| auszookers.com https://auszookers.com/forum/ |
|
| 33 or 35s and which sort https://auszookers.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=5233 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | mcwilly [ Tue Jun 16, 2009 12:22 am ] |
| Post subject: | 33 or 35s and which sort |
lookin at new tyres was tinkin simex pedes or mt117 silverstones in a 33 or 35 not sure is there any other good tyres? |
|
| Author: | kenn [ Tue Jun 16, 2009 1:12 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 33 or 35s and which sort |
Silverstone mt117 sports 285/ 75 /16. cant go wrong. |
|
| Author: | joeblow [ Tue Jun 16, 2009 1:30 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 33 or 35s and which sort |
kenn wrote: Silverstone mt117 sports 285/ 75 /16. cant go wrong.
now now kenn, don't go upseting the g-man for your lack of tech on your answer, as i am still applying lotion on my backside from the arse whoopin he gave me on outers on a recent thread. (you know i love getting my backside worked on  )
sorry kenn, i know you have driven just about any tire you can get your hands on but others don't. hell, i might even add some tech after good news week.........and some bourbonskis.... |
|
| Author: | Trojan [ Tue Jun 16, 2009 2:02 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 33 or 35s and which sort |
joeblow wrote: hell, i might even add some tech after good news week.........and some bourbonskis....
Can you do it all via PM, i'll even beg for it. |
|
| Author: | joeblow [ Tue Jun 16, 2009 2:22 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 33 or 35s and which sort |
Trojan wrote: joeblow wrote: hell, i might even add some tech after good news week.........and some bourbonskis.... Can you do it all via PM, i'll even beg for it. haha.........you know you want it trojan...........beg harder boy......
|
|
| Author: | Trojan [ Tue Jun 16, 2009 2:29 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 33 or 35s and which sort |
joeblow wrote: Trojan wrote: joeblow wrote: hell, i might even add some tech after good news week.........and some bourbonskis.... Can you do it all via PM, i'll even beg for it. haha.........you know you want it trojan...........beg harder boy...... Come on, please, don't drip feed it to me. |
|
| Author: | joeblow [ Tue Jun 16, 2009 2:48 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 33 or 35s and which sort |
ok............i'll add some tech............ what is it you want the tyres to do?.....'look ace'.....or be a good all-rounder? i will share some of my veiws.....but note: my views are my views, some people may not like my views, but i will only offer views on tyres i have tried, if my views are not liked by other viewers please feel free to to bitch and moan to me about it, i will get around to it as soon as i stop having a life...... ok....enough of that stuff...... for myself and other zooks i have built i will not recommend and or warranty anything that exceeds 33 inches. i do this becuase larger than 33 inch tyres will usually cop flack from...well....cops. larger than 33 inch tyres will also place extra stress on the driveline. this can be overcome, but at the end of the day 35's have not gotten much further than a zook on 33's. as for brands of tyres well just just an open can and really comes down to personel opinion and taste. i really, really used to hate claws......but i then did a test with said tyres with another vehicle running swampers (which at the time most of us were running). the claws blew me away with thier performance, that day onwards i didn't have any bad things to say bout them.....sorry i lie....they are a little on the pricey side. old school bfg's were also a not-too-bad performer, but when the ko's came out some awefull performance was noted. i ran swampers and will never, ever go back to that type of tyre, i value my life a lot more and also other road users. not grippy enough on the black top, horrible on wet corners, but they were ok off road. kelly tyres were great for the price one paid. good on raod, and good off road. no extra ordinary things to say, but no real negative things to say either. my choice of tyre these days is the silverstone mt 117 sport....yes not the extreme....the sport. i find it gives me the (allmost) best of both worlds. its great in the wet on the blck stuff, and i can say no other tyre of that type has pulled me up so well. off road has been great, from mud to sand to rocks to pedestrians........woops....ignore that last comment....seriously kenn has some awesome footage of the rocks we drove in tassie.....verty impressive. i cannot say enough good things about them, i even have a spare set in the shed waiting for when these are tired.....and so does kenn. but like i said these are my opinions only after many years trying lots of other brands. our tests were based on vehicles with the following set ups..... 33's only..... all vehicles ran tubes.... all vehicles had lockers..... all vehicles had power steer..... we all had 1.6 engines. auto and manual. and on the silvers i have had only one punture.........(damn those wood type people and thier long freakin nails....) hope this has been of some help. |
|
| Author: | Gwagensteve [ Tue Jun 16, 2009 3:30 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 33 or 35s and which sort |
swampers, as per outers. PM for details, or something. Steve. |
|
| Author: | mcwilly [ Tue Jun 16, 2009 3:33 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 33 or 35s and which sort |
thanks mate. great help. i am rethinking the 35 idea for one the size but also the price |
|
| Author: | hooki [ Tue Jun 16, 2009 7:58 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 33 or 35s and which sort |
i'v got some mt117 extremes on my sierra and they perform realy well on rocks and mud, however in the sand aren't great as all they like to do is dig. In the wet on the road they seem to be alright however iám yet to test at high speed. Also if your planning to daily drive your sierra these probably aren't the best tyre to use, they are very loud, provide a choppy ride, use more fuel and make it harder to sit on a higher speed. Those mt117 sports look like a good all rounder as mentioned by joe. Oh and also, silverstone seem to be very well priced. |
|
| Author: | kenn [ Wed Jun 17, 2009 12:05 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 33 or 35s and which sort |
GwagonStevie, have you ever driven on any thing other than swampers ? Their old tech even there new tech is old tech IE: side walls you can hold a bus up with(no flex), compounds equivalent to rock , and do they know what a radial is yet? OK so off road they work like a mud tyre, so what bald Kelly DTR"s on a Suzuki work like a mud tyre too! Oh and they handle on bitumen like a sperm whale covered in sperm. You know i once loved them but i have moved on now . 
|
|
| Author: | Mike [ Wed Jun 17, 2009 12:11 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 33 or 35s and which sort |
kenn wrote: they handle on bitumen like a sperm whale covered in sperm.
 hahahahahahahahaha
|
|
| Author: | shep [ Wed Jun 17, 2009 12:43 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 33 or 35s and which sort |
Mike wrote: kenn wrote: they handle on bitumen like a sperm whale covered in sperm. hahahahahahahahaha need photo's cos i cant quite picture it.
|
|
| Author: | mcwilly [ Wed Jun 17, 2009 1:15 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 33 or 35s and which sort |
lol interesting concept lol |
|
| Author: | Gwagensteve [ Wed Jun 17, 2009 3:30 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 33 or 35s and which sort |
kenn wrote: GwagonStevie, have you ever driven on any thing other than swampers ? Their old tech even there new tech is old tech IE: side walls you can hold a bus up with(no flex), compounds equivalent to rock , and do they know what a radial is yet? OK so off road they work like a mud tyre, so what bald Kelly DTR"s on a Suzuki work like a mud tyre too!
Oh and they handle on bitumen like a sperm whale covered in sperm. You know i once loved them but i have moved on now . I have no problem with sidewall flex with a load range C tyre on a suzuki. there ar some very stiff swampers available, which is why it's important to buy the right load range tyre for the job (that's true for every tyre, not just a swamper) Radials suck offroad. I've driven on plenty of tyres, and we've done some very interesting tyre comparisons over the years. I'll stick to my Swampers thanks. A key factor is also related to sizing. I can get the right ground pressure and contact patch shape simultaneously on a sierra with a swamper, something not possible with pretty much every other tyre. Of course I just actually like them for no justifiable reason, I'm not prepared to discuss why, and I've never seen anything else work offroad. Steve. |
|
| Author: | kenn [ Thu Jun 18, 2009 1:29 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 33 or 35s and which sort |
So the simple answer to both my questions then is no ! At the moment I have 5 different sets of tyre's on rims for my Suzuki's. My preference is the MT117 Sports for at least a couple of reasons along with the obvious ones that Joe mentioned, One they are DOT legal , unlike bias ply tyres . No bias ply tyre (on a car) is DOT legal (they don't stop or turn corners very well) so the cops will put your car off the road instantly. This includes Silverstone MT117's +MT117 Extremes , Simex pede's+JT2's, Swampers all but one ,etc.etc. Two is price , they are the best value for money i have come across... Food for thought.
|
|
| Author: | Gwagensteve [ Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:11 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 33 or 35s and which sort |
No, the simple answer to your questions is yes. I just didn't reply with "I think Silverstones are great" sorry for any disappointment. I think they are OK from what I've seen, but they don't come in any sizes I'm interested in, except the plain old MT117 in 285/85/16. I think they are cool but only once grooved. I've seen and driven on Simex 'pedes and no question they outperform Swampers, on a sierra, on slick climbs. The key is that's the only place they are better, and as an example, they suck on rock. Swampers are 100% DOT legal, however, they are not ADR approved. The DOT approval refers to the US DOT. They are 100% legal on any car in Australia that pre-dates the ADR for tyres, which was introduced in 1973. Unfortunately, that means they aren't legal on any Australian Suzuki. Bias ply tyres are completely, 100% totally legal, on some suzukis. My 1.0 trayback and your LJ50 came on bias ply tyres. (Bar treads) and they are perfectly legal where they are placarded or were originally fitted. In fact, so long as the other conditions are met, I do not believe there is any law that requires any car to run radial tyres. I'll just reiterate, your point about non-radial tyres being illegal is incorrect. Steve. |
|
| Author: | kenn [ Fri Jun 19, 2009 1:18 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 33 or 35s and which sort |
Steve, i rechecked my information and it seems that i am wright. A tyre that does not have a DOT stamp is illegal on Australian roads. Light truck tyres are different and are legal as long as they are on a light truck , which no Suzuki is classed as. If you don't believe me then go to a police station and ask them to look at your car and tell you if it is legal.. PS :Take some money for the cab fare home as well.
|
|
| Author: | Gwagensteve [ Fri Jun 19, 2009 9:29 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 33 or 35s and which sort |
Yay! Swampers are legal then- after all they are DOT approved! You're confusing DOT and ADR's. DOT is a US system, and all tyres sold in Australia will have a DOT approval. The problem is that without an ADR compliant speed rating, the DOT approval is meaningless - the tyre still isn't legal on the road for any car covered by the ADR for tyres. In a car that's pre 1973, you'll still have to run tyres with a DOT highway approval or they won't be legal for highway use, but you don't require the ADR speed/load rating system. It's a moot point anyway- any tyre that's not DOT approved has "NHS" or NOT FOR HIGHWAY SERVICE on it, making it clearly and instantly illegal for a road car on a public road. Note, this isn't the case with many tractor tyres, as they are used on highway and at reasonable speed. Swampers are legal int he US, and are DOT approved. They are not ADR approved. Steve. |
|
| Author: | kenn [ Fri Jun 19, 2009 10:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 33 or 35s and which sort |
So all that jiba jaba means is that swampers aren't legal and Silverstone MT117 SPORTS are, yeah 
|
|
| Author: | Brett [ Fri Jun 19, 2009 11:42 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 33 or 35s and which sort |
Gwagensteve wrote: Yay! Swampers are legal then- after all they are DOT approved!
You're confusing DOT and ADR's. DOT is a US system, and all tyres sold in Australia will have a DOT approval. The problem is that without an ADR compliant speed rating, the DOT approval is meaningless - the tyre still isn't legal on the road for any car covered by the ADR for tyres. In a car that's pre 1973, you'll still have to run tyres with a DOT highway approval or they won't be legal for highway use, but you don't require the ADR speed/load rating system. It's a moot point anyway- any tyre that's not DOT approved has "NHS" or NOT FOR HIGHWAY SERVICE on it, making it clearly and instantly illegal for a road car on a public road. Note, this isn't the case with many tractor tyres, as they are used on highway and at reasonable speed. Swampers are legal int he US, and are DOT approved. They are not ADR approved. Steve. so how fast car you drive on the swampers before they are legal? i'm not having a dig but as far as i know every tyre that is on aus roads has to be speed rated to be driven on the roads. |
|
| Author: | shep [ Sat Jun 20, 2009 12:04 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 33 or 35s and which sort |
Brett wrote: i'm not having a dig but as far as i know ever tyre that is on aus roads has to be speed rated to be driven on the roads. unless you are in the NT. thankfully our gov has realised that there are other things to consider. the tyres that i have on my wagon dont match the tyre placard and have a much lower load and speed rating. however they are legal in the nt and are covered by my insurance co(nt gov owned co) i have this on my policy and as a bonus i dont need to be on a designated road to make a clam. |
|
| Author: | mcwilly [ Sat Jun 20, 2009 4:22 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 33 or 35s and which sort |
mines classed as light commercial does that change anything |
|
| Author: | mcwilly [ Sat Jun 20, 2009 4:25 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 33 or 35s and which sort |
to run these tyres the wheel track is increased to much anyway so everything is illegal and cant be engineered aand i think youll find that anything over 33 including has to be engineered |
|
| Author: | kenn [ Sat Jun 20, 2009 11:31 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 33 or 35s and which sort |
The MT117's come in a 31/10r/15 as well ,just if any one want's to know. 
|
|
| Author: | joeblow [ Sat Jun 20, 2009 4:25 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 33 or 35s and which sort |
if there is no speed and load rating on a tyre you will have buckleys of an engineer passing it. do swampers have load and speed ratings? |
|
| Author: | Gwagensteve [ Sat Jun 20, 2009 11:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 33 or 35s and which sort |
Swampers are not load or speed rated in accordance with the ADR, so they are not road legal on any car covered by the relevant ADR for tyres, which applies from 1973 onwards. A light commercial can legally be engineered on a larger tyre than a passenger complied sierras as they ran a taller tyre stock, so the NCOP +50mm rule will allow a 31 X 10.5, not normally possible on a passenger complied Sierra. Light commercial sierras were sold on crossply tyres, but unfortunately, the ADR for tyre ratings still applies, so swampers are a no-no. Steve. |
|
| Author: | kenn [ Sat Jun 20, 2009 11:49 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 33 or 35s and which sort |
I didn't think the designer and manufacturer of Simex tyres would lie about that sort of stuff...
And he didn't... |
|
| Author: | Gwagensteve [ Sat Jun 20, 2009 11:56 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 33 or 35s and which sort |
WTF? |
|
| Author: | weaves [ Sun Jun 21, 2009 1:41 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 33 or 35s and which sort |
After test fitting and flexing up a old 35 MTR (measured 34.5") on mcwilly's zook tonight i think i've convinced him (with alot of flexing and going "c'mon" repeatedly) to go for a 35. They fill the guards in relation to the lift great. Not much heavier than a 31, and from his reports are cheaper than the 32's he was looking at. weaves |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC + 9:30 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|