Page 9 of 15 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 149

Thread: New General Grabber AT

  1. #81
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    melton, vic
    Posts
    440
    Total Downloaded
    0
    The side wall on the GGAT and AT2 in no were as strong as say a BFG but in say that tyre pres does play a big part in it..
    Also you can tear a side wall on any tyre if its in the right spot..
    You must also look at speed and load rates also play a big part in the tyres construction..
    Will get all the specs for the GG and post the up..

  2. #82
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Croydon VIC
    Posts
    161
    Total Downloaded
    0
    From what I have read and understand, they are two ply sidewalls, but as thick/strong as coopers 3 ply.
    Just what I have understood.

  3. #83
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Heathcote Junction
    Posts
    1,155
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Boof

    Have the 265 x 60 x 18 GG AT's arrived yet.

    Would you have any concerns regarding that they are not XL rated.

    The 15mm extra diameter & 10mm width would be useful as well as legal.

    Regards

    Chuck

  4. #84
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    225
    Total Downloaded
    0
    [QUOTE According to General Tires the AT is slightly more capable offroad than the AT2 but to my untrained eyes has a more road looking tread.
    Garry[/QUOTE]

    Interesting how over the years our eyes have been trained to recognise an off road tyre style.
    Yet many of the tyre manufacturers are now changing the tread patterns and our eyes believe them to be road biased. But with computer aided technology for design and simulation, there is no reason to suggest that these NEW style tyres will perform worse than traditional off road tyres is there? New rubber compounds/blends and construction have a big part to play these days.
    BFG went away from the old mud terrain for a more block style arrangement yet they seem to be better performers than the old one. GG also have a racing style off road tyre that look awesome, but not available in the sizes we need.

  5. #85
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    melton, vic
    Posts
    440
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by chuck View Post
    Boof

    Have the 265 x 60 x 18 GG AT's arrived yet.

    Would you have any concerns regarding that they are not XL rated.

    The 15mm extra diameter & 10mm width would be useful as well as legal.

    Regards

    Chuck
    As far as i know they are only doing the HTS in that size in the AT OR AT2 they are doing 255/60/18..

  6. #86
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    melton, vic
    Posts
    440
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by HedleyLamar View Post
    [QUOTE According to General Tires the AT is slightly more capable offroad than the AT2 but to my untrained eyes has a more road looking tread.
    Garry
    Interesting how over the years our eyes have been trained to recognise an off road tyre style.
    Yet many of the tyre manufacturers are now changing the tread patterns and our eyes believe them to be road biased. But with computer aided technology for design and simulation, there is no reason to suggest that these NEW style tyres will perform worse than traditional off road tyres is there? New rubber compounds/blends and construction have a big part to play these days.
    BFG went away from the old mud terrain for a more block style arrangement yet they seem to be better performers than the old one. GG also have a racing style off road tyre that look awesome, but not available in the sizes we need.[/QUOTE]

    Yeh the tyre you are talking about is the General Grabber with the red wall writing on the side wall there is a long wait to get them about 2mths back order they are very hot in the states at this time...

  7. #87
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    18,616
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Has anyone fitted the 265/70 R 18 version of the General Grabber AT2 (and I guess the AT) to their D3? If so, how have you found them?

    The Opposite Lock D3 at the Queanbeyan 4wd show had them fitted and they certainly looked the goods - the OL guy said he could get to access height with out major rubbing but he said they had taken the hot air gun to the plastic rear inner wheel well shielding so they would not rub but otherwise no issues. The front inner guards had also taken a little damage but they were not screwed down and when driving the air flow would have pushed them back onto the tyre.

    The GGs fitted to the car had suffered some chipping but the OL guy said that was to expected given where the car had been taken - not sure where but the chipping was relatively minor.

    Garry
    REMLR 243

    2007 Range Rover Sport TDV6
    1977 FC 101
    1976 Jaguar XJ12C
    1973 Haflinger AP700
    1971 Jaguar V12 E-Type Series 3 Roadster
    1957 Series 1 88"
    1957 Series 1 88" Station Wagon

  8. #88
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    18,616
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Hmm - no response so I guess not.

    This is how they look on the D3 at onroad height. Not a lot of clearance but is enough.

    Garry
    Last edited by 101RRS; 3rd January 2017 at 06:07 PM.
    REMLR 243

    2007 Range Rover Sport TDV6
    1977 FC 101
    1976 Jaguar XJ12C
    1973 Haflinger AP700
    1971 Jaguar V12 E-Type Series 3 Roadster
    1957 Series 1 88"
    1957 Series 1 88" Station Wagon

  9. #89
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    2,248
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Re 265/70R18's

    I doubt the car would be drivable without mods. My 275/65R18 are a smaller diameter and yes, the car will drop to access and is drivable at slow speeds.

    However, at road speeds the tyres rub badly around corners, bumps etc, so I have to use the shortened rods.

    Cheers,

    Gordon

  10. #90
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    18,616
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by gghaggis View Post
    Re 265/70R18's

    I doubt the car would be drivable without mods. My 275/65R18 are a smaller diameter and yes, the car will drop to access and is drivable at slow speeds.

    However, at road speeds the tyres rub badly around corners, bumps etc, so I have to use the shortened rods.

    Cheers,

    Gordon
    This car above has no suspension mods and is certainly drivable - driving from Sydney for the 4wd show and is used offroad (as evidenced by the chipping on the tyre). The owner said that there was no rubbing but he did say he took a hair dryer to the inner guard plastic and pushed it in where it tended to stick out.

    Maybe the GG in this size is a small tyre for its size.

    Garry
    REMLR 243

    2007 Range Rover Sport TDV6
    1977 FC 101
    1976 Jaguar XJ12C
    1973 Haflinger AP700
    1971 Jaguar V12 E-Type Series 3 Roadster
    1957 Series 1 88"
    1957 Series 1 88" Station Wagon

Page 9 of 15 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Search AULRO.com ONLY!
Search All the Web!