INEOS Grenadier

[jaxyaks]

The upcoming generation of trucks from long time manufacturers are offering very strong products for wheeling/overlanding in the US, and probably for a lot less. Also, I'm concerned about the functionality of the bed.

What part of the bed functionality is concerning, its a bigger bed than all the other mid size offerings, and has room/slots for 2 spares as well as a 4ft pallet between the wheel wells. Most midsize trucks don't have room for a pallet to lay flat between the wheel wells, much less a sheet of plywood. The length is pretty much the standard length on most mid size truck as well.

I really like the truck version...IF one were going to buy a mid size truck geared and outfitted for off road "overloading" from the other manufactures, they are gonna push you north of 60K or so once you are said and done. While this one will be more expensive, if your spending that much anyway, IMO you may as well get one that is more capable, tows more, hauls more , etc.

IF and that is a big IF, I were planning to spend that much on an "overloading" oriented truck, I would give this one a serious look.

 

[MFurey]

First concern was the size of the right wheel arch. But also, unlike most other midsize trucks, the tire comes in the bed so it takes up a bit of space. But, since it fits within the width of the wheel arch, it might not be a big issue. I'm guessing they might offer a tray option in certain markets. I'm definitely going to be following it.

 

[zimm]

Truck with a factory canvas top looks pretty cool, my only gripe is the spare tire in the bed, don’t want it on the roof, maybe an aftermarket swing out behind the tailgate?

This truck is effing stupid. the turning radius is already sucky, and another foot on the wheel base will require bow and aft thrusters to park. There's no where to put a spare tire under it so, they put the tire in the loadbed. thats like giving you two rear seats and putting a dummy in one. It's gonna get worse than the 14mpg the suv is seeing, and more than 6 less than my f150 that carries 2600 pounds with a useful bed. An lc 70 series is 2600 lbs.

All for 80,000.

Toyota should raise the price of their Tacoma, apparently.

No matter what chassis you base a pickup truck on, it gets judged at how good it is at being a pickup truck. This sucks as pickup truck.

 

[jaxyaks]

Toyota should raise the price of their Tacoma, apparently.

When the 2024 4th gen Tacoma pricing comes out, you will get your wish.....That sucker is gonna be expensive.

 

[plainjaneFJC]

When the 2024 4th gen Tacoma pricing comes out, you will get your wish.....That sucker is gonna be expensive.

We already have Colorado pricing, it will be in line with that just not offering many discounts.

 

[ChasingOurTrunks]

There are some comments in the article on the main page that are not correct.

The payload of the QM is not class leading. The Gladiator and I believe the Ranger offer a greater payload. The Twins are only ~100lbs less and the new Tacoma will offer more. I also question what makes this more suitable for a slide in camper than any other midsize as the article suggests -- as soon as you put almost any slide-in camper into a mid-size, you turn it into a solo adventure vehicle as most of those campers are north of a thousand pounds; add in a few off-road goodies like a winch and recovery gear and other "necessities", and there's not enough of a margin to also bring the wife and kids. I don't see how the QM is any different in this regard.

I've said this elsewhere, but I don't see what the QM does that the rest of the segment doesn't already do. It wins a few battles on the spec sheet, but just "by the ply on it's tires" with no decisive victories, really -- the war of "which midsize is best" doesn't have a clear winner, and at the prices Ineos is charging, the QM has to be a clear winner to be worth the premium in my opinion.

 

[utherjorge]

This truck is effing stupid.

Now, this guy actually gets it.

 

[nickw]

I was surprised they were releasing the "truck version" and I don't need it but I want it. Its going to be hard to break me away from my 2020 Power Wagon but this would be the truck to get me to move down to a mid-size truck (is this considered mid-size?).

On paper I like the payload and towing #'s.

Payload and towing are in-line with other "mid" size 1/4 ton rigs - what am I missing?

 

[BuckinghamBuilt]

Payload and towing are in-line with other "mid" size 1/4 ton rigs - what am I missing?

I could be wrong but I believe a Jeep Gladiator Rubicon only has around 1200lbs of payload and 6000lbs with the max tow package.

 

[ChasingOurTrunks]

I could be wrong but I believe a Jeep Gladiator Rubicon only has around 1200lbs of payload and 6000lbs with the max tow package.

I’m seeing a payload of 1700 on Jeeps website for quite a few trims, but with poor towing (4000). There are a few trims with 6000 lbs but that appears to be the upper limit, so you’re right there. I thought it towed a bit more.

2023 Jeep® Gladiator Specs - Dimensions, Weight, Wheelbase

The powerful Gladiator off-road truck is back & better than ever. Read about the full 2023 Jeep® Gladiator truck specs including dimensions, weight & wheelbase.

www.jeep.com

 

[plainjaneFJC]

It's not. Not if you have to add a swing out tire carrier behind a camper that is possibly/probably already extended, hanging of the back of the vehicle.

Now, if they had retro'd a LC single cab - but with a longer wb and without the crazy overhang - that would be something else. As it is, this looks to me like a very niche, vehicle aimed at their enthusiasts. At least for NA.

Also looks to me - if the planet keeps burning and in a pleasure use context - like a future target for activists. Not a hater, just the vibe I get.

Maybe the activists will be the target- the bumper looks good for that.

 

[nickw]

I could be wrong but I believe a Jeep Gladiator Rubicon only has around 1200lbs of payload and 6000lbs with the max tow package.

Ranger/Chevy's are 7500ish and 1500ish, new Tacoma is apparently going to get a bump too, so it's in same ballpark but the Ineos does edge them out by ~150 lbs.

 

[ChasingOurTrunks]

Ranger/Chevy's are 7500ish and 1500ish, new Tacoma is apparently going to get a bump too, so it's in same ballpark but the Ineos does edge them out by ~150 lbs.

You are right Nick it does have a bit of an edge, but I find myself wondering if those numbers as quoted are for the "base" model, and it gets eaten away once you add lockers and the like (which seems common with the rest of the segment), or if that's the spec of the off road model. And, like we chatted about in the other thread, there's the same questions with the new offerings from Toyota, but IF they have managed a 1700lbs+ Payload on on Overland-Ready rig in their Trailhunter package, it'll be really hard to beat the Taco in North America for capability and reliability.

I'm also thinking that some portion of that 150 lbs is gonna go away immediately in the form of putting that spare tire somewhere else A rear bumper with a swing out would eat it all; a cab rack would eat about half of it. Maybe there'll be a mount to toss it on the hood like the old Land Rovers as that would be the lightest option, but I suspect the tires are probably too wide for that while preserving visibility.

 

[nickw]

You are right Nick it does have a bit of an edge, but I find myself wondering if those numbers as quoted are for the "base" model, and it gets eaten away once you add lockers and the like (which seems common with the rest of the segment), or if that's the spec of the off road model. And, like we chatted about in the other thread, there's the same questions with the new offerings from Toyota, but IF they have managed a 1700lbs+ Payload on on Overland-Ready rig in their Trailhunter package, it'll be really hard to beat the Taco in North America for capability and reliability.

I'm also thinking that some portion of that 150 lbs is gonna go away immediately in the form of putting that spare tire somewhere else A rear bumper with a swing out would eat it all; a cab rack would eat about half of it. Maybe there'll be a mount to toss it on the hood like the old Land Rovers as that would be the lightest option, but I suspect the tires are probably too wide for that while preserving visibility.

LOL - yeah, those old tires on Rovers were like 30" x 7", new tires these days are so wide you can't see over the suckers! So you think that stated capacities are without a spare tire?

 

[ChasingOurTrunks]

LOL - yeah, those old tires on Rovers were like 30" x 7", new tires these days are so wide you can't see over the suckers! So you think that stated capacities are without a spare tire?

Not quite - what I mean is the spare tire is in a real bad spot on the QM for a truck; it looks like it would have to be relocated and that would require some kind of mount that would weigh something and mitigate that payload advantage; all the other mid sizes have a good spot for their spare (maybe not great for departure angle, but not in the load bed usually except for some ZR2s I think with very big wheels).