Fuel Economy, Tank Size, Range?

d1rty

New Member
Founding Guard
Just wanted to throw this out there, see what the community thinks.

Did some quick research and the BMW X7 with a similar motor (tuned at 335HP, so maybe this same engine on premium vs tuned for 87 octane?) is rated at 19 city and 24 highway.  I'd say the X7 is roughly similar size and weight, but will give the aero edge to the X7 by a good bit.

Still, does this mean we could see 20 MPG or better highway consumption?  Maybe.  Probably?

Couple that with a 100 liter (26 gallon) tank, and that's 500 mile range on the highway.  Not bad.

Thoughts?
 

Paachi

Contributor
Founding Guard
Yeah that seems like a good assumption. However bigger wheels, aero do take a heavy toll of the mpg. For example an OM606 in the E300 sedan gives 30-35 mpg to folks (based on Fuelly and desktop research). My OM606 in a square jawed suv with 32” off road tires, in a slightly different tune gives 18 mpg on highway. 

if they change the engine map to be torque rich and de tune  it for longevity it might move the numbers differently as well. 
On a related but different note, isn’t the gas tank aft of the rear axle where traditionally spare tires go in passenger SUVs? I wonder what options we’ll have for aftermarket tanks to increase range. That would have been the one option I would pay Ineos for from factory. Put it between the frame rails or something.

most of the aftermarket tanks that companies like Long Range and Brown Davis make are designed for the spare wheel well aft of the rear axle. I think they make a between the frame rails one only for the Jeep and apparently they ran into a lot of figment issues during early stages
 

d1rty

New Member
Founding Guard
@Paachi I hear you.  My refreshed 2014 Tundra came with a 100 liter/26.5 gallon tank.  I want to say it was 2015 or 2016 when Toyota rolled out a new 36 gallon tank, and Transfer Flow, an aftermarket provider have a drop in (lift in?) replacement that holds 48 gallons.  Not cheap, but if you need the range...
 

TnUplander

Contributor
Grenadier Ordered
Had really hoped for a diesel offering the in the US but petrol only.  I had this same gas engine in a BMW X5.  Good engine and got about 20 to 22 MPG combined using non-ethanol fuel (usually).  But as noted by others, the retune for torque coupled with pushing a brick is going to hurt.  Once I learned there was no diesel option coming here I cancelled my reservation.  Every light truck manufacturer in the states now offers a 6 cylinder 3.0L diesel in their 1/2 ton truck.  For INEOS to state there is no business case for a diesel in the market strikes me as an indication they are after the soccer mom set more than the work off road set they claim to target.  Or maybe there just aren't that many of us?   So...much as I did not really want to I will end up with a GMC AT4 with a diesel.   I did speak with a Land Rover dealer and asked if LR was bringing a diesel to the US market and drew this reply - "No, they are not, but you are the third person to ask me that today."
 

Paachi

Contributor
Founding Guard
@TnUplander. I feel your pain. But let me share my perspective as someone who has a diesel. We tend to romanticize diesels here in the US because it’s unobtanium. That being said if you peruse through Jeep forums, and read the JL Wrangler and JT Gladiator diesel feedback it’s paints an interesting story. 
The modern diesels give excellent fuel economy and as being diesels they have loads of grunt down low. However they are finicky. Bad high sulphur fuel and the engine craps out, if you run low or out of adblue then engine goes into limp mode. Not to mention the crap ton of electronics and systems to combat diesel emissions (which 1 ton trucks are exempt from I think).

Now my diesel is an IDI old school unit so many of these challenges don’t apply but then it doesn’t give that much amazing fuel economy. Plus in remote areas finding diesel is a 1 out of 3-4 station chance. That being said the low down grunt is still amazing.I love a good clatter diesel in an off-road vehicle but in todays terms I’d rather take a petrol engine that’s simpler and less finicky. Look at the 4Runner. It’s a petrol only car and it’s amazing. People take it serious off roading and overlanding. I just hope the BMW unit in the Gren is robust and simple to fix
 

TnUplander

Contributor
Grenadier Ordered
I have a 2009 GMC 2500, a Case tractor, and a Kubota RTV.  No issues with any.  I cover most of the midwest and southwest with a bird dog every year.  I use 4 wheel drive to get out of places I did not really mean to get in to.  In the meantime the bird dog is bothered by the notion of having to stop more often for fuel.   

?
 

stickshifter

Contributor
Grenadier Ordered
Just to echo Paachi's post: the 3.0 Ecodiesel in the Jeep Wrangler and Gladiator seems to be having problems with the DEF system causing limp mode (for various reasons), and with overheating. Both the links below are from the same YouTube channel (Casey250), but they include experience from a different YouTube channel (The Story Till Now). Neither of these guys are Jeep-haters, or diesel-haters. On the contrary, they love Jeeps and were pretty psyched to run the diesel engines. Granted, both of these guys have gone up in tire size, and run pretty heavy rigs, but their reviews are worth checking out.

However, I have no idea whether there are lessons here for the 3.0 BMW diesel in the Grenadier. They are different engines with different cooling and DEF systems. Lastly, if you live in North America the discussion is sort of moot, since Ineos is not planning on bringing the diesel here. But here are the links for those interested.

In the first video, go to 9:50 to see two Jeep diesels simultaneously experience a reduction in power due to overheating (on the highway):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QX9c3U4C24

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_fOrht9_7ww
 

Spjnr

Contributor
Grenadier Ordered
Founding Guard
I think the Jeep Ecodiesel has been a bit of a disappointment in both the JL and JT. Even though we didn't get that setup in the UK, ive followed it from its initial announcement until its release, and up to now. The issues that have stemmed from it seem to be from the emissions equipment, and cooling.

I have more faith in the BMW powerplant than the FCA one, and im sure Magna/INEOS have really dialled in the cooling/reliability of this engine for its intended use.

time will tell
 

ChasingOurTrunks

Contributor
Founding Guard
I would absolutely love a Diesel grenadier. I'd love to be able to putt around to that glorious rumble rattle, and it's a rig that SHOULD have a diesel option in my opinion. 

But that's objectively the wrong choice these days for everything except towing huge loads, and the Gren isn't designed for that. If a person needs to haul a 15,000 lbs trailer in hill country, a Diesel is still probably a good choice, but that puts you in the "big truck" segment (i.e. F-250 range) not in the segment the Grenadier is playing in.

Gas is far more available everywhere, and doesn't have the same issues with ad-blue (called DEF here). As much as a diesel motor might get a person an extra 100 miles between fuel stops, on a longer journey you also have to account for DEF, and not only are diesel stations in remote areas sometimes rare, its one more critical fluid that you need to keep track of and either acquire locally (i.e. at that 1 in 4 station that sells diesel, maybe, if they got their shipment that week) or bring with you. DEF in my neck of the woods is not delivered by the same people who deliver the diesel fuel, and I have seen situations (like in the interior of BC right now) where the UPS trucks full of DEF fluid are just not getting where they need to go. Gas on the other hand -- motorcycles are literally everywhere in the world, and that means so too is gas, and it's a lot less complicated to tune an engine to run on sub-87 octane gasoline than it is to get a modern diesel to run on anything other than the Ultra Low Sulphur Diesel mandates for sale at North American fuel stations. 

Practically speaking with modern gas cars, they are incredibly efficient. On a longer journey where range actually matters, you'd either need to bring a few litres of DEF to make the diesel do what the diesel needs to do, or you'd need to bring a few litres of gasoline, and that makes the difference in rage a bit of a wash. Gasoline is for sure more volatile in that context, but that risk can be mitigated.

And the modern diesel emissions systems do not lend themselves to longevity the way the old ones did. Injectors go on diesels, usually around the 6-figure mark on the Odometer, and fixing it costs a ton. And the emissions regs and the systems they necessitate mean that the modern diesels are extremely vulnerable to dirty fuel, or even clean fuel that is sub standard (high sulphur diesel). 

So, a diesel is objectively the wrong choice for 99% of what people will be using the Grenadier for. And if it was available in North America....I would absolutely go with the diesel over the gas because I like it better ? But I'd be doing so knowing it was the wrong choice. 
 

stickshifter

Contributor
Grenadier Ordered
Reply to ChasingOurTrunks - Yeah, I couldn't agree more. I don't know much about the German diesels - maybe their DEF systems are more reliable - but I wouldn't buy any of the diesel trucks here in the U.S. unless I was towing heavy, and regularly. Only then is it worth dealing with the costly and finicky emissions systems, higher maintenance costs, etc.  Until they improve modern diesels, gas engines will be more reliable, and you can get good low-end torque either from a gas V8, or from a gas V6/I6 with forced induction.
 

AZGrenadier

Contributor
Founding Guard
I would have loved to see a smaller NA V8 in these. I get that the power curves on the turbo are better but I have had phenomenal luck with the 2 4.7s and the 4.6 Toyota’s I have had. Haven’t put a dime in over 750k other then routine maintenance. 
 

stickshifter

Contributor
Grenadier Ordered
AZGrenadier said:
I would have loved to see a smaller NA V8 in these. I get that the power curves on the turbo are better but I have had phenomenal luck with the 2 4.7s and the 4.6 Toyota’s I have had. Haven’t put a dime in over 750k other then routine maintenance. 

Yeah, I’ll take a NA V8 over forced induction every day. I know they aren’t efficient, and they may not be objectively better in terms of power curve or some other metric, but I prefer the way they drive, and the greater simplicity - especially if we’re talking pushrod V8. Those Toyota engines you mention are legendary when it comes to reliability. Be great if the Tacoma had a small V8 option.

when it comes to efficiency, the official estimates can be a little misleading. A FI 6 will consume a lot of fuel if you are working it hard. 
 

d1rty

New Member
Founding Guard
Catching up on the thread and reading about wanting a V8 made me remember the Local Motors Rally Fighter.  Short version it was a crowd-sourced design for a streetable off-road buggy.  Original plans was for BMW I6 petrol or diesel.  By the time sales to the public came around, it was GM LS3/e-rod instead.  Justification was that for the North American market it made more sense - was lighter, cheaper, less complex, more power, and parts from any GM dealer.  Most of which is likely the opposite for ROW - likely much easier for Ineos to source the BMW motors.  Just funny how things work out some times.

The cool thing about the Local Motors was that it was the "80% lower" of kit cars.  You actually went to their facility in Arizona, and you had to build some of it so that it could be titled as a kit car - and as an end-run for Local Motors to avoid having to do emissions and crash testing.  LM figured out how much of the sub-assemblies could be pre-built and still be a kit car, and they had a great facility with all the lifts and equipment you'd need - and trained staff watching you closely so you couldn't screw it up.

I always wanted a Rally Fighter.  Missed out.  Not missing out on the Grenadier.  LS3 (or equivalent current LS-series crate motor) variant for US please?  LOL.
 

stickshifter

Contributor
Grenadier Ordered
d1rty said:
Catching up on the thread and reading about wanting a V8 made me remember the Local Motors Rally Fighter.  Short version it was a crowd-sourced design for a streetable off-road buggy.  Original plans was for BMW I6 petrol or diesel.  By the time sales to the public came around, it was GM LS3/e-rod instead.  Justification was that for the North American market it made more sense - was lighter, cheaper, less complex, more power, and parts from any GM dealer.  Most of which is likely the opposite for ROW - likely much easier for Ineos to source the BMW motors.  Just funny how things work out some times.

The cool thing about the Local Motors was that it was the "80% lower" of kit cars.  You actually went to their facility in Arizona, and you had to build some of it so that it could be titled as a kit car - and as an end-run for Local Motors to avoid having to do emissions and crash testing.  LM figured out how much of the sub-assemblies could be pre-built and still be a kit car, and they had a great facility with all the lifts and equipment you'd need - and trained staff watching you closely so you couldn't screw it up.

I always wanted a Rally Fighter.  Missed out.  Not missing out on the Grenadier.  LS3 (or equivalent current LS-series crate motor) variant for US please?  LOL.

I am fully with you on wishing the North American model was sourced with more American parts - starting with an LS3, and Dynatrac axles. I had never even heard of Carraro until the "Frame and Axles" build video came out from Ineos. I do think a bit about ease of access to parts with the Grenadier. Of course all cars today have a global supply chain, but in the absence of a national dealer network, a vehicle sourced mostly from Europe gives pause. The engine and transmission aren't a concern, since both are common here in the U.S. In addition to being found in multiple BMWs, the B58 is also in the Toyota Supra, and the ZF is ubiquitous (for good reason). I suppose by the time we would need suspension components, bottlenecks in the global supply chain will be resolved!
 

ChasingOurTrunks

Contributor
Founding Guard
My thinking is that I'm glad they are making the same rig everywhere in the world and not sourcing different parts depending on where we are. That's what Ford has done with the Ranger, and the results are a tangible difference in quality and capability between the RTW spec ranger and the NA spec one. 

This is a very low-volume vehicle -- 30,000 units is a pittance compared to Jeep (Hundreds of thousands of Wranglers alone per year in the US). Assuming they max-out that 30,000 units, it won't all be in North America, but let's even be generous and say 90% of them are. When we get down to the brass tacks -- How many ships containers need to be full of parts to service those 27,000 Grenadiers? I'd wager that somewhere between 100 and 500 50-foot containers full of parts could stock a warehouse that wouldn't run out of key pieces in our lifetimes. The largest container ships can carry upwards of 20,000 containers, with bigger ships on the way, and so in the scale of global shipping it should be very easy for Ineos to keep things in stock for us in North America. FWIW, Triumph motorcycles have this model; it used to be a 2-3 week wait to get parts from the U.K., but a few years back they opened up a single warehouse in the USA, and now I can get parts delivered next business day even up here in Canada. So as long as the parts on stateside, which is a very small number of containers to ship, they will be easily available. 

In other words, there will be no problem getting parts to the USA, and from there the excellent trucking and shipping infrastructure that allows fresh avocados to get from California to Vermont in February will kick in, and none of us will be wanting for parts (assuming they are produced and shipped). Sourcing American parts, at that point, from a practical perspective of availability is therefore not likely to be any advantage. But for the rest of the world -- well, it's a lot easier to get things from Europe to Asia and Africa than it is to get things from the USA to even Latin America, let alone places further afield, so I think relying on European parts suppliers makes a ton of sense for a vehicle that is "built for the world". For instance, if you travel to almost anywhere in Africa, there's a 90% chance you'll have to route through a European airport. That means wherever I happen to be on that continent, I can probably get the part I need to the nearest major city within a day or two. 

The above is all assumptions of course -- assumptions based on rumours and the "old way" of doing parts distribution. Warehouses are relatively cheap, and with Ineo's promises of serviceability within 1 hour in so many places, I imagine they will have a parts distribution network to facilitate that experience. It's a much smaller task for Ineos than it is for the typical car company.
 

d1rty

New Member
Founding Guard
@ChasingOurTrunks You're absolutely correct.  And add to the fact that the engines are BMW, and the transmissions are ZF which are widely used, particularly by BMW, and the major powertrain parts that would be in need of replacing have the supply chain mostly handled by partners, too

So what are the unique bits?  Axles and transfercase, but based on Magna engineering, and the desire to make a stout, reliable vehicle, I'm willing to be those won't exactly be in high demand for replacement.  So lights and body panels then?  If you get in a fender bender, it could be a while before replacement parts arrive - or hopefully those will be the bits that are stockpiled in distro centers around the globe.

All we've seen are smart guys that know business so far from Ineos.  I'm sure they've thought through these things.  And being in North America, I (we?) can let ROW sort out the first year issues this coming summer while we wait until 2023.  Makes the wait a little easier.
 

PL1

Contributor
I agree with the points raised above.  The Grenadier is a 'world vehicle' and BMW (engine) parts are far more widely distributed that GM engine parts. 
Think about the future of Grenadier for a moment:  Does INEOS / Sir Jim & Co really see themselves as a vehicle manufacturer 10 or 20 years into the future?  Probably not.  It's possible the BMW engine decision was made for strategic reasons.  M-B has the G-wagen,  Toyota has the Land Cruiser,  LR (for better or worse) has the new Defender, and BMW has no vehicle in this market segment.  If the Grenadier succeeds in this niche worldwide, it could be an acquisition target by BMW. 
If the past is any indicator, look what BMW has done to revive the MINI brand.  

Got a little off topic there...  Sorry.
 

AZGrenadier

Contributor
Founding Guard
In one video or interview they mention that they couldn’t find any other suitable power plant that the manufacturer could reliably provide for 10 years. This was a big reason that they went with the BMW vs something else. 
 

stickshifter

Contributor
Grenadier Ordered
That makes a lot of sense. BMW started making the straight six in 1933, and the B58 is a direct descendant of that engine; 90 years is some serious staying power. It also makes sense that a possible merger between BMW and Ineos has been discussed - it would allow BMW to compete against Mercedes in an area they never have before. I don't see BMW getting into heavy duty trucks like the Unimog, but having a G-Wagon competitor might be something they would value - especially with someone else funding the R&D, and - theoretically - establishing the brand. Having said all that - since this whole post is in the realm of the hypothetical - I'd still prefer the naturally aspirated GM 6.2 V8. The aluminum block version is the lightest, most compact V8 for its displacement in the North American market. There is also an iron block version, which is - of course - much heavier, but still very compact, and lighter than any other iron block V8 of similar displacement. GM V8s are relatively cheap, and in North America, widely available. Parts are also cheap and widely available. Its much more powerful than the B58; the 6.2 makes 420 HP, and 460 lb/ft torque (and there are higher output versions). It is very simple, and dead reliable. It is a real pleasure to drive, with good power at low rpms. It is - is  in my opinion - a much better fit for the Grenadier vision of a simple and reliable platform. My intended use is all over North America - so the lack of global support for a GM engine isn't a concern for me. I get that many people want to tour the world in their Grenadier - so I understand the case (in theory) for the B58 (BMW is a global brand). However, I'm skeptical that getting parts for a performance BMW engine will be any easier than for a GM engine in Mongolia or Madagascar. Its not like the B58 is a workhorse that's running in all kinds of boondock vehicles. Frankly, I'd rather drive across remote deserts in Africa with a NA GM V8 than a BMW 3.0 turbo. While both engines have multiple listings on Ward's Best, the GM engines have long been used in trucks and for work, while the B58 is found in performance sedans and crossovers. But now I'm sounding like a hater, and that's not my intention. Here's the reality: the folks at Ineos have chosen the B58 for North America, and that isn't likely to change. I'm excited about the Grenadier, and am fully rooting for its success.
 

Spjnr

Contributor
Grenadier Ordered
Founding Guard
As much as a GM v8 would be a cool proposition for the NA market, I think it would be exclusively for the NA market. 

Here in Europe we're paying $8-9 dollars a gallon for fuel, and are taxed to high heaven on big displacement powerful engines. The only reason the 3.0 I6 is able to go in the grenadier is because they're keeping under the sales cap. They're classed as a small manufacturer. 

The idea of a petrol v8 in a working vehicle over here is pretty much non existent, with them being reserved for luxury Suvs that are 100k and over. 

The big seller over here will be the diesel. It will tow well with plenty of low down torque, be far more efficient whilst doing so, and be what us Europeans (and aussies) are used to. The b57 and b58 are so similar, there was probably very little trouble in using both of them from a packaging standpoint, so they made sense I guess. 
 
Top