2020 Defender

kennith

Well-known member
Apr 22, 2004
10,373
98
North Carolina
Shit. If he's pulled that off, that's a massive roadblock out of the way, and a very strong indicator of intent.

Nevertheless, that doesn't mean we'll get it. It depends on how it's manufactured and registered. If he's starting up an actual motor vehicle manufacturing company, we won't see a single one of those. If he's pulling the Caterham maneuver, it's possible.

Cheers,

Kennith
 

DiscoHasBeen

Well-known member
Aug 7, 2016
96
11
Indy
Reading about it yesterday it appears to me that he sees it as something like the Bollinger vehicle. For use on the farm/ranch, maybe military (I think) than a DD or even trail rig.
 

kennith

Well-known member
Apr 22, 2004
10,373
98
North Carolina
Reading about it yesterday it appears to me that he sees it as something like the Bollinger vehicle. For use on the farm/ranch, maybe military (I think) than a DD or even trail rig.
If that's the case, it's not even meeting the specifications of a Series 1. An off-pavement vehicle (4X4, in many countries) is only fully functional if it is completely road legal. I'm selective about that terminology for a reason.

If it's not road legal, it's an off-road vehicle. There's a big difference. You park these at rock quarries or pull tractors out of carrot patches.

There is only one vehicle that ever bridged that gap, and Land Rover did not make it. The Unimog is the undefinable unicorn that lives between those two worlds, and it will forever live alone. That's a fucking strange bird, but I do kind of want one.

Cheers,

Kennith
 

CORover

Well-known member
Jun 11, 2007
635
34
Colorado, USA
Reading about it yesterday it appears to me that he sees it as something like the Bollinger vehicle. For use on the farm/ranch, maybe military (I think) than a DD or even trail rig.
That's what the ROXOR is, an Indian jeep knockoff not licensed for the road, just farm and offroad use only
 

Eliot

Well-known member
Feb 4, 2008
576
3
Bozeman, MT
If that's the case, it's not even meeting the specifications of a Series 1. An off-pavement vehicle (4X4, in many countries) is only fully functional if it is completely road legal. I'm selective about that terminology for a reason.

If it's not road legal, it's an off-road vehicle. There's a big difference. You park these at rock quarries or pull tractors out of carrot patches.

There is only one vehicle that ever bridged that gap, and Land Rover did not make it. The Unimog is the undefinable unicorn that lives between those two worlds, and it will forever live alone. That's a fucking strange bird, but I do kind of want one.

Cheers,

Kennith
In one of the promo videos, Ratcliff, he's behind the wheel of his Defender in this sequence, talks about on road drivability. He "concedes" that it has to be comfortable for on road use.

He also talks about selling Grenadiers to people in fields, and other, unconventional, locations. I can only assume that means a direct to consumer sales route, with fewer, if any, show rooms.

But then where do you take your Grenadier for repairs?
 

DiscoHasBeen

Well-known member
Aug 7, 2016
96
11
Indy

From the Ineos Automotive You Tube Chanel
More than anything else that vid shows the importance of a mud tire for mudding. The Defender is the only one of those rigs that really had anything close to a mud tire so it should come as no surprise he won that "challenge". Reminds me of many years ago I was a member of an archery club. We lost our lease and had to move. We had to go out and pull targets out of the woods in February/March and it was a muddy mess. Towards the end of the day one of the members came to me and said "I been watching you all day and you've taken that 2 wheel drive truck everywhere these 4x4's have went. WTF". Well those mooks had highway tires, within a few feet they were encased in mud and basically slicks. At least I had A/T's and I could spin them and clean them out a little bit. That Discovery and Jeep were basically relying on friction to move forward, which by the way, is really hard on your rig. On the other hand look what a really good set of M/T's will do.
 

kennith

Well-known member
Apr 22, 2004
10,373
98
North Carolina
In one of the promo videos, Ratcliff, he's behind the wheel of his Defender in this sequence, talks about on road drivability. He "concedes" that it has to be comfortable for on road use.

He also talks about selling Grenadiers to people in fields, and other, unconventional, locations. I can only assume that means a direct to consumer sales route, with fewer, if any, show rooms.

But then where do you take your Grenadier for repairs?
I contend that it needs to be much more than comfortable.

If it can't handle, if it can't keep up with traffic, and if it isn't progressive at the limit, it's simply obsolete at this point, or a bad vehicle entirely. The traffic you encounter in remote civilization combined with road conditions and a lack of safety considerations mandate much more than what's being sold.

Everyone loves an old Series, but it's from a bygone era when relatively modern vehicles weren't seen in under-developed nations. Those who rely on them out there simply can't afford anything more effective. People here should know better, and should spend their first-world money properly.

You're going to be out there on broken paths literally maintained by a yearly bulldozer, at night, in slippery conditions, facing down commercial transport without lights, and in some areas you're frequently on the side of a damned mountain. That thing had better be able to maintain stability.

When you're pulling around 50mph slaloming around holes that would swallow a Fiat for a hundred miles on snotty post-rain dust, park the Jeep. Just fucking park the thing and forget about it. It's not good enough. The same goes for long stretches of washboard when you are unable to match the frequency. You're skipping all over the place, and that rig should be able to handle it.

This is also where mismatching suspension technologies fails you, and where overall vehicle balance is critical. This is also why I'm extremely picky about lateral bolstering on tires, as well as retreads on long journeys in the middle of nowhere. It can be the difference between a tombstone and a Tusker.

This guy seems to have figured out how to handle Land Rover as a company, but I am seriously beginning to question whether he has any business building a car. I'm predicting a "kit car" level build, here. I don't know who he's planning on selling to, but it's not going to work out the way he thinks it will. He can slap conventional parts on it such as Mopar axles and GM power trains (or whatever his local equivalent is; I don't know where the bugger lives), but all he's done is build something twenty other companies can't sell in great numbers.

So, service doesn't necessarily have to be difficult, but if it's nothing special at all, why not just re-power an imported Defender for a quarter the inevitable price all-in? It's fucking stupid to make yet another vehicle that will automatically be eclipsed by side-by-sides before the first unit is even delivered. These vehicles are "why tech". They serve little purpose when better options are available for ten grand or less.

One could try and make an excuse by calling it a "trail rig", but trailering something to a trail that costs as much as a new car is not a good business model, and only shows that he doesn't understand his customer base any more than Toyota understood the people who were salivating over the new Supra before it was revealed.

Unless that thing is equipped to run farm machinery right out of the gate, and is cheap enough for developing nations, I don't see the point of it.

Cheers,

Kennith
 

Eliot

Well-known member
Feb 4, 2008
576
3
Bozeman, MT
One could try and make an excuse by calling it a "trail rig", but trailering something to a trail that costs as much as a new car is not a good business model, and only shows that he doesn't understand his customer base any more than Toyota understood the people who were salivating over the new Supra before it was revealed.
You're making unsupported assumptions about what it is, or might be, and then using that, to argue it will be a failure.

And it may fail, but what you've posted is just empty conjecture.

Given their low sales target, 20k, if I remember correctly. It could work out for Ineos, they're not being ambitious. They will have to be patient though, and it will probably take several years before they have a polished product. I don't think all this investment makes sense if all they're going to do is just build a better Defender. They'll need to expand their product line. Otherwise Ineos Automotive will never survive Ratcliffs departure, whenever that comes, be it in ten years, or twenty.
 
Last edited:

kennith

Well-known member
Apr 22, 2004
10,373
98
North Carolina
You're making unsupported assumptions about what it is, or might be, and then using that, to argue it will be a failure.

And it may fail, but what you've posted is just empty conjecture.
I was responding in regard to the likelihood of service difficulty, how he intends to sell them, and interpreting the intent of the vehicle based upon that information. It was suggested the vehicle was more intended for specialist use, and given the other suggestion that sales may be accomplished on-site, as well as the man's less than interested seeming response to the question of road-worthiness...

Service will be easy and dealerships not required only if it uses familiar parts. Do you disagree? The question was whether or not service will be provided in enough locations. That depends upon how many familiar components they use and where it's primarily marketed, and the result is generally going to be a popular drive train choice. GM here, but perhaps Toyota somewhere else. I think that much is obvious.

So, if it's essentially a Defender with a GM or local equivalent drive train, the question of value and individuality comes into play; and I should think it's going to be at least roughly similar, given the issues with Land Rover regarding the shape of the vehicle, and the difficulty of consistently producing a complex curve in sheet metal. If it's fiberglass... Look. That's like wearing a leopard print fur cape... People are going to have a thought.

The text you quoted is regarding a scenario that involves the rest of the post to be true. If the vehicle turns out like that, I don't see a need for it. My concern is that given the mentioned marketing direction and intent, that's precisely what he will end up with. He may not. He may figure a way around it, but very few manage to do that.

Furthermore, I take issue with the tone of his response to the question of road-worthiness. I think it's far more critical than those words indicate, and it sounds like everyone else trying to lean into their excuse for not being able to hit production levels of versatility. That's not easy at all to do, but I hate it when people start to lean into sounding like "we have to do it", instead of "we started there".

Cheers,

Kennith
 

kennith

Well-known member
Apr 22, 2004
10,373
98
North Carolina
It doesn't have to work out that way, though.

Look at the Rivian. That's an unexpected level of quality at the price/production ratio, at least in pictures and description. For every one of those, however, there are ten Bollingers and a festival of ideas that never launch, can't be sold within reason when they do, or aren't easily made road legal.

Where does that Ineos fit, given what we both know and can extrapolate?

I'm not sure what Elon is smoking, but that new Cybertruck shows just how easy it is for anyone to fail in design and intent. I'm going to assume he has some other plan going on there; but damn. What the fuck; and this is Tesla we're talking about: Automotive Apple.

Cheers,

Kennith
 

kennith

Well-known member
Apr 22, 2004
10,373
98
North Carolina
I'll give him one thing on that: I know the person who is drooling over it right now, and it's whoever owns one of those Bond villain carbon fiber yachts...

Maybe I'm just not seeing the potential, but, really?

...and why is it running those stupid tires? Can I never escape the Wrangler with Electrolytes?

I kind of get it, watching the reveal. It's certainly more of a concept designed to affect emotion rather than wallets directly. He certainly knows how to put on a show; and if I was there at the event, looking up at the stage with that computer chick and all the lasers, he'd have probably gotten me.

Cheers,

Kennith
 
Last edited:

Eliot

Well-known member
Feb 4, 2008
576
3
Bozeman, MT
I was responding in regard to the likelihood of service difficulty, how he intends to sell them, and interpreting the intent of the vehicle based upon that information.
Fair

Furthermore, I take issue with the tone of his response to the question of road-worthiness.
That was just British understatement.

So, if it's essentially a Defender with a GM or local equivalent drive train, the question of value and individuality comes into play;
They went with the BMW straight six.

I do think they're just trying to make a better Defender.
 

ukoffroad

Well-known member
Jan 13, 2010
1,587
38
Lynchburg, Va
Me friend and neighbor has a Tesla S, and he is geeking so hard over this. I think it is more about the idea of a Tesla truck that looks so radical more than anything. That S is elegant.

I m seeing a lot of X's here in Lynchburg recently.
 

ERover82

Well-known member
Nov 26, 2011
3,227
98
Darien Gap
Me friend and neighbor has a Tesla S, and he is geeking so hard over this. I think it is more about the idea of a Tesla truck that looks so radical more than anything. That S is elegant.
That Tesla pickup is like a Series truck in that it just looks so fascinating it piques one's curiosity to drive it. In these times of crossover clone wars, being unique sells.