Americas Front Driveshaft CV redesign

[Commodore]

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.

 

[parb]

Hey @Clark Kent how familiar are we talking about?
Replacing the rzeppa joint or something much more fundamental?

 

[CRH]

"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.

 

[Clark Kent]

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.

 

[Rayzar]

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

 

[Zimm]

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.

 

[Zimm]

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.

 

[evomind]

"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.

Im not saying you upsold it, you didnt design the darned thing...
I think I was hoping for a solution that wasnt a ton of money and worked.

I have serious doubts that Ineos is going to fix these retro actively.
Im sure they will redesign it for version 2 but we are stuck.
Some off-road overlander.
Sorry, just frustrated.

 

[evomind]

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

Oh they're listening.
I am sure they will incorporate many changes on the next truck

 

[C-Mack]

Just speculating of course, but I wouldn’t pin any hopes on a retroactive design fix ever being offered to existing owners from IA. If they do eventually reengineer the front axle it’ll be a moving forward solution only. Any pre-revision model years will take a big hit with resale value as enthusiasts flag them as not reliably modifiable at least in terms of suspension lifts.

What would be helpful would be meaningful discounts or incentives being offered to current owners first to upgrade to a future revised model should one be produced. Any pre-revision model years IA would be more than comfortable letting them slip deeper into the hands of the aftermarket and their solutions especially as warranties expire with age and mileage.

 

[Clark Kent]

Im not saying you upsold it, you didnt design the darned thing...
I think I was hoping for a solution that wasnt a ton of money and worked.

I have serious doubts that Ineos is going to fix these retro actively.
Im sure they will redesign it for version 2 but we are stuck.
Some off-road overlander.
Sorry, just frustrated.

No apology necessary, we're good

I think we are all a bit frustrated over this but it's also getting a fixation level of attention. I mean, as far as we know the failure rate is still low. It's the pile-on nature of every fault and hiccup that gets reported here that blows things out of perspective and as soon as we read about it we're all buying spare parts because someone said it would be a good idea. Don't misread me, I'm on my 2nd driveshaft but IA do know about it. It was discussed at the last podcast. IA have demonstrated over and over they are not good at communicating and we always assume their silence means they're doing nothing.

 

[Commodore]

Oh they're listening.
I am sure they will incorporate many changes on the next truck

This very thread is marked as “solved”. She post 72 in this thread. I don’t see them offering us an engineering fix. The aftermarket is going to have to fix it. Ineos just wants the cheapest way to get the truck to the end of warranty.

 

[evomind]

Why do you think they are listening? This very thread is marked as “solved”. Ineos’s official line is that they know nothing about a front driveshaft problem.

Im kind of being facetious, though I do think they will fix the design on the next version.
Us?
We are out of luck.

 

[evomind]

This very thread is marked as “solved”. She post 72 in this thread. I don’t see them offering us an engineering fix. The aftermarket is going to have to fix it. Ineos just wants the cheapest way to get the truck to the end of warranty.

Well they didnt really say "solved" as much as dismissed everything except perhaps "an issue with a rubber boot."

 

[Slov]

This issue is heavily making me rethink my order thats due to arrive in March 2026. Im concerned how often this would need to be replaced, how much ($300 or so roughly from what I'm seeing?), and no IA solution for existing owners... Most of the quirks I dont mind at all, but this is concerning. If the failure rate is low, are we talking 1-5%, 10% out of all vehicles?

 

[Dokatd]

This issue is heavily making me rethink my order thats due to arrive in March 2026. Im concerned how often this would need to be replaced, how much ($300 or so roughly from what I'm seeing?), and no IA solution for existing owners... Most of the quirks I dont mind at all, but this is concerning. If the failure rate is low, are we talking 1-5%, 10% out of all vehicles?

Failure rate will be 100%, it's just unpredictable in terms of mileage. Stock trucks stand to make it vastly longer than lifted trucks, but we have seen stock trucks fail with super low mileage as well.

 

[Commodore]

Failure rate will be 100%, it's just unpredictable in terms of mileage. Stock trucks stand to make it vastly longer than lifted trucks, but we have seen stock trucks fail with super low mileage as well.

I totally agree.

 

[Commodore]

Well they didnt really say "solved" as much as dismissed everything except perhaps "an issue with a rubber boot."

Yup, then response I was hoping to hear from Lynne was, “we are aware of the problem and believe the failure point is the design of the rubber boot. We are working with our vendor to improve this boot design. Vehicles will receive the updated design when it is available. Our anticipated timeline for the new boot is X months.” Of course, legal would never let her admit to the issue even though she admits that “Propshaft angle a hot topic from the very early days of engineering the Grenadier”…. So they knew this was a problem from the beginning but didn’t want to fix the design. Now they are really stuck.

The irony is that the actual production fix wouldn’t cost anything. Have Cararro turn then pinion angle up when the build the axle. No big deal. Instead they have stuck their heads in the sand. It will come back to haunt them.

 

[Dokatd]

Yup, then response I was hoping to hear from Lynne was, “we are aware of the problem and believe the failure point is the design of the rubber boot. We are working with our vendor to improve this boot design. Vehicles will receive the updated design when it is available. Our anticipated timeline for the new boot is X months.” Of course, legal would never let her admit to the issue even though she admits that “Propshaft angle a hot topic from the very early days of engineering the Grenadier”…. So they knew this was a problem from the beginning but didn’t want to fix the design. Now they are really stuck.

The irony is that the actual production fix wouldn’t cost anything. Have Cararro turn then pinion angle up when the build the axle. No big deal. Instead they have stuck their heads in the sand. It will come back to haunt them.

I agree, but I think we might be stuck between a rock and a hard place on future production. Currently the CV joint is reaching its max operating angle with or without a lift. To correct this you would turn up the pinion, but based purely on comments here it's suggested that the Cararro diff has a limited range it can operate in with the pinion turned up.

I don't personally buy that the diff is that close to being under oiled but if Cararro has a spec then it doesn't matter what I think unless they change that spec.

A high clearance diff would be a better bet. Get that pinion up on the top of the crown and gain a couple precious inches.

Just a mess all around though and only Ineos knows the truth and outcome at this point

 

[Slov]

Failure rate will be 100%, it's just unpredictable in terms of mileage. Stock trucks stand to make it vastly longer than lifted trucks, but we have seen stock trucks fail with super low mileage as well.

So, if I am waiting on my truck for March 2026 delivery...would anyone still recommend this vehicle? Pretty bummed out to hear about this. It's hard to find a simple body on frame modern 4x4 thats built to last if I have to replace a drive shaft prematurely at an unknown time. Everything else on the market in my eyes is crap in terms of durability due to hybrid systems sacrificing payload, cargo space, and require an engineer at the dealership to essentially fix.

Would you guys still buy the vehicle knowing this issue or advise someone to hold off?

 

[evomind]

So, if I am waiting on my truck for March 2026 delivery...would anyone still recommend this vehicle? Pretty bummed out to hear about this. It's hard to find a simple body on frame modern 4x4 thats built to last if I have to replace a drive shaft prematurely at an unknown time. Everything else on the market in my eyes is crap in terms of durability due to hybrid systems sacrificing payload, cargo space, and require an engineer at the dealership to essentially fix.

Would you guys still buy the vehicle knowing this issue or advise someone to hold off?

Depends on what you want to do with it.
If I had a do over I would probably find a real low mile last gen G Wagon and call it a day.