Name the reason for mixing routes
Ask which customers or assignments need each powertrain and which common functions must remain consistent. The route decision guide separates operating requirements. Flexibility in colour does not automatically authorise a different powertrain.
Record permitted quantities and specification boundaries without implying current availability. One attractive candidate should not define the whole order. The dealer needs an understandable assignment for each unit rather than a blended stock description that conceals meaningful variation.
Identify individual equipment and findings
Use the configuration evidence list per car, retaining the actual original specification and relevant operation. Matching trim names or body appearance cannot establish matching systems, later work or current condition.
New units need their own status and delivery checks; used candidates need suitable history and findings. A representative battery result cannot certify the group. If a unit's essential remains unconfirmed, keep it pending rather than calling the entire batch ready from one favourable example.
Maintain separate replenishment and support scopes
Record the intended charging arrangement for each relevant configuration. The charging review prevents one cable or station observation covering every unit by assumption. EREV support also needs its own applicable scope.
The additional-system service guide keeps that requirement visible. A mixed order can have shared commercial services while preserving individual technical needs. Ask appropriate providers for actual answers rather than assuming similar model identity guarantees interchangeable equipment or remedies.
Reconcile amounts without hiding differences
The quotation scope framework aligns currency and transfer stage while retaining vehicle-level preparation and supplied items. An average amount can conceal a unit with material work or a failed essential. Shared services should state their scope clearly.
Do not promise a group resale margin or universal running saving. The remote file review helps reconcile final references and evidence. Substitution across powertrains needs a visible customer decision, not silent approval from the shared model name or an equal amount.
An order serving two customer routines
Suppose several buyers have suitable private charging while others accept a separately supported EREV operating plan. Assign each proposed unit to the relevant brief. Keep common passenger or phone essentials consistent while preserving actual powertrain and support differences.
If a BEV candidate is replaced by EREV, reopen the affected acceptance rather than counting the replacement as equivalent stock. The reverse change also needs review. Retain final quantities, records and pending tasks before movement. The result should be a clearly understood mixed order, not a collection whose important differences are discovered only after arrival.
Create a final per-unit readiness list that distinguishes established configuration, completed preparation, supplied items and accepted remaining limitations. One row should not inherit another car’s result because they share a planned customer assignment. Resolve an unexplained change before movement, preserving the actual record and amount for whichever candidate was finally accepted.
Choose the next action
| Finding or requirement | Purchase response |
|---|---|
| Variation is intentional | Assign actual units to explicit customer requirements and retain common mandatory functions. |
| One charging result represents the group | Verify relevant combinations separately rather than treating similar cars as technical equivalents. |
| A substitute changes powertrain | Record renewed customer acceptance and support evidence before including it in the final count. |
Evidence to keep with the decision
- Assign intended customers or uses to explicitly accepted powertrain routes, separating common passenger and equipment essentials from permitted variation so shared i60 naming or flexible colour preference cannot silently authorise a different operating proposition.
- Retain actual original specification, required functions and condition per unit, identifying new-status checks and used-history findings separately rather than using one representative battery result or matching trim label to certify the order.
- Establish relevant charging combinations and usable access individually where applications differ, with suitable observations or provider answers instead of treating one supplied cable, station or charging demonstration as proof for every vehicle in the group.
- Keep EREV additional-system work and receiving support visible beside electric-system evidence, allowing shared commercial services without merging different technical needs or promising interchangeable remedies merely because the cars have the same model identity.
- Reconcile vehicle amounts, confirmed preparation, supplied items and pending tasks with shared service scope at one currency and transfer stage, preventing an average figure from hiding a unit that fails an essential or remains materially unassessed.
- Record approval responsibility and fresh evidence when a substitute changes powertrain, preserving accepted quantities and individual readiness before movement rather than counting an equal-priced replacement as equivalent stock under the same broad name.
Questions buyers ask
Does matching i60 branding prove equivalent propositions?
No. Actual powertrain, equipment, condition and operating support can differ.
Can the average amount describe every unit?
No. Keep individual work and accepted differences visible beside shared scope.
Model reference: GAC’s AION i60 presentation and AION’s manufacturer overview. Model information gives context; the offered vehicle needs its own specification and condition evidence.