1/4" off set 2b rims

[juddy]

I have the original 2b rims on my 2b FC, and have just got some new Michelin XZL 255/100x16, I also have a full set of Landrover 1 tonne 6.5 J X 16 Steel rims,, iam concerned that the tyres may stick outside the line of the vehicle being a wider. What are the rules here for the tyre off set???

[Lotz-A-Landies]

Juddy

According to the 1972 parts manual for the SIIB the part number of the rim is 569203. I'm thinking that these are the rims you are talking about. (the early SIIB had less negative offest and were part number ?543384 - the 1 ton rim 569204 are similar offset to the early f/c rim.) There are about a 40mm (20mm + 20mm) difference in the track width outside to outside between the early and late f/c rims.

Only this last weekend I fitted a set of 569203s to Gog my ex-SADF f/C and the tread shoulder on the tyres are right below the outside of the original wheel arch extensions. The same extensions that your SIIB firefly doesn't have.

I would certainly think that they would be illegal in Aus and more than than even with +ve offset Disco I rims I still think you will have a problem. The best oprion would be the late defender 130 +ve offset rims but you're not going to achieve the 50mm or so you need for each rim..

IMHO, I would be attempting to acquire a set of the original extensions or better still this type (see below)



and if necessary fit flexi flares to the rear wheel arch.

Diana

[Lotz-A-Landies]

Juddy

AFAIK the 569203 rims are the most negative offset* OEM 6.5 rims available. All other OEM rims have a more positive offset (i.e. the track is narrower).

Given that the 569203 rims are listed as standard you have no problem with the legality.

According to the SIIA parts catalogue, 1 ton rims are stamped 569204. If your 6.5 J 16 rims have other numbers like FVxxxx stamped on the inter stud flats, the rims are from a Defender 120 but have essentially the same offest as the 1 ton or SIIA f/c rims.

As mentioned in the post above, the problem you may have is if the tyre tread is outside the wheel arch alignment.

Diana

* The offset of a vehicle's wheel is the distance between the centerline of the wheel and the plane of the hub-mounting surface of the wheel. It can thus be either positive or negative.

C = wheel centreline
M = hub-mounting surface.
ET = offset ( if this is a positive number it is positive offset shown)
If the hub-mounting surface is inline with the centreline the off-set is neutral (no offset)
If the hub-mounting surface is inboard of the wheel centreline the offset is negative (i.e. 569203 rims)

[juddy]

Wow thanks for the info...

So basiclly i have a problem??? if so iam alittle confused, as the tyres are the same as whats on it, and you would think that set up was legal...

The Rims that are still on it are iam told original 2b rims, so would i be better off keeping those on??? Mines a 1971 year

And why is there a issue if the new tyres i have are not going to be legal. would this not then mean all tyres would be illegal, or can you get ultra thin 2b tyres..... not that i want to as i have 4 brand new ones....

[juddy]

Juddy

According to the 1972 parts manual for the SIIB the part number of the rim is 569203. I'm thinking that these are the rims you are talking about. (the early SIIB had less negative offest and were part number ?543384 - the 1 ton rim 569204 are similar offset to the early f/c rim.) There are about a 40mm (20mm + 20mm) difference in the track width outside to outside between the early and late f/c rims.

Only this last weekend I fitted a set of 569203s to Gog my ex-SADF f/C and the tread shoulder on the tyres are right below the outside of the original wheel arch extensions. The same extensions that your SIIB firefly doesn't have.

I would certainly think that they would be illegal in Aus and more than than even with +ve offset Disco I rims I still think you will have a problem. The best oprion would be the late defender 130 +ve offset rims but you're not going to achieve the 50mm or so you need for each rim..

IMHO, I would be attempting to acquire a set of the original extensions or better still this type (see below)



and if necessary fit flexi flares to the rear wheel arch.

Diana

Can flexi arches be used legaly all round if need be.......

[Lotz-A-Landies]

Can flexi arches be used legaly all round if need be.......

Yes they can, I just thought with all the rusty forward controls in the U.K. and your contact with an FC guru he may be able to find you a pair of the front ones.

When you go for rego, I'd be taking a copy of the 1972 IIB parts catalogue so they can confirm the rim numbers.

No 9.00 16 are all basically the same width, the issue is what I said in an early post when you first bought the vehicle, I could not understand how your vehicle without the front wheel arch extensions could be both an SIIB and have it's tyres within the body alignment. Even the SIIA f/c had the wheel arch extensions (outside firefly) and their track was 4" narrower.

Firstly I would not worry about it yet, I would wait and see if there is an issue when it arrives (perhaps SIIB firefly have a widened cab.)

Once it gets here you can do a number of things, find the extensions is one (I acquired a complete body panel set on ebay a couple of years ago), you can also use flexi flares if needs be.

Regarding the tyres I'd be keeping the Michelins, they are a good tyre.

If the original rims are the 569203 the 1 Ton rims would give you 40mm less of a problem.

[juddy]

Yes they can, I just thought with all the rusty forward controls in the U.K. and your contact with an FC guru he may be able to find you a pair of the front ones.

When you go for rego, I'd be taking a copy of the 1972 IIB parts catalogue so they can confirm the rim numbers.

No 9.00 16 are all basically the same width, the issue is what I said in an early post when you first bought the vehicle, I could not understand how your vehicle without the front wheel arch extensions could be both an SIIB and have it's tyres within the body alignment. Even the SIIA f/c had the wheel arch extensions (outside firefly) and their track was 4" narrower.

Firstly I would not worry about it yet, I would wait and see if there is an issue when it arrives (perhaps SIIB firefly have a widened cab.)

Once it gets here you can do a number of things, find the extensions is one (I acquired a complete body panel set on ebay a couple of years ago), you can also use flexi flares if needs be.

Regarding the tyres I'd be keeping the Michelins, they are a good tyre.

If the original rims are the 569203 the 1 Ton rims would give you 40mm less of a problem.

That fc fire truck in your picture is it not a 2a? none of the 2b fire trucks had those wheel arch brows.... so maybe they did have a wider cab..

but i the pic below both the a and b have them...


these firefly's dont











Now this one does however its not HCB Angus, could be a carmichel and is it a 2a???

[101RRS]

Juddy,

The metric 255 Michelins are not all that much wider than normal 9.00x16 tyres (they are about an 1" higher though). The Michelins are used on 101s quite often and wheelarch extensions are not required.

I would wait until your vehicle arrives and then work things out - nothing may be required but if it is the cheapest and easiest option are the cheap rubber extensions that you buy by the meter - at least until you work out what you want to do. The 101 has rubber extensions on the front arches as standard to cover the standard 9.00x16s and if wider rubber is used the rubber extensions are easily screwed onto the rear arches.

Garry

[Lotz-A-Landies]

I can not see where they would have added any width to the cab on any of the pics, other than the fact that all the Firefly's are missing the extensions.

The last image is a SIIB.

Below is an old front image of one of my SIIB, which has 543384 SIIA/early SIIB rim on the front LHS (it also had 2 of the 569203 rims but came from Nickel Mines Ltd which were second in SIIB purchases after W.A. Flick).



You can almost see the tyre is marginally within the alignment of the extension. This vehicle now has a full set of 569203s and the tyre is (as I said) right on the alignment of the extension.

I'll take some better images of the situation with "Gog" on Friday.

[Lotz-A-Landies]

Juddy,

The metric 255 Michelins are not all that much wider than normal 9.00x16 tyres (they are about an 1" higher though). The Michelins are used on 101s quite often and wheelarch extensions are not required.

I would wait until your vehicle arrives and then work things out - nothing may be required but if it is the cheapest and easiest option are the cheap rubber extensions that you buy by the meter -
<snip>
Garry

Garry

Similarly to another recent thread, we are talking about SIIB here and not a 101, which is a different animal designed to run on the wide track axle assemblies!

The track of an SIIB is essentially the same as a Defender, 4" wider than a bonnetted Series Landy. The body is also the same dimensions as the Series/Defender bodies and as we know the Defenders do require the wheel arch extensions.

However, you (we) are correct, Juddy shouldn't worry about it till the vehicle arrives in Oz and then if necessary add the rubber flexi flares.