Disco 4 advice

[tonyci]

Hi Everybody this is my first post.
I have owned several landies over the years,and currently own a puma defender.I have just retired and am looking forward to several central Australia trips. I also tour around the Victorian high country. The Defender is not really spouse friendly so I (we) are looking at purchasing a D4, or (forgive me) a land cruiser 200.
The real issue for me is can one acquire locally a set of tyres that are suitable for outback travel to fit the D4,if so what are they?.

I know this issue of wheels and tyres is often discussed but I have not read any reports of happy punters and their tyres.

Would my options be better if I went for the tdv6 2.7 , rather then the newer 3.00 litre engine models.
Many thanks.
Tony

[mowog]

Read this thread

http://www.aulro.com/afvb/d3-d4-rrs/121130-disco-4-v-landcruiser-prado.html

And this thread

http://www.aulro.com/afvb/d3-d4-rrs/105896-18-rims-disco-4-3-0l-sign-up-here.html

[Owl]

Would my options be better if I went for the tdv6 2.7 , rather then the newer 3.00 litre engine models.
Many thanks.
Tony

In a word - yes.

3.0L comes with 19" rims - very limited off road rubber available. 18" rims are available but limited, so your selection of rubber improves a little.

2.7L comes with 18" rims, so you're better off to start with. But importantly, 17" rims are available, so tyre selection improves markedly. Even so, you will be dissapointed with tyre availability if you are used to 16" rims.

There's plenty of discussion on here re 17" vs 18" vs 19" tyres - so search and read on.

And you won't be dissapointed if you do make the move to a D4.
Ian

[discojools]

You won't be disappointed with a 2.7 D4. Mine is excellent, very rarely feel like I need more power. In addition to the 18s with Goodyears the car came with I have a set of 17s with BFG KM2 MTs 245/70/17 size. They are an excellent tyre offroad and not too noisy on road. They do increase fuel consumption a little though.

[chuck]

Tony

The 2.7 D4 will be a big step up in power compared to the puma as was my step up from D2 to D3.

The 3.0 D4 is grouse however in my opinion to justify the additional cost & the tyre sacrifice you would have to be towing heavy loads frequently.

Having said the above I would love a new 90 Puma as my car & keep the D3!!!

I have 17's on mine & tyre choice is much improved not only in size but quality.
I have found my 17" MT's to handle better than 18" oems both on & off road.

You can buy 17's from the UK via ebay or TRS has them in non oem at a reasonable price.

Regards

Chuck

[gghaggis]

Those that have had a 2.7 and then a 3.0 would never go back to a 2.7, but that's more a case of psychological imprinting than any lacking in the 2.7 ltr motor :D

However, you do get a superior braking package along with the better engine response. Tyres for the 3.0 ltr in AT (which is what the majority of tourers are after) are limited in the 19" rim size to either the Pirelli ATR or the GG AT, the latter still not released yet in Oz (but you could order from the UK). You can either go for the 20" rim and add the Cooper Zeon LTZ, or get the custom 18" rims (from me) and open up your choices to BFG, Yoko's, Goodyear, Dunlop, Hankook, Nokian, General Grabber, Pirelli, Conti, Nitto, Bridgestone and a few others.

In MT, the choices are very limited - if that's the sort of tyre you need, you'd have greater choice if you look at the 2.7 ltr with 17" rims.

Cheers,

Gordon

[outbacktourer]

I've got Pirelli ATR's on my D4 3.0 and Jax tell me I can get Goodyear MTR's if I want, that's enough choice, go the 3.0.

OBT

[Disco4SE]

I'm with Gordon. Have had the 2.7Lt and now the 3.0Lt. Would not go back to the 2.7Lt, whether it be tyre choice or otherwise.
The 2.7Lt is certainly a very capable engine, but the 3.0Lt is soooooo much better.

Cheers, Craig

[roamer]

I'm with Gordon. Have had the 2.7Lt and now the 3.0Lt. Would not go back to the 2.7Lt, whether it be tyre choice or otherwise.
The 2.7Lt is certainly a very capable engine, but the 3.0Lt is soooooo much better.

Cheers, Craig



X2

Cheers Ken

[CSBrisie]

Yep, I went the 3.0l (having owned a 2.7) and wow....!

Also went with Goodyear Wrangler MTR's (19's) on a second set of rims (rims $250 each and tyres around $495each) out of Barbagallo Tyres in Osborne Park, WA). They shipped them to me in SA.

[rmp]

Agree re the 2.7 and 3.0 comments, particuarly:



Those that have had a 2.7 and then a 3.0 would never go back to a 2.7, but that's more a case of psychological imprinting than any lacking in the 2.7 ltr motor


I would add that my D3 2.7 carried my family around Tassie for 3.5 weeks, fully loaded, and never at any point did I feel it underpowered or unable to get to, and maintain the speed limit everywhere. The limting factor for speed was one of the tyres, blind corners, speed limits or the wife, not the engine. If there was a 3.0 in front of me I couldn't see it pulling away unless the driver exceeded the speed limit or went nuts around blind corners. We were able to keep up with normal car traffic no problem at all in all conditions, in fact more than just keep up.

The caveat I would make is if you were towing a very heavy trailer I'd be more inclined to a 3.0. But if you're not towing the 3.0's power is lovely, but not required and the smaller rims plus significant cost difference make it the better choice in my view.

The 3.0's brakes are better, but again I've not had a problem with the 2.7's either.

[tonyci]

Thank You to everybody who has posted replies. Very helpful.
Gordon the 18 inch rims you sell I assume no modifications to the body is required to avoid tyre rub etc. Once fitted is there any impact on speedo readings ?.
Thanks again everybody.
Tony

[mowog]

Tony

A 255/60/18 has the same rolling diameter as a 255/50/20.

I will be using the ContiCrossContact AT on my 18" rims.

[rmp]

The rim diameter has nothing to do with the rubbing or not. That is dependent on the tyre diameter.

[Duck's Guts]

Those that have had a 2.7 and then a 3.0 would never go back to a 2.7, but that's more a case of psychological imprinting than any lacking in the 2.7 ltr motor :D

I have the 2.7 D4. Very happy with it: on road, off road, & towing my 17' off road poptop c/van. More than capable of the duties required of it. More than enough power/torque and fuel efficient when compared to previously owned diesel vehicles (LC100, GU3.0, 3.0 HiLux) and petrol vehicles (Prado 90 series, LC 80 series)
But underpowered compared to previously owned petrol vehicle (R51 Pathie).
Against all those vehilces the 2.7 D4 is a much better tow vehicle in every aspect, and a better on/off road vehicle.

Now, with all that said...I specifically didn't take a test drive of the 3.0 D4 because I KNEW I would have to have one rather than the 2.7 D4.
MORE POWERRRRRRR!!!

But I had to be sensible re cost/money, 17" rims & LT tyre choice. So, if the 2.7 D4 was capable and satisfying enough of a vehicle to do the required duties, then I wasn't to tempt myself by test driving the more powerful 3.0 D4.

And guess what! I have no regrets! (but then again, I still haven't gone and driven a 3.0 D4 !!!;))