| Author |
Message |
SSSIERA
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2011 1:26 pm Posts: 1770 Location: Perth's RUF
|
 Posted: Wed Apr 27, 2011 12:21 pm |
|
|
what are the standard tyres size for a sierra
_________________ THINKING BEFORE POSTING!!!
|
|
|
|
 |
Fatzook

az supporter
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 11:30 pm Posts: 14977 Location: The Hills
Vehicle: Vitara, NGV
|
 Posted: Wed Apr 27, 2011 12:24 pm |
|
|
205/70 15
_________________ 2013 GV 1998 SV420 ute
|
|
|
|
 |
Choppy

az supporter
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:30 pm Posts: 1074 Location: sunshinecoast
|
 Posted: Wed Apr 27, 2011 12:24 pm |
|
|
not sure but 26" i think
edit: beaten
|
|
|
|
 |
Gwagensteve
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 10:30 pm Posts: 13007 Location: Melbourne
|
 Posted: Wed Apr 27, 2011 12:34 pm |
|
|
H7815 for JX NT's
6.00X16 for "commercial" 1.3's and 1.0 litres.
205/70/15 for WT's (mid 1988 onwards)
Maruti's stuck with H7815 AFAIK.
Steve.
|
|
|
|
 |
SSSIERA
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2011 1:26 pm Posts: 1770 Location: Perth's RUF
|
 Posted: Wed Apr 27, 2011 12:35 pm |
|
|
cheers
edit: all of you
_________________ THINKING BEFORE POSTING!!!
|
|
|
|
 |
SSSIERA
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2011 1:26 pm Posts: 1770 Location: Perth's RUF
|
 Posted: Wed Apr 27, 2011 12:37 pm |
|
|
without gearing what should i put on my sierra, i wanna go as big as possible without any gear box probs is 30s pushing it
_________________ THINKING BEFORE POSTING!!!
|
|
|
|
 |
Fatzook

az supporter
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 11:30 pm Posts: 14977 Location: The Hills
Vehicle: Vitara, NGV
|
 Posted: Wed Apr 27, 2011 12:44 pm |
|
You won't have any gearbox probs. You'll just get sick of changing gears everytime there is a 1 degree incline or someone in the car infront farts, causing the resulting flatulant wind to slow your vehicle.
No bigger than 30's would be my vote.
_________________ 2013 GV 1998 SV420 ute
|
|
|
|
 |
Gwagensteve
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 10:30 pm Posts: 13007 Location: Melbourne
|
 Posted: Wed Apr 27, 2011 12:45 pm |
|
|
30's is borderline depending on the terrain you drive.
Steve.
|
|
|
|
 |
S13RR4
Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2009 11:30 pm Posts: 1072 Location: Sunshine Coast
|
 Posted: Wed Apr 27, 2011 12:59 pm |
|
|
I noticed 29's with my 1.3L
Choppy didn't as much with his 1.6L
I have 1lt transfer case now and its much better
_________________ My Rig --> Click WWW
|
|
|
|
 |
alien
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 10:30 pm Posts: 16343 Location: Perth
Vehicle: '92 Sierra, 1.6efi, SPOA, 31s.
|
 Posted: Wed Apr 27, 2011 1:03 pm |
|
|
215/75r15 if you want to keep a usable low range... if you're driving sand a 235 would be "get-away-with-able" in my opinion.
dont forget a 215/75r15 is 6.5% larger than factory... so when the speedo reads 100km/hr you're really doing 106.6 etc... same affects your lower down speeds... where right now you might do say 1000 rpm in 1st gear, crawling along... rev it to around 1100rpm and imagine that being the slowest you can go.
there comes a point where you're just going too fast to be controlled going over things and end up riding the clutch all day to keep it slow.
_________________ 
|
|
|
|
 |
ando_zook94
Joined: Sun May 09, 2010 9:23 pm Posts: 263 Location: brissy
|
 Posted: Wed Apr 27, 2011 10:53 pm |
|
|
I got 30's with the standard 1.3 n gearing.
Hills r not your friend:/
Ended up in 2nd on the highway haha
_________________ If in doubt power out!
Last edited by ando_zook94 on Wed Apr 27, 2011 11:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
|
|
 |
SierraDan

az supporter
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2011 10:55 pm Posts: 9348 Location: Newcastle
Vehicle: G13BB Jimny
|
 Posted: Wed Apr 27, 2011 11:07 pm |
|
|
Geez.. I've got 31's and just barely had to drop back to 3rd up a hill.
But agree that it's crap without gearing mods. I wouldn't go up from 235's without gearing.
_________________ mlm
|
|
|
|
 |
dawsey
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2010 10:30 pm Posts: 218 Location: perth
|
 Posted: Thu Apr 28, 2011 4:10 am |
|
|
Ive got 235 on mine .untouched gears.I can notice it but still very drivable on the highway and low range..wouldnt go any bigger..after awhile you forget what stockos drive like anyway.
|
|
|
|
 |
Moph

az supporter
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 11:30 pm Posts: 2535 Location: Perth
Vehicle: 93 Sierra
|
 Posted: Thu Apr 28, 2011 4:50 am |
|
|
I had 235/75R15's on mine with stock gearing ... fine on the highway (better even) but not great offroad. Burnt way too much clutch saving the rest of the driveline.
|
|
|
|
 |
SSSIERA
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2011 1:26 pm Posts: 1770 Location: Perth's RUF
|
 Posted: Thu Apr 28, 2011 7:55 am |
|
|
i dont realy care if i have to piss other drivers of by going slow, but i do care if ima need a new clutch. sigh i was thinking 28s but i wanna go bigger
_________________ THINKING BEFORE POSTING!!!
|
|
|
|
 |
SSSIERA
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2011 1:26 pm Posts: 1770 Location: Perth's RUF
|
 Posted: Thu Apr 28, 2011 7:55 am |
|
|
recon the small tyres r gona look shite with a 4 inch lift
_________________ THINKING BEFORE POSTING!!!
|
|
|
|
 |
Fatzook

az supporter
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 11:30 pm Posts: 14977 Location: The Hills
Vehicle: Vitara, NGV
|
 Posted: Thu Apr 28, 2011 7:56 am |
|
SSSIERA wrote: recon the small tyres r gona look shite with a 4 inch lift
Yep!
_________________ 2013 GV 1998 SV420 ute
|
|
|
|
 |
SierraDan

az supporter
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2011 10:55 pm Posts: 9348 Location: Newcastle
Vehicle: G13BB Jimny
|
 Posted: Thu Apr 28, 2011 8:11 am |
|
|
Yeah that's a given. Stock tyres look crap on a TWO inch lift.
_________________ mlm
|
|
|
|
 |
bohuler

az supporter
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 9:18 am Posts: 1376 Location: Avonsleigh, Victoria
|
 Posted: Thu Apr 28, 2011 8:32 am |
|
|
My lwb has 215, 75, 15's and thats whats one the tire placard so i thought it was standard. Mine is an 85 n/t lwb and its also the smallest bfg will do a km2 muddy altho you can't get the buggers atm.
Dave
_________________ Life's short, fiddle with your willy while you can
|
|
|
|
 |
Gwagensteve
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 10:30 pm Posts: 13007 Location: Melbourne
|
 Posted: Thu Apr 28, 2011 8:53 am |
|
bohuler wrote: My lwb has 215, 75, 15's and thats whats one the tire placard so i thought it was standard. Mine is an 85 n/t lwb and its also the smallest bfg will do a km2 muddy altho you can't get the buggers atm. Dave
I don't believe you. I have an 86 N/T LWB and it's H 78 15.
Personally, I think 215 is too small to spend money on. A 235 is a much better option.
Steve.
|
|
|
|
 |
bohuler

az supporter
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 9:18 am Posts: 1376 Location: Avonsleigh, Victoria
|
 Posted: Thu Apr 28, 2011 9:32 am |
|
ok i stand corrected. i would of sworn that they said 215 :p So can you explain why the fu&*k don't they have the tyre size. WTF does FR 78-15 mean?
Could someone explain the number here?
Dave
_________________ Life's short, fiddle with your willy while you can
|
|
|
|
 |
303zuke

az supporter
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 11:30 pm Posts: 2447
Vehicle: LJ50V, SJ70
|
 Posted: Thu Apr 28, 2011 1:12 pm |
|
Gwagensteve wrote: bohuler wrote: My lwb has 215, 75, 15's and thats whats one the tire placard so i thought it was standard. Mine is an 85 n/t lwb and its also the smallest bfg will do a km2 muddy altho you can't get the buggers atm. Dave I don't believe you. I have an 86 N/T LWB and it's H 78 15. Steve.
Can we see a pic of the H78 15 placard? I've always thought the JX NT's were FR78 Bridgestones?
|
|
|
|
 |
303zuke

az supporter
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 11:30 pm Posts: 2447
Vehicle: LJ50V, SJ70
|
 Posted: Thu Apr 28, 2011 1:21 pm |
|
bohuler wrote: So can you explain why the fu&*k don't they have the tyre size. WTF does FR 78-15 mean?
Could someone explain the number here?
Dave
FR78 15 is an older tyre size, but not as old as the 6.00-16 style sizing. The 78 means it is a 78% aspect ratio tyre, while sizes A, B, C etc get bigger. The R means it's a radial tyre. 15 is for a 15" rim. A FR78 15 is approximately equivalent to a 205/75-15. Note that the widetracks had a 205/70-15 tyre, which is lower profile than a FR78 and smaller diameter, which is why they changed from 3.9 diffs to 3.7.
6.00-16 is a 100% aspect ratio tyre that nominally is 6 inches in section width and 6 inches in height (although they are rarely exactly these dimensions) for a 16" rim.
|
|
|
|
 |
remydog05
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2008 10:30 pm Posts: 1260 Location: Vic
|
 Posted: Fri Apr 29, 2011 10:26 am |
|
Gwagensteve wrote: H7815 for JX NT's
6.00X16 for "commercial" 1.3's and 1.0 litres.
205/70/15 for WT's (mid 1988 onwards)
Maruti's stuck with H7815 AFAIK.
Steve.
So going by this the NT 1.3 was known as a commercial?
What measurement in our current sizes do these compare too?
EG a 30/9.5 or 29?? 31??
|
|
|
|
 |
303zuke

az supporter
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 11:30 pm Posts: 2447
Vehicle: LJ50V, SJ70
|
 Posted: Fri Apr 29, 2011 1:34 pm |
|
|
There were 2 spec levels for the NT Sierras, JA and JX.
JA was the commercial or basic version and had 6.00-16 bar tread tyres. The body had no flares, there was no Tacho or dash clock, vinyl floor mats and low-back seats.
JX had FR78-15 tyres, small rubber flares, Tacho and clock, carpets and cloth seats in Hard-top, full-floor mats in soft-top and better vinyl sears with headrests.
1.0 JA soft-tops had half doors (like Drover). Hi-roof was only available as JX
205/75-15 = 670mm = 26.4in.
FR78-15 = 690mm = 27.1in.
6.00-16 = 725mm = 28.1in.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
|
|
|
|
 |
alien
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 10:30 pm Posts: 16343 Location: Perth
Vehicle: '92 Sierra, 1.6efi, SPOA, 31s.
|
 Posted: Fri Apr 29, 2011 1:40 pm |
|
http://www.turbinecar.com/tires.htm
has a good chart.
the 6.00-16 is what most people use to argue engineering a larger tyre size too, cos going from a 28 to a 31 is only a 10.7% increase rather than the 19.2% increase over a 205/70r15.
_________________ 
|
|
|
|
 |
Gwagensteve
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 10:30 pm Posts: 13007 Location: Melbourne
|
 Posted: Fri Apr 29, 2011 11:57 pm |
|
303zuke wrote: Can we see a pic of the H78 15 placard? I've always thought the JX NT's were FR78 Bridgestones?
My bad - F78 not H78.
Steve.
|
|
|
|
 |
SSSIERA
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2011 1:26 pm Posts: 1770 Location: Perth's RUF
|
 Posted: Sat Apr 30, 2011 11:10 am |
|
 TO MANY DIFFERENT NUMBERS 
_________________ THINKING BEFORE POSTING!!!
|
|
|
|
 |
TZAR

az supporter
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 11:30 pm Posts: 3461 Location: licking some windows
Vehicle: LJ20 LJ50
|
 Posted: Sat Apr 30, 2011 11:14 am |
|
303zuke wrote: bohuler wrote: So can you explain why the fu&*k don't they have the tyre size. WTF does FR 78-15 mean?
Could someone explain the number here?
Dave FR78 15 is an older tyre size, but not as old as the 6.00-16 style sizing. The 78 means it is a 78% aspect ratio tyre, while sizes A, B, C etc get bigger. The R means it's a radial tyre. 15 is for a 15" rim. A FR78 15 is approximately equivalent to a [url=http://tireguides.com/print_friendly2.asp?.
The alpha numeric size tyres where about load ratings. The letter dictated how much load a tyre could carry. Stupid american attempt at sizing. Wish they would just get with the metric system....
_________________ Camels have nice toes
|
|
|
|
 |
atari4x4

az supporter
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 10:30 pm Posts: 34842 Location: East Radelayed
Vehicle: SV420+SV620 Vitara's
|
 Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2011 2:32 pm |
|
Gwagensteve wrote: bohuler wrote: My lwb has 215, 75, 15's and thats whats one the tire placard so i thought it was standard. Mine is an 85 n/t lwb and its also the smallest bfg will do a km2 muddy altho you can't get the buggers atm. Dave I don't believe you. I have an 86 N/T LWB and it's H 78 15. Personally, I think 215 is too small to spend money on. A 235 is a much better option. Steve.
don't believe tyre placards, they are adjustable...

_________________ You're just hating because you don't understand
|
|
|
|
 |
|