RE: INEOS Grenadier officially unveiled
Discussion
I think the biggest challenge for this will be getting people to trust its reliability. One of the reasons Toyota took over in places like Australia is because - as an Australian farmer once told me - "when you're out in the bush, your vehicle is your lifeline".
I know people romanticise about fixing their Land Rovers with tape and string but if you're trying to work, or indeed survive, I don't think anyone could argue that it's better not to break down at all.
I know people romanticise about fixing their Land Rovers with tape and string but if you're trying to work, or indeed survive, I don't think anyone could argue that it's better not to break down at all.
durbster said:
I think the biggest challenge for this will be getting people to trust its reliability. One of the reasons Toyota took over in places like Australia is because - as an Australian farmer once told me - "when you're out in the bush, your vehicle is your lifeline".
I know people romanticise about fixing their Land Rovers with tape and string but if you're trying to work, or indeed survive, I don't think anyone could argue that it's better not to break down at all.
I know people romanticise about fixing their Land Rovers with tape and string but if you're trying to work, or indeed survive, I don't think anyone could argue that it's better not to break down at all.
Land Rovers were dropped by consumers as utility vehicles in Australia very quickly once the Landcruiser arrived, because they were no good. That was in the mid-1970s!
So INEOS would be competing against 45 years of Landcruiser reputation in Australia (and everywhere else). Not an easy sell for a 'Nonsense 4x4'!
Hopefully having it productionised by MS will achieve that. And the parent’s company's vast experience in how to lunricate government officials and procurement officers will also.
As others have mentioned, not being adapted from the concept of a car will be a big advantage in terms of practicality.
Being price competitive to compensate for other impracticalities may well be critical in hitting the target of 25000/year for profitability.
As others have mentioned, not being adapted from the concept of a car will be a big advantage in terms of practicality.
Being price competitive to compensate for other impracticalities may well be critical in hitting the target of 25000/year for profitability.
2xChevrons said:
Apart from the overseas operations that manufactured Land Rovers and/or Range Rovers (as of 1976):
Spain
Portugal
Morocco
Sudan
Ethiopia
Ghana
Nigeria
Zaire
Kenya
Tanzania
Zambia
Malawi
Mozambique
South Africa
Iran
Pakistan
Thailand
Malaysia
Indonesia
The Philippines
Australia
New Zealand
Costa Rica
Venezuela
Ecuador
Trinidad
Not really wanting to get involved in your wider discussion. But were all those really "manufacturing" weren't most/all just CKD's and final assembly. Apart from Santana, who built under licence and developed their own range of vehicles. Which is slightly different again, as they weren't shipped back to the UK and sold as part of the regular Rover line up.Spain
Portugal
Morocco
Sudan
Ethiopia
Ghana
Nigeria
Zaire
Kenya
Tanzania
Zambia
Malawi
Mozambique
South Africa
Iran
Pakistan
Thailand
Malaysia
Indonesia
The Philippines
Australia
New Zealand
Costa Rica
Venezuela
Ecuador
Trinidad
LimaDelta said:
loskie said:
wouldnt you just buy a base spec LandCruiser?
If it was genuinely about ruggedness and utility then yes, you would. But they don't look like a legacy Defender if you squint a bit.
Looks a bit like a defender yes it does but to me more of a Santana X UMM Alter.
Would guess at it being built at the Steyr factory in the end if indeed it does go into production.
I'm not knocking it, it must be a nightmare to set up something like this from scratch and hope to build it into a profitable business. Look at Zenos and was there not another Welsh sports car plant recently that failed too?
Bill said:
And that's it in a nutshell.
I'd love this to succeed. Interesting cars are always a good thing, and it does seem to address a lot of the old Defender's shortcomings.
But why would NGOs and utilities choose this over the known quantity of a Landcruiser or other pick up?
And why would people who want a lifestyle vehicle choose this over the GWagen or Defender? Or, in the US, a Wrangler.
It's a massive gamble for any buyer. And I can't see it succeeding unless they make it significantly cheaper than the competition.
Tbh if it was British it’s high up my short list. If it’s french I’ve no more attachment to it than an Alpine or a Peugeot and more of a relationship with Jeep / Japanese 4x4s. I'd love this to succeed. Interesting cars are always a good thing, and it does seem to address a lot of the old Defender's shortcomings.
But why would NGOs and utilities choose this over the known quantity of a Landcruiser or other pick up?
And why would people who want a lifestyle vehicle choose this over the GWagen or Defender? Or, in the US, a Wrangler.
It's a massive gamble for any buyer. And I can't see it succeeding unless they make it significantly cheaper than the competition.
300bhp/ton said:
Not really wanting to get involved in your wider discussion. But were all those really "manufacturing" weren't most/all just CKD's and final assembly. Apart from Santana, who built under licence and developed their own range of vehicles. Which is slightly different again, as they weren't shipped back to the UK and sold as part of the regular Rover line up.
Yes, most of those were CKD/various degrees of local assembly; although the BL chart that list is taken from simply designated them all as 'manufacturing'. But I was hoping to point out that Land Rovers have always been built/assembled wherever it made the most sense to do so, and that the Land Rover or Defender's 'Britishness' has never really been a part of its appeal for most of its existence. Most people who bought them did so for other reasons, and it is only very recently that the whole British Automotive Icon thing got rolling.Aside from Santana, the Australian, Brazilian, South African and Turkish (not on that list since it began in the 80s) operations were all majority local content. So was the operation in Iran, albeit on an unofficial basis post-79.
Edited by 2xChevrons on Wednesday 8th July 12:32
300bhp/ton said:
Not really wanting to get involved in your wider discussion. But were all those really "manufacturing" weren't most/all just CKD's and final assembly. Apart from Santana, who built under licence and developed their own range of vehicles. Which is slightly different again, as they weren't shipped back to the UK and sold as part of the regular Rover line up.
Yes, most of those were CKD/various degrees of local assembly; although the BL chart that list is taken from simply designated them all as 'manufacturing'. But I was hoping to point out that Land Rovers have always been built/assembled wherever it made the most sense to do so, and that the Land Rover or Defender's 'Britishness' has never really been a part of its appeal for most of its existence. Most people who bought them did so for other reasons, and it is only very recently that the whole British Automotive Icon thing got rolling.Aside from Santana, the Australian, Brazilian, South African and Turkish (not on that list since it began in the 80s) operations were all majority local content. So was the operation in Iran, albeit on an unofficial basis post-79.
Edited by 2xChevrons on Wednesday 8th July 12:33
2xChevrons said:
Yes, most of those were CKD/various degrees of local assembly; although the BL chart that list is taken from simply designated them all as 'manufacturing'. But I was hoping to point out that Land Rovers have always been built/assembled wherever it made the most sense to do so, and that the Land Rover or Defender's 'Britishness' has never really been a part of its appeal for most of its existence. Most people who bought them did so for other reasons, and it is only very recently that the whole British Automotive Icon thing got rolling.
Aside from Santana, the Australian, Brazilian, South African and Turkish (not on that list since it began in the 80s) operations were all majority local content by the mid-70s. So was the operation in Iran, albeit on an unofficial basis post-79.
Even if final assembly in Wales were to go ahead it is just cobbling together a Portugese chassis, Italian axles and crated in German engines and gearbox etc. etc.Aside from Santana, the Australian, Brazilian, South African and Turkish (not on that list since it began in the 80s) operations were all majority local content by the mid-70s. So was the operation in Iran, albeit on an unofficial basis post-79.
RoverP6B said:
and I can't wait to see how that monocoque stands up to being air-dropped.
er:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGI8llbeGKo
looks like it manages being "airdropped" just fine!
(try doing that in an old defender and see how you get on...... ;-)
travisc said:
Tbh if it was British it’s high up my short list. If it’s french I’ve no more attachment to it than an Alpine or a Peugeot and more of a relationship with Jeep / Japanese 4x4s.
The Smart factory is only just inside the current French borders, it's in the Saarland, which is majority German speaking, five miles from the border. Anything built there is not going to be "French" in the way that a PSA or Renault car is.300bhp/ton said:
loskie said:
wouldnt you just buy a base spec LandCruiser?
No, they are truly fugly looking. Such a shame as they are probably quite capable. also IFS.Shame that more people can't be honest about the primary reason they like the INEOS concept.
Max_Torque said:
RoverP6B said:
and I can't wait to see how that monocoque stands up to being air-dropped.
er:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGI8llbeGKo
looks like it manages being "airdropped" just fine!
(try doing that in an old defender and see how you get on...... ;-)
t from JLR.Gassing Station | INEOS | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff