Thread: Track Width

if you extend the axle (fit portals, volvo or mog axles) and then off set the rims to bring the center of the rubber back to normal (or within legal limits of normal) thats legal.

to make working out your offset easy

lay the rim flat on the back side of rim/tyre (as in the side that faces inwards) and lay a straight edge over the top edge, measure from the ground to the back of the straight edge

if the back of the disc (where the mounts onto the hub) is exactly in the middle you have 0 offset.
if the back of the disc of the rim is closer to the top you have positive offset, if you plan to move the disc this way you are adding offset.
if the back of the disc is closer to the floor you have negative offset, if you plan to move the disc that way you are subtracting offset.

Originally Posted by slug_burner

That sounds like an excellent price. Eastern Wheel Works are asking $135 to flip a disco 1 steel rim (from memory which maybe a bit sus).

I think current Race Eng. prices are similar. One thing I should point out is that the $40+GST was not flipped, however offset/track was increased by 50 mm total (25 mm per side) - which is the max legal. (also D1 steel rims).

Originally Posted by Blknight.aus

if you extend the axle (fit portals, volvo or mog axles) and then off set the rims to bring the center of the rubber back to normal (or within legal limits of normal) thats legal.

If you extend the axle then the track change needs to reflect the extension or reduction of the axle length.

not according to my RTA, Ive been looking at some work on foz replacing the axles with something a bit wider,

according to them if I put the 100mm wider axles in I have to use the offset to get the track width back to where it was for the vehicle. this of course roots the steering geometry and wont work because of the clearances to the steering arms (unless I run uber cheese cutters)

of course this is the same RTA that wanted to register my wifes disco as a sports car because it has a turbo.

Originally Posted by wagoo

Just measured a std 5.5'' 110 wheel. 60mm more backspacing will bring the Wheel Mounting Surface of the centre 5mm out from the outer edge of the rim, so the original centres can't be re used, you'd need to factor in the cost of custom made probably flat plate centres around 16.5'' diameter to weld to the outer face of the bead flange.Will a 110 brake caliper clear the ID of a std deep well rim?
Wagoo

To answer my own question.This morning I had a quick look under the front of my wet mud caked Hybrid (Yuk). The answer appears to be NO. The distance from the centre of the hub to the outside of the brake caliper is larger than the inside diameter of the 'well' section of a 110 steel rim. I don't have one to measure, but Disco 1 steel rims might clear as they have a shallower well and a larger inside diameter. But Disco 1 rims are very tinny and may not be srong enough to cope with around 100% backspacing.So rather than just the cost of modifying his Defender rims, Serg may have to factor in the cost of all new custom jobs, possibly even based around the larger internal diameter Nissota 16'' split rims to acheive the backspacing required.
Of course if Sergs plans don't relate to adding portals, then much more than 25mm extra backspacing will see the inside of the rim make contact with the steering arms and trackrod ends.
Wagoo.

Originally Posted by Benny_IIA

positive offset reduces the track

As Benny said.I think that people are doing the normal thing,and mixing what is required,ie increased "backspacing" or "negative offset".
The original question by Serg was left open to misinterpretation by saying "more inboard" .More inboard what?The centre mounting flange more inboard,meaning more Negative offset.Or the inner lip of the rim more inboard,inferring that the "backspacing" needs to be increased.Whenever wheel discussions come up,the same old things seem to apply,and everyone is confused

Wayne

Originally Posted by Blknight.aus

not according to my RTA, Ive been looking at some work on foz replacing the axles with something a bit wider,

according to them if I put the 100mm wider axles in I have to use the offset to get the track width back to where it was for the vehicle. this of course roots the steering geometry and wont work because of the clearances to the steering arms (unless I run uber cheese cutters)

of course this is the same RTA that wanted to register my wifes disco as a sports car because it has a turbo.

That's insane and extremely angry making!I wonder if some of these dumb stupid QLD DOT regulations are formulated by competent Engineers or lazy useless beaurocrats (Sp?)?
The considerably heavier series 2B FCs,had axles with the same spring spacing(up front),were 4'' wider and with identical steering linkage layout to Fozzy, so where is the engineering issue here? Chassis strength? I don't think so.They have identical rails,And Fozzy would have shorter spring hangers,so subject to less twisting stress.
Wagoo.

Originally Posted by Blknight.aus

not according to my RTA, Ive been looking at some work on foz replacing the axles with something a bit wider,

according to them if I put the 100mm wider axles in I have to use the offset to get the track width back to where it was for the vehicle. this of course roots the steering geometry and wont work because of the clearances to the steering arms (unless I run uber cheese cutters)

I assume you mean DOT/QT, not RTA (NSW)???

That was the same advice I had from my (QLD) approved officer (mod plater/engineer for those in other states).