Front drive shaft broken

[Tom109]

As in 2 Rzeppas?

Yes. A DC is two u-joints with a centering ball. What about two Rzeppa's with a centering stud?

 

[Tom109]

Or just LR's Rotoflex at the t-case.

 

[Dokatd]

Yes. A DC is two u-joints with a centering ball. What about two Rzeppa's with a centering stud?

Certainly possible, just not a mainstream product. There are some crazy high end joints that can work at insane angles. But they are often to delicate or simply impractical for our purposes.

A Rotoflex is a terrible setup for high angles. The LR version was a disaster. Especially on lifted trucks. Great idea but they didn't hold up well in practice.

 

[Clark Kent]

Not sure if this has been posted before, but dates back to early May. It does not appear to be available as yet, but JRace suggest in a more recent video they have a full upgrade package launching soon.

View this content on Instagram

View this content on Instagram

That's the dev work I talked about in this post and this post.

 

[Commodore]

View attachment 7914317

How funny is that… that’s me, Ron Johnson, asking the question. I knew I read that they were 1310 u joints somewhere!

 

[pmatusov]

Or just LR's Rotoflex at the t-case.

Actually, doubling the Rotoflexes is not a bad idea, for a Land Rover. Very simple to implement, too.
I think that's how I am going to build a rear driveshaft for my Wagoneer with Rover axles.

 

[Logsplitter]

I’m following up here with a response to the insight @Jeremy996 gave about service and upgrade campaigns on the quiet as that hit a nerve with me regarding the prop shaft issue. The thread in question was stuck at Cape York.

That’s a useful insight, thank you. Quiet upgrades and service campaigns are definitely normal across the industry, and I appreciate that manufacturers rarely publish detailed failure data.
However, when it comes to the front prop-shaft CV joint on the Grenadier, this isn’t a cosmetic or convenience item — it’s a safety-critical drivetrain component. A sudden failure can leave a vehicle stranded or cause secondary mechanical damage, which is a genuine concern for anyone travelling remote or off-grid.
For that reason, I think many of us would simply like clarity on whether the front prop shaft has been updated in later builds to address the known CV joint issues. A new part number suggests something has changed, but without confirmation we’re left guessing whether our early vehicles are protected from repeat failures.

No one is asking INEOS to publish internal warranty data — just some reassurance that a known safety issue has been fully resolved, and whether updated components can be proactively fitted to earlier vehicles.
Quiet campaigns are normal, but transparency on safety-critical items is important for owners who rely on the vehicle in remote environments.

 

[Tazzieman]

As I'm prone to say, 10 positives are required to quell a negative.
Every system/ part failure is blown up on social media and forums to the point where the brand is distrusted.
At what point does the brand step in to address this potential loss of sales or brand exit?

 

[Logsplitter]

As I'm prone to say, 10 positives are required to quell a negative.
Every system/ part failure is blown up on social media and forums to the point where the brand is distrusted.
At what point does the brand step in to address this potential loss of sales or brand exit?

I get what you’re saying. It’s difficult to give positives about a prop shaft as there’s nothing to say if doesn’t fail I suppose.
Honest discussion and clear information from the manufacturer actually help build confidence in the brand, not undermine it.

 

[OkGo]

It definitely feels like the time has come for IA to at least explain what the fix path here is. Someone, and it could be one of us, is going to get hurt. Knowing how to reduce the chances of that happening, can't be optional. This isn't about social media or things being blown out of proportion, enough people have a problem that it's by and large luck if you don't get hit. For everyone it's literally just a case of when, not if.

 

[ECrider]

have purchased some insurance for when eventually get a new front prop.

tks to @landmannnn

 

[Logsplitter]

have purchased some insurance for when eventually get a new front prop.

tks to @landmannnn

Send me the link please . Isn’t it crazy though that we feel the need to buying such things on a new vehicle !

 

[Clark Kent]

Send me the link please . Isn’t it crazy though that we feel the need to buying such things on a new vehicle !

Yes it is. It was the secondary damage to the transmission and TC plumbing that prompted me to start talking about it, like your experience. @landmannnn has found an off-the-shelf solution

If the loop does its job the only secondary damage should be to your Calvin Kleins.

 

[landmannnn]

Yes it is. It was the secondary damage to the transmission and TC plumbing that prompted me to start talking about it, like your experience. @landmannnn has found an off-the-shelf solution

If the loop does it's job the only secondary damage should be to your Calvin Kleins.

It did need quite a bit of modification to fit, and the imperial bolts need replacing with metric.
(I do have Imperial and Whitworth tools but dont want a vehicle with a mixture)

 

[Logsplitter]

It did need quite a bit of modification to fit, and the imperial bolts need replacing with metric.
(I do have Imperial and Whitworth tools but dont want a vehicle with a mixture)

Is there a link somewhere where I can pick those up in the UK