Safety Systems

[roozkhan]

Is there any crash test information on the vehicle? I suspect my wife and kid will drive this a lot and I want to make sure they're in a tank, not a death trap. Btw I don't care at all about the electronic safety crap. Just need to know that the truck will not roll over and if it does will not destroy the passengers.

 

[AnD3rew]

Is there any crash test information on the vehicle? I suspect my wife and kid will drive this a lot and I want to make sure they're in a tank, not a death trap. Btw I don't care at all about the electronic safety crap. Just need to know that the truck will not roll over and if it does will not destroy the passengers.

No, none public anyway

 

[Tom D]

Is there any crash test information on the vehicle? I suspect my wife and kid will drive this a lot and I want to make sure they're in a tank, not a death trap. Btw I don't care at all about the electronic safety crap. Just need to know that the truck will not roll over and if it does will not destroy the passengers.

Beware of official crash test data, it doesn’t take into account vehicle size and weight. So if a 5 star car weighing 1.5 ton hits a 2 star truck weighing 3 tons you’d rather be in the truck.

There was an interesting study published years ago in the UK based on real accidents and real injuries. All the cars at the top of the list were big and heavy, and all those at the bottom were small and light.

 

[roozkhan]

Beware of official crash test data, it doesn’t take into account vehicle size and weight. So if a 5 star car weighing 1.5 ton hits a 2 star truck weighing 3 tons you’d rather be in the truck.

There was an interesting study published years ago in the UK based on real accidents and real injuries. All the cars at the top of the list were big and heavy, and all those at the bottom were small and light.

Top of the list means safer I assume?

 

[Hicarus]

Beware of official crash test data, it doesn’t take into account vehicle size and weight. So if a 5 star car weighing 1.5 ton hits a 2 star truck weighing 3 tons you’d rather be in the truck.

There was an interesting study published years ago in the UK based on real accidents and real injuries. All the cars at the top of the list were big and heavy, and all those at the bottom were small and light.

Agreed, TomD, but it should also be pointed out that the relevant dynamics also play a part. The IG will not respond like a 5 star car any more than a HGV will respond like an IG or the 5 star car like a Ferrari.
Whilst you have a point with crash safety, the IG must be driven within its dynamic envelope -something a lot of non-4x4 drivers either forget or have never learnt. I spent several years involved with the (years-back) Range Rover cross-over incidents and found that none of the drivers i interviewed drivers were 4x4 experienced.
NCAP safety ratings can be misleading: crash safety is one point only.

 

[Boston Boy]

One new "safety system" I do not like or want is automatic lane assist. We had to drive 1000 miles round trip for a wedding a couple of years ago and rented a new Volvo V90 wagon (for the rare long trips over a one or two days like that I try to rent a car. Hertz gives me unlimited miles and it is less expensive than putting miles on you own car). It had all the safety bells and whistles including auto lane assist, which nudges the car back to the center of the lane mildly and then aggressively if you are going to cross the line. Our return trip was on a Sunday afternoon on a fast two lane, no divider road that was packed with fast weekend traffic. I was trying to stay close to the right hand edge of my lane (US we drive on the right side) so as to avoid the oncoming drivers who were riding the center line or drifting over. The car was NOT happy, constantly twitching the wheel to try to get me to move left. I finally pulled over and found in the manual how to turn that system off. In a perfect test world the system may have made sense. In the real world it was a hazzard.

 

[DaveB]

Beware of official crash test data, it doesn’t take into account vehicle size and weight. So if a 5 star car weighing 1.5 ton hits a 2 star truck weighing 3 tons you’d rather be in the truck.

There was an interesting study published years ago in the UK based on real accidents and real injuries. All the cars at the top of the list were big and heavy, and all those at the bottom were small and light.

The star rating is mainly there to compare similar vehicles to each other and is not compulsory.
Jeep made the mistake of submitting the Wrangler and Rubicon for crash testing in Australia and they got 3 out of 5 stars.
The Mustang was submitted because the police wanted to use it and it also got 3 out of 5 stars and a comment that rear seat passengers would not survive a crash.
In the UK the Wrangler only got a 1 star crash test so if you have ever let your family into a Wrangler you will love the Grenadier comparison


Have a look at the video labeled testing and development of the Grenadier

Testing and Development

ineosgrenadier.com

 

[bemax]

One new "safety system" I do not like or want is automatic lane assist. We had to drive 1000 miles round trip for a wedding a couple of years ago and rented a new Volvo V90 wagon (for the rare long trips over a one or two days like that I try to rent a car. Hertz gives me unlimited miles and it is less expensive than putting miles on you own car). It had all the safety bells and whistles including auto lane assist, which nudges the car back to the center of the lane mildly and then aggressively if you are going to cross the line. Our return trip was on a Sunday afternoon on a fast two lane, no divider road that was packed with fast weekend traffic. I was trying to stay close to the right hand edge of my lane (US we drive on the right side) so as to avoid the oncoming drivers who were riding the center line or drifting over. The car was NOT happy, constantly twitching the wheel to try to get me to move left. I finally pulled over and found in the manual how to turn that system off. In a perfect test world the system may have made sense. In the real world it was a hazzard.

I like the system in my daily driver but switch it off when necessary. That’s at two click operation without taking a hand from the wheel.
But I know some people who do not like it because they do not like technology rule their decisions.
I see it pragmatic. I use it like the autonomous cruise control as a relaxing feature.

 

[Tazzieman]

And don't base safety on the number of airbags a vehicle can "deploy".
Most accidents are incidents and have a cause ; driver error being a major one.
Knowing the vehicle's limitations in various conditions , under various loads and at various speeds can prevent many incidents.
I have made my sons drive my 50 year old agricultural Land Rover on dirt and sealed roads to ingrain these thoughts, and so far they are incident/accident free in around 40 years combined worth of driving.
Anecdotal yes , but the point is made.

 

[DenisM]

Is there any crash test information on the vehicle? I suspect my wife and kid will drive this a lot and I want to make sure they're in a tank, not a death trap. Btw I don't care at all about the electronic safety crap. Just need to know that the truck will not roll over and if it does will not destroy the passengers.

FWIW....
The YouTuber "Will" who produces LR Workshop&Expedition in one of his vids of last year addressed the crash safety of the Grenadier.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8b1y_OyIUs


At the 1m45sec mark says that there were 135 prototypes produced "...of which 15-20 were 'crashed' including roll-overs".
He was attempting to encourage Ineos to release the crash filming to demonstrate how much 'tougher' the Grenadier is compared to the "old Defender" and that "modern is good"!

 

[DCPU]

FWIW....
The YouTuber "Will" who produces LR Workshop&Expedition in one of his vids of last year

Has he lost interest in the project? Thought at one stage he was going to be a regular contributor.

 

[DenisM]

Has he lost interest in the project? Thought at one stage he was going to be a regular contributor.

According to his video list he seems to have paid his reservation ££ fee then changed his mind, got a refund to buy Defender parts (and he moved house....)

 

[emax]

constantly twitching the wheel to try to get me to move left

That's in particular funny if you want to avoid potholes: The car mercilessly takes you back, right into them.

 

[DaveB]

FWIW....
The YouTuber "Will" who produces LR Workshop&Expedition in one of his vids of last year addressed the crash safety of the Grenadier.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8b1y_OyIUs


At the 1m45sec mark says that there were 135 prototypes produced "...of which 15-20 were 'crashed' including roll-overs".
He was attempting to encourage Ineos to release the crash filming to demonstrate how much 'tougher' the Grenadier is compared to the "old Defender" and that "modern is good"!

 

[Pipm4000]

With this type of car there are the inbuilt safety systems of naturally lower speeds, good visibility and the driver sitting above typical side impact points from other cars. I do not expect a high rating due to the omission of some active safety systems.

 

[emax]

It's a political rating. If they would rate separately for passive safety and active safety it would be more credible to me.

But so it looks very much like they're trying to force automakers to install active safety systems, including that annoying forced emergency call which can always tell where you are - and you're not even notified when someone has made such a query.

 

[Arkaig]

But so it looks very much like they're trying to force automakers to install active safety systems, including that annoying forced emergency call which can always tell where you are - and you're not even notified when someone has made such a query.

What is your problem @emax - just what makes you so special that you believe you shouldn't be treated the same as everybody else or that you've something to hide or fear from such a safety featiure?

 

[bemax]

It's a political rating. If they would rate separately for passive safety and active safety it would be more credible to me.

But so it looks very much like they're trying to force automakers to install active safety systems, including that annoying forced emergency call which can always tell where you are - and you're not even notified when someone has made such a query.

Why do you think that e-call is traceable? As far as I understand the system it connects to the mobile phone net when activated e g by an accident.
Do you have any information that it can be activated by a „call“ from outside as well?

 

[Boston Boy]

Auto manufacturers are fighting to be able to sell the location and other valuable data on their customers. Business consultants McKinsey & Co. said in one of their reports, "Connected cars provide a unique customer experience while simultaneously delivering cost and revenue benefits to mobility companies, including OEMs, suppliers, dealers, insurers, fleets, tech players, and beyond." (https://www.mckinsey.com/industries...full-life-cycle-value-from-connected-car-data)
And here, "To answer key questions around car data monetization and to understand how players along the connected car value chain might capture this potential, McKinsey & Company launched a large-scale, multimodality knowledge initiative course of research:" (https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mc.../monetizing car data/monetizing-car-data.ashx)

 

[bemax]

Auto manufacturers are fighting to be able to sell the location and other valuable data on their customers. Business consultants McKinsey & Co. said in one of their reports, "Connected cars provide a unique customer experience while simultaneously delivering cost and revenue benefits to mobility companies, including OEMs, suppliers, dealers, insurers, fleets, tech players, and beyond." (https://www.mckinsey.com/industries...full-life-cycle-value-from-connected-car-data)
And here, "To answer key questions around car data monetization and to understand how players along the connected car value chain might capture this potential, McKinsey & Company launched a large-scale, multimodality knowledge initiative course of research:" (https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mckinsey/industries/automotive and assembly/our insights/monetizing car data/monetizing-car-data.ashx)

As I understood every owner of a car with e-call functionality has the right to reduce it to the bare e-call system which doesn’t allow the manufacturer to use the data. It seems that in Europe the big (maybe the German) manufacturers made the law changed so they can offer the customers a proprietary system instead of the common e-call. This enables them to get the data of the car. Nevertheless it has to be possible to change the system to a pure e-call without any data protection issues. The manufacturers do not like the idea and tell the customers that some other services will not work either when the e-call is set to the basic setting. While this will be a problem for BEV which need a real time calculation for the optimal next charging stop it should not affect us Grenadier owners.
I will try to get the basic e-call from the beginning. If anyone has more information about this issue I appreciate any comment!