Quote:
Originally Posted by scarry
Because for genuine 4WDing, it is handy to have a sensible amount of rubber between the rocks and your rims.Quote:
Originally Posted by willem
Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by scarry
Because for genuine 4WDing, it is handy to have a sensible amount of rubber between the rocks and your rims.Quote:
Originally Posted by willem
True ... but that's only a comment on the tyres available at present, not on 19" rims as such. The tyre industry will catch up eventually.Quote:
Originally Posted by vnx205
Willem
What everyone in this thread seems to have forgotten is that the market that Landrover was built on (and has virtually abandoned in Australia, but not everywhere else) is working four wheel drives - farms, construction, mining, development, utilities, infrastructure, police, military. These markets usually buy vehicles in substantial numbers and usually new. Cost of ownership is a major concern, and hence they would prefer solid axles, although this is not a top priority. (And traditionally, these vehicles second hand have provided the majority of the recreational market - all except two of the Landrovers I have ever owned were bought new by construction, farming or military buyers.
The current Defender shortcomings for this market are mainly:- regional dealerships, ergonomics (people have just got bigger!) airbags, loss of reputation, dealerships.
For this market, 19" wheels are less suitable, not so much because of what tyres are available, but because you want as high a sidewalls as possible to reduce the likelihood of tyre and rim damage on rocks, railway lines, kerbs etc. Nothing wrong with 19" wheels as such, but the D3/4 bodywork does not leave room for decent sidewall height on 19" wheels.
This market also requires multiple body types and wheelbases, and this is where it is difficult to see a D3/4 platform Defender replacement meeting these requirements, although you never know.
On the subject of stability control - will it apply to utility vehicles, or just passenger vehicles? Worth noting that the reason the Defender gets away with no child restraint anchorages is that it is classed for this purpose as a utility vehicle.
John
I agree, and add that with a beam axle when 1 wheel goes up (on a rock or step etc. the beam axle goes up with it - with ind. suspension the centre stays down much further, not gaining clearance.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Whippy
I like air springs, and although they are used to improve ground clearance off road, the limited wheel travel is not overcome.
I recently re-read an old trip report by Patrick Sutcliffe on a Simpson Desert trip - a coil sprung disco 3 became stuck requiring recover numerous times because of low ground clearance (and no ability to raise its ride height).
Above quote from Patrick's trip report in The L.R.O.C. News, November 2006, page 34.Quote:
It catches on all the clumps of mud and spinifex in the centre of the track, giving a very uncomfortable ride to its occupants, and had to be pulled over small sand dunes that no-one else had a problem with. By the end of the trip, Peter was not a very happy chappie and was talking of selling it, ...
I don't think the tyre industry will come to our rescue regarding this issue.Quote:
Originally Posted by willemTrue ... but that's only a comment on the tyres available at present, not on 19" rims as such. The tyre industry will catch up eventually.Quote:
Originally Posted by vnx205
Willem
The legalities of increasing tyre size is a big problem. The allowable increase of 15mm on diameter will not change a low profile tyre to one suitable for rugged off road travel.
Also as JDNSW said the vehicles in question don't have the clearance in the wheel arches to use a high profile tyre.
There is also the question of a high profile tire going flat at highway speeds in a vehicle with a high center of gravity. bigger rims and lower profile tires seem to remove much of this problem. IE ford and firestone I think
Hi Guys,Quote:
Originally Posted by JDNSW
To add to this if I may.....
Regarding the point about "commercial" (working) vehicles and Airbags and stability control. A number of the safety type people I have spoken to regarding general vehicle safety at work have all said, at one time or another, that a lot of the larger industry groups have been pushing tojo and datsun to include these safety controls as standard equipment on their base vehicles for some time, and the first manufacturer who eventually does it, is going to pick up a lot a business very quickly.
If that would be the case or not who knows.......
Thats toyota,the next cruisers getting bags,it will be interesting to see what price they sell them at.They are the most pointless safety devices yet fitted to mine vehicles,just another dumb idea from the people who invent dumb idea's. Pat
The new dash came out mid last year for airbagsQuote:
Originally Posted by PAT303
I agree, dumb idea, but OH&S is full of them:(
ExactlyQuote:
Originally Posted by Bush65
They came to the rescue in the early 70's when the first RR came out,but this time they have a much bigger,if not impossible challenge....
And until this size tyre becomes common in the market place,they will probably do nothing.
Maybe the vehicle manufacture's have to catch up & produce lighter vehicles that don't need massive brakes.But this will never happen as they will be seen to be going backwards.....
Anywhere except the blacktop,any19"/ 55 profile tyre wouldn't last long.And isn't off road what these vehicles are supposed to be designed for?
Outback touring,such as desert trips,or cape trips are virtually impossible in a vehicle that has these low profile tyres.
They will also be hopeless in soft sand,no matter what tyre manufacturers do.
People who have 19'' rims with 55 profile tyres want a pimp mobile not an outback tourer,you can always change the rim/tyre combo to suit but a metalic black RR with chrome trim,black tinting and full of ''homey's'' is gunner look funny sitting on 7.50x16 split rims. Pat