RE: INEOS Grenadier officially unveiled

RE: INEOS Grenadier officially unveiled

Author
Discussion

RoverP6B

4,338 posts

129 months

Wednesday 8th July 2020
quotequote all
Those mods listed still wouldn't be sufficient to enable the things to jump that far, that high, with that much clear air under them. The laws of physics haven't suddenly changed because the JLR engineering department say so. The suspension and shock towers would not have survived that. I am not so naive as to believe that JLR have somehow made something yummy mummies can use yet which has the capability of a Baja truck...

camel_landy

4,925 posts

184 months

Wednesday 8th July 2020
quotequote all
LimaDelta said:
Max_Torque said:
Last time i saw it, it was in theGdeck reception at Gaydon, but at least one will probably end up in the Gaydon museum. They were obviously pre-production mule cars (because the filming happened before the Proddy line buit cars existed)..
Thanks. So not WBAC then.
As they were technically test mules, HMRC regulations mean there's only 2x options available once they've been finished with... Motor museum or destroyed. Even when destroyed, the parts can not be salvaged as they would not have been type approved.

M

camel_landy

4,925 posts

184 months

Wednesday 8th July 2020
quotequote all
RoverP6B said:
Those mods listed still wouldn't be sufficient to enable the things to jump that far, that high, with that much clear air under them. The laws of physics haven't suddenly changed because the JLR engineering department say so. The suspension and shock towers would not have survived that. I am not so naive as to believe that JLR have somehow made something yummy mummies can use yet which has the capability of a Baja truck...
Good grief, are you still here?

M

RoverP6B

4,338 posts

129 months

Wednesday 8th July 2020
quotequote all
I could ask the same of you, when all you've done is regurgitate lies and marketing propaganda from JLR. Well, it'll be grimly entertaining seeing them go bankrupt...

LimaDelta

6,533 posts

219 months

Wednesday 8th July 2020
quotequote all
RoverP6B said:
Those mods listed still wouldn't be sufficient to enable the things to jump that far, that high, with that much clear air under them. The laws of physics haven't suddenly changed because the JLR engineering department say so. The suspension and shock towers would not have survived that. I am not so naive as to believe that JLR have somehow made something yummy mummies can use yet which has the capability of a Baja truck...
Ever seen ski jumping?

The landing field in the video is clearly sloping downhill, and very soft which will no doubt have helped survivability. Literally none of this is rocket science.

InitialDave

11,952 posts

120 months

Wednesday 8th July 2020
quotequote all
RoverP6B said:
Those mods listed still wouldn't be sufficient to enable the things to jump that far, that high, with that much clear air under them. The laws of physics haven't suddenly changed because the JLR engineering department say so. The suspension and shock towers would not have survived that. I am not so naive as to believe that JLR have somehow made something yummy mummies can use yet which has the capability of a Baja truck...
They did do it. You have quotes from Land Rover confirming this, and actual engineers telling you it's completely plausible.

On what basis should you be believed instead?

camel_landy

4,925 posts

184 months

Wednesday 8th July 2020
quotequote all
RoverP6B said:
I could ask the same of you, when all you've done is regurgitate lies and marketing propaganda from JLR. Well, it'll be grimly entertaining seeing them go bankrupt...


M

RoverP6B

4,338 posts

129 months

Wednesday 8th July 2020
quotequote all
Because it's blatant bullsh!t. A stock Pretender with eight feet or so of clear air under its tyres, on only lightly beefed-up standard air suspension, lands and drives off undamaged? It's such a blatant lie that anyone who knows anything about jumping 4x4s can tell, yet those who insist JLR can do no wrong swallow these lies hook, line and sinker.

595Heaven

2,421 posts

79 months

Wednesday 8th July 2020
quotequote all
If you look at https://www.landrover.co.uk/james-bond-film/index.... you will see the following. Not sure where the lies are being told?

Land Rover said:
Vehicles modified for stunt work: Defender features extreme duty roof, front beams and undertray; roll cages; safety fuel cell. Non-production seats and belts, engine cooling, tyres and ride-height

durbster

10,288 posts

223 months

Wednesday 8th July 2020
quotequote all
RoverP6B said:
Those mods listed still wouldn't be sufficient to enable the things to jump that far, that high, with that much clear air under them. The laws of physics haven't suddenly changed because the JLR engineering department say so. The suspension and shock towers would not have survived that. I am not so naive as to believe that JLR have somehow made something yummy mummies can use yet which has the capability of a Baja truck...
The shot of the cars after the landing was probably shot before the one of the jump. You'd film the jump last, since it's the most risky and wrecking one of the cars wouldn't ruin the rest of the days shooting.

It's a soft surface and angled for a gentler landing but the suspension may well have been trashed.

RoverP6B

4,338 posts

129 months

Wednesday 8th July 2020
quotequote all
Those landings were still hard enough to cause serious structural damage, likely sufficient to immobilise the vehicle immediately. What's the point anyway? If you want a Land Rover that can go fast off-road and jump over stuff, you get a Bowler.

durbster

10,288 posts

223 months

Wednesday 8th July 2020
quotequote all
RoverP6B said:
Those landings were still hard enough to cause serious structural damage, likely sufficient to immobilise the vehicle immediately.
I'm saying maybe it did. We don't know.

300bhp/ton

41,030 posts

191 months

Wednesday 8th July 2020
quotequote all
2xChevrons said:
300bhp/ton said:
Not really wanting to get involved in your wider discussion. But were all those really "manufacturing" weren't most/all just CKD's and final assembly. Apart from Santana, who built under licence and developed their own range of vehicles. Which is slightly different again, as they weren't shipped back to the UK and sold as part of the regular Rover line up.
Yes, most of those were CKD/various degrees of local assembly; although the BL chart that list is taken from simply designated them all as 'manufacturing'. But I was hoping to point out that Land Rovers have always been built/assembled wherever it made the most sense to do so, and that the Land Rover or Defender's 'Britishness' has never really been a part of its appeal for most of its existence. Most people who bought them did so for other reasons, and it is only very recently that the whole British Automotive Icon thing got rolling.

Aside from Santana, the Australian, Brazilian, South African and Turkish (not on that list since it began in the 80s) operations were all majority local content. So was the operation in Iran, albeit on an unofficial basis post-79.


Edited by 2xChevrons on Wednesday 8th July 12:33
I'm not sure I fully agree. I think a lot of people bought Defenders, or Land Rover products in the general, because they were British and British built. I know it goes against the internet trend and a lot of PH opinion. But a lot of people are indeed proud to be British. And rightly so.

It is also worth noting, if in say 1993 you rocked up to your local Land Rover dealer (UK) and drove away in a brand new Defender 90, it would indeed have been built in Britain and not in one of the other manufacturing countries you listed. I get your point, but I think you are also ignoring some honest truths too. smile

InitialDave

11,952 posts

120 months

Wednesday 8th July 2020
quotequote all
RoverP6B said:
Because it's blatant bullsh!t. A stock Pretender with eight feet or so of clear air under its tyres, on only lightly beefed-up standard air suspension, lands and drives off undamaged? It's such a blatant lie that anyone who knows anything about jumping 4x4s can tell, yet those who insist JLR can do no wrong swallow these lies hook, line and sinker.
You're really not coming out with any good rationale here, just a blunt "it's obvious and I know I'm right".

braddo

10,561 posts

189 months

Wednesday 8th July 2020
quotequote all
RoverP6B said:
Those landings were still hard enough to cause serious structural damage, likely sufficient to immobilise the vehicle immediately. What's the point anyway? If you want a Land Rover that can go fast off-road and jump over stuff, you get a Bowler.
Your comments are pure guesswork. You are old, ignorant and deluded.

2xChevrons

3,234 posts

81 months

Wednesday 8th July 2020
quotequote all
300bhp/ton said:
It is also worth noting, if in say 1993 you rocked up to your local Land Rover dealer (UK) and drove away in a brand new Defender 90, it would indeed have been built in Britain and not in one of the other manufacturing countries you listed. I get your point, but I think you are also ignoring some honest truths too. smile
Not ignoring - you're right that all British-sold Landys were British-built, and that the 'Britishness' is part of the appeal of the likes of the Range Rovers and (in some markets) the Disco etc. And this certainly applied to the Defender in its waning years.

It's noticeable that the Range Rovers and the Discovery are the ones which are still predominantly UK-built. While the more no-nonsense Defender is built where it is more commercially expedient.

LR clearly don't think that building the Defender outside of the UK will harm its appeal. And if people were previously favouring it on account of where in the world it was put together then it clearly wasn't a purely functional, utilitarian purchase that it is so often portrayed as.

I'm not saying that the Defender being built in Slovakia in any way adds to its utilitarian credentials, but equally it shouldn't detract from its 'Defender-ness'.

300bhp/ton

41,030 posts

191 months

Wednesday 8th July 2020
quotequote all
2xChevrons said:
I'm not saying that the Defender being built in Slovakia in any way adds to its utilitarian credentials, but equally it shouldn't detract from its 'Defender-ness'.
Personally I think it is a little sad, and would indeed give me pause. But ultimately it wouldn't likely dictate my decision. Unless there was an alternative that maybe was idea


However, while I'm proud to wave the Union Jack and call myself British, I'd like to think of myself as somewhat enlightened in regards to this.

I have an American pony car, that was built in Canada...

My Jimny is from Japan.

I recently sold a German car that was built in France.

Previously had a Swiss/German creation, also built in France.

I'd very happily own a Pinzgauer or a Unimog. No matter were either were built.


ettore

4,144 posts

253 months

Wednesday 8th July 2020
quotequote all
Disco also built in Slovakia I believe.

camel_landy

4,925 posts

184 months

Wednesday 8th July 2020
quotequote all
ettore said:
Disco also built in Slovakia I believe.
Correct...

M

unsprung

5,467 posts

125 months

Wednesday 8th July 2020
quotequote all

Bill said:
And why would people who want a lifestyle vehicle choose this over the GWagen or Defender? Or, in the US, a Wrangler.
In support of your last point, these are launching next week: