RE: All-new Ineos Fusilier revealed as electric 4x4
Discussion
Sir Jim does seem to have lost the dressing room around here.
stuckmojo said:
I like it a lot (I know I'm in the minority here)
Me too, it's a great looking vehicle and the antithesis of so many of the modern SUV body types. This article is of course just a 'tease' - until there are weight/performance/range figures available, then we just don't know how viable or sellable it's likely to be.
I'd be more interested in the range extender - if it had a decent towing capacity.
However, if experience with the current Grenadier is anything to go by, then the lack of dealer back up and software glitch issues are likely to hamper sales. Also, they currently have a low profile with the general public - who's going to choose this over something from the more established mainstream manufacturers? Apart from its retro looks, does it offer anything unique?
ChocolateFrog said:
Weight, driveline drag and lack of aerodynamic efficiency I'll be surprised it that gets much above 1 mile per kWh.
So that'll be a 100 mile range.
Does seem like their is potential for a small number when it comes to range. So that'll be a 100 mile range.
I'm assuming they're just putting a body on top of a third party skateboard which we were talking about years ago on PH as being one of the future benefits of EVs, that being the potential for the return of the coach builder who can just bolt any shape body on top of a cheap mass produced rolling chassis. Which in turn would mean brands could appear out of nowhere with limited funding and deliver their product to market quickly but also be able to sell in low volume without comedy pricing.
We're starting to see this happen now with the likes of Magna having teamed up with REE (I think) a few years ago to offer such a coach building service. And I'm guessing that this is what the Fugilier is, which does make it interesting.
It's not going to be a 4x4 for heading off in any desired direction, at any time, going anywhere but a modern SUV not for fording rivers and ravines but ring roads. Efficiency doesn't really matter as it's not expected to travel long distances or go where electricity isn't ubiquitous and to combat the marketing side they've cleverly decided to offer an option to stick a genny under the bonnet.
That said, I wonder if it wouldn't have been more innovative and a great tax wheeze to offer the range extender as a trailer that could be hooked up when needed which in turn would be tied in to all forms of lifestyle promotions where numerous things could be added to the trailer depending on whether going skiiing, shooting, camping, cycling etc. I'm guessing the core issue with that idea would be that the genny would just be running to try and combat the energy losses from towing the trailer?
All in it looks nicer than the Grenadier, is less beardy weardy and less silly for the suburban person of action portrayal.
jhonn said:
Apart from its retro looks, does it offer anything unique?
Assuming they've got over their live axle obsession it could do some very tricky 4x4 things.And if they test it on eco tyres rather than off road ones the range might not look to horrific. Just offer AT tyres as an option.
Bill said:
Assuming they've got over their live axle obsession it could do some very tricky 4x4 things.
And if they test it on eco tyres rather than off road ones the range might not look to horrific. Just offer AT tyres as an option.
True - however the market size for vehicles that can do tricky 4x4 stuff is vanishingly small - for mass market penetration it just has to be good enough for what most people want and need from an off-road vehicle - decent ground clearance for snow/ruts, wading ability, some form of traction control and appropriate torque/gearing. And if they test it on eco tyres rather than off road ones the range might not look to horrific. Just offer AT tyres as an option.
Edited by jhonn on Saturday 24th February 09:52
jhonn said:
True - however the market size for vehicles that can do tricky 4x4 stuff is vanishingly small - for mass market penetration it just has to be good enough for what most people want and need from an off-road vehicle - decent ground clearance for snow/ruts, wading ability, some form of traction control and appropriate torque/gearing.
Fair point, but the market for people who want something vastly more capable than they need is huge. Just look at Land Rover... 
Bill said:
Fair point, but the market for people who want something vastly more capable than they need is huge. Just look at Land Rover...
Exactly! And I'm sure that's the customer base that Jim will be hoping to tap in to. However, if he has no USP and a bunch of potential downsides (low profile/image, lack of dealer network), then he's going to have an upward struggle.However, I wish his venture well - it's great to see alternative new interesting vehicles being developed.
jhonn said:
Bill said:
Assuming they've got over their live axle obsession it could do some very tricky 4x4 things.
And if they test it on eco tyres rather than off road ones the range might not look to horrific. Just offer AT tyres as an option.
True - however the market size for vehicles that can do tricky 4x4 stuff is vanishingly small - for mass market penetration it just has to be good enough for what most people want and need from an off-road vehicle - decent ground clearance for snow/ruts, wading ability, some form of traction control and appropriate torque/gearing. And if they test it on eco tyres rather than off road ones the range might not look to horrific. Just offer AT tyres as an option.
Edited by jhonn on Saturday 24th February 09:52
That's not being facetious about modern off-roading but facing the reality that how we use such cars today modern electronics can almost completely compensate for using road tyres on a car that is driven 99.9% of the time on road.
A few years ago this was brought home to me when we were mucking about with Range Rovers in a friends field while the children were tobogganing. We have a Classic, P38, L322 and also an L405. None had offroad tyres. The younger the car and the more laden with grip tech it was the further up the slope it could manage. And the you heat Range Rovers are exceptional on snowy roads and across wet fields with summer tyres on.
So one imagines that skateboard EVs have the potential to improve that control even further and find more conditions where normal road tyres remain reliable and usable?
DonkeyApple said:
A few years ago this was brought home to me when we were mucking about with Range Rovers in a friends field while the children were tobogganing. We have a Classic, P38, L322 and also an L405. None had offroad tyres. The younger the car and the more laden with grip tech it was the further up the slope it could manage. And the you heat Range Rovers are exceptional on snowy roads and across wet fields with summer tyres on.
I saw this myself a few years ago at an off-road hill drive in icy conditions where a standard L322 (with 3 passengers) on all-season tyres effortlessly drove up an icy rutted track , where the knobbly tyred, diff-locked Defenders struggled.I agree - with the capability of modern traction-controlled systems, the need for aggressive tyres is greatly reduced, meaning more range, less noise/drag, etc.
Bill said:
I did some trial sections in my D4 on road tyres (admittedly winters) and got as far as any of the other LWB competitors using D1/2s and Defenders on AT/MT tyres.I'm still hoping this things has a motor at each corner and portal axles.
jhonn said:
I saw this myself a few years ago at an off-road hill drive in icy conditions where a standard L322 (with 3 passengers) on all-season tyres effortlessly drove up an icy rutted track , where the knobbly tyred, diff-locked Defenders struggled.
I agree - with the capability of modern traction-controlled systems, the need for aggressive tyres is greatly reduced, meaning more range, less noise/drag, etc.
Also on road stuff. When it snows in London the modern Rangies are crawling nicely up Haverstock Hill on road tyres while the MLs and others are stuck at the bottom. I agree - with the capability of modern traction-controlled systems, the need for aggressive tyres is greatly reduced, meaning more range, less noise/drag, etc.
And while my Classics on all seasons will crawl nicely up the hill (with the historic exception of the LSE Overfinch on its Carlos Fandango turbospeeds and too much torque!!), a modern Rangie does so requiring no thought or ability, just the press of a button, if that now. That is phenomenal tech. Unobtrusive, idiot proof tech that dials out the need to compromise. The epitome of what tech should be doing, removing hassle not adding.
Winter tyres are different to AT tyres due to the softness of the compound as well as the tread being designed to hold the snow; snow on snow giving the best traction, bit like rolling a big snowball when you're a kid.
Control systems will help you get up an icy hill but won’t do anything for you going down (ABS gives up when there is no grip) which is where most of the accidents happen. The all seasons on my Defender are very capable but i wasn't completely comfortable on an icy descent. The full winters are noticeably better for that.
I much prefer the looks of the Fusilier to the Grenadier although obviously they're both knock-offs.
Control systems will help you get up an icy hill but won’t do anything for you going down (ABS gives up when there is no grip) which is where most of the accidents happen. The all seasons on my Defender are very capable but i wasn't completely comfortable on an icy descent. The full winters are noticeably better for that.
I much prefer the looks of the Fusilier to the Grenadier although obviously they're both knock-offs.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff