Grenadier

[evilfij]

Nicely written and informative especially on the LS. Forgot it was a cast iron block.
On the hybrid exactly and why the newer Landys are not an off-road truck.

Thanks. There are both aluminium and cast iron block LS. The trucks generally got iron, cars got aluminium.

I will say that the supercharged V8 in new landies is not bad assuming they don’t have timing chain issues (@WreckITFrank was explaining when that supposedly ended).

 

[pfshoen]

Again, I have to disagree. The 4:0 flat six engine in my GT3 has 500 PS (493 hp; 368 kW) and 460 N⋅m (339 lb⋅ft). That’s a terrible truck engine and it has a lot to do with the architecture (short stroke, 9k rpm redline). But it would be plenty of power to motivate a truck …. So too with the lambo, which was designed not as a truck engine, but an engine for high speed use (both road and in the Rambo lambo).

And the corvette engine, an LS, is a truck engine. Large displacement, high torque and most commonly found in SUVs and pickups. Especially the iron block LS are very durable (which is why you see them swapped in everything). And, barring the ones with emissions/fuel economy cylinder deactivation, it’s reliable and they are cheap, parts available everywhere (at least in the US) and inexpensive, and easy to work on.

Turbos are the obvious cheat code to get low down torque (which you want in a truck engine) out of a relatively small gas engine and that is what’s going in pretty much everything at this point. Hybrid helps too. But that’s complexity you probably don’t want in an off-road truck.

Good point that long stroke engines are more suitable for low rpm torque bias over high rpm bhp, and for truck-like duties. Also looks like the LM002 used the same tune as the Countach, although perhaps the Italians are the only ones mad enough to do something like that. The LM002 gets down the road just fine, but I question whether it can idle its way thru a sloppy section off pavement.
Engines with identical architecture can be tuned for very different torque and bhp curves.
If I bought a Corvette and it came with a truck spec engine, I'd ask for my money back.

 

[Adam]

Again, I have to disagree. The 4:0 flat six engine in my GT3 has 500 PS (493 hp; 368 kW) and 460 N⋅m (339 lb⋅ft). That’s a terrible truck engine and it has a lot to do with the architecture (short stroke, 9k rpm redline). But it would be plenty of power to motivate a truck …. So too with the lambo, which was designed not as a truck engine, but an engine for high speed use (both road and in the Rambo lambo).

And the corvette engine, an LS, is a truck engine. Large displacement, high torque and most commonly found in SUVs and pickups. Especially the iron block LS are very durable (which is why you see them swapped in everything). And, barring the ones with emissions/fuel economy cylinder deactivation, it’s reliable and they are cheap, parts available everywhere (at least in the US) and inexpensive, and easy to work on.

Turbos are the obvious cheat code to get low down torque (which you want in a truck engine) out of a relatively small gas engine and that is what’s going in pretty much everything at this point. Hybrid helps too. But that’s complexity you probably don’t want in an off-road truck.

So are you saying there is some inherent flaw in flat six motors that prevents them from being built and tuned for torque?

I've not heard this before. The low center of gravity would be awesome for off-camber activities.

 

[erover82]

That GT3 engine has a very different bore-stroke ratio than you'd find in a truck. It's a more fundamental property than tuning cam profile. Everything can be tweaked to suite another application, but what is the difficulty in doing so? It's not so simple as truck vs car.

 

[Adam]

From an engine manufacturing perspective, bore and stroke are some of the most important tuning aspects there are. Cam, fueling, etc. All come from that decision.

We're not talking about aftermarket bolt ons and cam swaps.

 

[evilfij]

So are you saying there is some inherent flaw in flat six motors that prevents them from being built and tuned for torque?

I've not heard this before. The low center of gravity would be awesome for off-camber activities.

No, I am saying it’s more than tuning. Engine design makes a big difference. Taken to the extreme, look at over the road or off road construction engines as opposed to F1 engines.

 

[erover82]

From an engine manufacturing perspective, bore and stroke are some of the most important tuning aspects there are. Cam, fueling, etc. All come from that decision.

Exactly

We're not talking about aftermarket bolt ons and cam swaps.

I'm speaking to how much the engineers have to modify a given engine design to suite another application. Sometimes it's minimal and other times it's so much that it's not worth it. The RV8 is an example of an engine that was tweaked by the engineers to suite several sifferent applications. Sure, the GT3 engine could be reengineered, but it's easier to use an existing engine that has already been optimized for a specific use. Again, I don't think it's a simple as an engine being a truck engine or a car engine, unless one is speaking of a specific configuration of a specific engine.

 

[Adam]

Getting back on track - Dinan says the B58 performs like this:

Ineos has said they've tuned extensively for more torque and reliability - ~280hp and 330 ft/lb of torque (1750-4000rpm). It'll be interesting to see how the power is delivered, but the engine already has a pretty flat torque curve. It looks like they've done quite a bit of work to bring peak torque down ~1000 RPM, while increasing it ~15 ft/lb from the stock peak.

Those are pretty much all the facts we have at the moment. Seems pretty good to me.

 

[evilfij]

Starting the chart at 2000rpm is odd.

 

[SaintPanzer]

I'm getting confused by the term "architecture". When I think architecture, I think V or straight engine? If a V, what is the angle between the banks? How many cylinders?

Bore and stroke, cam, all that other stuff, I consider that as where the "tuning" comes in. For example, the old Chevy 302 engine had the same architecture as the 305, but the bore and stroke were different (although they were similar in displacement) but the two engines from a tuning perspective were as different as chalk and cheese. Keeping the focus on the 305, my mother's '79 Impala Wagon had one, and the '85 IROC had one, but HP, torque, etc. etc. etc. were NOT the same. And the one that was in the wagon would probably be a better match for a Rover than the IROC engine.

 

[Adam]

Starting the chart at 2000rpm is odd.

If you think that's bad, here's one of a B58 that starts at 3000 RPM

 

[evilfij]

TLDR: a truck engine should be low reving, NA, port injected, low tech, or a simple diesel.

With modern variable vain (or twin scroll like the b58) turbo engines and variable valve timing, viable valve lift, variable cam timing, cylinder deactivation etc. a manufacturer can make an engine do a lot of things that were not possible in the Chevy 305 era.

Of course, all of these things are potential failure points. And engineers have a habit of “optimizing” everything. More on that later.

The next consideration which I alluded to in the reference to the GT3 engine is design.

Cribbed this: The force of inertia is a function of mass times acceleration, and the magnitude of these forces increases as the square of the engine speed. In other words, if you double the engine speed from 3,000 to 6,000 rpm, the forces acting on the piston don't double—they quadruple.

So the difference between 3000rpm and 9000rpm is 9X and you are pushing what you can actually do with piston speed. This is not some crazy analogy either, a 6BT redlines at 3200rpm. Designing an engine to survive 9k rpm is no joke. And it’s expensive, really expensive. And you can get the same headline HP number with a turbo at much, much lower rpm.

So you can build a 9k rpm, all aluminium engine that gets >125hp/liter (the new GT3RS is 518hp) without a turbo (Porsche 4.0) or you can build a 3200rpm, all cast iron engine that gets 25hp/liter with a turbo (6BT). And the Porsche produces more torque per liter. 339 v 400 (obv the 6BT increased over time).

Now I do think the Porsche 4.0 is a good engine, I would not have bought the car if I did not think so (insert Rover V8 joke here), but I have no illusions that it will be as durable as a 12v 6BT.

Back to my optimization point. Cummins 6MT was optimized for reliability, Porsche is optimized for most everything. Neither were really optimized for cost (thankfully) or NVH.

So take the B58. By all accounts it’s not a bad engine (so far), but it’s optimized for emissions, fuel economy, NVH, weight, cost (to an extent), power (depending on tune/spec — S58 variant is pushing 500hp). Will it power a truck? Sure. Is it a truck engine? Not in my book. Even the B57 diesel (which apparently uses the same bottom end as the B58) is very tech heavy. I get it, the add ons make things more efficient, even more powerful, but I don’t see BMW optimizing for reliability and durability, let alone ease of repair, which, to me, should be a paramount considerations in a truck engine.

I have gotten addicted to engine tear down videos (I do cars on YouTube) and it’s really fascinating to see, especially the ones that are by reputation very good (jeep 4.0, cummins, 7.3 powerstroke, LS, 2JZ, UZ and UR). You see different design philosophies at play. He still has not done a 2TR-FE though.

 

[WreckITFrank]

CA and TX can book now for test drives.

INEOS Grenadier | Event Listing

Events Listing from INEOS Grenadier

grenadierevents.com

 

[brdhmltn]

Full Australian Review

2023 Ineos Grenadier review

Not only does it live up to the original Land Rover Defender brief, the Grenadier goes above and beyond but it's not perfect.

www.carexpert.com.au

It looks like embargo lift day...
https://www.autoblog.com/2023/02/07/ineos-grenadier-first-drive-review/

https://www.motortrend.com/reviews/2024-ineos-grenadier-first-drive-review/

https://www.autoweek.com/news/trucks/a42792715/ineos-grenadier-drive-review/

https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/ineos-readies-small-4x4-ev-crossover-and-luxury-suv-2030

https://www.drive.com.au/reviews/2023-ineos-grenadier-review/

2023 INEOS Grenadier | PH Review

The wait is finally over - time to find out what the Grenadier is like in the real world...

www.pistonheads.com

Ineos Grenadier Review 2023 | Top Gear

For all it owes to the Defender and G-Wagen, the Ineos Grenadier has lots of character of its own

www.topgear.com

Driven: 2024 Ineos Grenadier SUV Is a Great New Twist on Old-School Off-Roading

We take the 2024 Ineos Grenadier on- and off-road. This 4x4 SUV from a new brand blends BMW power, classic Defender-inspired looks and serious capability.

www.edmunds.com

Driven: 2023 INEOS Grenadier – When Dreams Come True

The INEOS Grenadier is positioned as the spiritual successor to the original Land Rover Defender, but promises more comfort on the road and better handling

www.autoevolution.com

MSN

www.msn.com

That last link I found interesting and it's not related to the truck... had no idea Radcliffe had an engineering degree and MBA... same as myself! mine is EE instead of ChemE.

Edit: Youtube also...

Johnny Smith putting down land rover...

 

[pfshoen]

Seeing a bunch of them in trail is pretty encouraging. Getting it beyond the production prototype stage.

 

[TX246]

I had an opportunity to drive the Grenadier here in Texas today, I have to say my expectations are beyond met. Everything was off road, highway driving is not possible, but they have done an amazing job creating this.

 

[TX246]

Some Pictures…

 

[TJS]

With all the recent reviews more Grenadier particulars are being revealed. I can't confirm that any of these facts or figures are official but here's what I've come across so far:

GVW is 2.7 and 2.8 tons (5,952 and 6172 pounds) for the gasoline and diesel models respectively. Slightly better load capacity in the gasoline (petrol) model. I think the supplied numbers up until now have been 5829 and 6050 pounds.

Hydraulic recirculating ball and nut steering with 3.85 turns lock to lock. Annoying to sports car reviewers but a blessing off road and on long drives.

The crown/ring gear diameters are 220mm (8.66142") with 76.1mm (2.996063") axle tube diameter. Equivalent to a modern Dana 44 - but not a Dana 60.

Diff housings should measure out at 262mm (10.3") tall so 131mm from centerline not including any spec'd skid plate or armoring. That leaves 264mm of ground clearance (roughly the advertised 10.4") with 31" tires.

The axle housings are fitted with Dana hubs, half shafts, and CV joints. One reviewer listed the differential "bevel gears" as also being made by Dana.

Rear axle is of semi-floating design. Whether the axle/half shafts are retained by C-clips or by pressed-on bearing retainers is not known.

Petrol models should be able to use the DEF reservoir area to fit an extra fuel tank or perhaps a potable water tank. Extra transmission fluid/gear oil/engine oil storage could also be an option.

It is possible to drive the vehicle from a dead stop in second gear using the transmission's manual mode. This may be available in low range only.

Transfer case shifting is not "on the fly". You can technically shift into the lock position at very low speeds. I still haven't seen a "neutral" position confirmed for the transfer case so I'm assuming there isn't one.

You can only engage the factory front locker after the rear locker is engaged. Turning off the rear locker also disengages the front.

5.5mm thick front wind screen to help cut wind noise.

That's about it.

 

[TJS]

Continuing with the odd differential lock protocol, this review states that the Trialmaster version will be standard spec for U.S. purchasers...

2024 Ineos Grenadier First Drive Review: Overlanding the Newest 4x4 SUV

We put the new off-road SUV through its paces in the tricky terrain of the Scottish Highlands.

www.motortrend.com

This is somewhat eyebrow raising. Should I purchase a Grenadier I had hoped to aviod factory locking diffs and the useless-for-my-purpose raised air intake in favor of more cold climate-friendly options - even if I had to wait for the aftermarket to come around to developing them. Coupled with the mandatory Smooth Pack and the supposedly now required automatic emergency braking, lane keep assist, and drowsy driver detection that the above reviewer mentions, methinks Ineos may have waited too long to release the vehicle in North America. They appear to be both running afoul of increasingly stringent federal regulations (2024 may even demand an engine revision due to tighter emissions regulations) and trying to turn this error in judgement into a financial win by dumping overstocked components previously purchased at bulk rates (and factored into projections) that other markets just aren't having.

I think that the large U.S.A. market is, in particular, absolutely critical to Ineos' success and that they are betting that, even if the advance reservation holders back out, they can foist unwanted upscale Grenadiers on the Mall Crawler crowd straight off the dealer lots becaus they will "look" badass. It's almost as if they are trying to use us Yanks as a way to fund the small British buying sector. Let's be brutally honest here. That's who the Grenadier was originally conceived for.

 

[pfshoen]

I would thank our Fed govt for the extraneous "safety" features more than Ineos.
Any new vehicle sold here is going to have loads of digitalized non-necessities. The Gren will have fewer than most/all of their competitors.
Ineos has been pedaling as fast as they can for 5 years. I don't think they've been doing much waiting.
The USA market is the Holy Grail for foreign manufacturers. Volume leads to profitability, and nobody but nobody consumes mass quantities of product like America. Like the Stones song goes, "American girls want everything in the world you could possibly imagine."
Ineos' plan depends on success in the U.S. I don't see how they can survive without it. Heck, if they manage to stay around for awhile, who knows, they may produce a special edition "Utilitymaster" Utility vehicle. There are people who would pay more for less in this case, and I'm one of them.