Ineos Automotive will launch the delayed Fusilier 4x4 “in 2028 or 2029”, confirming its commitment to becoming a multi-model, mass-market car maker.
The follow-up to the Grenadier 4x4 was shown in concept form last year and planned to go on sale in 2027 as both a pure-electric car and a range-extender (REx).
According to CEO Lynn Calder, the delay “is all driven by [doubts about] powertrain” and “from regulators in key markets, notably in the EU and UK”.
Although the Fusilier REx’s engine would act as a generator for the battery, rather than directly driving the wheels, it “would be banned” under upcoming laws outlawing hybrids from 2035.
We’re too small to spend huge amounts on product development to then find that we can’t produce it, we can’t sell it, in key markets,” said Calder.
When many other car makers are winding back their commitments to phase out combustion engines, “we’re quite small to be taking gambles on things like that”, said Calder, “at a time when consumers don’t know what to buy, aren’t super-clear on what’s being regulated.
“In our minds, we know the product line-up we want, but how they’re powered is to come.”
“When we get some clarity from governments about what will be allowed to be sold, then we can do what I think automotive manufacturers should do, which is focus on what customers want to buy and then develop and sell that,” continued Calder, noting a disconnect between legislative requirements and how quickly consumers are adopting new tech.
Calder was speaking to Autocar at the opening of a biomass energy plant at Ineos’s factory in Hambach, France (formerly Mercedes-Benz’s ‘Smartville’), which will reduce the factory’s CO2 emissions by around 20% – to “beyond net zero” – as well as its heating costs. Heating is around 70% of all energy use at the plant.
Join the debate
Add your comment
Ineos' problem was from the very start. Mr Radcliffe intimated a hose-out 90 that would be fairly cheap and built in the UK. NONE of that happened. It morphed into a sophisticated 4x4 that was much bigger than a 90, much more expensive, and built abroad. It therefore is absolutely no different from the new Defender...at a time when a small 4x4 to be used by utility companies, the RNLI, and the police (even the army) was and still is much in demand. It reminds me of the zero difference between Reform and the Conservatives! In my opinion, he should simply have bought the rights to the Ibex and reconfigured it. Utility companies would have bitten his arm off for an Ibex that was a little more refined, but still hose-out.
Alas, the damage was done and can't be righted - Radcliffe lost his way with the project. And now here he is, announcing that the Fusilier will be made...in the same week that Land Rover announced the baby Defender!!! Again, what's the difference between them? Why does he think that many people will choose the Fusilier over the baby Defender? They appear to be identical even in size.
Is it too late to return to his original in-pub (did anyone fall for that PR?) idea of a replacement 90? No, but he would have to start by admitting the failures, all of them. The Grenadier is never going to sell in the numbers he thought, and neither will the Fusilier, as pretty as it is. There is still a market for his 90 idea - it's just that he will probably be beaten to it by someone like Ford or Renault. Ford priced the Bronco too high in the US, and falling sales numbers aren't adding to its appeal. Once Ford and Jeep grasp that cars need to be made much cheaper, they will clean up.
The current awful trading landscape is the work of Farage and his good friend Trump.
Ineos CEO Jim Ratcliffe was a cheerleader for it all.
And yet they are still carping at the EU and UK government.
Own your mess Ineos!
I never look to see if my posts have been replied to, and I never reply to others, but I'll make an exception...do you seriously not grasp anything about global macro economics at all? Do you not understand what the EU is all about (even after the news has been explaining it to you for the past four weeks about the US and China)? Do you get that to be part of a protectionist group of nations doesn't serve ANYONE (not the consumer or the country) apart from large companies and farmers? At what point are you going to understand what tariffs are, and why they are bad...and that lightbulb of a thought will lead you to the EU?
No, it's YOU who is still whining (carping) about a democratic decision taken by the people. It's YOU who doesn't grasp basic global socio-politico-economics. I could write paragraphs about it to try and explain it to you, but I feel I would most certainly waste my time. I'm not criticising you for your view (which you are entitled to have) I am criticisng you for your evident ignorance of the subject. If the idea interests you, then read up on stuff by Patrick Minford, for example - how economics are applied by systems and countries, and why they fail.
Matt's brilliant interview with Calder is well worth a listen... wherever you get your podcasts.
I still don't think this is going to end well. If Ineos really has spent £1bn on this project, they are never going to recoup it on sales that don't even best the old Defender - and JLR was clear that those kind of volumes were unsustainable.
The tariffs are another heavy body blow, and the boss is distracted by a very dysfunctional football club.