Wide buggers with the standard guards, looks pretty stupid.
Printable View
Wide buggers with the standard guards, looks pretty stupid.
Trying to tuck the rear tyre into the guard, running a 10.5" width with a 0 offset rim would go with no problem.
In this photo the tyre is just hitting on the alloy in the inner guard area and the bump stop is just touching.
Whereas with the front it is just starting to tuck into the guard nicely, with heaps of room to spare both in height and width.
Those tires look Massive on the 90 0_0
in the firt photo it looks like any movement whatso ever woudl ahve them rubbing, but aparently not hey?
how is it fro turning circle though?
Leroy.
Wowsers,
Those 35's do look huge on that 90. Hmmmm. Just to confirm, is that stock suspension on the 90 in that picture?
My BFG KM2's are apparently not a 'true' 35 so that may actually work to my advantage when trying to stuff them under the 90.
I'm just trying to build a 'shopping list' of sorts to figure out what will be needed to do it properly. That and I want some seriously flexy suspension also.
:twisted:
Twelfth
Because the diffs are smaller than that on the Cruiser, I would assume this will mean they are weaker.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombie
Is this an issue on the new (post TD5) 90s? Are they prone to failure?
Twelfth
G'day fellas.
Just confirming, absolutely stock standard suspension on the 2013 model 90.
Steering stops have been adjusted to allow best angle without the tyres rubbing on the radius arms.
Wheels are -25 offset, my normal wheels are sawtooths with +20.6 offset.
I have got some 110 heavy duty/130 standard front springs to put in it, however I have not yet put them in.
I think that twelfthman may be right in that the 315/75r16 KM2's are not a true 35", will measure them later.
Anyways, I'm putting the standard 235/85r16s back on, must say I was impressed with the way the little 2.2 TDCI handled the bigger tyres, although I am still taking it easy running the car in (still has less than 13,000klms on it).
There are quite big differences in chassis and body measurements from one Defender to the next......
So while I may be able to fit 35"s on my one someone else may have a slightly offset body or chassis slightly out of true.
Regards,
Mike.
NB: pic of springs to be installed (110heavy duty/130 standards) - along with some Koni Raids soon.
Standard rover diffs from Landrover usually need to be set up properly, the factory doesn't do it.......Quote:
Originally Posted by Twelfthman
I think that others have found out that if you abuse them to much they break,
My opinion is if you use them hard and they break, then upgrade them.
If you get the diff set up properly and drive with the intention of getting "there" (wherever "there" is) and back again, they give you no problems, however if your life would be fulfilled if you are featured in a 4wd action DVD and drive like they do in them, then about $15,000 to $20,000 grands worth of driveline/suspension upgrades will set you right.
Regards,
Mike.
I just measured the 315/75r16 km2, true height comes to 34 & 1/8" or 866mm.Quote:
Originally Posted by Twelfthman
Not really 35".... These tyres have approximately 1100klms on them, so basically new.
Anyways, it's not the height that is the issue in running these tyres on my standard suspension 90, it is the width.
When the tyres are tucking into the rear guards under suspension compression, I feel that if I didn't have the extra alloy rear corner protection pieces and the steel corner guards outside them, that the sheet alloy guards would have been crumpled, as it was with the extra stiffness there, the plastic guard flares were the ones that had to flex and make way for the tyres.
Picture= true 315/75r16 tyre height = 34 & 1/8" or 866mm.
Regards,
Mike.