Roof load rating downgraded in NA brochure

[Xrford]

I noticed now in the NA brochure that they have significantly down graded the roof load rating to 100kg static from 420kg and require you to buy the full length roof rack to achieve the previous stated load ratings. This what is in the fine print now and no mention of dynamic load rating without a roof rack.

**With Full Length Roof Rack (Roof Rack weight not included). Maximum 100kg Static Load without Roof Rack or Cross-bars

this fine print was not in the UK brochure. This is a significant down grade, not sure why they are doing this as it was always stated that no roof rack was required and load values given were 150kg dynamic and 420kg static.

 

[AWo]

Is that due to US regulations? Otherwise I would expect that this has to be done in other regions, as well.

AWo

 

[Xrford]

Is that due to US regulations? Otherwise I would expect that this has to be done in other regions, as well.

AWo

I do not think there is any regulations around this in Canada that would cause this to change. It may be however, that due to the litigious tendencies of the USA, they are covering their ass.

 

[Xrford]

I just checked the latest UK version of the brochure and it has also has now been changed to have same disclaimer. The version I downloaded dated 2022-07-18 has no disclaimers

 

[bemax]

It’s added in the German version as well. What does that mean for the black sheep rack? It seems to have contact with the roof.

 

[AWo]

What could be the reason which was unknown before?

AWo

 

[Xrford]

Not sure anything changed to the vehicle, but most likely nothing did. I think it is a marketing strategy to get you to buy the approved roof racks or a lawyer’s addition for risk management. By relying on Rhino rack to do the ratings based on their rack design and testing, they can shift the liability to them if it fails, and by severely limiting their roof load capacities with out a rack they limit their exposure if something should fail and your not using the approved rack systems. Looking at the documents archive on this site the USA brochure as recent as Feb 2023 did not have the new disclaimers

 

[emax]

What could be the reason which was unknown before?

AWo

A typo.

The '4' is very close to the '1' on my keyboard number block.

Typo

 

[emax]

Seriously, how can a rating be wrong by 420%?

Come on, INEOS, I think you are really exaggerating a bit now. We're already used to your announcements for delivery dates being wrong by several hundred percents ... and counting.

But with such hammers, despite all patience, it is now getting a bit too hard. 100 Kg instead of 420 Kg.

Unbelievable.

 

[DenisM]

The roof must be able to withstand a static load of 450kg otherwise it would collapse like a pack of cards in a roll over.

 

[emax]

by severely limiting their roof load capacities with out a rack they limit their exposure if something should fail and your not using the approved rack systems.

I'm not sure about those who have already signed a contract based on the releases INEOS made until then.

wording

 

[emax]

The roof must be able to withstand a static load of 450kg otherwise it would collapse like a pack of cards in a roll over.

The A/B/C pillars will probably withstand such a load. But maybe not the roof and/or the gutter.

 

[bemax]

It will be a safety information so that nobody has the idea that the roof can take the 420 kg at any point. The weight has to be distributed all over the roof (or all pillars).
That would explain why the installation of smaller racks will not support the same weight as the full rack.
Just my opinion anyway

 

[Loc Nar]

Since I'm learning more than I ever thought possible about cross-bars, I find the reference to cross-bars in the new brochure footnote interesting: "**With Full Length Roof Rack (Roof Rack weight not included). Maximum 100kg Static Load without Roof Rack or Cross-bars."

For my and other's future reference, let's break this down a comparison between the full length roof rack and cross-bars taking into account their weights (info drawn from the Accessories brochure):

Full Length Roof Rack:

Weight: 60kg
Dynamic Payload: 90kg
Static Payload: 360kg
Off-road Dynamic Payload: (?) This is not referenced in the Accessories brochure. I am hoping that due to the beefed up full length Rhino Rack with the wider feet and backbone system, the absence of any reference to an off-road payload limit means the rack is not derated for off-road use. The fact that the cross-bar information in the Accessories brochure does include a derated off-road payload makes me think/hope this is the case. There is a pending question in the Ask Ineos section of the forum on this topic that asks about the on-road, off-road, and static payload capacities for all roof cargo offerings in the Configurator, and I look forward to the official answer.

Cross-bars (pair)

Weight: 14kg
Dynamic Payload (on-road): 95kg
Dynamic Payload (off-road): 75kg
Static Payload: 375kg

Would adding a third cross-bar to help distribute the load raise these numbers higher? Could you end up with something like:

Weight: 21kg
Dynamic Payload (on-road): 129kg (150kg-21kg)
Dynamic Payload (off-road): 103kg (20% reduction to match 20% reduction in two cross-bar setup above)
Static Payload: around 399kg? (420kg-21kg)

 

[RavenVoice]

Since I'm learning more than I ever thought possible about cross-bars, I find the reference to cross-bars in the new brochure footnote interesting: "**With Full Length Roof Rack (Roof Rack weight not included). Maximum 100kg Static Load without Roof Rack or Cross-bars."

For my and other's future reference, let's break this down a comparison between the full length roof rack and cross-bars taking into account their weights (info drawn from the Accessories brochure):

Full Length Roof Rack:

Weight: 60kg
Dynamic Payload: 90kg
Static Payload: 360kg
Off-road Dynamic Payload: (?) This is not referenced in the Accessories brochure. I am hoping that due to the beefed up full length Rhino Rack with the wider feet and backbone system, the absence of any reference to an off-road payload limit means the rack is not derated for off-road use. The fact that the cross-bar information in the Accessories brochure does include a derated off-road payload makes me think/hope this is the case. There is a pending question in the Ask Ineos section of the forum on this topic that asks about the on-road, off-road, and static payload capacities for all roof cargo offerings in the Configurator, and I look forward to the official answer.

Cross-bars (pair)

Weight: 14kg
Dynamic Payload (on-road): 95kg
Dynamic Payload (off-road): 75kg
Static Payload: 375kg

Would adding a third cross-bar to help distribute the load raise these numbers higher? Could you end up with something like:

Weight: 21kg
Dynamic Payload (on-road): 129kg (150kg-21kg)
Dynamic Payload (off-road): 103kg (20% reduction to match 20% reduction in two cross-bar setup above)
Static Payload: around 399kg? (420kg-21kg)

I aired my concerns with Ineos about the Rhinorack controversy before paying for my vehicle & they told me that the attachment system used on the Grenadier was custom designed especially for the vehicle, is a lot more heavy-duty than the regular Rhinorack system & that the figures Ineos quote are not downgraded for off-road use.

 

[emax]

Would be nice to have this on paper by INEOS.

 

[YellowLab]

There are very strict NTSB standards for supporting in rollover

 

[Xrford]

I talked to the Ineos representative at the ride event today. He said the roof load limits without any roof rack is dynamic 180lbs and static 300lbs. I would however take this with a big grain of salt, as there is no documented confirmation of this in writing from Ineos.

 

[DaveB]

I talked to the Ineos representative at the ride event today. He said the roof load limits without any roof rack is dynamic 180lbs and static 300lbs. I would however take this with a big grain of salt, as there is no documented confirmation of this in writing from Ineos.