INEOS Grenadier

SkiWill

Member
6. How's the interior feel "fully loaded" with humans, including rear bench seat.

Again, not palatial - but not bad and far better than the competition. I asked three folks about my size and we sat three in the back with me in the middle, and I would have been comfortable sitting there for a while. It's WAY better than a Jeep or a mid-side truck middle seat. The rear seat is also quite elevated so there's a fairly good view, even out the front. Here is a pic with blurred faces to respect privacy of the others in the photo who were kind enough to play along that shows the room in the middle seat:

View attachment 725889
Awesome! Thank you so much for doing that. What about the center console? Were you straddling it?

Another question, which may not have come up: is there any word on the USA gasoline only version requiring regular or premium gasoline?
 

ChasingOurTrunks

Well-known member
^Wonderful, thanks so much. I owe you guys a beer !

I'm not gonna comment on the donut trip or you friends' Tilley. Instead I'll ask what you thought of the sunroofs or whatever they're called.
The man in the Tilley is the real deal - I didn't know him at all before, but got to chatting at the event as he's looking at the Gren to replace his beloved 110 that he left behind after 20 years living and travelling in Africa. I personally like the Tilley -- and every adventurer needs a hat. I don't know too many other brands of hat that can claim to be digested by an elephant and still be in good shape. Those things do the job and are indestructible. Which, coincidentally, is exactly how I'd describe how the Grenadier looks!

The donut was a honey dipped.

As for the sunroofs, I loved them. They reminded me of boat windows, which makes sense given they need to be robust and waterproof. They look easy to use and let lots of light in, and they are a simple and clean latch design. But, what is particularly interesting is that I heard the Ineos guy say that they are planning three rack options -- a full rack, a 3/4 rack that keeps the sunroofs open, and a basket rack at the rear. The 3/4 rack that leaves the sunroofs open would have enough space on it for an RTT and a row of Jerry cans, so it's big even if you want the sunroofs open. I am 100% getting them on mine, but will wait to see the full length rack. They don't yet know how the full rack will work with those sunroofs; I think one idea might be an insert, which is what Gobi uses on their JK racks and it works quite well but we shall see!
 

ChasingOurTrunks

Well-known member
Awesome! Thank you so much for doing that. What about the center console? Were you straddling it?

Another question, which may not have come up: is there any word on the USA gasoline only version requiring regular or premium gasoline?
Yes I was - sorry I didn't get a picture! But yes my feet had to go on either side of the centre console. However, I still wouldn't describe is as cramped or anything -- I didn't think to take a photo of it, but if it was uncomfortable or annoying I probably would have noticed it.

No word on gasoline but candidly I would be absolutely shocked if it required a specific octane since it's a world-wide vehicle. If it requires 93 Octane, but it can only get "Transferred to your tank in a laundry jug" octane locally, it ain't going to be a good time. But, that's so painfully obvious, and they caught so many details that are way less obvious, that I would assume they covered this too. I am curious though so I'll keep an ear out and report back if I hear anything.
 

ABBB

Active member
Many thanks, [mention]ChasingOurTrunks [/mention]

Appreciate you repping the forum and I hope you enjoyed the donut!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 

klahanie

daydream believer
The man in the Tilley is the real deal
Oh, I'm only funnin (mostly ;)). Actually I was an early adopter (ahem) and the original lasted decades before it was retired well before it's time sadly covered in roofing tar, which btw is much tougher to remove than elephant poop, or so I imagine. 😄

Thanks for the sunroof review.

So you're in for sure ?! First one in town, YVR yes ?
 

ChasingOurTrunks

Well-known member
I'm 100% in, if things keep going the way they are going. Realistically due to COVID restrictions our current rig still has a lot of life in it, so we'd have to be cautious about the need for two vehicles of this type as I originally had the vision of replacing my current rig with this so it might be a few years further in the future, but honestly I have no hesitations about this vehicle. I'm based out of YEG so this represented a 6-hour round trip, but it was a great day out with the family and my son was apparently the first kid to crawl around a Grenadier. He loved it, for what it's worth -- he is only 2 years old and refers to the Grenadier as "beep beep" whenever he sees it on YouTube or on my trip planning wall, so he had a lot of enthusiastic "beep beeps" when he got to see the real thing.
 

klahanie

daydream believer
We have 12.5 more years of ICE sales, so if u get a new one next year, and the vehicle is commercial grade and meant to last 20+ years you could drive it well until they stop selling fuel for non commercial use. (Which I assume government would do first, as industry and farming probably won't be able to switch to electric as easily as consumers)

The idea of a commercial grade vehicle meant to last decades is the biggest appeal to me for this vehicle ...
Been thinking more on this ...

... not only the 2035 end of ICE sales but also the Net Zero by 2050 - meaning decarbonizing transportation.

If one believes this action won't be kicked down the road yet again, or even imagines, as I do, that events will force it - and maybe sooner, then does that play into your purchasing desicion for this vehicle ?

For me I don't foresee an ideal, fullsome use for 10 or 15 years. Rather, it might be something I'd like to keep, and be able to use, for much longer - much like some neighbourhood cars from the '60s and '70's. Also would want it to last because of the high purchase cost.

I ask here because the Grenadier is new, a niche vehicle and it looks to be designed for a robust and long service life.

Any predictions on the practicality of owning and operating one after 20 or 25 years ? Sure, fuel should be available but then again, life got a lot tougher for smokers after the tide turned (expense, restrictions, public disapproval etc).

I guess this is partly dependant on ones age, but does anyone share this concern over buying a Grenadier amid the ongoing transition away from gas and diesel fuel ?
 

SkiWill

Member
Been thinking more on this ...

... not only the 2035 end of ICE sales but also the Net Zero by 2050 - meaning decarbonizing transportation.

If one believes this action won't be kicked down the road yet again, or even imagines, as I do, that events will force it - and maybe sooner, then does that play into your purchasing desicion for this vehicle ?

For me I don't foresee an ideal, fullsome use for 10 or 15 years. Rather, it might be something I'd like to keep, and be able to use, for much longer - much like some neighbourhood cars from the '60s and '70's. Also would want it to last because of the high purchase cost.

I ask here because the Grenadier is new, a niche vehicle and it looks to be designed for a robust and long service life.

Any predictions on the practicality of owning and operating one after 20 or 25 years ? Sure, fuel should be available but then again, life got a lot tougher for smokers after the tide turned (expense, restrictions, public disapproval etc).

I guess this is partly dependant on ones age, but does anyone share this concern over buying a Grenadier amid the ongoing transition away from gas and diesel fuel ?
I work in the energy industry, and, for whatever it is worth, I think the goals of no ICE sales by 2035 and net zero by 2050 are, unfortunately, aspirational. Fact of the matter is that presently we have nowhere near the production of minerals required to meet the needs of battery makers to end production of ICE vehicles by 2035, and it's not even close. I hear a lot of arguments about recycling, which will be necessary in the future, but you still have to complete the initial buildout. Cars last for 10-20 years, so it's not like we can recycle batteries from one car today to make 10 cars tomorrow.

Pacific Northwest National Lab has an excellent battery research program which I follow. One of their consultants indicated that current supply of materials gets us to maybe 20% ish of the way to no ICE cars by 2035. Automakers are already running out of batteries and cannot make electric cars not because they don't sell, but because they can't get batteries. The expectation is that hybrids will be around for a long time to come simply because there's no way to meet the staggering material demand.

Assuming that we could meet those demands, we then have to more than double the electrical transmission infrastructure to facilitate car charging in remote locations plus an increase in renewables which drives further demand for battery energy storage from a grid perspective. The fundamental physics indicate that we are moving from energy dense sources (fossil fuels) to energy sources which are not nearly as energy dense such as batteries, wind, solar, etc. This means we have to mine way more material, run way more wiring, more transmission towers, and have heavier vehicles for the same range. That means just to get to the energy demand of today (never mind tomorrow) we need WAY more infrastructure, and it took us over 100 years to build what we have. To say that we can more than double that infrastructure in 15-30 years when it has become far more difficult to permit and acquire right of ways to build that infrastructure, there's already a craft labor shortage to maintain the infrastructure that we currently have, and that everyone will accept the requisite higher costs is a fairly unlikely scenario under such a short timeframe.

If we buy Grenadiers and can't find fuel in 20 years for them I'll be shocked, but maybe it also means that we did a much better job addressing energy needs and environmental challenges than I thought we would. In which case, I'd be more than happy that I overpaid somewhat for my Grenadier or didn't get quite 20 years of full-time service out of it. Remember, fossil fuels still provide about 85% of our primary global energy. Replacing that 85% with something else that is less energy dense, by laws of physics, will not be easy nor as fast as many of us would like.

This is all from my perspective as an actual engineer with actual project experience and not a political statement one way or the other since politics ruins everything.

If you want a Grenadier and can afford it, go for it. It will be one of millions upon millions of ICE vehicles built per year through the 2020s and into the 2030s.

For me personally, if they make a 7 seat Grenadier in a few years, I'll buy one. For day to day, our family will use an EV when they make a reasonably affordable and practical 7 seater EV and the Grenadier on remote trips.
 

klahanie

daydream believer
I work in the energy industry, and, for whatever it is worth, I think the goals of no ICE sales by 2035 and net zero by 2050 are, unfortunately, aspirational. Fact of the matter is that presently we have nowhere near the production of minerals required to meet the needs of battery makers to end production of ICE vehicles by 2035, and it's not even close. I hear a lot of arguments about recycling, which will be necessary in the future, but you still have to complete the initial buildout. Cars last for 10-20 years, so it's not like we can recycle batteries from one car today to make 10 cars tomorrow.

Pacific Northwest National Lab has an excellent battery research program which I follow. One of their consultants indicated that current supply of materials gets us to maybe 20% ish of the way to no ICE cars by 2035. Automakers are already running out of batteries and cannot make electric cars not because they don't sell, but because they can't get batteries. The expectation is that hybrids will be around for a long time to come simply because there's no way to meet the staggering material demand.

Assuming that we could meet those demands, we then have to more than double the electrical transmission infrastructure to facilitate car charging in remote locations plus an increase in renewables which drives further demand for battery energy storage from a grid perspective. The fundamental physics indicate that we are moving from energy dense sources (fossil fuels) to energy sources which are not nearly as energy dense such as batteries, wind, solar, etc. This means we have to mine way more material, run way more wiring, more transmission towers, and have heavier vehicles for the same range. That means just to get to the energy demand of today (never mind tomorrow) we need WAY more infrastructure, and it took us over 100 years to build what we have. To say that we can more than double that infrastructure in 15-30 years when it has become far more difficult to permit and acquire right of ways to build that infrastructure, there's already a craft labor shortage to maintain the infrastructure that we currently have, and that everyone will accept the requisite higher costs is a fairly unlikely scenario under such a short timeframe.

If we buy Grenadiers and can't find fuel in 20 years for them I'll be shocked, but maybe it also means that we did a much better job addressing energy needs and environmental challenges than I thought we would. In which case, I'd be more than happy that I overpaid somewhat for my Grenadier or didn't get quite 20 years of full-time service out of it. Remember, fossil fuels still provide about 85% of our primary global energy. Replacing that 85% with something else that is less energy dense, by laws of physics, will not be easy nor as fast as many of us would like.

This is all from my perspective as an actual engineer with actual project experience and not a political statement one way or the other since politics ruins everything.

If you want a Grenadier and can afford it, go for it. It will be one of millions upon millions of ICE vehicles built per year through the 2020s and into the 2030s.

For me personally, if they make a 7 seat Grenadier in a few years, I'll buy one. For day to day, our family will use an EV when they make a reasonably affordable and practical 7 seater EV and the Grenadier on remote trips.
Thanks for the thoughtful reply. I hadn't considered material shortage enough. What you say makes perfect sense.

You mentioned hybrids. I haven't looked in depth into the legislation but that might be the wiggle room - a ban on ICE only drive systems.

Agreed, retail gasoline most likely will be available. It's just the potential difficulty for the "little guy" I'm pondering.

Clearly there's a massive transition ahead. And though many countries countries have had some huge capital projects (my own, Canada particularly in power generation and transportation) it's hard to grasp the breadth of work required to pull this off.

I know Ineos has said they might release an EV model. But I expect the boxy body shape will change. And that's not going to work for us 😀

Thanks again for your perspective.
 

ChasingOurTrunks

Well-known member
I guess this is partly dependant on ones age, but does anyone share this concern over buying a Grenadier amid the ongoing transition away from gas and diesel fuel ?
I think it will be regional and we will see legislation that shifts focus to population centres. As in, it might not be allowable to drive an ICE rig in Toronto, but in Sioux Lookout in the North, ICE will still be allowed; this is what happened when the government mandated emissions testing on vehicles. They initially wanted "all cars" but eventually, cars registered outside of the major population areas (i.e. people who live in Northern Ontario) are allowed to skip the emissions tests (at least they were, it's been 10 years since I've lived there).

Same deal for ICE Grens - you won't see many of them in New York or Toronto in 2035, as EVs will be all the rage -- but get out of town a bit, and ICE won't be going away anytime soon in rural areas unless something magnificent happens with hydrogen very soon. And I wouldn't hold my breath - when I look at how much pressure has been on Governments from the EV crowd for years, and they are just now getting reasonably good at putting chargers into new infrastructure, with far-off promises of retrofitting existing roads, I think any major shifts in commercial/rural power generation for vehicles is farther away than 2035, especially with the materials context previously posted.

In short, I'm not worried about an ICE Gren getting 20 solid years of convenient use in an Overlanding context, assuming the other bits last that long.
 

SkiWill

Member
In short, I'm not worried about an ICE Gren getting 20 solid years of convenient use in an Overlanding context, assuming the other bits last that long.
I would say that is actually the far bigger risk than availability of gasoline in 20 years. This is a brand new car company which may or may not be supporting vehicles and having parts availability in 20 years. Granted, we may not really be able to afford that gasoline in 20 years beyond the weekend car show drive, but I don't know many vehicles that after a 20 year Overland service life are good for much more than a car show cruise or endless repairs or full restoration.
 
Last edited:

nickw

Adventurer
I think it will be regional and we will see legislation that shifts focus to population centres. As in, it might not be allowable to drive an ICE rig in Toronto, but in Sioux Lookout in the North, ICE will still be allowed; this is what happened when the government mandated emissions testing on vehicles. They initially wanted "all cars" but eventually, cars registered outside of the major population areas (i.e. people who live in Northern Ontario) are allowed to skip the emissions tests (at least they were, it's been 10 years since I've lived there).

Same deal for ICE Grens - you won't see many of them in New York or Toronto in 2035, as EVs will be all the rage -- but get out of town a bit, and ICE won't be going away anytime soon in rural areas unless something magnificent happens with hydrogen very soon. And I wouldn't hold my breath - when I look at how much pressure has been on Governments from the EV crowd for years, and they are just now getting reasonably good at putting chargers into new infrastructure, with far-off promises of retrofitting existing roads, I think any major shifts in commercial/rural power generation for vehicles is farther away than 2035, especially with the materials context previously posted.

In short, I'm not worried about an ICE Gren getting 20 solid years of convenient use in an Overlanding context, assuming the other bits last that long.
To your last point there - my main concern is complexity and easy of maintenance, we are not talking vintage Landcruisers here or even modern domestics pickups, the BMW stuff is notoriously difficult to work on when it comes to things like timing chains, turbo's, water pumps, etc. although I am not super familiar with the B58 platform.

With that said I'm the first person to come to the defense of modern rigs and while complex, are GENERALLY very reliable for daily use and typical useful life, I've had nothing but good luck from our VW's, BMW's and Audi's.....but use case with those and design life are pretty limited relative to a hardcore expedition rig, when we start talking 10/15/20+ years and rebuild cycles, IMO it starts to fall outside of use case for BMW engine/trans design parameters.

If it was me and I was in it for the long haul, I'd be doing all the research I could and convincing myself that the B58 platform was a) reliable for the time period I'd want to keep the vehicle and b) I knew what the shortcomings were and knew the fixes.
 
Last edited:

ChasingOurTrunks

Well-known member
To your last point there - my main concern is complexity and easy of maintenance, we are not talking vintage Landcruisers here or even modern domestics pickups, the BMW stuff is notoriously difficult to work on when it comes to things like timing chains, turbo's, water pumps, etc. although I am not super familiar with the B58 platform.

With that said I'm the first person to come to the defense of modern rigs and while complex, are GENERALLY very reliable for daily use and typical useful life, I've had nothing but good luck from our VW's, BMW's and Audi's.....but use case with those and design life are pretty limited relative to a hardcore expedition rig, when we start talking 10/15/20+ years and rebuild cycles, IMO it starts to fall outside of use case for BMW engine/trans design parameters.

If it was me and I was in it for the long haul, I'd be doing all the research I could and convincing myself that the B58 platform was a) reliable for the time period I'd want to keep the vehicle and b) I knew what the shortcomings were and knew the fixes.

I'm fully in agreement with what you've written. At www.theineosforum.com we've had some good chats about the B58; so far it seems to be pretty reliable in other platforms, but the main issues that the community has identified so far are the location of the timing chain and the fact that it's plastic. The plastic worries some folks; I'm less worried as I've got a motorbike with plastic bits inside the timing chain mechanism and it's been flawless so, properly designed, it's not an issue. But the timing chain sandwiched between the firewall and the engine mean it could be a big lift to do that service. And, I think as we all know, difficult and/or expensive maintenance is often skipped maintenance. At least it isn't a regular part that needs to be replaced -- once ever 60-100,000 kms, I would guess -- but when the time comes it MUST be done, and that won't be easy. Beyond that, there are a smattering of complaints about the valve cover gaskets, and a rare (but not rare enough that it's unheard of) coolant loss issue that has yet to be identified. And, right up with the Timing Chain are these solenoids that operate BMW's version of Variable Valve Timing that sometimes go wrong, and those are a headache to fix (but how much of a headache will depend on how much room is in the engine bay).

On that note, the Gren does look promising in that it's got a lot of room under the hood. It's not like a lot of modern cars where every cubic inch has been maximized for space. I think, from what I've seen and read, it should be fairly straightforward to drop in a totally different power plant if one was so inclined, and I think we'll likely see quite a bit of that in 5-10 years time.
 

klahanie

daydream believer
Anyone know if the B58 is an interference engine (searched but couldn't find) and what if any longevity benefit might come from the unique engine tune ?

Looking at this underhood pic and not seeing much room for engine rear timing/vanos work


Twenty years of over landing or hardcore expedition use I'd be happy as a clam. Don't see that for me. But yeah, light use just keeping it for 20+ support could be a problem. Good point.

Edit. Tho even the EV could be same concern. New vehicle, new mfr, time of great changes.
 
Top