Thread: Won’t be retro...

Originally Posted by Ean Austral

Airfreighting tyres around the country eh. I have airfreighted a lot of things for work , but can't see someone who has just forked out their hard earned being happy to pay air freight charges for tyres because they are not a readily available item.

Hopefully they are smart enough to fit a common size .

Cheers Ean

Particularly a tyre that is prone to catastrophic failure. More often than not, a simple puncture in a low profile tyre results in carcass failure before the driver is able to stop. Low profile tyres are more susceptible to failure, off road.

Originally Posted by Ean Austral

Im guessing it has a lot to do with the endless pictures posted with low profile tyres on the test vehicles Garry.

Cheers Ean

Well maybe but there does seem to be a mix of profiles - from very low when on the Nürburgring to others that are not so bad - lets wait and see.

Originally Posted by 101RRS

I find it amazing that people are canning a vehicle and its wheel size before we even know what it is actually going to be fitted with.

Nah, LR will have access to this thread, we're merely helping them with the development.

Big wheels are largely for aesthetics and people pay extra for them so car companies use that to extract more profit. Big brakes are for stopping power and they cost the manufacturer more to make and go the other way financially. One of those requires the other. But not the other way around. Plenty of cars running around on big wheels with small brakes. Can't be done the other way. Stopping once from 100mph is very different to doing it a hundred times in a row with WOT acceleration between them. Just selling a vehicle in a market doesn't mean it's designed for it. If AMS have actually run a LC200 through their test (I haven't checked) it'd not rare well, just like the very poor showing of the Japanese 1-tonners. Not designed for it so fail that market test.

Lumbering can be big, heavy and fast. And also slow to stop or change direction. F-series brakes are relatively anemic, as are other North American full size trucks. They'll stop you a couple of times, maybe even thrice in a row, fully loaded from freeway speeds. And that's more than most people will ever need or want. They are engineered to that customer expectation. Europeans expect more. They just do. That's why their vehicles handle and brake and can maintain 200km/hr plus all day long. Totally different to here, or the US, or SE Asia. F-series (even the little ones) are all on 17s as a minimum anyway.

And sidewall is sidewall... 6" is 6" irrespective of the metal holding it to the car. So saying 17s or 18 are no good is a bit silly without context. Plus a bigger overall diameter tyre with the same sidewall will generally outperform a smaller one off-road.

A Defo on 16s with std (nearly) 32" tyres has around 7" effective sidewall (the wheel lip is about 3/4" high, so you lose that). The tyre is sized/measured to the bead, not the visible rubber we generally think of as the "sidewall". On 18s you'd need a 34" tyre to match that sidewall height and that should be possible with slightly oversize tyres on the new one. RRC/D1/D2 ran 16s with 29s. That's actually less effective sidewall than a new Defo on 18s. Comparable to 19s on new Defo in fact. There's some context.

Barnsey at Birdsville brought in 1200 tyres just for last years Big Red Bash IIRC. Lots of those were 17s and 18s to cater for the LC brigade (and increasingly others, like some of us with later LR product). 16s are great, but 17s and 18s can be as good, or even better...

Originally Posted by 101RRS

Well maybe but there does seem to be a mix of profiles - from very low when on the Nürburgring to others that are not so bad - lets wait and see.

4350 posts or there about's , that has covered everything from the supposed interior to supposed 6 figure future sales figures , which is all assumptions on a yet to be released vehicle and its the talk about tyres only that draws the lets wait and see response.

If you knew how much work the mods have had to put in behind the scenes on this thread , you would understand why some of us who wish the new defender was a wait and see, but it isnt , so we will just count down the days till release and go around the circle again on what may or may not be the new 2020 defender.

Cheers Ean

Yep - lets wait and see - my initial post was about the vehicle and its tyres - you picked up on just the wheels/tyres aspect.

Yes lets wait and see how the over 4000 posts of conjecture turn out compared to what is actually released.

Garry

Originally Posted by V8Ian

Particularly a tyre that is prone to catastrophic failure. More often than not, a simple puncture in a low profile tyre results in carcass failure before the driver is able to stop. Low profile tyres are more susceptible to failure, off road.

What profile do you classify as low, there has been multiple profiles shown as a strong possibility for the new defender, with the smaller wheel choice none of which I would classify as low and some of which surpass the current defenders profile.

There will be low profile options for those that want to go 280kph on the autobahn and profiles that will suit a big lap and profiles that will suit hardcore weekend 4wding.

Fact wise it looks to be non issue to me.

Originally Posted by 101RRS

Yep - lets wait and see - my initial post was about the vehicle and its tyres - you picked up on just the wheels/tyres aspect.

Yes lets wait and see how the over 4000 posts of conjecture turn out compared to what is actually released.

Garry

Yep I did and because I never stood the vehicle on a pedistool and I'm a mod, Inc will prolly get a PM today saying something like I disrespected the brand and I somehow personally attacked you in my post , like what generally happens when the brand isn't praised in this thread.

Oh how I wish we could wait and see.

Cheers Ean