Yup - I wouldn't throw it back either!
Although you'd always be looking out for an Arnold Swarzenneggererarrraer :D
Printable View
what are the cross plys in RAGS made from?
im guess its just as much to do with staking/puncture resistance and better offroad performace.....go out west and see what all roo shooters run on their trucks and for this reason
i just dont think you can run down the engineers that have designed this vehicle...ESPECIALLY from a photo!!!
how much for the merc ...wonder how much a service would be:o
you're not serious are you?
"Rag tyres" is the common name for bias-ply tyres also termed "cross-ply" tyres. They are made from rubber or synthetic rubber impregnated canvas like material with the strips of material running from one side of the rim to the other then moulded with additional rubber on the tread.
Radial (ply) tyres have the material running the entire circumference of the tyre which makes them less rigid in the side walls and less resistant to penetration, as a consequence they usually need a belt of either steel mesh or kevlar mesh running around the circumference above the ply and under the tread.
In Afghanistan the Perenties are wearing Goodyear Custom Hi Miler Xtra Grip (cross-plys) in Australia they wear Olympic Steel Trek (steel belted radials).
Roo shooters etc in the outback are most unlikely to have the stake they run over explode. Steel mesh in the radial tyre becomes shrapnel where most of the cross-ply tyre burns up in the explosion.
This tyre business all seems to be getting a bit silly. The term RAG tyre really should only be applied to tyres reinforced with cotton canvas. These days most bias ply tyres (often called cross ply) are reinforced with various 'plastic' polymers such as nylon and Aramid (which is what is used in bullet proof vests and the like). Radial ply tyres can be, and are, made without steel though that is not the common practice today. The ADF may be using Goodyear Custom Hi Miler Xtra Grip because the tyre "burns up in an explosion" and doesn't produce shrapnel but I would need to be directed to some evidence from the ADF to be convinced of this. I would have thought it most unlikely that an improvised explosive device such as the roadside bombs commonly employed in Afghanistan would actually have the power (ie heat) to actually vaporise the tyres (ie "burn in the explosion").
Respect is a 2 way street! show some and get some....
Diana's point while appropriate in referrence to the WWII vehicles was disrespectful to the engineers and manufactures of the vehicle being discussed....and from what, A PHOTO....with no tech specs
nore did she note my example of how different materials doing the same job have a different result, which she was arguing against....
I dont doubt she has excellent LR knowledge and has been a valuble member here....but bashing another vehicle like that smacks of Toyota syndrome....but then again the only difference between US and them is the shape of our badge.....
Serg