He mentioned 19" rims, you will have to close this thread now.:wasntme:Quote:
Originally Posted by Slunnie
Printable View
He mentioned 19" rims, you will have to close this thread now.:wasntme:Quote:
Originally Posted by Slunnie
It's ok in this thread (or any thread devoted to the topic), it's every other thread I'm concerned about.
Re the petition -- good luck. It doesn't have to be a moderator by the way. There is always much less real support for a given idea than people who think it is a good idea. The latest in a very long line of examples was the fact that ggh was unable to raise even 15 people to pony up for the G-Max rims.
Isn't it funny rmp.
So many people bitching about the 19" rims and wished the D4 3.0 had 18" rims, yet Gordon can't even get 15 sets together to place an order?????
How about those people put their hand up for a set!
No whats funny is all the bloody ho-har about what essentially becomes 0.500" of sidewall... Thats about the height of THIS emoticon :wallbash:
OK so right now there arent 20+ varieties of rubber for the vehicle.
But then there werent a lot of 16" or 17" sizes not so long ago...
Then theres those who purchase a $75k+ vehicle and yet complain about $500 a corner rubber... :wallbash::thumbsdown:
Deal with it people! Move on.... Its a tyre on a rim..... Technology has moved on, tyres are better now than they were back in the days of 15" rims... Better compounds, constructions etc...
How about just driving the damn thing?
:tease:
Yep. I've organised a few forum things and I can tell you there is a pyramid of support for any given idea. When you ask for actual money or commitment that's when people suddenly look away. Not that I wish to discourage such efforts which have had notable successes, it's just a cautionary tale. Good on Gordon for giving it a shot, you have to respect that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Disco4SE
We could go on about this for ever............Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck
But wouldn't we be better pushing for 17' rims,as these would be a bigger jump in size & more suitable for those that want to run larger rims on the D4 3.0l.
I realise the vehicle would need more changes than going to 18's,& could probably only be done by LR.
Surely there is a design that won't compromise braking effectiveness,that would allow for 17's
But,does LR ever listen to it's customers?
Just my 2 cents worth
We've shown (as a proof of concept) that you can build 18" rims to fit without modifying the car at all. I don't think this would be true of a 17" rim - you would have to downgrade (or severely re-design) the brake package. There just isn't enough clearance
Given that choice (and a gun to their head), I'd imagine that LRA would find the former far more palatable.
Cheers,
Gordon
:soapbox:Quote:
We could go on about this for ever............
But wouldn't we be better pushing for 17' rims,as these would be a bigger jump in size & more suitable for those that want to run larger rims on the D4 3.0l.
I realise the vehicle would need more changes than going to 18's,& could probably only be done by LR.
Surely there is a design that won't compromise braking effectiveness,that would allow for 17's
But,does LR ever listen to it's customers?
This is not a personal attack - do not take it as such, I quoted the above because it raises good points. And are valid questions from the owners perspective - In my view these questions are based on heresay rather than experience in real world situations.. (Think ala 2" lift - almost everyone who gets a new 4wd mentions a 2" lift!)
Firstly vehicles have to have stronger brakes the more power they produce. This is not about speed, its about the ability to decelerate a vehicle which can accelerate quicker than lesser powered versions.
Then theres ventilation, a large rotor requires air flow around it to cool the brakes. The larger rotor also requires a larger caliper and this consumes room necessitating larger rim diameters / clearances.
Then, we have the 'car like' drivability of a modern 4wd, people throw them around like a car, forgetting the 2500kg they have to slow. A 3.0L accelerates quicker and therefore needs to slow faster once the inertia is built....
Larger rotors allow a larger swept surface for brakes, smaller surfaces work harder for the same effort, resulting in faster brake wear rates.
Land Rover, like all other (I hate this term) SUV manufacturers has listened to the market... A car like, 2500kg people mover with offroad capability and modern styling has been built. To think that the Australian market constitutes more than a drop in a bucket to the global sales base is laughable. Soccer Mums the world over love their big, car like SUV and its great brakes and larger rim tyre combo with responsive steering and handling.
Whats more surprising, is that the locals are looking to spend thousands of dollars on a 12.7->25.4mm profile change in their running gear. I mean were talking the need to slow your offroad pace less than 5km/h to protect the tyre compared to a slightly increased profile.
Ride and handling in these larger rims is affected by AIR VOLUME inside the rim/tyre combo... The tyre may be lower profile but the rim is shaped to provide an air chamber suited to a volume of air they wish it to hold. The air is the cushion for the most part (although sidewall construction plays a role) in the ride quality of the wheel assembly.
PROOF OF CONCEPT is easy to achieve, however, are you willing to also put in the tens of thousands of kilometers of testing to ensure that the rim is strong enough to take the pounding that the OEM has done?
ROH for example make a rim for earlier Landrovers - the ZF I think, which fits, works and under use fatigues and cracks...
To make a rim profiled internally to avoid the caliper means something had to give, the profile has been changed and the rim profile is not quite the norm! Nor is the clearances between rim and caliper.
Plenty of POC products fail to achieve in the real world unfortunately.
But still, we are talking - and I will laugh forever over this one... 12.7mm difference to the sidewall height going to an 18" rim.
How much more deflection do you honestly believe this 12.7mm will give offroad? At 80+km/h likely to be nothing noticeable. Better to get a tyre with a nice thick rim protector built into it...
ALL OF THIS EFFORT would be better put towards lobbying a tyre manufacturer to make a mould for a 19" tyre that is 25mm LARGER than OEM.
Considering the law generally allows a 25mm larger tyre this is the SAME gain in sidewall as the rim change, with the added benefit of increased rolling diameter.
You can then have the CCF modified to correct the speedo error back to zero.
Towing, with the larger brakes trapped inside smaller rims with lower airflow is my idea of a nightmare... A long downhill on the brakes will definitely heat them up more than running std rims...
Offroad, the extra debris that can be trapped inside the smaller rim (including rocks caught between caliper and rim) will cause more damage and wear than sticking to 19's...
Anyone ever seen a rock caught between rim and caliper? I have...
It nigh on carved the rim into 2 seperate pieces and the owner was lucky not to suffer a dangerous failure. Rim was cut over halfway through the alloy.
Let it rest, the vehicle is more than capable on 19's... Yes they are not as common right now - so buy a spare carcass before you go on that long trip... Get a repair kit and learn to use it. 19s, 18s, 17s and 16s make no difference... I've never staked a tyre offroad ever in any profile. And I'm offroad more than probably 90% of members here...
I've sat watching accredited trainers and cringed at the old school, old thinking methods used offroad... This is not a 1990s vehicle, its a 2010 vehicle.. Build using modern techniques and modern technologies including suspension and tyres.. Combined with modern materials used for recoveries today almost the entire 4wd handbook is outdated.
Same thinking applies to oils and filters.... People keep thinking like 1980 Landcruiser diesel owners... 5000km changes etc...
We really need to get this old school thinking out of our minds and catch up with the reality of the times...
And stop obsessing with bloody 19" rims would be a good start :whistling:
I'm sure I've just knocked someones nose out of joint...
I went the 2nd set of rims option, 19's with GY MTR's (like ggh). I really think this is a great option; I have car like handling for the 90% of the time the car is used and then MTR's for off road - and I've heard nothing bad about the MTR's and am comforted by Landrover G4 Challenge specifying them which HAS to say something! Best part was the RRS 19" rims I got (and anyone else could from the same seller) were relatively cheap $295each and look great! The MTR's will last for ages and I thought were also reasonably priced ($495). The wheel tyre package is not cheap - given - but hey, neither was the car...
One day Conti's will bring out an GGAT2 in 19inch and I would swap to those when the D4's road tyres expire as they have been brilliant on and off road on the D3 (18inch).
So, I'm a happy tyre camper allround...so to speak...
Well said.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombie2
It's a baby boomer thing... wariness/fear of modern concepts, inflexible thinking, myopic belief that their own knowledge is gospel. Find any 60 or so year old house painter (like the one I've just had in), they'll argue till their blue in the face an oil based paint is more durable than an acrylic, they're not interested in being progressive, studying what the manufacturers are putting out, Orica and Wattyl give their flagship exterior acrylic paints a 15 year warranty, they don't give their oil based products any warranty at all, but still they'll use a oil based gloss on your (my) window frames.
It's great when you get a generic old school 4x4 instructor (ie NOT working exclusively with LR) that has no idea of the technology and advises, OOMA, disabling anti-stall or disabling TC and fitting lockers because their knowledge IS RIGHT and the technology is WRONG:rocket: