I have been through enough litigation in my life and filing another one next month. That is life as an industrial landlord in Kalifornia. One thing I will say... litigation is a full contact sport for the wealthy. It's a time suck and will keep you awake at night. The best thing would be if NTSB determines this is a safety concern. Look at the GM 6.2L engine recall. That took years to happen and involved 800,000 cars/trucks.
Another one that affected me directly was the famous Porsche M96 intermittent shaft bearing failure. Porsche never did a recall, never admitted it was an issue, but a few years into the production fun of 997 they revised the engine and got rid of the IMS bearing entirely. I suspect this is what Inoes is going to do and the fact that Ineos completely refuses to comment on the issue is sorta the tell on their strategy... Hell the issue is even marked as "solved" in the forums "ask Ineos" section... something smells funny with this one. Ineos will redesign the front driveline and just keep replacing existing customers driveshaft until they are out of warranty. The Porsche IMS bearing was solved by the aftermarket and really isn't an issue now. I know of one aftermarket company working on a Grenadier driveshaft with an oversized CV joint and an adapter to the existing t-case yoke. I only know about it because I contacted the same driveline shop to inquire about this exact solution and he showed me the prototype that he is currently working on for the very well know aftermarket parts vendor. Assuming that it works out like it should, this is most likely be the fix that we will all end up with.
Just have a little patience and I do belive that the aftermarket will solve this.
