The Grenadier Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to contribute to the community by adding your own topics, posts, and connect with other members through your own private inbox! INEOS Agents, Dealers or Commercial vendors please use the contact us link at the bottom of the page.

Americas Front Driveshaft CV redesign

Commodore

Grenadier Owner
Local time
1:35 PM
Joined
Apr 6, 2024
Messages
585
Location
Pasadena, CA, USA
Ineos crew, there is an issue with the front driveshaft CV at the transfer case side. The acute driveline angle generates heat causing the rubber on the CV to rip and spill grease. This leads to failure of the CV joint and ultimately immediate loss of forward propulsion. The failures have been well documented. Do you have plans to redesign this part or should owners start looking for their own permanent solutions?

This is a serious safety concern that needs to be resolved.
 
Solution
Ineos crew, there is an issue with the front driveshaft CV at the transfer case side. The acute driveline angle generates heat causing the rubber on the CV to rip and spill grease. This leads to failure of the CV joint and ultimately immediate loss of forward propulsion. The failures have been well documented. Do you have plans to redesign this part or should owners start looking for their own permanent solutions?

This is a serious safety concern that needs to be resolved.
Lynn didn't have the answer to hand but we discussed the CV joint boots failing by the nature of them operating at their extremes in terms of deflection. She took it back to her engineering team and they replied today.

Propshaft angle a hot topic from...
"No Golden Goose Solution" should have set the tone. I don't think I upsold it?

Understanding a problem helps make progress towards eventually solving it. Even if that means trying things that don't work. As more smart people apply their skills to this we will eventually bracket in on a fix or a liveable compromise in the interim. As I noted above and Jay pointed out several times, Ineos should fix this with a redesign. I won't share what Jay actually said but suffice to say he's frustrated that this has soaked up a lot of time that he won't get back when it's actually a factory problem. He was not complimentary towards Magna or Carraro for what he sees as rookie design mistakes for a rugged adventure vehicle.
One thing was clear. If you want to improve your odds of avoiding problems then stay away from suspension lifts at this point, or go ahead if you really must but do it with both eyes open and get familiar with the drivetrain.
The problem in UK and then later in EU, is a lot of us bought these vehicles as our last purchase before being forced to go electric. A gen2 vehicle will fix it for the rest of the world, we will still be with the original.
 
Hey @Clark Kent how familiar are we talking about?
Replacing the rzeppa joint or something much more fundamental?
No change to what you already know Parb. The rear CV is the most vulnerable and a lift places it at further risk of damage. If you're equipped and skilled to swap out that CV on the trail then you're good to go. As a minimum and if the trail permits, have the tools and knowledge to be able to remove a damaged front shaft so you can lock the centre diff and drive out in RWD.

The Golden Wonka Bar for you guys running lifts is the failure of driveshafts on standard vehicles. That's the best-worst thing that could have happened as it taints the driveshaft as compromised even before a lift is done. Still a warranty fight though.

We need the aftermarket to do a driveshaft safety loop/strap/ring for the TC end of the front driveshaft. It's still an uncommon failure but separation with secondary damage from a flailing shaft can disable the vehicle and become expensive very quickly. A safety ring would be cheap insurance especially if a warranty claim was rejected.
 
I hope ineos are reading these post's. It would serve them well to rectify this issue. They say theyre listening to their customer feedback so how much more feedback and concerns do you need. If it takes the aftermarket industry to try and resolve this then you have bigger problems. This should be priority #1. You dont have to design a new model just design a fix for the CV failures
 
It exceeds the angle. DC joints have a much lower operating limit than Rzeppa joints.
Ok.. I think the question is because I'm making a difference in my head between a CV, and a CV like we have here with built in boot to pinch and fail. The boot being the limiting factor of the cv's ability, not a mechanical limitation. I don't know the exact angle of the cv at the tcase, but from visual observation, I know I run worse on my fj40 with a DC, and it hasnt shown any wear, so i'm just looking at our issue here, thinking the a DC is fine, and much better than a CV with a boot.
 
I think you either use this truck as is with narrow 33-34's, or you drop the coin on a custom dynatrack front axle with a rotated center housing and driveshaft to match.

If you spent 95g usd, you're gonna be disappointed, If you're buying this as project in 2028 used for 30g usd, you're fine.
 
Back
Top Bottom