Thread: Wheel nut torque to wide versus thin tyres

Tall and thin profile tyres also have the advantage in soft surfaces in that their surface area is long with a narrow width. Therefore less resistance against the leading edge moving forward.
Newer vehicles compensate for their fat tyres with lots more power. Current SUV type Fourbies get away with fat tyres (which look sexy) by having a zillion kilowatts.

WRT to your 18V rattler, just buy a torque extension bar in the range you need for your wheel nuts, spin em off at full noise, apply using the torque bar

Kincrome - Torque Extension Bar Set 10 Piece 1/2" Square Drive | Sockets, Socket Sets & Acces (174) - Kincrome Australia Pty Ltd

S

which Ryobi gun do you have(or are you looking to buy one)?

I have the 181W model .. works OK, nowhere near as strong as say a Makita(or other high quality, super expensive brand/models), but for us mere mortals .. strong enough.
The 181W does up to 360Nm, but remember they have various speeds, which then lower the total torque they apply.

eg. can't remember the exact specs, but at speed 3 mine supposedly does 360N, speed 2 about 200-ish, and at speed 1 around 100-ish too. Can't remember, manual and box got recycled ages ago!

Also got a torque tube set too a while back .. not so much for the wheel nuts, but it's handy to have for them too.
So what I do is leave the 110Nm torque tube on the extending bar I have in the D1 for the wheel nuts. Without any extension tube, it's a pain to use extension bar as a wheel brace due to it's closeness to the tyre.
So given that I need an extension bar, may as well use a torque tube.
They work good, you can easily feel when they start to flex .. easy peasy stuff.
They're quite accurate too, used my torque wrench to estimate how tight they get(and it will vary, as you need to include human error) but between 100 and 120Nm is what I seem to get from the 110Nm tube.

The Kingchrome torque tube set was wayyyy too exxy as an investment, I found a set(of 4) at Nightgales(in Laverton, if you don't know them) about $70 or so.

As for the investment value .. probably high. I've used mine for much more than just auto stuff ... always use it to undo wheel nuts, use it on low speed to do them up after all nuts have been started on their threads.
Recently tho, I'm building my shed, which involves "half a million" nuts and bolts, way too many of these for the footings with long threads. Couldn't imagine having to do them the old way, with a ratcheting wrench.
I reckon the speed savings using the impact wrench over doign them manually will save me at least an hour or so ... just on the footings nuts and dynabolts(about 24 all up).
The box of nuts and bolts I need for the frame are both marked 220 and 240 respectively, makes about 400+ all up for all of the columns and beams and gables and stuff.
Having to do them all by hand(even tho they're short) is going to be a pain. rattle gun and the 3/8's cordless wrench I also have will save me hours of tedium.

investment value .. IMO .. very high.

There’s a bazillion articles and arguments on fat versus thin tyres. Sometimes it also depends on what you can access. For example in 33” I have the choice of my currently 285/75R16 (fatties) or 255/85R16 (thinnies) but the type range and availability in one is far broader and superior to the other that it’s not the size determining my choice.

Personally, I’d not use the rattle gun for torquing up the wheel nuts - they’re find for undoing. A torque wrench set to 140NM rather.

interesting, I recently changed from Kumho MT to a slightly skinnier profile road pattern AT tyres for my Electric Series in the interests of getting less rolling resistance and a quieter ride.

From Kumho 225/75r16 MT to Evergreen ERS89 215/85r16

No difference noted in kwh/km after a few hundred km , but I tell you what - they are noticeably better off road esp in mud, I always knew skinnier was better but I thought the more aggressive tread of MT's played more of a part. I won't be wasting $$ on MT's again.

Unlike pressure, friction does not depend on the contact surface area but on the coefficient of friction between the 2 surfaces and the force exerted downwards. Traction on the other hand refers to the grip of the tyre with the road surface, where 2 more factors are involved - the adhesion forces (i.e. the bonding between the rubber and the road surface) and the mechanical interlocking as the tyre deforms against the road surface. All things being equal, as the contact surface area increases, so do adhesion and mechanical interlocking, meaning that the wider the tyres, the better the grip (and unfortunately the higher the fuel consumption).

Purchased this second hand a while ago and Ryobi reckons its 160Nm which exceeds the 140Nm Land Rover recommend but well within the ball park allowing for boasting by the company.Will need to be sure they at least do 140 so will have to get this checked insitu.

As I am looking at having a set of HT on the D2 for daily driving and having just lucked a set of 5 * 265 75 16's Bridgstone Dueller AT's at roughly 80% for $115 will not worry too much about muddies yet (just had hell getting these fitted as the front alloys bonded nicely to hubs, no way could it have done on the side of the road!!!!) and have 235 80's on the TDi 300, both nominally 32's but these are an inch wider and a hell of a lot more rubber on road versus the space of 235 muddy.

At first view it looked the tyres would rub but even on full lock nothing, nice!

But in looking to change over the wheels for off road purposes, the idea of changing 25 wheel nuts by hand seems over the top, hence the buying of a rattle gun as well as for screw in tent pegs. The shop used the makita but will loosen these off and rattle them to my max so to speak.

Have never seen those bars before, do they have some form of ratchet or slip disc?

The need for horsepower, well, lets say a standard Td5 should have 335's standard then shouldn't they?


Arty

Unlike pressure, friction does not depend on the contact surface area but on the coefficient of friction between the 2 surfaces and the force exerted downwards. Traction on the other hand refers to the grip of the tyre with the road surface, where 2 more factors are involved - the adhesion forces (i.e. the bonding between the rubber and the road surface) and the mechanical interlocking as the tyre deforms against the road surface. All things being equal, as the contact surface area increases, so do adhesion and mechanical interlocking, meaning that the wider the tyres, the better the grip (and unfortunately the higher the fuel consumption).

Absolutely but as any F1 driver will tell you, the force of the tyre into the tarmac makes all the difference hence all the down force of the wings etc. The use of different compounds is a variable as of course is width. But ultimately it is the force down that makes the difference. No conclusion of course which is best just that all factors are important and I think as Goingbush says the variables are many and which is best is not necessarily looking at one area of the equation in the simple scenario such as wider is better grip which does not take into account how hard the thin tyre is being pushed into the surface and therefore requiring more pressure to elicit sideways movement or loss of grip against a wide tyre with very little pressure on the surface that could easily (relatively of course) lose grip.

Maybe if you have wider tyres, just load up with more kilos LOL

Sorry for the spelling joke, it is Tuesday