INEOS AsiaPac boss interview - part 4 of 4
Вставка
- Опубліковано 10 чер 2024
- #INEOS #INEOSAustralia #Grenadier
Part 4 of an interview with Justin Hoecvar, INEOS's AsiaPac boss:
00:00 Quartermaster
04:37 GVM upgrades, payloads, weights
12:28 final words, Apple Carplay
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @l2sfbc
Post questions as comments!
Follow me on Facebook:
/ robertpepperjourno
Support me on Patreon:
/ l2sfbc
Buy my books:
l2sfbc.com/where-to-buy/ - Авто та транспорт
Watch for my interview with INEOS tech chief Oliver Schlipf, coming soon as a 4-part series. And my other INEOS content:
www.youtube.com/@L2SFBC/search?query=ineos
I said it on the ineos forum, you are doing the lords work with these interviews. Plus you will have a ctek interview, wow. Keep it coming
The CTEK will be about their car charger. I'm hoping to get one on INEOS as well but not confirmed.
@L2SFBC yes, there is a lively discussion on the proper role of the 120 in the dual battery system. So the charger maybe a new solution like me who did not spec the dual battery system because I wanted to DIY.
That would be very interesting, I look forward to it
Thanks for a great series of videos on this subject. Great for Justin to give his time and speak so openly.
Brilliant interview all round.
Great work to Justin for being so honest and transparent. So refreshing to see from CEO's especially from auto manufacturers.
I just thought I'd come back here to say that my Grenadier had the promised "fix" done to Apple CarPlay operation yesterday (24 May 24) at Purnell Adventure in Sydney. CarPlay navigation now seems to work exactly as it should, with none of the lagging and freezing issues that had plagued it. Cheers!
Another thing to consider with payload… (it is subjective) is what features does it already have that would normally eat into other vehicles payload. Eg steal front/rear bar.
Thanks Robert for doing this 4 part interview. This has helped answer questions I had and coming directly from Justin give this a lot of credibility.
Which questions were those?
@@L2SFBC Manuals, spare parts availability and market INEOS is targeting
Good discussion on payload, and it is important. However, it’s easy to miss the issue of suspension performance across that range. Suspension has to do more than hold a load off the ground.
Most cars/SUVs have a payload less than 600kg because nobody has really figured out suspension that can deliver ride, handling, reliability, stability and safety over a greater range of load. Utes don’t have 1000kg because they have brilliant suspension, it’s because, as commercial workhorses, they are accepted to compromise in those areas - especially when they are unladen or at max gvm.
Ineos aren’t prepared to accept those compromises and have delivered better performance over a pretty decent payload range.
Air suspension is quite good at handeling across variable loads, but off-road it’s not that useful as it’s too stiff when you want ground clearance and maximum articulation.
I agree with the compromise but not with your assessment of payload. It is clear they targetted 1000kg for Grenadier based on early claims, this interview, and my forthcoming one with Oliver. The fact they could not deliver is because the car ended up heavier than planned, more like 2800kg not sub 2500kg, and there is a regulatory limit of 3500kg. The compromise they made was payload, not taking weight out and compromising robustness. I would and have argued that an overly robust vehicle with compromised payload is not a good tradeoff, and it's not like other 4x4s are breaking chassis or axles these days - Hilux anyone? Ranger? I would have preferred independent suspension and extra payload. However, Jim R decreed the car would have beam axles and be over-engineered, and it seems nobody wanted to argue the point.
@@L2SFBC True. I think the 1000kg was a pipe dream to be honest. My point on range is that an unladen Hilux (and co.) don’t drive great with no load. They ride harshly and it doesn’t take much of a mid-bump corner to skip at the rear. The Grenadier isn’t a Bentley but is way ahead of the Ute brigade in this respect. Maybe the overrun on kerb weight was a blessing in disguise. It was a couple of hundred kilos like that old Ute saying, “Throw a few bags of cement in the back and she rides just fine.”😀
The old utes rode better loaded because of your first point the suspension was too great a compromise over the load range. Nowadays we have parabolic leaf springs made of more ductile metal, progressive coils, better tyres, improved NVH etc etc etc so that's less of a problem, and payloads have become smaller as well. My view remains the Grenadier is under-payloaded and there should have been less of a focus on ultra-robustness and more on payload. There comes a point when adding more strength is pointless, and extra weight is a vicious circle the reverse of the Chapman ideals.
Extremely interesting, thanks. If I had the money for a tougher 4wd I would defs get an Ineos, the high flow is the only thing that is a problem but I guess you can always fill into a can then into the car.
A great series Robert, thanks. My vehicle is going in for it's first service on 23rd May so hopefully the software update is ready. Other than that it has been a fantastic daily driver and work vehicle.
Sounds like they are doing what Ford does. Ford's F-150 axle capacity is 4.13 tons but the GVWR is 3.56 tons or below in North America. You can do a GVWR increase, but you pay more taxes. The difference is the Ford single cabs can have 1.5 tons payload. Will Ineos make a single cab chassis?
well worth a listen!
It will be public in due course preview for Members 👍
Great interview. Do you know if the android auto is also affected like the apple car play issue? Had my Grenadier for a year now and have tried with multiple android phones to connect with no success. Very happy with the Grenadier overall. Getting 8 updates outstanding done with first service this week so hoping system updates fix the issue
I have had no issues with Android in my Grenadier, I have a wireless Bluetooth dongle and it connects and works seamlessly
I believe a single cab or at least an extended cab should be an option, that way the unladen weight would be reduced so the payload increased, plus a longer bed would be available which is a nice option to have. Yes all the extra tooling and manufacturing complexity would increase cost but it would certainly broaden the buyer spectrum.
It would but it's also a commercial decision; development cost vs revenue.
The extended wheelbase on the quartermaster means the majority of the engineering has already been done. All you would need is an extra panel in the roof. Then you would have a long wheelbase wagon or a two seat troopy.
@@L2SFBC I believe there is a market for a single cab quartermaster especially in the usa where off road campers that are based on pick ups are rather popular. Also in many markets, in europe especially, vehicles with payload greater than a ton are taxed less and exempt from some regulations.
Maybe another solution for redused weight would be one taken from it's inspiration ,the old defender, the use of aluminum body panels.
Safety stars? 🤣🤣🤣🤣 You are buying a tank that will drive away from most accidents. I doubt a single buyer cares about that. If it was IFS I would not have ordered one, eventually 2.
Think you'd be surprised. Note Justin's "we're not chasing stars" comment which is a little dismissive - safety is not an area they play in, so they play it down. As I said in a previous comment, listen to what's not said, and how what is said, is said. There is your information.