Open letter to Sir Jim and Lynne Calder at Ineos automotive

[parb]

I have thought about this for a long time. I don't know if the execs reads our forum or not but if they do this would be my piece of advice to them.

ParB

Stop fighting it—customization is here to stay, and Ineos needs to stop halfway-assing it.
Honestly, i frequently see the posts saying that the "OEM knows best" on Grenadier threads and i think I'm my heart that this just shows which owners are out of touch with reality. Car modification culture is a real thing and phase 1 companies with no strategy for it are dying. We need to be honest here, and i don't blame those owners entirely: Ineos took a half-step toward embracing the modern car culture, but right now, they are stopping short of actually supporting it.

We know the data: the aftermarket is a $407 billion juggernaut. Enthusiasts are willing to drop 15% to 40% of the truck's value to dial it in. Ineos was smart enough to market the Grenadier as a "blank canvas," but they are failing the most critical phase of the relationship: Collaboration.

You can’t market a "Built on Purpose" overlanding rig and then bury your head in the sand when we actually try to build it out.
The Driveshaft Issue: You can’t hide from the market. When owners are reporting vibrations and failures, saying "keep it stock" isn't a solution. Ineos needs to investigate why this is a weak link and collaborate with the community to solve the geometry or material flaws—not fight the customers who found the limit.

Lift Kits: Stop acting like lifting a solid-axle truck is some taboo dark art. If the market demands clearance, the OEM should be encouraging safe ways to achieve it, not discouraging it to cover their own backs.

We are currently stuck in a Phase 2 strategy , badges , colors and trim is about as far as factory customization goes. Ineos gave us the "safe" modular stuff—the aux switches and the utility rails. That’s great. But Phase 3, embracing the car as a canvas for personalization is where the real industry players now live: oems that are fundamentally acknowledging that the vehicle is a platform for performance modification.


To Sir Jim and Lynn Calder, here is some straight-up advice:
You have brand advocates with us owners right now because you promised us a spiritual successor to the old-school 4x4s—vehicles we could wrench on, modify, and improve. You captured our hearts because you said you weren't like the other corporate manufacturers.

Here is how you will lose us: By becoming exactly what we ran away from. If you start hiding behind lawyers, silence, and "voided warranty" stamps every time the community pushes the truck's limits, you kill the passion. The moment you make the enthusiast the enemy, the brand dies.

Here are 3 actionable items you should do right now:
Own the Driveshaft Issue: Stop the silence. Release a technical bulletin acknowledging the vibration issues on lifted or heavily used rigs. If the OEM part is the weak link, collaborate with a driveshaft specialist to offer a "Heavy Duty" factory-approved replacement.

Define the "Safe" Lift: People are going to lift this truck. Period. Instead of fighting it, release the engineering specs for what you consider a "safe" geometry range (e.g., 2 inches). Better yet, partner with a suspension brand to release a warranty-compliant lift kit so we don’t have to guess.

Establish a Technical Roundtable: Create a direct line between your engineering team and the top aftermarket developers. Don't shut them out; bring them in. Let them help you fix the weak points faster than you can do it alone.

The community wants to love this truck. Stop making it hard for us.

 

[Jeremy996]

Much as I understand the desire behind this, the reality is that manufactures are tied by type approval and testing costs to an approved configuration. Anything that changes emissions or safety, even remotely, is retestable; so crazy expensive. Badges, colour and trim is the limit before retests are required, (and if weight changes, they are on thin ice).

Single Vehicle approval, (the LeTech portals as an example), is one approach where you are looking at radical changes; alternatively modifier beware, as in Germany, if it does not have TUV approval, you cannot use it on a public road, (and many other European countries). If the German police are being particularly picky, that includes foreign vehicles passing through, (if the authorities see them as undesirable). Australia has its own rules that are just as draconian in their own way.

Defining the design life and expectations for the front driveshaft would be helpful for all concerned, but it will not, no matter the outcome, become a carte blanche for lifts, as no product liability insurer would wear it. Once you lift it, significant parts of your warranty will be toast. It would be helpful if IA declared which bits would be toast.

Ineos Automotive has gone further with releasing technical data to third parties than most manufacturers, (Gerry McGovern at JLR declared war on aftermarket modders), Even Toyota bottled the GT86 with the aftermarket.

 

[Kinglenario]

I have thought about this for a long time. I don't know if the execs reads our forum or not but if they do this would be my piece of advice to them.

ParB

Stop fighting it—customization is here to stay, and Ineos needs to stop halfway-assing it.
Honestly, i frequently see the posts saying that the "OEM knows best" on Grenadier threads and i think I'm my heart that this just shows which owners are out of touch with reality. Car modification culture is a real thing and phase 1 companies with no strategy for it are dying. We need to be honest here, and i don't blame those owners entirely: Ineos took a half-step toward embracing the modern car culture, but right now, they are stopping short of actually supporting it.

We know the data: the aftermarket is a $407 billion juggernaut. Enthusiasts are willing to drop 15% to 40% of the truck's value to dial it in. Ineos was smart enough to market the Grenadier as a "blank canvas," but they are failing the most critical phase of the relationship: Collaboration.

You can’t market a "Built on Purpose" overlanding rig and then bury your head in the sand when we actually try to build it out.
The Driveshaft Issue: You can’t hide from the market. When owners are reporting vibrations and failures, saying "keep it stock" isn't a solution. Ineos needs to investigate why this is a weak link and collaborate with the community to solve the geometry or material flaws—not fight the customers who found the limit.

Lift Kits: Stop acting like lifting a solid-axle truck is some taboo dark art. If the market demands clearance, the OEM should be encouraging safe ways to achieve it, not discouraging it to cover their own backs.

We are currently stuck in a Phase 2 strategy , badges , colors and trim is about as far as factory customization goes. Ineos gave us the "safe" modular stuff—the aux switches and the utility rails. That’s great. But Phase 3, embracing the car as a canvas for personalization is where the real industry players now live: oems that are fundamentally acknowledging that the vehicle is a platform for performance modification.


To Sir Jim and Lynn Calder, here is some straight-up advice:
You have brand advocates with us owners right now because you promised us a spiritual successor to the old-school 4x4s—vehicles we could wrench on, modify, and improve. You captured our hearts because you said you weren't like the other corporate manufacturers.

Here is how you will lose us: By becoming exactly what we ran away from. If you start hiding behind lawyers, silence, and "voided warranty" stamps every time the community pushes the truck's limits, you kill the passion. The moment you make the enthusiast the enemy, the brand dies.

Here are 3 actionable items you should do right now:
Own the Driveshaft Issue: Stop the silence. Release a technical bulletin acknowledging the vibration issues on lifted or heavily used rigs. If the OEM part is the weak link, collaborate with a driveshaft specialist to offer a "Heavy Duty" factory-approved replacement.

Define the "Safe" Lift: People are going to lift this truck. Period. Instead of fighting it, release the engineering specs for what you consider a "safe" geometry range (e.g., 2 inches). Better yet, partner with a suspension brand to release a warranty-compliant lift kit so we don’t have to guess.

Establish a Technical Roundtable: Create a direct line between your engineering team and the top aftermarket developers. Don't shut them out; bring them in. Let them help you fix the weak points faster than you can do it alone.

The community wants to love this truck. Stop making it hard for us.

Also to add if you look at the Ineos IG page most of their photos are of lifted modified vehicles with big tires.

 

[Itsdchz]

@parb bravo sir! I agree and stand behind your sentiments!

 

[GrenADV]

Is Ineos not already doing some of what you're recommending already? Are there aftermarket developers that Ineos have shut out/declined to work with?

Not disagreeing at all with your thoughts, but rather acknowledging that Ineos are doing something - perhaps not to the extent that you wish - but they are doing something more than what I would consider a half-step forward. For example, I heard on a recent video by Owl (If I'm recalling correctly, I think for the fuel pump they developed) that they worked alongside Ineos engineers to develop this? I have to assume Ineos have done something similar with Eibach for suspension and other aftermarket developers, no? I do think the LeTech collab was tone deaf on their part because it's fairly unattainable and not realistic to go with their portals - if not for it's exorbitant cost, then for regulatory/compliance issues it would create in some regions. However, I'm sure the LeTech deal was a direct request from their dear leader, Sir Jim - where for the sake of adventure, he will spare no expense and have his vehicle fully equipped and drop-shipped anywhere in the world at a moments notice. Most of us in life will never be able to relate to this, but I digress...It took time but they addressed the ADAS reset for the US market, the fuel overfill sensor errors, gave us access to the service portal, and even acknowledged they might attempt to develop a plan for connecting to the vehicle to monitor/reset diagnostic codes in the future. I mean, I even received the jacket that was promised!

Relative to other car manufacturers, I think Ineos have done a reasonably good job of embracing, communicating, and engaging with customers (i.e., even on this forum; the AUS boss that personally delivered a drive shaft to someone leaving on a trip; Their thoughtful response to the false and negative press by content creators about the customer who drowned his engine + expedited air shipping of the replacement). Someone recently posted on the thread for the front shaft about engaging with one of executives about the issues surrounding this (as a result of a comment left on Lynne's LinkedIn, maybe?) - it sounded like they are somewhat unaware of this as an issue, which may or may not be truthful on their part, but at least they are engaging with a customer about it, no? I think my expectations are more tempered than some others, because I can appreciate how challenging and complicated all of the things you mention are in a corporate bureaucracy and extremely litigious world, and where anyone can effectively make or break a brand with a single social media post.

Bottom-line, my experience has been good so far with them honoring every issue I and my dealer brought to them under warranty - which is all that I feel I can really expect of them at this point in time. All else is considered icing on the cake. I personally love the vehicle even without the lift.

 

[Jeremy996]

Is Ineos not already doing some of what you're recommending already? Are there aftermarket developers that Ineos have shut out/declined to work with?

Not disagreeing at all with your thoughts, but rather acknowledging that Ineos are doing something - perhaps not to the extent that you wish - but they are doing something more than what I would consider a half-step forward. For example, I heard on a recent video by Owl (If I'm recalling correctly, I think for the fuel pump they developed) that they worked alongside Ineos engineers to develop this? I have to assume Ineos have done something similar with Eibach for suspension and other aftermarket developers, no? I do think the LeTech collab was tone deaf on their part because it's fairly unattainable and not realistic to go with their portals - if not for it's exorbitant cost, then for regulatory/compliance issues it would create in some regions. However, I'm sure the LeTech deal was a direct request from their dear leader, Sir Jim - where for the sake of adventure, he will spare no expense and have his vehicle fully equipped and drop-shipped anywhere in the world at a moments notice. Most of us in life will never be able to relate to this, but I digress...It took time but they addressed the ADAS reset for the US market, the fuel overfill sensor errors, gave us access to the service portal, and even acknowledged they might attempt to develop a plan for connecting to the vehicle to monitor/reset diagnostic codes in the future. I mean, I even received the jacket that was promised!

Relative to other car manufacturers, I think Ineos have done a reasonably good job of embracing, communicating, and engaging with customers (i.e., even on this forum; the AUS boss that personally delivered a drive shaft to someone leaving on a trip; Their thoughtful response to the false and negative press by content creators about the customer who drowned his engine + expedited air shipping of the replacement). Someone recently posted on the thread for the front shaft about engaging with one of executives about the issues surrounding this (as a result of a comment left on Lynne's LinkedIn, maybe?) - it sounded like they are somewhat unaware of this as an issue, which may or may not be truthful on their part, but at least they are engaging with a customer about it, no? I think my expectations are more tempered than some others, because I can appreciate how challenging and complicated all of the things you mention are in a corporate bureaucracy and extremely litigious world, and where anyone can effectively make or break a brand with a single social media post.

Bottom-line, my experience has been good so far with them honoring every issue I and my dealer brought to them under warranty - which is all that I feel I can really expect of them at this point in time. All else is considered icing on the cake. I personally love the vehicle even without the lift.

LeTech has a compliant passage to market as Single Vehicle Approval. As both German and French fire services have bought portal vehicles, it is a commercial project.

 

[landmannnn]

Here are 3 actionable items you should do right now:
Own the Driveshaft Issue: Stop the silence. Release a technical bulletin acknowledging the vibration issues on lifted or heavily used rigs. If the OEM part is the weak link, collaborate with a driveshaft specialist to offer a "Heavy Duty" factory-approved replacement.

Define the "Safe" Lift: People are going to lift this truck. Period. Instead of fighting it, release the engineering specs for what you consider a "safe" geometry range (e.g., 2 inches). Better yet, partner with a suspension brand to release a warranty-compliant lift kit so we don’t have to guess.

Establish a Technical Roundtable: Create a direct line between your engineering team and the top aftermarket developers. Don't shut them out; bring them in. Let them help you fix the weak points faster than you can do it alone.

The community wants to love this truck. Stop making it hard for us.

I absolutely agree with comunication issue and some kind of action to produce a heavy duty version or solution.

I am not sure about publishing a safe lift specification, I am not aware of any manufacturer who has done this or considered doing so.

I do like your thoughts on Ineos or an accredited third party producing a warranted lift kit.