Largest Functional Tire Without Mods

[stickshifter]

As a follow-up, the Grenadier is quite heavy (gas version is 5,840 pounds), and is not overly powerful. In fact, for its weight, its power lags behind most of the competition. Below is a table of (1) horse power to weight, and (2) torque to weight of what will look like a random assortment of vehicles (these are vehicles I have either owned or considered buying). The Grenadier comes last in each list. I'm not trying to slag the Grenadier, rather, I am making a point with regard to 35-inch tires: the taller heavier tires will rob the Grenadier of power, and most people who use the Grenadier for highway driving as well as off-road driving will want to re-gear. Before I purchased a Grenadier - if I was dead-set on 35-inch tires - I would want to know two things:

1. Are there after-market gear sets for the Carraro axles?

2. Are they available in the appropriate size?  I would guess that one would want to re-gear to something between 4.30 and 4.88. 

Related Example: In a Jeep Wrangler, a common choice after moving to 35-inch tires, with the 3.6 Pentastar (NA V6), is 4.56 gears (in Dana axles). The Rubicon version of the Wrangler comes from the factory on 33-inch tires with 4.10 gears. If one opts for the "Recon" off-road package with 35-inch tires, one is given the choice by Jeep of either 4.56 or 4.88 gears (the lower option - 4.88 - provides better towing performance, better grunt off the line, and better throttle response at elevation, but worse fuel-economy). The Grenadier (in both gas and diesel) has much better low-end torque than the 3.6 Pentastar, so one might be okay running 35s with 4.30 gears; on the other hand, the Grenadier is 1,400 pounds heavier than a Wrangler, so maybe 4.56 is the sweet-spot.

 

[4runnernomore]

If aftermarket R&P’s become available??

 

[Ferrugenfish]

[QUOTE username=stickshifter userid=8617054 postid=1332976881]

That's a very helpful chart thank you for sharing! I was wondering about the very same information (torque-to-weight ratio) and where is stood among it's closest competitors... perfect. I wonder if the B58 will feel like the pentastar in the heavy Grenadier. Looking at the chart, it's no wonder Ineos told me they don't recommend using tires bigger than what comes standard. I do really like the B58 engine but with the weight and final gear ratio, seems it will be fighting hard up steep hills/rocks, or while towing at elevation. 

That said, the B58 is known for being very tune'able... after the warranty is over so it's not voided prematurely. 

 

[stickshifter]

[QUOTE username=Ferrugenfish userid=9004165 postid=1333022607][QUOTE username=stickshifter userid=8617054 postid=1332976881]

That's a very helpful chart thank you for sharing! I was wondering about the very same information (torque-to-weight ratio) and where is stood among it's closest competitors... perfect. I wonder if the B58 will feel like the pentastar in the heavy Grenadier. Looking at the chart, it's no wonder Ineos told me they don't recommend using tires bigger than what comes standard. I do really like the B58 engine but with the weight and final gear ratio, seems it will be fighting hard up steep hills/rocks, or while towing at elevation.

That said, the B58 is known for being very tune'able... after the warranty is over so it's not voided prematurely. [/QUOTE]

Glad you found it helpful! I have both good news and bad news:

The Good News: since the B58 is turbocharged, it will make close to full power at pretty low rpms, whereas the Pentastar is naturally aspirated - so you have to rev it to over 3500 rpms to get close to full power. Furthermore, the Pentastar is not a very torquey engine - especially at lower rpms - whereas the B58 (even in its de-tuned state in the Grenadier) makes better maximum torque, and it will produce nearly all that torque starting around 1500 rpms or so. Conclusion: the Grenadier should drive better than the Pentastar Wrangler in all those low-rpm situations (pulling off the line, initial acceleration in each gear, etc.). I'm hoping that this is true - despite the greater mass of the Grenadier (1400 pounds heavier than a 4-door Wrangler).

The Bad News: I think we have to be a little cautious about tuning the B58 in the Grenadier, since it is being paired with the 8HP51 version of the ZF transmission, and this version has a max torque capacity of 500 Nm (369 lb-ft of torque). Stock in the Grenadier, the B58 makes 332 lb-ft of torque, so if you add 10% to that through a tune, you are right at the max torque-rating of the transmission. I understand that people are tuning up their B58s in the Toyota Supra (which is also running the 8HP51), so maybe ZF is just really conservative in their ratings, or maybe Supras are going to start blowing-up their trannies. I don't know which is more likely... Sadly, the gas-version of the Grenadier (B58) does not get the higher-rated version of the ZF - the 8HP76 - which you get if you buy the diesel Grenadier (running the B57 engine).

All the best!

 

[Ferrugenfish]

All so true. Yes I was bummed about there not being an option to upgrade to the stronger tranny as that would have given the ability to tune up lots more with head room (as the B58 has so much room for tuning... feels a waste of potential in a setup that could use more power & torque considering the weight of the vehicle). 

On the bright side as you mentioned, the instant torque will help the low power-to-weight ratio. Just really want to drive and feel... though the numbers can't lie.

 

[Caladan]

As a follow-up, the Grenadier is quite heavy (gas version is 5,840 pounds), and is not overly powerful. In fact, for its weight, its power lags behind most of the competition. Below is a table of (1) horse power to weight, and (2) torque to weight of what will look like a random assortment of vehicles (these are vehicles I have either owned or considered buying). The Grenadier comes last in each list. I'm not trying to slag the Grenadier, rather, I am making a point with regard to 35-inch tires: the taller heavier tires will rob the Grenadier of power, and most people who use the Grenadier for highway driving as well as off-road driving will want to re-gear. Before I purchased a Grenadier - if I was dead-set on 35-inch tires - I would want to know two things:

1. Are there after-market gear sets for the Carraro axles?

2. Are they available in the appropriate size? I would guess that one would want to re-gear to something between 4.30 and 4.88.

Related Example: In a Jeep Wrangler, a common choice after moving to 35-inch tires, with the 3.6 Pentastar (NA V6), is 4.56 gears (in Dana axles). The Rubicon version of the Wrangler comes from the factory on 33-inch tires with 4.10 gears. If one opts for the "Recon" off-road package with 35-inch tires, one is given the choice by Jeep of either 4.56 or 4.88 gears (the lower option - 4.88 - provides better towing performance, better grunt off the line, and better throttle response at elevation, but worse fuel-economy). The Grenadier (in both gas and diesel) has much better low-end torque than the 3.6 Pentastar, so one might be okay running 35s with 4.30 gears; on the other hand, the Grenadier is 1,400 pounds heavier than a Wrangler, so maybe 4.56 is the sweet-spot.

Really great comparison chart! I don't see the new (current) Land Rover Defender. Is that because it wasn't included or because it placed below position #12?

 

[stickshifter]

Really great comparison chart! I don't see the new (current) Land Rover Defender. Is that because it wasn't included or because it placed below position #12?

Thanks - glad you found it helpful. I explained why I selected the vehicles in my post - they were vehicles I have either owned, or were vehicles I was considering buying - so I already had the data in an Excel spreadsheet. This is why the list might look a little odd to some; for example, the inclusion of a 2013 Landcruiser, 2013 Landrover, and 2014 FJ-Cruiser (included because I was in the market for a 4x4 in 2013-14). Similarly, I included the 2022 Power Wagon because I have been shopping one of these recently. I have never considered buying the new Defender, so it is not included. Data on curb weight, power, and torque is readily available should anyone want to put together a list of current vehicles. I'd probably do it if I had the time and inclination. If I were to do so, I would certainly include the new Defender - whether it is more or less powerful per pound than the Grenadier. In addition, I would also include the Wrangler 392 (NA V8, making 470 hp / 470 lb/ft torque), the Bronco Raptor (turbo-charged 3.0 V6, making 400 hp / 430 lb/ft), the 2023 Chevy ZR2 (turbo-charged 2.7 I4, making 310 hp / 430 lb/ft), and the new turbo-charged 3.0 I6 from Stellantis (making 400 hp / 450 lb/ft). Unfortunately - and I say "unfortunately" because I am a big fan of the Grenadier - the Grenadier would drop well-below position #12.

See my follow-up post (Post #7 in this thread) for a description of why the Grenadier should drive better than the vehicles with naturally aspirated V6 engines that might - when just looking at max power and torque - seem "more powerful". The obvious lesson is that one must look at the power curves not just max power. Forced induction engines make most of the max power at relatively low rpms, and sustain that power up to red-line. In contrast, naturally aspirated V6 engines tend to make relatively little power at low rpms. For example, anyone who has driven a 3rd Gen Tacoma can tell you that there is a lack of power & torque below 3000 rpms - regardless of how much power can be found at 4000 rpms. That is - in a sense - the "good news" from the perspective of a Grenadier enthusiast. However, the more recent entries into the market (Ford Bronco, Ford Bronco Raptor, Chevy ZR2, the 3.0 from Stellantis once we start seeing it in vehicles, etc.) are forced induction (like the Grenadier). These newer vehicles all have much better power-to-weight than the Grenadier, and they share the fact that they are forced induction, and can make that power at low rpms.

Some folk on this forum tend to misunderstand these comments, and think I'm just being a troll. Nothing could be further from the truth. On the contrary, I think there is still time for Ineos to make some adjustments to the Grenadier before it is introduced to North America, so that it is better able to compete against the competition. I know that this is unlikely, but the perfect solution - and one that is feasible - is that Ineos use the 8HP76 version of the ZF transmission with the B58 (gas engine). They are currently using the 8HP76 with the B57 (diesel engine) in the rest of the world. Using the 8HP76 would allow for tuning the B58 (either by the user, or from the factory). To be considered competitive in the North American market, I would think that the B58 in the Grenadier would need to make around 325 hp and 375 lb/ft of torque. These are pretty typical power numbers produced by the B58 in BMW applications. But who knows. Maybe the Grenadier can be successful being marketed as a super-reliable, heavy-duty, overlanding vehicle. Maybe its retro style can overcome its power-deficit (when compared to most similar vehicles on the market). The 200-series Landcruiser was enormously capable, incredibly reliable, but at $84,000 it was expensive, and few buyers were captivated by its style. Most people did not understand what they were getting for their money, and opted for other vehicles. And so the best four-door overland wagon in the North American market was discontinued.

 

[Igfan]

Thanks - glad you found it helpful. I explained why I selected the vehicles in my post - they were vehicles I have either owned, or were vehicles I was considering buying - so I already had the data in an Excel spreadsheet. This is why the list might look a little odd to some; for example, the inclusion of a 2013 Landcruiser, 2013 Landrover, and 2014 FJ-Cruiser (included because I was in the market for a 4x4 in 2013-14). Similarly, I included the 2022 Power Wagon because I have been shopping one of these recently. I have never considered buying the new Defender, so it is not included. Data on curb weight, power, and torque is readily available should anyone want to put together a list of current vehicles. I'd probably do it if I had the time and inclination. If I were to do so, I would certainly include the new Defender - whether it is more or less powerful per pound than the Grenadier. In addition, I would also include the Wrangler 392 (NA V8, making 470 hp / 470 lb/ft torque), the Bronco Raptor (turbo-charged 3.0 V6, making 494 hp / 630 lb/ft), the 2023 Chevy ZR2 (turbo-charged 2.7 I4, making 310 hp / 430 lb/ft), and the new turbo-charged 3.0 I6 from Stellantis (making 400 hp / 450 lb/ft). Unfortunately - and I say "unfortunately" because I am a big fan of the Grenadier - the Grenadier would drop well-below position #12.

See my follow-up post (Post #7 in this thread) for a description of why the Grenadier should drive better than the vehicles with naturally aspirated V6 engines that might - when just looking at max power and torque - seem "more powerful". The obvious lesson is that one must look at the power curves not just max power. Forced induction engines make most of the max power at relatively low rpms, and sustain that power up to red-line. In contrast, naturally aspirated V6 engines tend to make relatively little power at low rpms. For example, anyone who has driven a 3rd Gen Tacoma can tell you that there is a lack of power & torque below 3000 rpms - regardless of how much power can be found at 4000 rpms. That is - in a sense - the "good news" from the perspective of a Grenadier enthusiast. However, the more recent entries into the market (Ford Bronco, Ford Bronco Raptor, Chevy ZR2, the 3.0 from Stellantis once we start seeing it in vehicles, etc.) are forced induction (like the Grenadier). These newer vehicles all have much better power-to-weight than the Grenadier, and they share the fact that they are forced induction, and can make that power at low rpms.

Some folk on this forum tend to misunderstand these comments, and think I'm just being a troll. Nothing could be further from the truth. On the contrary, I think there is still time for Ineos to make some adjustments to the Grenadier before it is introduced to North America, so that it is better able to compete against the competition. I know that this is unlikely, but the perfect solution - and one that is feasible - is that Ineos use the 8HP76 version of the ZF transmission with the B58 (gas engine). They are currently using the 8HP76 with the B57 (diesel engine) in the rest of the world. Using the 8HP76 would allow for tuning the B58 (either by the user, or from the factory). To be considered competitive in the North American market, I would think that the B58 in the Grenadier would need to make around 325 hp and 375 lb/ft of torque. These are pretty typical power numbers produced by the B58 in BMW applications. But who knows. Maybe the Grenadier can be successful being marketed as a super-reliable, heavy-duty, overlanding vehicle. Maybe its retro style can overcome its power-deficit (when compared to most similar vehicles on the market). The 200-series Landcruiser was enormously capable, incredibly reliable, but at $84,000 it was expensive, and few buyers were captivated by its style. Most people did not understand what they were getting for their money, and opted for other vehicles. And so the best four-door overland wagon in the North American market was discontinued.

I think the figures are interesting. I’ve always assumed that the grenadier places low in these kinds of comparisons due to purposeful detuning of the engine to increase reliability. Does anyone have any concrete statements from Ineos regarding this? I wonder how you could quantify and compare something like the level of detune and the resulting increase in reliability. Would be cool to see such a comparison!

 

[stickshifter]

I think the figures are interesting. I’ve always assumed that the grenadier places low in these kinds of comparisons due to purposeful detuning of the engine to increase reliability. Does anyone have any concrete statements from Ineos regarding this? I wonder how you could quantify and compare something like the level of detune and the resulting increase in reliability. Would be cool to see such a comparison!

Yes, you are absolutely right - Ineos seems to have 'detuned' the B58 in order to increase reliability. They also say that they have increased torque at very low rpms - which is great for off-road driving or getting a trailer moving - even though max-torque has been reduced. Unfortunately, there is no way to quantify "increased reliability" at this point, where as power numbers are easy to quantify (for people cross-shopping vehicles).

I think most Grenadier enthusiasts are drawn to the vehicle because of its 'old-school' design and its capability (body-on-frame, solid axles, available lockers, high payload, big brakes, retro style), and the expectation that this design will also be super-reliable. I hope that this is enough to keep the Grenadier in production. This is why I mentioned the 200-series Landcruiser - it should serve as a warning to Ineos. In many ways, the 200-series was in the same niche as the Grenadier: a rugged, reliable, over-built, 4x4 wagon. But there are also important differences between the two: the 200-series Landcruiser had IFS, the U.S. version had become a luxury vehicle - and so buyers looking for a rugged 4x4 drifted away, and the 200-series lacked the retro style that is so popular these days (i.e. the look of a Wrangler, old Defender, Bronco, etc.). Ultimately, the Landcruiser had no niche: too expensive for the hard-core off-roader, and not fast enough or crisp enough in the corners to compete against Range Rover or similarly-priced offerings from the top German brands. As good and reliable as the 200-series was, it only sold ~3,300 units per year in the U.S. That's a pretty shocking stat, and should give Ineos cause to re-consider power output for the Grenadier. I don't know if a vehicle priced at $70,000 - $80,000 (U.S. dollars) will sell in big enough numbers if its calling card is just durability and reliability (but maybe its good looks will draw in the buyers that the 200-series could not). But clearly, you don't want to sell like the 200-series Landcruiser:

200-series sales in the United States (Source: Good Car Bad Car)

2017	3,100
2018	3,235
2019	3,536
2020	3,146
2021	3,711

 

[Max]

Understanding Ineos's marketing research would shed light on so many queries we may have. Who is the main end user?
They would have a very good idea and why is it going to parts of the world before other parts? Petrol and not diesel?
Here In Australia, I believe Ineos are looking at the fleet cars, mining and military but of course the older generation fallout from the
Land Rover demise.
It is interesting to hear from the rock crawlers here and how they buy then build their own variation with ingenuity and mechanical crafting.
I fall into the first of Ineos's categories and Sir Jim's want, build the Old Defender but better.
I am really looking forward to my Grenadier and all of what you guys are talking about. Thanks.

 

[painter]

... On the contrary, I think there is still time for Ineos to make some adjustments to the Grenadier before it is introduced to North America, so that it is better able to compete against the competition. I know that this is unlikely, but the perfect solution - and one that is feasible - is that Ineos use the 8HP76 version of the ZF transmission with the B58 (gas engine). They are currently using the 8HP76 with the B57 (diesel engine) in the rest of the world. Using the 8HP76 would allow for tuning the B58 (either by the user, or from the factory). To be considered competitive in the North American market, I would think that the B58 in the Grenadier would need to make around 325 hp and 375 lb/ft of torque. These are pretty typical power numbers produced by the B58 in BMW applications. But who knows. Maybe the Grenadier can be successful being marketed as a super-reliable, heavy-duty, overlanding vehicle. Maybe its retro style can overcome its power-deficit (when compared to most similar vehicles on the market). The 200-series Landcruiser was enormously capable, incredibly reliable, but at $84,000 it was expensive, and few buyers were captivated by its style. Most people did not understand what they were getting for their money, and opted for other vehicles. And so the best four-door overland wagon in the North American market was discontinued.

I agree with your assessment and conclusions. Unfortunately, I think the USA EPA certification process which requires a complete vehicle (chasiss certification) is already underway and that completed vehicle likely does not have the higher torque transmission.

Also, I wonder if output could be factory increased without requiring higher octane gasoline. Per @d1rty post in another tread,

""re-tuned for torque" is a polite way of saying "detuned to run on 87 regular and not require 89 premium or 91 super"

As for super reliability ... one can hope. But that often pairs with longevity and with the looming 'end of ICE vehicles' one wonders how much of a premium mfrs can charge. (current market madness notwithstanding).

And speaking of premiums, l sure hope IG NA Marketing takes pity on the poorer relations to the north

 

[emax]

Do you know whether the B58 and B57 have identical installation dimensions?

If one has a different length or width or the flange is different / deeper / wider or narrower then this might be the (or a) reason for using one or the other version of the ZF transmission. And in that case there is - apart from the chassis or frame questions - no simple solution to switch to the other version with the B58.

 

[stickshifter]

I agree with your assessment and conclusions. Unfortunately, I think the USA EPA certification process which requires a complete vehicle (chasiss certification) is already underway and that completed vehicle likely does not have the higher torque transmission.

Also, I wonder if output could be factory increased without requiring higher octane gasoline. Per @d1rty post in another tread,

""re-tuned for torque" is a polite way of saying "detuned to run on 87 regular and not require 89 premium or 91 super"

As for super reliability ... one can hope. But that often pairs with longevity and with the looming 'end of ICE vehicles' one wonders how much of a premium mfrs can charge. (current market madness notwithstanding).

And speaking of premiums, l sure hope IG NA Marketing takes pity on the poorer relations to the north

You raise some great points - and I hadn't considered that changing the transmission would affect EPA certification. I find it a little frustrating - given the emphasis on being 'over-built' - that Ineos went with the lower-rated transmission for the gas engine. Also regarding octane: BMW says that the B58 (TU), which in BMW vehicles produces 322-382 horsepower, and 332-369 lb/ft of torque (depending on application), requires a minimum of 89 octane, and performance will be improved with 91 or 93. So you are probably right: the 'detune' is likely a means to allow the Grenadier to run on 87 (which international travelers will appreciate). I'm sure folks planning on touring in Africa and Asia will be happy with the trade-off (less power in exchange for running 87). Thanks for the conversation!

As an aside, what would you like to see Ineos doing in terms of marketing in Canada?

 

[stickshifter]

Do you know whether the B58 and B57 have identical installation dimensions?

If one has a different length or width or the flange is different / deeper / wider or narrower then this might be the (or a) reason for using one or the other version of the ZF transmission. And in that case there is - apart from the chassis or frame questions - no simple solution to switch to the other version with the B58.

The 8HP76 is paired with the B58 in some BMW models, so whatever differences there might be between the B57 and B58, they are not an obstacle to pairing the 8HP76 and the B58. For example: "BMW has ditched the dual clutch transmissions as used in previous M3/M4 models and switched to the latest automatic transmission from ZF the 8HP76."

Source: https://www.puredrivetrainsolutions.com/blog/2021/2/13/bmw-switches-to-zf-transmission-for-new-m3-m4

 

[emax]

So a change was only a question of money? (besides software questions of course)

 

[stickshifter]

So a change was only a question of money? (besides software questions of course)

So it seems, but I don't pretend to know how Ineos makes these decisions

 

[DaveB]

Pretty good review considering he normally uses 35's

 

[Tazzieman]

Pretty good review considering he normally uses 35's

That is a very good review
The main thing is going to 35s requires some extra $/engineering , over and above the cost of tyres.
Let alone warranty/insurance potential issues.
It will be interesting to see how it all pans out.

 

[DaveB]

That is a very good review
The main thing is going to 35s requires some extra $/engineering , over and above the cost of tyres.
Let alone warranty/insurance potential issues.
It will be interesting to see how it all pans out.

I think it shows that unless you are going to be spending at least 50% of your time off road 31 or 33 is better than 35. But as one of the reviews says. If you just want the look of 35@ with Mt tyres then go for it I like the fact that he points out a 2" lift gives you zero extra ground clearance.

 

[stickshifter]

I think it shows that unless you are going to be spending at least 50% of your time off road 31 or 33 is better than 35. But as one of the reviews says. If you just want the look of 35@ with Mt tyres then go for it I like the fact that he points out a 2" lift gives you zero extra ground clearance.

A two-inch lift improves approach, departure, and break-over angles - all of which are important for off-road driving. Of course it doesn't raise your differentials.

A two-inch lift is typically applied to a 4x4 so that one can run a larger tire - which in turn gives you more ground clearance under your differentials.

Lastly, going from a 31 to a 35 (should one choose to do so), requires re-gearing in order to avoid loss of power. Re-gearing is costly and can void your warranty (depending on manufacturer). This is why enthusiasts have pushed manufacturers to deliver vehicles from the factory with larger tires, appropriate clearance, and appropriate gears. Hence, much of the thread-content on this topic on this forum. Here in North America, Ford, Jeep, and now Chevy have responded, and their sales reflect this. There is more specific info on gearing in post #4 in this thread.