Ineos Grenadier customer cars arrive at dealers

The footwell intrusion is only on the RHD models though, Jim's only gone and given the Europeans a superior driving position too

The last yacht designer to "style" a car, came up with this.

I'm liking the cut of that jib. Truly stylish.

The poopdeck. One can see where the confusion may have occurred in the design brief.

It is interesting how individual things, especially when portrayed in a deliberately poor light, influence thinking so greatly amongst people who have yet to experience the actual vehicle.

For clarity, I don't work for Ineos, and I haven't actually (yet) pulled the trigger on an order for one. But I have been on one of the prototype events, spoken with members of the development team, and spent quite a bit of time poking around the vehicle and comparing it with my own and others' LR products.

Just to pick up on a few of the points:

Having watched a number of reviews, including Harry's, nobody - including Harry - has suggested it is anything but light years ahead of an old Defender. It may not be up there with a new Defender, but that's not at all the same thing.

Isn't that the same design choice as the new Defender, amongst others (at least the Defender 90 - there's a large step).



The new 130 also has a step:



Harry didn't show the seats properly folded, incidentally, just "flopped forward" perhaps for effect? The squabs fold forward in the traditional manner, before you lower the backrest, so the folded seats are flat, just not level with the cargo area. This view from H'sG is very misleading:



The Grenadier follows the G-Wagen approach, which doesn't seem to hamper sales



The 2-seater has a flat cargo floor. In a trad Defender 110, the (absolutely dire) 2nd row seats "tumble" forward - so you get more height, but less length. The later "Puma" seats take up even more space.

A D3/D4 set-up is good, but has a higher rear boot floor to make it all "flat" (and to provide space for the 6/7 seats to stow). If you took out the 3rd row of seats in a D3/D4, and lowered the rear cill, you'd have a Grenadier cargo area...

But if you want a flat floor, just fit a box / drawer in the rear. Then you'll have as much load height as a new Defender, and the extra space underneath

New Defender cargo area height: 35.6"; Grenadier cargo area height: 40.9". You get your flat / flatter floor by raising it...

I have an old Defender 110. The turning circle just really isn't a big issue. One doesn't actually perform U-turns all that often, whilst proper planning of road positioning means one never runs out of lock in the real world. Of course it would be lovely if it were better, but it just isn't a real-world problem in my experience. That's not to say there aren't lots of YouTube videos of people unable to choose a proper line around a corner and then "demonstrating" what a problem it is in an old Defender

Having sat in the vehicle, I couldn't really see a problem. For me, most left foot rests are too steeply-angled on cars like this. Given I habitually brake with my left foot, having my left foot's resting position at a level high enough to just pivot over to the brake is more comfortable. In some cars I've actually raised up the floor between seat and pedals to get my heel up a touch and sort out what are (for me) very poor design choices.

Doesn't mean it is for everyone, but some of the comments are a bit odd without actually sitting in the vehicle. TBH, I thought Harry's choice of seating position a bit strange. I note that as he (like so many of us) starts to stoop more, he adopts less and less ideal seating positions in some of his test vehicles.



He seemed to be sat pretty much identically in his latest Range Rover review, for instance.

His back shape is now a much better fit for sports cars than for something upright like this It is also a legitimate point for him not to like the overhead console - his upper back + glasses = this isn't an ideal solution. As usually the case, it is for each of us to sit in and consider whether we like or not the set-up we see. For me I'd rather have physical switches (even if overhead) rather than endless touch screens to engage things.

Why's the steering wheel so far forward? Look at Catchpole's review (another tall chap), and see the driving position with a properly-adjusted wheel. Likewise the Ashraf Auto Express piece, and numerous others. None are sitting in a "brutal" position.

In fact, and it pains me to say it (because I have a huge amount of time for Harry's opinions), this felt like a piece from somebody who didn't like the vehicle in principle.

As for the comments from many about how live axles are a dead end, and surely everyone can get along with IFS (at least), the sort of abuse these axles are designed to take is far in excess of anything a new Defender could cope with.

Do I think the Grenadier perfect? No, far from it, which is why I haven't pulled the trigger yet. It is way too heavy IMHO (and I'm coming from a D3 at 2.4t and an old 110 at 2.1t). As a result, its fuel economy suffers. And I want to know more about the BMW engine durability in this application (noting that the old BMW-engined Defenders out of South Africa were sought-after). But as a robust, drive-over-anything-without-losing-an-axle, abuse it around a field with impunity and still get you home, tool, it is a very sound proposition.

Consider the front suspension on a new Defender:



The better steering lock comes from a significant absence of fore-aft constraint. But what happens if you hit a large boulder or divot at speed off road? Especially if going backwards? The loads will be immense, yet there's very little support.

The Grenadier is built around a philosophy not of being great off-road when carefully driven, but on keeping you going when *not* carefully driven (or not being lucky).

That's not a philosophy that works for everyone. Hence there seems a lot of interest in these in places like Australia, and why perhaps the UK market isn't going to lap them up.

For my part, the sole reason for owning vehicles like this is so that I minimise my chances of ever being stranded wherever I go. That's why I'm still keen on the Grenadier, and may well end up owning one.

What do I not like? I think the accessory power points look amateurish in the "faux alpine lights." I'm not convinced by the split-folding rear door (not the idea, but the execution). I don't really like centre-screen displays.

None of the above is to suggest people aren't entitled to their own opinions - of course they are. Just that it is odd that people single out things as being terrible as if they were some universal truth, when in fact they are common to many other vehicles, or simple bely the giving of choice

I think it was while he was driving, it looked like his leg was laid over at an angle that would kill my knee in about 20 minutes.

That's not a situation that's exclusive to the Grenadier though, long legs and fked knees means I'm uncomfortable in lots of cars.

All fair points of view

The lack of lock is down to the swivels used on live axles combined with very large tyres. The Defender uses a trick “dual bottom joint” IIRC to help with lock despite the large tyres.

The steering guard is because the steering arms are ahead of the axle. As you say, pretty easy to protect. If you look at the size of those on the Grenadier, however, they make an old Defender look awfully weedy.

Also worth noting that the new military-spec G-Wagen sticks with live axles, despite the Chelsea-spec switching to independent.

But you’re right that the new Defender is undoubtedly well-engineered, and if the NTTD Defenders were genuinely standard (bar then roll cages) then that looks to be impressive - but those machines didn’t need to do 100k miles…

Re left foot braking, I’m pretty stunned people drive around in autos using 2 pedals with 1 foot and the other just idle. But hey ho.

Yup. I'll switch between the two without thinking so most of the time I'll just be operating both pedals with the right foot but there will be times I'll be using both feet for better control, especially when wanting total throttle control and total control over when the car moves, how far, when and what speed, so using it a bit like you might use the hand brake in a manual to have more control.

But in general driving I wouldn't waste the energy to move the left leg. The problem I had in this regard with the Grenadier was that the floor hump put my knee above my hip with no thigh support. For me that guarantees discomfort over any distance beyond a local run. The fact that the ignition key was then aimed at my kneecap made me feel like gagging.

I just don't get why they've spend over a £1b to engineer in deliberate ergonomic failings?

Was it deliberate to create that aura of only a real man can handle the product so as to tap the Walt market? Was it some kind of nostalgia need to copy the Land Rover even more? Or was it just various design oversights?

Someone above made valid points about the new Defender rear seats not folding flat or the new G Wagon but they don't need to as they are luxury cars that can surrender that practicality but this is a commercial vehicle that exists solely for the purpose of utility and practicality and the whole of the rear not going flat is just silly, of course it needs to be able to on a commercial or a utility vehicle. It even has a ladder chassis to make it easy to do.

And I genuinely don't get the cheap plastics over the front of the cabin. I'm not getting how you can ask that kind of money for something that is so Poundland? They're plain nasty to touch, look at or to realise you've paid for.

I think it's worth waiting to see whether the next ones address some of these things or for aftermarket companies to offer road kits and nicer trim?

A ladder chassis makes it harder to fold the seats flat - where will they go? Other makers fix this by lifting the boot floor and, say, hiding a spare wheel or fuel tank under there.

If I buy a Grenadier, I’ll most likely just put a drawer or platform in the rear to level the load bay. I’ll still have more space than in a new Defender.

So we’re clear, I’d rather they’d done something different BTW. A W463 G-Wagen has the battery under the floor behind the centre console, and I guess that’s not good for wading, adding extra batteries, etc.



Later models have it under the boot floor. An old-Defender style under-seat position’s no good if you want rear passengers to have any foot room.

I still think there’s a misunderstanding of the market the Grenadier is really aimed at.

Toyota is still producing the 70 series Land Cruiser because there’s still global demand, for instance.

The W464 G-Wagen is in production because there’s sufficient global demand: https://ggb.mercedes-benz.com/en/vehicles/base-veh... - that’s the live axle version. And it starts at a price point way higher than the Grenadier.

The promise - which may or may not be validated - of the Grenadier is that it will truly last like an old Land Cruiser or perhaps an old G-Wagen. Underneath it really is built like very little else. But that costs money, which you have to value in order to justify paying for.

That doesn’t mean it suits your needs. Frankly, in the UK, almost nobody needs what a proper G-Wagen or a Grenadier can offer. And hence there’s an awful lot more enthusiasm for this vehicle in places like Australia, South Africa and, yes, the USA than here. If Ineos can tap into a market that appreciates what it is offering then it should do fine. There are a lot of people willing to pay a lot of money for durability and toughness.