We have had many instances when e-lockers did not engage and disengage in real-time, and next to the failures we have seen, this was a major reason why everyone in our technical driving group changed them over. Interesting to see that Ineos acknowledges the issue. While the locker selection order is also how ARB installs their lockers by default, it's something I recommend changing ASA. I have had a few instances, even while touring, where I used a front locker only, and I want to control how I use my lockers.
I have a D3 with factory rear e locker. I recently installed a manually activated front e locker. I still have a long way to go, learning how the vehicle reaponds when I engage the front locker but so far I am impressed how little wheel spin i get, if any, when engaging front e locker to pull me out of river beds (whilst in rock crawl mode). I can the pulling effect using the front locker will be a great improvement in capability of the D3.
Thank you! I'm not sure I'd get a long termer as car companies focus on giving cars to people who a) say the right things and b) to the right people and c) to a large quantity of people. I don't fit those criteria as well as many others, so hence no car companies lining up to offer me test drives. For example, in the last week, I've found pretty big technical errors in two different press releases, Ford and Toyota. One company had had the grace to modify their information, the other, not. That's not the sort of person the average car company wants to loan their cars to, they prefer someone who just parrots the talking points. I'll go my own way, and what happens, happens. th-cam.com/video/K81d03WcQiQ/w-d-xo.html
Ineos and Manufacturers don't seem to be able to give a solid reason why front OEM lockers can't be independently locked. Its impacton steering happens regardless of the rear. I have my ARB lockers setup for independant activation and for appropriate situations it gives me certainty that the fron will climb evenly without any risk of rear shuffle. Using lockers is pretty niche, I just don't see the risk of driver selections - usually when lockers are needed you are balancing a range of risk, including not being able to recover easily. Sick of nanny electronics in modern cars. Ineos was supposed to be different.
Based on various conversations, not just INEOS, the reasons are: 1. drivetrain protection - front lockers can snap drivetrain components easier than rear 2. protecting the driver from themselves 3. simply not understanding there is a need for anything other than centre-rear-front, because they don't employ specialist offroaders, nor do they talk to them 4. catering to the 95% of people for whom centre-rear-front is okay. All of this is understandable and I have no problem with it. What disappointed me was the "there is no need for it" answer as that betrays a fundamental lack of understanding. I would accept "yes, we see a niche need, but here's why we haven't done it" listing the reasons above. We had a discussion on my Patreon about this, and on my FB. It's niche, but there are definitely times you want full control over your lockers. More in Clarification Part 2.
Something not many talk about is side mirror placement and adjustment range. A shim raising the height of the mirror housing by 3-5mm would likely place rear view mirrors in positions more useful and safe for rear visibility, especially when towing. My grenadier’s mirrors are tilted full up/forward just to provide adequate visibility. If I were any taller, I imagine the mirrors would be less than useful.
At least on the Grenadier you get all 8 gears in low range and can do up to 70-80 kmh. A bit of a compromise for your preferred locked in hi range and doesn't solve the inability to select low range issue but still helps.
Fair point, not all vehicles allow all use of gears in low range, and sometimes low range is so low it makes anything other than crawling difficult eg Rubicons. I think INEOS got the gearing just right with the Grenadier.
@@L2SFBC Aren't high gears more fragile in low range because of their smaller gear size? I've always been told to avoid overdrive gears (5th and 6th in a manual) because the torque multiplication of the low range may break those gears, so i suspect jeep on the rubicons with that crazy 4 to 1 reduction ratio doesn't allow you to select the top gears in order to preserve the gearbox. I hope ineos have done their maths and chosen a zf 8 speed variant that can take the stress of the torque multiplication in all gears.
Yes, higher gears may be more fragile, but you wouldn't be doing high-torque work in higher gears anyway. Serious 4x4 hills would be 1-3 low, possibly 4th, for 5th and higher it'd be transit. I do use low range in soft sand up to 6th in my Ranger but when it does get into sixth it's easy going...when the sand becomes more difficult I've got another 5 gears to use so I can choose 3 or 4 low for example manually, not letting the gearbox decide which it does too late, or needing to stress the car between 1 and 2 high.
@@L2SFBC Yes, if wikipedia is to be believed (gear ratios on the 8hp 51 transmission, 2.5: reduction ratio in lr) 8th low on the grenadier is slighty taller than 4th high, which means if you are in that gear the going is very easy and if you want to avoid overdrive gears 6th low is a bit shorter than 3rd high which is very usable. On a wrangler rubicon auto, 6th low is shorter than 2nd by quite a margin
I’d love to see a forward control version of the Grenadier. I can see Ineos going down the luxury car brand route and will be put of of reach of the average punter, which would be unfortunate
An interesting point from the first interview - Jim Ratcliffe gave the engineers a sheet of paper, which Oliver showed, that said wheel at each corner, AWD etc. And that's what they built. It appears nobody argued that other configurations would be better. I would have done, arguing strongly for a forward control with small bonnet, like the current-gen Hiace, and independent suspension based on interior space and payload. But I guess that's why I'm a journalist not a chief engineer :-)
@@L2SFBC I’ve been watching episodes on Pinzgaler and Volvo TBG. The foot print (width&length) aren’t that big, but have a whole lot more space for a touring set up than something like a Troopy. They have a great platform, and wouldn’t take much to do a forward control version, which would open up a whole lot of different options, without much more engineering. I can see them doing a short wheel based version next, as it would obviously be a seller, though.
SWB 4X4s typically don't sell as well as LWB. I'm sure they've done the analysis and that's why we haven't seen one. Nor have I ever seen anyone ask for it.
@@L2SFBCI believe they ruled out a SWB as the existing drivetrain (engine/gearbox) was too long to fit a smaller wheelbase vehicle without compromising driveshaft angles & developing g a 2nd drivetrain was too expensive.
Winch clarification - what about Ariel with the Nomad, Foers with the Ibex (both front & rear from the same unit), perhaps even Munro with their electric vehicle; and a civvy Supacat Jackal (there have been a few) even had the Red Winches option before Ineos. Would Unimog be excluded?
I would put Unimog in a different class yes. As for Ibex and Nomad...fair points although again neither are really in the Grenadier class. However if you need to qualify a statement with "we the only people to fit a winch in Europe in our class of vehicle" it gets a bit pointless! At the time I was surprised to hear the statement but it seemed a ready answer and could be LR, Toyota etc had dropped their winch. Not the case when I checked after the interview ended.
Interesting answers with regard to the OBDII diagnostics. Would it really be the case that Autophix have it wrong on stating Ineos have "locked" the access? With your relationship with Autophix, maybe that's something you could follow up on. It seems odd UK/Oz vehicles have no success with third party readers whilst US vehicles appear to be more open to code deletes. Given all the talk from Ineos about open access and the ability to fix in the field then they should find an official partner to develop a full diagnostic tool with.
I can't do anything without a volunteer Grenadier. If someone wants to try, I'll get all the scanners Autophix has and see if they work, plus my own. And yes, this is important re talk about fix.
@@L2SFBC Hopefully, there's an interested owner close to you that would help out. I'll put a post in a few groups if that's OK with you? I was wondering if you could facilitate an intro between Ineos technical and Autophix (assuming the latter saw a commercial interest in this) and they could take Ineos up on their offer to support third party vendors with access to in house technical data. A bespoke Grenadier unit that had a degree of support from Ineos and allowed additional functionality such as service counter reset and TPMS sensor relearning would be a real winner.
Sure happy to connect an owner with Autophix. They'll need to be prepared to generate a fault on their car which lights up a warning, such as disconnecting a wheel speed sensor, MAF sensor or something so that can be detected and cleared which is the real test. Autophix in Australia just distribute, no tech people. That conversation would need to be between INEOS UK HQ and the OBD2 people, and all that's needed is a list of codes and descriptions. I'm not sure INEOS would be up for that, but they have talked at length about self-fix...
I don’t agree that having a locker in reduces wheel spin - it often increases it as it forces both wheels to spin and at the same speed when possibly one might not. Almost always when I see a vehicle with lockers engaged one or more wheels is actively spinning and churning up the ground.
I have a D3 with factory rear e locker. I recently installed a manually activated front e locker. I still have a long way to go, learning how the vehicle reaponds when I engage the front locker but so far I am impressed how little wheel spin i get, if any, when engaging front e locker to pull me out of river beds (whilst in rock crawl mode). I can the pulling effect using the front locker will be a great improvement in capability of the D3.
@jerrymyahzcat I totally agree! now that I have one and have experienced the benefits and being able to use it when and if needed. An independently activated front locker is a great addition to extra traction and recovery tool bag 🙂
![F.HERO Ft. JSPKK x ลำไย ไหทองคำ x M-PEE - ไม่สนิทบิดหมด (Thai Riders Anthem) [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kPJZ0UihBfk/mqdefault.jpg)
Would love to see a similar video with the new Prado 250 series!
Robert. I like being back to school. So much to learn and understand about different concepts and their application.
We have had many instances when e-lockers did not engage and disengage in real-time, and next to the failures we have seen, this was a major reason why everyone in our technical driving group changed them over. Interesting to see that Ineos acknowledges the issue. While the locker selection order is also how ARB installs their lockers by default, it's something I recommend changing ASA. I have had a few instances, even while touring, where I used a front locker only, and I want to control how I use my lockers.
Can you describe where you used front and not rear?
I have a D3 with factory rear e locker. I recently installed a manually activated front e locker. I still have a long way to go, learning how the vehicle reaponds when I engage the front locker but so far I am impressed how little wheel spin i get, if any, when engaging front e locker to pull me out of river beds (whilst in rock crawl mode). I can the pulling effect using the front locker will be a great improvement in capability of the D3.
These are the best videos on the Grenadier on youtube. I wish Ineos would give you one for a long term review.
Thank you! I'm not sure I'd get a long termer as car companies focus on giving cars to people who a) say the right things and b) to the right people and c) to a large quantity of people. I don't fit those criteria as well as many others, so hence no car companies lining up to offer me test drives. For example, in the last week, I've found pretty big technical errors in two different press releases, Ford and Toyota. One company had had the grace to modify their information, the other, not. That's not the sort of person the average car company wants to loan their cars to, they prefer someone who just parrots the talking points. I'll go my own way, and what happens, happens.
th-cam.com/video/K81d03WcQiQ/w-d-xo.html
So glad you inserted that video of Matt and the front locker. As I was about ready to go off and find it to post it in the comments 😂😂
I know he has strong views so asked him to record a little cameo 👍
Ineos and Manufacturers don't seem to be able to give a solid reason why front OEM lockers can't be independently locked. Its impacton steering happens regardless of the rear. I have my ARB lockers setup for independant activation and for appropriate situations it gives me certainty that the fron will climb evenly without any risk of rear shuffle. Using lockers is pretty niche, I just don't see the risk of driver selections - usually when lockers are needed you are balancing a range of risk, including not being able to recover easily. Sick of nanny electronics in modern cars. Ineos was supposed to be different.
Based on various conversations, not just INEOS, the reasons are:
1. drivetrain protection - front lockers can snap drivetrain components easier than rear
2. protecting the driver from themselves
3. simply not understanding there is a need for anything other than centre-rear-front, because they don't employ specialist offroaders, nor do they talk to them
4. catering to the 95% of people for whom centre-rear-front is okay.
All of this is understandable and I have no problem with it.
What disappointed me was the "there is no need for it" answer as that betrays a fundamental lack of understanding.
I would accept "yes, we see a niche need, but here's why we haven't done it" listing the reasons above.
We had a discussion on my Patreon about this, and on my FB. It's niche, but there are definitely times you want full control over your lockers. More in Clarification Part 2.
Niche vehicle has systems designed for mainstream drivers...someone, somewhere didn't understand or agree with the essence of Projekt Grenadier.
Great video, thanks.
Glad you liked it!
Something not many talk about is side mirror placement and adjustment range. A shim raising the height of the mirror housing by 3-5mm would likely place rear view mirrors in positions more useful and safe for rear visibility, especially when towing. My grenadier’s mirrors are tilted full up/forward just to provide adequate visibility. If I were any taller, I imagine the mirrors would be less than useful.
I did mention this in my first drive review!
Yes, you did, which is why I brought it up. A few others have as well, but I’ve not heard the manufacturer acknowledge it yet.
At least on the Grenadier you get all 8 gears in low range and can do up to 70-80 kmh. A bit of a compromise for your preferred locked in hi range and doesn't solve the inability to select low range issue but still helps.
Fair point, not all vehicles allow all use of gears in low range, and sometimes low range is so low it makes anything other than crawling difficult eg Rubicons. I think INEOS got the gearing just right with the Grenadier.
Same with Land Rover. All gears in low and high range and all Terrain Response modes at any speed.
@@L2SFBC Aren't high gears more fragile in low range because of their smaller gear size?
I've always been told to avoid overdrive gears (5th and 6th in a manual) because the torque multiplication of the low range may break those gears, so i suspect jeep on the rubicons with that crazy 4 to 1 reduction ratio doesn't allow you to select the top gears in order to preserve the gearbox. I hope ineos have done their maths and chosen a zf 8 speed variant that can take the stress of the torque multiplication in all gears.
Yes, higher gears may be more fragile, but you wouldn't be doing high-torque work in higher gears anyway. Serious 4x4 hills would be 1-3 low, possibly 4th, for 5th and higher it'd be transit. I do use low range in soft sand up to 6th in my Ranger but when it does get into sixth it's easy going...when the sand becomes more difficult I've got another 5 gears to use so I can choose 3 or 4 low for example manually, not letting the gearbox decide which it does too late, or needing to stress the car between 1 and 2 high.
@@L2SFBC Yes, if wikipedia is to be believed (gear ratios on the 8hp 51 transmission, 2.5: reduction ratio in lr) 8th low on the grenadier is slighty taller than 4th high, which means if you are in that gear the going is very easy and if you want to avoid overdrive gears 6th low is a bit shorter than 3rd high which is very usable. On a wrangler rubicon auto, 6th low is shorter than 2nd by quite a margin
I’d love to see a forward control version of the Grenadier.
I can see Ineos going down the luxury car brand route and will be put of of reach of the average punter, which would be unfortunate
An interesting point from the first interview - Jim Ratcliffe gave the engineers a sheet of paper, which Oliver showed, that said wheel at each corner, AWD etc. And that's what they built.
It appears nobody argued that other configurations would be better.
I would have done, arguing strongly for a forward control with small bonnet, like the current-gen Hiace, and independent suspension based on interior space and payload.
But I guess that's why I'm a journalist not a chief engineer :-)
@@L2SFBC I’ve been watching episodes on Pinzgaler and Volvo TBG. The foot print (width&length) aren’t that big, but have a whole lot more space for a touring set up than something like a Troopy. They have a great platform, and wouldn’t take much to do a forward control version, which would open up a whole lot of different options, without much more engineering.
I can see them doing a short wheel based version next, as it would obviously be a seller, though.
You can see a forward-control 4x4 Hiace here th-cam.com/video/m9UcPcu4HUA/w-d-xo.html
SWB 4X4s typically don't sell as well as LWB. I'm sure they've done the analysis and that's why we haven't seen one. Nor have I ever seen anyone ask for it.
@@L2SFBCI believe they ruled out a SWB as the existing drivetrain (engine/gearbox) was too long to fit a smaller wheelbase vehicle without compromising driveshaft angles & developing g a 2nd drivetrain was too expensive.
Winch clarification - what about Ariel with the Nomad, Foers with the Ibex (both front & rear from the same unit), perhaps even Munro with their electric vehicle; and a civvy Supacat Jackal (there have been a few) even had the Red Winches option before Ineos. Would Unimog be excluded?
I would put Unimog in a different class yes. As for Ibex and Nomad...fair points although again neither are really in the Grenadier class. However if you need to qualify a statement with "we the only people to fit a winch in Europe in our class of vehicle" it gets a bit pointless! At the time I was surprised to hear the statement but it seemed a ready answer and could be LR, Toyota etc had dropped their winch. Not the case when I checked after the interview ended.
The Grenadier can use all 8 gears in low range at up to 45
Danke!
Thank you Sassan!
Interesting answers with regard to the OBDII diagnostics. Would it really be the case that Autophix have it wrong on stating Ineos have "locked" the access?
With your relationship with Autophix, maybe that's something you could follow up on. It seems odd UK/Oz vehicles have no success with third party readers whilst US vehicles appear to be more open to code deletes.
Given all the talk from Ineos about open access and the ability to fix in the field then they should find an official partner to develop a full diagnostic tool with.
I can't do anything without a volunteer Grenadier. If someone wants to try, I'll get all the scanners Autophix has and see if they work, plus my own. And yes, this is important re talk about fix.
@@L2SFBC Hopefully, there's an interested owner close to you that would help out. I'll put a post in a few groups if that's OK with you?
I was wondering if you could facilitate an intro between Ineos technical and Autophix (assuming the latter saw a commercial interest in this) and they could take Ineos up on their offer to support third party vendors with access to in house technical data.
A bespoke Grenadier unit that had a degree of support from Ineos and allowed additional functionality such as service counter reset and TPMS sensor relearning would be a real winner.
Sure happy to connect an owner with Autophix. They'll need to be prepared to generate a fault on their car which lights up a warning, such as disconnecting a wheel speed sensor, MAF sensor or something so that can be detected and cleared which is the real test. Autophix in Australia just distribute, no tech people. That conversation would need to be between INEOS UK HQ and the OBD2 people, and all that's needed is a list of codes and descriptions. I'm not sure INEOS would be up for that, but they have talked at length about self-fix...
Presently operating an Australian delivered vehicle in North America. Can confirm that the MX+ OBD reader operates the same on our vehicle as a US.
Previous Foxwell Diagnostics device could not clear codes however so something is up.
I don’t agree that having a locker in reduces wheel spin - it often increases it as it forces both wheels to spin and at the same speed when possibly one might not. Almost always when I see a vehicle with lockers engaged one or more wheels is actively spinning and churning up the ground.
Lockers definitely help avoid wheelspin but when it does happen it will be worse.
@@L2SFBC Yeah that’s fair. I agree. Just see many vehicles spinning like crazy 😵💫 with lockers engaged.
I have a D3 with factory rear e locker. I recently installed a manually activated front e locker. I still have a long way to go, learning how the vehicle reaponds when I engage the front locker but so far I am impressed how little wheel spin i get, if any, when engaging front e locker to pull me out of river beds (whilst in rock crawl mode). I can the pulling effect using the front locker will be a great improvement in capability of the D3.
@@lyndonkapoor8823 Having the ability to just use the front locker should be standard as like MadMatt said, often you just need it to pull you up.
@jerrymyahzcat I totally agree! now that I have one and have experienced the benefits and being able to use it when and if needed. An independently activated front locker is a great addition to extra traction and recovery tool bag 🙂
Can you test the new everest traction control?
At some point yes