RE: Ineos shows off Grenadier interior

[Howitzer]

If it’s anything like the Hiluxes that I’ve driven all around Africa, it will have some ride quality, some performance and also not rattle like mad. These are vehicles used on mine sites and on African roads.

What they did have was absolute reliability and whatever the outside temp you always stayed cool. I used to have to tow the Hilux we had, a 2000 model 2.6 turbo diesel, off the beach with the P38 RR we also had on lots of occasions as they had a habit of getting stuck, a lot. I’d never even entertain the idea of using the RR for long drives to satellite sites though as it had its fair share of breakdowns and poor design. This is what Ineos needs to be sure of. If not then the Hilux will still be the vehicle of choice.

Dave!

[skwdenyer]

Howitzer said:

If it’s anything like the Hiluxes that I’ve driven all around Africa, it will have some ride quality, some performance and also not rattle like mad. These are vehicles used on mine sites and on African roads.

What they did have was absolute reliability and whatever the outside temp you always stayed cool. I used to have to tow the Hilux we had, a 2000 model 2.6 turbo diesel, off the beach with the P38 RR we also had on lots of occasions as they had a habit of getting stuck, a lot. I’d never even entertain the idea of using the RR for long drives to satellite sites though as it had its fair share of breakdowns and poor design. This is what Ineos needs to be sure of. If not then the Hilux will still be the vehicle of choice.

Dave!

Agreed about the Hilux on sand - I once had to rather rapidly dig one out of the Mersey foreshore as the tide approached...

[Chris944_S2]

NomduJour said:

skwdenyer said:

The new G wagon isn’t a “development” it is a re-engineered pastiche. A good one, it has to be said.

Of course the Defender could have been developed. Just applying post-Victorian manufacturing thinking to it it would have yielded endless incremental benefits. Over time it would have - at the least - become something of what the Grenadier is.

In full agreement about the G-Class being an embarrassment, but I can’t see any way of making an old Defender comply with modern standards and expectations without starting over.

Howitzer said:

So are you saying that the many small flaws which annoyed people in the Defender couldn’t be fixed over the course of 30 years ?

Yes. How are you going to make an old Defender comply with modern safety legislation, for a start?

All been done to death on here.

The new G class is still an extremely good off roader.
For sure, the vast majority of them are used for the image rather than its abilities. But they still are great off roaders despite having been reengineered to be more car-like on the road.
Over here in CH you still find many being used in the Alps for what they were meant to do. My local electric board runs a few as they need something that is able to go to remote areas in tough terrain. Of course, the densest population of G-classes will be in Zurich town center, and if you want to find AMG or even Brabus versions you should go look there rather than up a mountain, but the base car is very capable and unlike LR products has always been reliable.

[skwdenyer]

Chris944_S2 said:

The new G class is still an extremely good off roader.
For sure, the vast majority of them are used for the image rather than its abilities. But they still are great off roaders despite having been reengineered to be more car-like on the road.
Over here in CH you still find many being used in the Alps for what they were meant to do. My local electric board runs a few as they need something that is able to go to remote areas in tough terrain. Of course, the densest population of G-classes will be in Zurich town center, and if you want to find AMG or even Brabus versions you should go look there rather than up a mountain, but the base car is very capable and unlike LR products has always been reliable.

Worth bearing in mind that the previous G (chassis 461) is still in production and sold anywere Euro 5 is OK. The Australian military has just bought a lot of them. Sales have *increased* over the last few years as other rivals dropped out - a fact probably not missed by the Grenadier product planners.

[C Lee Farquar]

I like the interior.

As a family and work truck we like our Puma 110 and the Grenadier seems to solve the few gripes we have (mainly it's not watertight and now it's getting on a bit the body a rattles a fair bit)

I like the prospect of the BMW petrol, we have the same engine in a leased 8 series. I like the Disco 4 but not the engine, the new Defender leaves me cold as do Land Cruisers and Jap pick ups.

It doesn't bother me whether the Grenadier is a commercial success or not but I'm thinking it ticks most of my boxes. If the VAT is reclaimable on the station wagon that would make a significant difference to me.

[CS Garth]

C Lee Farquar said:

I like the interior.

As a family and work truck we like our Puma 110 and the Grenadier seems to solve the few gripes we have (mainly it's not watertight and now it's getting on a bit the body a rattles a fair bit)

I like the prospect of the BMW petrol, we have the same engine in a leased 8 series. I like the Disco 4 but not the engine, the new Defender leaves me cold as do Land Cruisers and Jap pick ups.

It doesn't bother me whether the Grenadier is a commercial success or not but I'm thinking it ticks most of my boxes. If the VAT is reclaimable on the station wagon that would make a significant difference to me.

I think the engine is a massive plus in its favour. The petrol 3 is coming in at circa 270bhp but I would have thought that could be wicked up to 400bhp pretty easily by the aftermarket tuners (I’ll leave aside them issue of whether the chassis can handle this for the time being).

You’re not doing that in a D Max.

[PH User]

CS Garth said:

Countdown said:

Ok so forgetting the fashion/image aspect....what will the Grenadier do that various japanese pickups won't do for less money?

I think it will last longer, most pick ups are shagged after 5 years. Buy cheap buy twice.

That's through use, not from the vehicle not being capable. The Grenadier has that G wagon vibe about it which is far more fashionable than a pick up truck.

[CS Garth]

PH User said:

That's through use, not from the vehicle not being capable. The Grenadier has that G wagon vibe about it which is far more fashionable than a pick up truck.

I’d suggest it’s because they are also built to a budget. Regardless I do think durability is a fair point of comparison when assessing value ie it’s great the cheap truck can do all the things the expensive one can but it’s not much use if it breaks in half after a few years.

If you don’t like that example I’d quote the example I just gave ie it is capable of being tuned to 350-400 bhp with ease so even at factory spec output it should be capable of the comfortable, safe conveyance of people over long distances and then still going off road.

I appreciate the twin cab game has moved on over the last 10 years but their forte is short trips not bashing all over the country visiting remote locations to inspect and service equipment for example.

[NomduJour]

skwdenyer said:

Worth bearing in mind that the previous G (chassis 461) is still in production and sold anywere Euro 5 is OK. The Australian military has just bought a lot of them. Sales have *increased* over the last few years as other rivals dropped out - a fact probably not missed by the Grenadier product planners.

Not sure you can still buy a Professional G461 as a private customer - certainly not available in Australia now(which should have been its best market).

[blueST]

NomduJour said:

Not sure you can still buy a Professional G461 as a private customer - certainly not available in Australia now(which should have been its best market).

It was something like a 3rd more expensive than a 70 series, given the reputation Toyota have down there the G must have been a hard sell. Technically it was no doubt better, but that’s not everything,

[NomduJour]

CS Garth said:

You’re not doing that in a D Max.

… but you are in an Amarok.

[snowandrocks]

CS Garth said:

I’d suggest it’s because they are also built to a budget. Regardless I do think durability is a fair point of comparison when assessing value ie it’s great the cheap truck can do all the things the expensive one can but it’s not much use if it breaks in half after a few years.

If you don’t like that example I’d quote the example I just gave ie it is capable of being tuned to 350-400 bhp with ease so even at factory spec output it should be capable of the comfortable, safe conveyance of people over long distances and then still going off road.

I appreciate the twin cab game has moved on over the last 10 years but their forte is short trips not bashing all over the country visiting remote locations to inspect and service equipment for example.

I'm not sure what you're doing to your Hilux that's causing it to break in half after a few years?! My mk8 Hilux feels and looks almost like new at 5 years old and 80k miles, it tows a big trailer most days and every journey starts and ends with tackling a rough track. The warranty has just been extended to 10 years/100k, not that it makes much difference, I haven't even had to change a lightbulb.

It also cruises quietly and comfortably at well over the motorway speed limit while carrying 4 passengers and a lot of equipment.

I like the grenadier but suggesting that it will be more durable than a Toyota 4x4 is maybe a little fanciful given my experience of highly stressed BMW engines!

[CS Garth]

snowandrocks said:

I'm not sure what you're doing to your Hilux that's causing it to break in half after a few years?! My mk8 Hilux feels and looks almost like new at 5 years old and 80k miles, it tows a big trailer most days and every journey starts and ends with tackling a rough track. The warranty has just been extended to 10 years/100k, not that it makes much difference, I haven't even had to change a lightbulb.

It also cruises quietly and comfortably at well over the motorway speed limit while carrying 4 passengers and a lot of equipment.

I like the grenadier but suggesting that it will be more durable than a Toyota 4x4 is maybe a little fanciful given my experience of highly stressed BMW engines!

I’m clearly not saying this (that a new car will immediately be subjectively better than all current 4x4s In one fell swoop) but I think this summarises the my point neatly: I don’t think it is the what, it’s the how.

There seems to be a belief that the car can’t exist unless it can do specific things others can’t. Obviously people will cite examples of their car that’s done a million miles and hasn’t needed so much as a drop of oil as you do.

They’re probably wedded to that brand and nothing Ineos can do will persuade them otherwise. It’s the other 95% of people who perhaps haven’t had the same experience with their vehicle who might be up grabs.

Or put another way, you can’t imagine that every single user of every single vehicle has had the same experience of you has had?

[CS Garth]

NomduJour said:

CS Garth said:

You’re not doing that in a D Max.

… but you are in an Amarok.

Which will cost you £42k for a 3 year old one with 37,000 miles.

https://www.autotrader.co.uk/car-details/202107175...

[skwdenyer]

CS Garth said:

Which will cost you £42k for a 3 year old one with 37,000 miles.

https://www.autotrader.co.uk/car-details/202107175...

Is it just me, or do VW seem to sell quite a few of those?

[AW111]

CS Garth said:

snowandrocks said:

I'm not sure what you're doing to your Hilux that's causing it to break in half after a few years?! My mk8 Hilux feels and looks almost like new at 5 years old and 80k miles, it tows a big trailer most days and every journey starts and ends with tackling a rough track. The warranty has just been extended to 10 years/100k, not that it makes much difference, I haven't even had to change a lightbulb.

It also cruises quietly and comfortably at well over the motorway speed limit while carrying 4 passengers and a lot of equipment.

I like the grenadier but suggesting that it will be more durable than a Toyota 4x4 is maybe a little fanciful given my experience of highly stressed BMW engines!

I’m clearly not saying this (that a new car will immediately be subjectively better than all current 4x4s In one fell swoop) but I think this summarises the my point neatly: I don’t think it is the what, it’s the how.

There seems to be a belief that the car can’t exist unless it can do specific things others can’t. Obviously people will cite examples of their car that’s done a million miles and hasn’t needed so much as a drop of oil as you do.

They’re probably wedded to that brand and nothing Ineos can do will persuade them otherwise. It’s the other 95% of people who perhaps haven’t had the same experience with their vehicle who might be up grabs.

Or put another way, you can’t imagine that every single user of every single vehicle has had the same experience of you has had?

In other words, you made up a claim out of thin air to disparage the "cheap Japanese trucks".

Well done, give yourself a pat on the back.

[sisu]

CS Garth said:

PH User said:

As has been said before, it's a fashion thing.

You can’t credibly think that Ineos have pumped a billion quid into this in the hope that it obtains iconic status as some kind of vagazzled trinket of the the middle classes and shifts 30k units PA into this demographic?

Aahhh Yes. Yes they have.

Make fun of the G-Wagen, but the sales of this are all down to hitting the mark with women on social media over the last 10 years. Old men in Fishing vests at Mercedes dealers are not fuelling this boom in G-Wagon sales. In 2020 they sold 7200 AMG g-wagons in the state of California alone.

Ineos bought Belstaff clothing in 2017 because they want this link.

[DonkeyApple]

skwdenyer said:

NomduJour said:

You’d have to start over, its actual method of construction prevents it from ever being capable of meeting modern standards. An all-new welded body would need a different chassis, which would need to be engineered for crash safety etc - there’d be nothing left.

Look at the SD5, Project Challenger/Defender 2, LCV2/3 etc (and the supposed Bronco/Defender platform share from the Ford days).

The point being made is that *incremental* change could have got you there.

Instead (and this was a very common BL problem), various "clean sheet" projects were proposed and then dismissed.

Compare against, say, the Toyota LC70 - on the surface, that's a 40 year old design, but has been continually updated.

Anyhow, all moot now.

I think the reality is between the two.

BL was a disgusting company. An absolute disgrace of rotten human incompetence, theft and laziness from the very top to the very bottom. The worst of British culture. It wasn't alone, most of the utilities and other businesses were no better but when it comes to the LR/Defender it needs to be recognised that the vast majority of humans involved in it weren't fit to clean your toilets.

It was a weird company that took most of its ideas from the US while worshipping the USSR but with the work ethic and competence of a sub Saharan state.

The finances were a mess throughout most of the life of the vehicle and other projects took priority as they not only generated more revenue but more profit and most importantly had to stand on their own feet.

In many ways the Range Rover killed the Land Rover almost overnight. That was the product that appeared in 1970 and by 1980 it was clear that this was where the money and the future lay.

What you had was the RR product that had to compete in a free market and has evolved constantly with each change being incremental but still quite significant to the point that there is a natural evolution from the Classic to the L405 but almost nothing similar about the two products.

Conversely, the Defender was never sold under free market economics but was a State backed, command economy product. By the end of the 70s there was no need to do much more than the bare minimum as you had no competition. The companies and people who bought LRs had little to no choice as the British Govt told them that was all they could buy. The competition was locked out by tariffs, embargo's and laws.

What we can be rather confident of is that if the Defender had evolved as the Range Rover was allowed to and had to then the new Defender is still where the product would be today. Just like the L405 is where the Range Rover needs to be but is jarringly different from the Classic.

The only difference between the two lines is that the Range Rover had that big change with the L322 20 years ago when it was absolutely correct to recognise that the use of modern tech meant you could build a road car that drove perfectly on the road but could still go off-road and actually be better off road where the bulk of customers use it.

The Defender never got its 'L322' moment twenty years ago so the product today seems more of a step change than an evolution. But whichever route the Defender had gone down we would have arrived at the car we have today because that is the car that the market today wants to buy at that sort of price.

The Grenadier is popping into a niche that it believes rather robustly exists which is a group of consumers who want a product that isn't old but is built in an old way and with on trend retro styling.

The retro styling niche clearly works, you only need to see the success of the MINI, 500, Alpine. They are hugely fashionable and clearly lots of people want a modern pastiche of an old design so I think the Grenadier taps that big retro fashion trend well. The G Wagon also shows that its not just women who like the retro fashion angle.

I'm not sure the ladder chassis thing matters. Some people are of the view that it means the car won't be likely to win either a GT race or the Dakar but as a lifestyle bit of practical fun it'll go down motorways and country lanes perfectly well and it will cross fields perfectly well.

[anonymous-user]

Howitzer said:

So why didn’t JLR develop the defender ?


Dave!

The simply answer is because there was litterally no money to do so, because the business case for such a vehicle after about 1990 simply didn't add up.

When you think that a Discovery 1 has basically all the same parts a defender has, and is much cheaper and easier to build to a suitable level of quality, (having a welded body) and yet sold for a significantly greater price you can see the problem.

IMO, the defender did get developed, it because the Discovery!

The D4 is probably the high point in terms of finding a balance between true off road capability, robustness and yet being nice enough for the road miles which inevitably make up the majority of these vehicles use.

That the new defender has been compared to the D4 is no accident, both vehicles try to find that tricky balance.

[CS Garth]

AW111 said:

In other words, you made up a claim out of thin air to disparage the "cheap Japanese trucks".

Well done, give yourself a pat on the back.

Not really, I was asked what I thought it would do that the Jap pick ups wouldn’t. I said I thought (operative word) it would last longer.

If you’re going to get annoyed at people having thoughts maybe the internet isn’t for you