps themself open for what comes. That is often critizised, but such a transition takes time and I like their approach to take this time for themself.

However, Ineos need to sell enough units over the long run. We need to wait, when the wave is over. WIll there be enough sales? Also to keep the company running, to keep the dealers happy and to build a world wide reliable service network.

What do you think about their prospects of using the brand in the city car space? Just idle speculation....

You talk about small electric city cars?


Sorry, I need to fetch my wife, she is on her way from Frankfurt to Cologne...

AWo

 

[Fidei Defensor]

Ineos has already said elsewhere that the smaller electric vehicle will not be built using the existing ladder frame or drivetrain. Have they stated otherwise recently? They were envisioning a standard "skateboard" platform with independent motors at each wheel corner. If this pans out then there will be little re-used beyond the steering wheel and the seats. Maybe the doors or fender/wings. They certainly won't be incorporating the heaviest parts of the current model - i.e. the ladder frame and solid axles.

Diminishing battery size with increasing capacity will eventually make possible the electrification of the full sized Grenadier. Until then it makes much more sense to retrofit existing short wheelbase 4X4s to battery power for most industrial/agricultural/enthusiast scenarios wherein vehicle use is constrained to a small working radius and returns to base at the end of each shift or workday than it does to purchase a brand new and untested light duty vehicle from a small manufacturer (Ineos). For urban/suburban dwellers that want the "look" but just need to get to work each day while avoiding the disapproval of whetever neighborhood eco-warrior is manning the gatehouse, a small conventional electric vehicle is perfectly fine. If it looks like it can climb Kilimanjaro all the better. Ineos will likely sell as many as they can produce. I know @AWo disagrees with me about retrofit vehicles.

I seem to remember back in the '90's, Land Rover came out with a concept (I think they actually applied for a patent) for an electric WD with four independent motors, each driving one wheel. Seemed like an interesting idea at the time, but of course the technology was not there (batteries, electronics) to go further. Pity. I wonder did they forget all about it, with their constant changes of ownership/management......

 

[Lord Ripon USA]

I seem to remember back in the '90's, Land Rover came out with a concept (I think they actually applied for a patent) for an electric WD with four independent motors, each driving one wheel. Seemed like an interesting idea at the time, but of course the technology was not there (batteries, electronics) to go further. Pity. I wonder did they forget all about it, with their constant changes of ownership/management......

You build what you can sell.
The concept of full retail, build to order, in a fast reacting plant is a relatively recent development.

Historically manufacturers relied on forecasts for production.

Sometimes they get it spot on, other times horrifically wrong.

Today, you can put a configurator online, charge a nominal fee to submit an order, and then the market will tell you what to build.

When you get into finer technical details, like four motor electric systems, demand is a problem. Whether due to lack of understanding, lack of charging facilities, or lack of need.

 

[Jeremy996]

I seem to remember back in the '90's, Land Rover came out with a concept (I think they actually applied for a patent) for an electric WD with four independent motors, each driving one wheel. Seemed like an interesting idea at the time, but of course the technology was not there (batteries, electronics) to go further. Pity. I wonder did they forget all about it, with their constant changes of ownership/management......

The idea of four traction motors was used by Porsche in the Lohner-Porsche System, so there is a lot of "prior art", https://newsroom.porsche.com/en/products/taycan/history-18563.html#

 

[Voader - Oudersopzwier]

Autocar said this, which was refuted by JLR, who do you believe. Too much misinformation on the "net"

Anyway, isn't the item of this thread:

Anyone else considering returning their Ineos Grenadier?​

So are there any people?

Hell no!