Thread: Incorrect rated rims

Update so far, dealer is checking with LR Austraila as to what is official correct load rating. I have also contacted LR Aust, and am waiting for response from both parties. As FYI the original, 20" spare is rated at 860 kgs max load. Spoke to a few independent tire places they reckon that the tire placard does not automatically follow through to the rims. Be interesting to see what the "official" line is.

Originally Posted by bbyer

I doubt that there is any fancy aftermarket alloy rim made that meets factory numbers for the 3. Well, maybe Cromodora makes some but they would not be cheap.

The 17" BB6 alloy wheels from Performance Wheels in SA not only match the standard OEM wheel load ratings but far exceed them. They will make any of their various design wheels to fit any vehicle to any size and spec as well as off sets as required.

And best of all they aren't that expensive either for a good quaility alloy wheel.

cheers,
Terry

I found the link below to some BB6 and other alloy wheels. I was surprised at how high the load ratings were, 1,400 kg is quite impressive, I must say.

I did wonder about the positive offset numbers however. All the wheels in the link had a positive offset between 20 and 45 mm. The 3's factory wheel is 53 mm positive which by my understanding means the greater the P, the more the wheel wraps around the brake caliper. This can of course be a problem when fitting over sized calipers or smaller wheel diameters.

If I understand positive offset correctly, spacers do not solve a positive offset concern if the purchased wheel has an offset of a smaller P number than what one was trying to match up to. As such, I wonder if reduced positive offset, (which means the centreline of the tyre is closer to the outside), matters much to the suspension? I also have a feeling that the greater the positive offset, the more money the wheel costs.

http://www.performancewheels.com.au/...roup=4&Cat=4WD

Wheels supplied by dealer details are:
Size 20x9.5" PCD 5x120, Offset 50, CB7255, Bolt Set 23.1*37. Max Load 815kgs. Brand is not stamped on them, nor on the box they came in. China???
Cost was $375 per rim.
Also spotted today anther RRS I am sure wearing same rims. Spoke to LRA today as they are having problems with email. They advised that info re what is correct required load rated rims is " not something we normally advise however we will check on it". Which surprised me. You'd think this was pretty easy question to answer.

HI Meccles.

You have obviously not dealt with LR Aust before,
So welcome to the world of "useless pack of bastards".

I think alot of the times the dealers wear the brunt of their incompetent,
couldn't give a dam, noncommited, I'll get back to you sir, crap

They should have been able to tell you the rim ratings or looked it up while you waited. Probably will tell you they need to check with UK.
Would find it odd if it was less than original ratings.

You will be better off hanging in with your dealer, they do seem to try,
And remember they have to deal with LR Aust as well, poor buggers

Cheers Ken...

Ps. Bet ya LR Aust don't ring back...

I looked on the inside of one of my 6 spoke 19" Cromodora rims, LR part number ALY72191U, and in addition to the Land Rover logo and a sort of Ford marking plus Made in Italy moulded on the inside, there are other letters, all of which I believe to be wheel acceptance design standards.

These were E-DOT and the three closely spaced symbols, a stylized JWL that per the link below, are a Japanese standard. VIA is another Japanese standard linked to the JWL marking. It appears an aftermarket wheel to be sold in Japan must have both markings, (or at least VIA), but for OEM, the JWL only is OK.

I also looked inside an aftermarket alloy rim today and saw the word JAPAN and the same symbol/letters, JWL. The load rating of the rim I noted as 825 kg so that must be a common load rating.

"JWL" stamp on alloy wheels | Cartype

VIA Registration of Aluminum Wheel

I suppose that if a wheel has no markings moulded into it, the good news is that one cannot conclude he has been misled. Acceptance marks are normally moulded in as a routine part of the copy process so the lack of markings could be viewed as a positive.

If a rim is rated at less than half the vehicle manufacturer (LR) stated maximum load of the "heaviest" axle (usually the rear) then the rim is obviously under-rated for maximum axle load.

Meccles,
I have been down this path trying to get correct info on wheel load ratings from local LR dealer and Qld dept of transport and main roads. Received answers that were not based on fact but reluctance to vary from original.
If it comes down to a legal argument from an insurer trying to knock back a claim due to a modification from original then it will come down to the legislation in your state. I looked up the Qld regulations and there is reference to wheel load ratings. Reference from legislation below. There is no mention of tyre placard or varying from OEM wheels.
Wheels and tyres—size and capacity
35. The wheels and tyres fitted to an axle of a vehicle must be of
sufficient size and capacity to carry the part of the vehicle’s gross mass transmitted to the ground through the axle.
I am not a lawyer though, so seek advise if in doubt.
cheers,
Sean
http://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/LE...99/99SL213.pdf