Thread: Are you having any problems with your new LR

In relation to Insurance companies - you are spot on . They will look for an out where they can.

In relation to tyres, sort of right, what im saying is that there are SOME tyre stores out there that will sell you anything you want....Reputable tyre stores that are company owned, will (and ill go out on a limb) only sell you that which is legal, as it is the company policy( the big three - Bob Jane, Brigestone and any of the SPT tyre stores - Dunlop - Goodyear - Beaurepaires). So in relation to "Mud terrain tyres" it doesnt really matter whether they are mud or road or LT or anything it is the tyre placard that is the determining factor.

I recall working for a tyre company that sold retreads - the company policy was - only to be sold with tubes.... but i know for a fact that they were rarely sold with tubes. We also had a little orange warning sticker that we were supposed to stick on the inside of the windscreen .. along the lines of this veihicle is fitted with thyres rated at ##KMH etc etc - it was a disclaimer and was in accordance with the Tyre and Rim association and im pretty sure with the AS9002 standards or somesuch.

Its a funny game to be in tyres, it gets into yer blood. _ most blokes in the game stay round it for life.

But yes I am sure that there are tyre stores out there that are responsible for fitting tyres that dont comply, same as there are mechanics that will charge labour rates that arent in line with the MTA times guide.

I remember this - When i was young a cool thing to do was to put "fats" on the back of cars and "cheese cutters" on the front, so you would see HQ Hz prems with 10 to 12 inch rear tyres (265/50/R15 etc) and realy narrow front tyres. The popular choice was Bridgestone Eagers or BFG Radial TA.... and for the front cheese cutter 165/15 Michelins, that were a bias (or Rag) ply. this fitting certainly did not comply and I have seen heaps of blokes given a canary (in victoria a defect label) for that fitting.

When i see blokes driving round on hUUUGE muddies i think to myself geez i hope they comply. As i would stand to be corrected (that is im not sure as i would never have sold them) but im pretty sure that some of these tyres arent even steel belted.... so they cannot comply..

Having said that early vehicles are different......(Pre ADR / Tyre placard) thats why you can fit basically anything on a Series landrover - what you have to cosider then is each states legislation - thats the thing you posted.

hope this helps - it looks a bit confusing to me even

mick

More useful info, thanks Mick.

Basically it is a confusing game, and it isn't clear. I suppose (no offence) that some police officers may not be entirely clear on it either and incorrectly defect vehicles. After all, you've got the placard, the state legislation, and then who knows what.

The guys on huge muddies; well that exceeds the 15mm diameter rule so they'd need an engineer certificate to begin with.

I wouldn't ever like it to, but ultimately it'd be a court battle. Joe Bloggs vs Insurance Company or something. I wonder if Joe would need to prove his non-compliant vehicle was in fact sufficiently dangerous to have caused the crash. And if declaring it on his insurance was sufficient. Or whatever.

Who knows.

One thing is for sure, if any one insurance company did take it that far that would be the last 4WD they'd insure from the enthusiast community.

Space-saver spares are another case in point.

Yep mate thats the thing, its a scary buisness, and as far as cops knowing all the things, I think the majority who dont know dont do......we really doin need complaints based on us doing things we shouldnt have.... but there always is the one bloke... [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif[/img]

Its one of those things there was bloke on these pages that was talking about knowing someone in WA who to raise the vehicle had to put it through a slalom test..... nighmare in the least.

its been a good thread

Mick

RPM you hit the nail on the head. There is just no satisfactory set of rules where tyres are concerned, and I to, would not want to go through a legal battle to prove the point either.
My insurance is less than $1100 a year on a $130,000 vehicle. It was nearly $2700 through the major companies so I don’t want to get on there wrong side, if you know what I mean.
If an accident does occur, it is not the first cops on the scene at are the problem as they usually don’t know the laws relating to tyres beyond whether they are bald or not. It’s only when the accident requires the accident investigation squad to attend the scene that the wrong tyres would become a problem as these cops do know there job.
So at this point in time I’m stuck with these pieces of junk for tyres and this is the only complaint I have about my LR.
Back to the question, have you got any problems with your new LR and regards.

Originally posted by drivesafe
Back to the question, have you got any problems with your new LR and regards.

None whatsoever. Well, bending the track rod was my fault.

No complaints about build quality, driveability, anything.

All good.

Its all good so far only 4500km though [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif[/img]

I mentioned in the first posting on this subject that I had had a front transfer box fail. When it did, the Rangy was not drivable. Something the service people were a bit mystified about because apparently early Land Rovers could still be driven, all be it a slow speed.
Can anyone clarify this for me.
Regards 8)

Hi DiscoTDi, this is not a dig just queries and I know it’s not run it yet but how is your fuel consumption so far.
Regards 8)