Tyres - a slightly different question

Hi MK1 Oz,
I had a set of D697z on my disco 2 and a RR classic, great tyres agree with Tombie. I now have my D3 on GG AT's not the AT2's. I have heard that the AT2 has a harder sidewall and therefore not a comfortable as the standard AT. For the driving I do which sound similar to yours I find then just great. So far 20, 000 and looking just fine. Don't find them to noisy, run them at 38 psi, 42 in the back when towing my camper trailer.
I have had several sets of BFG AT's in the past and been more than happy with them however for me now they are just to expensive when I can get something like the GG tyre.

Lots to consider. Which Continentals are on the new D4?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tombie

D697 A/T are quiet and so far with a heap of offroad and highway have done 65,000km

---

Tombie, can't recall if you were running the Pirelli Scorpion ATR before these?? If so, which do you prefer for noise?

While I am asking questions, my D3 currently has 255/60/18 112V Pirellis. I cannot recall what the OEM tyre size was.

What is the widest tyre that the D3 can use?? (Doing some tyre research online)

I've run 285/60 R18 Zeons and have to say that there is only about 5mm clearance to the upper control arm on the front. I don't think you could go any wider than that.
It also depends on the tyre too, some are wider than others to some extent.

Hi Rich,
You've done well, I've got 255/60/18 GG AT's and I have about 12mm around the top ball joint control arm area. Saying that I have RRS 18 inch rims on, I suspect the clearance would also be rim dependant.

If you are looking at D697s then try K-Mart tyres. In Bendigo their price was heaps below the Bridgestone outlet and other dealers.
Frontrunner roof rack rumble is a problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by catch-22

Tombie, can't recall if you were running the Pirelli Scorpion ATR before these?? If so, which do you prefer for noise?

---

No, straight from dealer to home to tyre shop!

Local friend has Scorpions... I don't notice much difference...

I've heard that the fitting of inner tubes is illegal, is that true..? Too me that would be a bit of a bind, in that I've always favored inner tubes on the premise that one can always recover from a dire situation, providing one carries the appropriate repair gear, self vulcanisng patches, tubes, etc.

In remote situations it is sometimes the case that a rim can become damaged and the sealing of a tubeless might be a problem, whereas this wouldn't present a prob with if inner tubes were fitted.

Thanks,

Norm.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by normbourne

I've heard that the fitting of inner tubes is illegal, is that true..? Too me that would be a bit of a bind, in that I've always favored inner tubes on the premise that one can always recover from a dire situation, providing one carries the appropriate repair gear, self vulcanisng patches, tubes, etc.

In remote situations it is sometimes the case that a rim can become damaged and the sealing of a tubeless might be a problem, whereas this wouldn't present a prob with if inner tubes were fitted.

Thanks,

Norm.

---

Not sure about the legality, but practically speaking on modern tubeless tyres I can't see any situation where fitting a tube would be an advantage.

If you damage a tyre badly enough that it can't be repaired, then a tube isn't going to hold air. It will destroy itself through contact with the damaged area. It may work for a while with a damaged rim, but more than likely the tube will pinch or rub in the damaged area and burst anyway.

This topic gets discussed a lot with regard to rally tyres, but the only possible advantage I can see is when you slide sideways into something with enough force to push the bead away from the rim to cause a flat without actually damaging either the rim or the tyre. It happens in rallying but not really relevent to 4wding.

Cheers,
Jon