15x8 vs. 15x10

Post by **MQ080** » Sun Sep 28, 2003 10:16 pm

For a 35/12.5 what do people think is the best way to go.... no "theories" - i could make these up myself. I'm sure there are people out there that have tried both... your thoughts please.

I know there are a lot of other factors want a bit of an idea

Post by **Kev80** » Sun Sep 28, 2003 10:21 pm

I have tried both & like my 10" rims.

I think if you intend to to drop your tyre pressure down low the 8" rim could be beter if not bead locked.
The tyres fill out beter on the 10" rims and make them look fatter. :cool:

Also think the tread is flatter so it wears evenly.

Only illegal in QLD though ! :bad-words:

Post by **MUSS** » Sun Sep 28, 2003 10:36 pm

Kev80 wrote:I have tried both & like my 10" rims.

I think if you intend to to drop your tyre pressure down low the 8" rim could be beter if not bead locked.
The tyres fill out beter on the 10" rims and make them look fatter.
Also think the tread is flatter so it wears evenly.

Only illegal in QLD though !

bugger me... why they only legal in qld????? i think im gonna have to go 16x10s when i go procomp X terrains (315x75x16r) hmmmm do they even make 16x10 rims?????

Post by **MQ080** » Sun Sep 28, 2003 10:39 pm

16x10's do exist

Post by **Kev80** » Sun Sep 28, 2003 10:45 pm

JAKE wrote: bugger me... why they only legal in qld?????

illegal = not legal in QLD :finger:

JAKE wrote: do they even make 16x10 rims?????

Yup, i have 10x16 rims running 315/75/16 muds.

Post by **MUSS** » Sun Sep 28, 2003 10:48 pm

awwe teh he teh he i can read :roll:

what make are they kev... MANGELS??? what price did you get em for?

Post by **Kev80** » Sun Sep 28, 2003 10:54 pm

Mickey Thompson classic 2 (alloy) imported from OS through USA 4x4. :cool:

Nice rims but not cheap, couple hundred $$$ each.

Post by **MQ080** » Sun Sep 28, 2003 11:04 pm

Yeah the only 16x10's i can think of are through the states, casue that seems to be the norm over there

Post by **auto_eng** » Mon Sep 29, 2003 12:38 pm

Are you sure they are illegal in Qld?

I thought the rule for width was largest manufactures option plus 30% for the tyre and the rim just had to be suitable for that tyre?

Could be wrong. They used to have max rim widths but they got dropped.

Post by **bogged** » Mon Sep 29, 2003 1:34 pm

also illegal in Vic, and NSW from whats been talked about 298472984792834792374928347 times before.

Post by **Wendle** » Mon Sep 29, 2003 2:32 pm

bogged wrote:also illegal in Vic, and NSW from whats been talked about 298472984792834792374928347 times before.

the dude that posted above you is an engineering signatory, and he is right, the rules are a changing.

Post by **Kev80** » Mon Sep 29, 2003 2:47 pm

Wendle wrote:the dude that posted above you is an engineering signatory, and he is right, the rules are a changing.

Good point, just because something has been discused before doesn't mean nothing has changed.

Auto_eng, Are things changing ?
I heard they may bring all states inline with each other, if so would we be beter off or worse ?

BTW- like ya email address ! :twisted:

Post by **bogged** » Mon Sep 29, 2003 3:33 pm

Wendle wrote: the rules are a changing.

Are doesnt mean have...

Is that part of the ADR rules going national (which I thought they were, but are different from state to state? eg QLD is tight as a nuns nasty on what you can and cant do.... ) cause thats been happening since jesus played in the centers for Jerusalem under 10D's...

Personally I dont see what the problem with wider rims is from the authorities side, I cant see a dangerous side of the argument... anyone got an idea? Or is it just being anal?

Post by **robbie54** » Mon Sep 29, 2003 3:44 pm

IVE GOT 30 OF THESE IN STOCK AT THE MOMENT.THEY RETAIL AT $376.00 EACH BUT FOR MEMBERS OF THIS SITE I TAKE OFF 5%

CHEERS
ROBBIE

Post by **Kev80** » Mon Sep 29, 2003 4:01 pm

bogged wrote:Personally I dont see what the problem with wider rims is from the authorities side, I cant see a dangerous side of the argument... anyone got an idea? Or is it just being anal?

Could it be the bead is not seated as well ?
Or does it change the offset ? (just a guessing)

Post by **MUSS** » Mon Sep 29, 2003 4:19 pm

the reason why wider tyers are illegal in other states is purely because the tyres will sit proud of the guards no matter what off set... and if a vehicle runs one of these while both vehicles are movin it can an wil project the car sky ward..... air borne....weeeeeeee....... :shock:

......LOOK AT ME MUMMY :finger:

Post by **Wendle** » Mon Sep 29, 2003 4:33 pm

increased track width and increased leverage on steering and suspension bits.

Post by **MUSS** » Mon Sep 29, 2003 4:43 pm

Wendle wrote:increased track width and increased leverage on steering and suspension bits.

but thats not why you cant legally road them... been told that its purely a safety issue

Post by **MQ080** » Mon Sep 29, 2003 4:46 pm

Robbie54 what type of rims are you talking about? 15x10 steels? I'll do a set with -44 offset for $175ea Outerlimits member or non :cool:

Post by **Kev80** » Mon Sep 29, 2003 4:58 pm

MQ080 wrote:Robbie54 what type of rims are you talking about? 15x10 steels? I'll do a set with -44 offset for $175ea Outerlimits member or non

I think he's talking about the 16x10 Mickey Thompson classic 2 (alloy)

Post by **MQ080** » Mon Sep 29, 2003 4:59 pm

Oh well, i'll under cut him with them too

Post by **CRUSHU** » Mon Sep 29, 2003 7:44 pm

the problem with extra load on steering and axle components is the safety issue when your axle breaks as you do 100kph on the onramp to the bolte bridge, or any other high speed situation, when your car or truck unexpectantly becomes a trike!

Post by **auto_eng** » Tue Sep 30, 2003 8:10 am

I'm not sure that there is one particular reason why limits are set for alternative rims and tyres but both above make sense.

The ADR's (Australian Design Rules) are the rules that must be met when a vehicle is first manufactured. This certification is done at a Federal Level. Once a vehicle is registered and used on the road it becomes a state level and the states get to make up their own rules/guidelines. Just because your modification meets the ADR does not mean it will meet the state guidelines

There is good and bad to different schemes. Each vehicle when certifed for the first time has to meet the relevant ADR for braking systems. Fitting larger diameter tyres decreases the effectiveness of the brake system so I think that is why they set limits.

There are certification schemes available at a Federal Level for new vehicles. If you were really keen you could take a new Criuser Ute (just and example) and put the biggest set of tyres on it you could find that were still an aproved combination and gain approval (called a second stage of manufacture) but you would have to prove the vehicle still meets the ADR's affected - brakes, ligh layout, rims size, rim selection, turning circle . This would mean a full brake test amongst other things. This test includes a lane change manouver fully laden.

Basically if you want to take full advantage for the ADR limits as opposed to the state limits you need to be ready to shell out the cash and get the approvals. Not cheap!

If you don't want to blow all your cash on approvals then you have to stick within the limits set by the states.

Can I take a minute to mention my posts are provided for infomation only. Please don't think if I say something is not legal or approvalbe that I am saying you should change it or should not have done it. I'm not the police - some people just want to know where they stand.

Post by **Wendle** » Tue Sep 30, 2003 8:12 am

JAKE wrote:
Wendle wrote:increased track width and increased leverage on steering and suspension bits.

but thats not why you cant legally road them...

Yes it is. More than 25mm increased track width gets the authorites "UP IN ARMS"

Post by **MQ080** » Tue Sep 30, 2003 8:45 am

auto_eng wrote:There are certification schemes available at a Federal Level for new vehicles. If you were really keen you could take a new Criuser Ute (just and example) and put the biggest set of tyres on it you could find that were still an aproved combination and gain approval (called a second stage of manufacture) but you would have to prove the vehicle still meets the ADR's affected - brakes, ligh layout, rims size, rim selection, turning circle . This would mean a full brake test amongst other things. This test includes a lane change manouver fully laden.

Can I take a minute to mention my posts are provided for infomation only. Please don't think if I say something is not legal or approvalbe that I am saying you should change it or should not have done it. I'm not the police - some people just want to know where they stand.

Auto are you telling me it's advice only, I just bought a new cruiser ute like you said... can you also give advice how to pay it off?

Post by **MUSS** » Tue Sep 30, 2003 6:56 pm

Wendle wrote:
JAKE wrote:
Wendle wrote:increased track width and increased leverage on steering and suspension bits.

but thats not why you cant legally road them...

Yes it is. More than 25mm increased track width gets the authorites "UP IN ARMS"

ILL GIVE YA THAT ONE WENDLE... ARMS UP TO THE LOT OF YA :finger:

Post by **robbie54** » Wed Oct 01, 2003 11:18 am

yeah I WAS TALKING ABOUT 16X10 M/T CLASSIC 2

Post by **WOLF** » Fri Oct 03, 2003 2:04 am

Even if you decided to run 10" rims and you were worried about the wheel sticking out of your guard you do have a few RIM OFFSET options,maybe not so much here in OZ but over in the states you can get ANYTHING.
I think it adds some extra stability to a lifted fourbe too. :roll:

Post by **MQ080** » Fri Oct 03, 2003 2:48 pm

Who increases their height without increasing track.... that makes t r u c k s verrrryyy ssllleeeppppy

Post by **MUSS** » Fri Oct 03, 2003 3:40 pm

MQ080 wrote:Who increases their height without increasing track.... that makes t r u c k s verrrryyy ssllleeeppppy

WTF.....vry sleepy????? :roll:

????????

Outer Limits 4x4 Board

15x8 vs. 15x10

15x8 vs. 15x10

16x10 mickey thompson classic 2

rims

Who is online