Narrow or wide tyres?

This site contains affiliate links for which LandyZone may be compensated if you make a purchase.

Which do you like/prefer/think is best off road?

  • short and narrow

    Votes: 2 3.1%

  • tall and narrow

    Votes: 36 55.4%

  • short and wide

    Votes: 2 3.1%

  • tall and wide

    Votes: 25 38.5%
  • Total voters
    65
blue beasty said:
S'right.......Its not like anyone is going to be stupid enough to do things like lifts and big boots just cause it looks good is it? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
:eek:
to take your quote further,
why do d1kheads in new blinged up flashier an trashier rangies think there the mutts nutts coz there going shopping in the "4 X 4"
Ohhh, look at me, I got a bigger set of chrome wheels than you,
got fook all rubber on them tho`
maybe we should have a section for blinged up tossers,
In over blinged up tossers trucks/cars/
oh,
there landrover/range rovers.....
somebody should leave a calling card under the wipers saying,
TOSSERS.................:doh:
 
goonarmy said:
wotee sed.
The basic set up on landys is a goodun. Me series very often surprised me, nearly as often as it let me down.:doh:
Click to expand...

My series holds its own the majority of the time off-road, on lanes, etc.

The two things which (some would say) 'let it down' are:

1. ground clearance - not got big tyres on it and sometimes ground out on heavily rutted lanes (I guess width is also an issue on rutted lanes too)

2. Speed on motorways travelling to laning areas / off-road sites - only an issue if your not happy chugging along and enjoying life

Copes fine with everything else i've ever done, just as well as a heavily modded 90.
Infact, I sunk it on an off-roading site - got it recovered and it started up fine, someone else then tried the same thing in a 3 year old 90 - it f**ked all his electrics and cost him a fortune to fix.
 
Bump said:
My series holds its own the majority of the time off-road, on lanes, etc.

The two things which (some would say) 'let it down' are:

1. ground clearance - not got big tyres on it and sometimes ground out on heavily rutted lanes (I guess width is also an issue on rutted lanes too)

2. Speed on motorways travelling to laning areas / off-road sites - only an issue if your not happy chugging along and enjoying life

Copes fine with everything else i've ever done, just as well as a heavily modded 90.
Infact, I sunk it on an off-roading site - got it recovered and it started up fine, someone else then tried the same thing in a 3 year old 90 - it f**ked all his electrics and cost him a fortune to fix.
Click to expand...
Not meaning any offense as I love series Landy's as much as any other. But just because it's coped with the same things as a heavily modded 90 hardly means they are of the same off road ability level. Is it not more likely you've just not done anything that extreme in it?

Maybe that's harsh though. :) As said I like Series Landy's, as a family we've had a IIa and a couple of III's, one petrol and one diesel. My bro has also had a Lightweight and I'm currently building up a modded Series III pickup.

But looking at it objectively Series Land Rover's do have some design flaws.
 
With your typical muddy pay & play site in mind, I voted for tall + narrow tyres (say a 205/85+), here's why:

- You'll have more weight per sq inch of tyre on a narrower tyre, which means it will push down through the mud better to find traction, not float on top
- A narrower tyre is less suspectible to rocks jutting out in ruts, whereas with a wide tyre you could be rubbing along both sidewalls = puncture time!
- A taller tyre raises the axles off the ground more, improving ground clearance

Having said that, I run a 235/70/16 on my RRC, as wide as you can go with standard arches/suspension/wheel rims, mainly because it looks great but also because it is a good compromise for my needs - road, offroad, snow, etc.
 
MikeV8SE said:
- You'll have more weight per sq inch of tyre on a narrower tyre, which means it will push down through the mud better to find traction, not float on top
- .
Click to expand...
as i said early on in this fred this statement is the biggest load of tosh ive ever heard and is always put forward by people that have theese miracle tyres that dig down thru mud to get traction

theese miracle tyres will only dig down as far as your diffs will allow

i progressed thru 265/75/16 then 35/10.50/16 then 36/12.50/16 and currently have 35/12.50/15

i would say that the 35/10.50/16 was the optimum size for me
the narrow vs wide will always be an ongoing debate but is very very boring,can we just say that theres people who have skinny tyres and they think there great

and people have wide tyres and think there great
:nothingtoadd:
 
storm99 said:
I'm still searching ebay for these miracle tyres that make a 2ton land rover float...save a fortune on fuel.
Click to expand...

web%20briggs%20wader.jpg


maybe??
 
300bhp/ton said:
web%20briggs%20wader.jpg


maybe??
Click to expand...
:p
ah, a dumper truck!
:D
I bin reading your posts on whos got the biggest, or who`s got the fattest, or who`s got the tallest,
and i also read of those happy with there own size.
(no, not in yer pants)
but all I would say is when looking at ralley cars in the deep snow & ice, they have tall & skinney, but, mostly with studs in, but, very very tough side walls!
seems to work for them guys.
:confused:
we got any members from Scandanavia on here,
what do you use?
 
hiya i have a disco with 7.50 x16 a/t witch came off a defender and its yet to get stuck ! they seem really good :]
 
MikeV8SE said:
You'll have more weight per sq inch of tyre on a narrower tyre, which means it will push down through the mud better to find traction, not float on top
Click to expand...

wiltshire landyman said:
as i said early on in this fred this statement is the biggest load of tosh ive ever heard and is always put forward by people that have theese miracle tyres that dig down thru mud to get traction

theese miracle tyres will only dig down as far as your diffs will allow
Click to expand...

Erm...no, you're wrong. It's called Physics. A smaller footprint will result in more pressure for a given weight/force being placed on it.

I'm not saying that a car will "float" on water, but wider tyres don't sink into soft surfaces as well as narrow tyres do.

This is why all the Icelandic trucks have massive wide tyres (bigger footprint) and a lot of offroaders use fairly narrow tyres on their trucks.

In addition, the taller tyre (narrow and tall vs wide and short) will give the diffs more clearance too, aiding offroad ability further.

Having said that, I've got wide tyres on mine and love 'em :)
 
easye1 said:
:p
ah, a dumper truck!
:D
Click to expand...
Or a 2.5 TD 90 on flotation tyres. Some of which can be road legal.

easye1 said:
I bin reading your posts on whos got the biggest, or who`s got the fattest, or who`s got the tallest,
and i also read of those happy with there own size.
(no, not in yer pants)
but all I would say is when looking at ralley cars in the deep snow & ice, they have tall & skinney, but, mostly with studs in, but, very very tough side walls!
seems to work for them guys.
Click to expand...
Snow and ice maybe, also on rally car in such situations there is an expectations that the snow covers a more solid road or track.

But it's a valid point.

I guess the only counter to this would be to cite the Icelandic trucks such as:
Super-Jeep-Iceland.jpg

ILR-IcelandToursFors_xxy.jpg



Which tend to run very large wide tyres for snow use.
 
300bhp/ton said:
Is a 235 section tyre really a wide tyre?? :confused:
Click to expand...

Yes - it is as wide as you can go on an RRC without arch/suspension mods, and 30mm wider than stock.

I'd say anything between 235-285 is a wide tyre, above that and you're getting to "balloon tyres!" 205-225mm would be stock, 205 and below is narrow I would say.

Here's my old RRC on 205's and my current one on 235's, the latter definitely look wider (because they are) and better for it IMO:

IMG_4550b.jpg

IMG_1260.jpg
 
Last edited:
MikeV8SE said:
Yes - it is as wide as you can go on an RRC without arch/suspension mods, and 30mm wider than stock.

I'd say anything between 235-285 is a wide tyre, above that and you're getting to "balloon tyres!" 205-225mm would be stock, 205 and below is narrow I would say.

Here's my old RRC on 205's and my current one on 235's, the latter definitely look wider (because they are) and better for it IMO:

IMG_4550b.jpg

IMG_1260.jpg
Click to expand...
Yes it does look good and better.

But as you say a 225 was a standard tyre, so a 235 isn't much difference.

And neither is that wide. You can go wider on a stock RR, but you'd likely need to lose some height though.

But in terms of off road tyres for Landy's I'd say it ranks in the narrow category. I also think there is a relationship to height, e.g. a 31.10.50R15 is fairly wide, while I'd say a 35.10.50 is fairly narrow.
 
300bhp/ton said:
Yes it does look good and better.

But as you say a 225 was a standard tyre, so a 235 isn't much difference
Click to expand...

Stock RRC tyre width is 205mm (205/80/16) so the 235 is a good 30mm (15%) wider! And you cannot go wider than 235mm unless you want rubbing on full lock (my 235's do a little, in fact!) and arch problems on the rear. Then you're looking at arch/suspension mods.

As you say, profile makes a big difference too. My 235/70/16's look fairly wide and chunky, yet CarlV8's identical tyres in a 235/85/16 look a lot narrower on his Disco, even though supposedly they are the same width!
 
MikeV8SE said:
Stock RRC tyre width is 205mm (205/80/16) so the 235 is a good 30mm (15%) wider! And you cannot go wider than 235mm unless you want rubbing on full lock (my 235's do a little, in fact!) and arch problems on the rear. Then you're looking at arch/suspension mods.

As you say, profile makes a big difference too. My 235/70/16's look fairly wide and chunky, yet CarlV8's identical tyres in a 235/85/16 look a lot narrower on his Disco, even though supposedly they are the same width!
Click to expand...
Maybe I'm wrong, but I thought 225's where also a standard fit. The RRC was in production for quite a long time.

As for steering, well "adjusting" the steering stops is hardly a modification. And running either wheel spacers or different off set rims would be possible without body or suspension mods, so long as the tyre wasn't too tall.
 
300bhp/ton said:
Not meaning any offense as I love series Landy's as much as any other. But just because it's coped with the same things as a heavily modded 90 hardly means they are of the same off road ability level. Is it not more likely you've just not done anything that extreme in it?

Maybe that's harsh though. :) As said I like Series Landy's, as a family we've had a IIa and a couple of III's, one petrol and one diesel. My bro has also had a Lightweight and I'm currently building up a modded Series III pickup.

But looking at it objectively Series Land Rover's do have some design flaws.
Click to expand...

You should come out with us some time... I definetly do do extreme.

Water over seat level (fully submersed engine bay), mud over tyre height, vertical drops into mud / water pools resulting in landy getting stuck on its bumper at the bottom of the mud (how it didnt sumersault we'll never know) rock crawls which killed 3 out of the 6 landy's in the group (1 tyre popped off, 1 engine blown and 1 rear dif or half shaft issue) and landy on its side from a slight mis judgement of severity of the angle of something!

the 2.25 petrol engine did eventually die on a P&P site though which forced the 200tdi conversion.

But, yes, i agree, there are design flaws with the series which have been addressed in later models (i.e. defenders) I still stand by what it costs for me to keep and run a series in comparision to a defender it's still the best choice for me. One day i'll hopefully replace it with a bowler wild-cat type machine, but, until then, i'm happy in my Series :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

G
New member
Replies
2
Views
679
Glenn Peterson
G
Discodevon
Not Land Rover but still
Replies
14
Views
2K
Discodevon
Discodevon
M
Coolant replacement
Replies
9
Views
863
Arctic2
Arctic2
Lej
Discovery 2 nanocom suggestions
Replies
9
Views
507
frostythor
frostythor
A
Ingenium head gasket
Replies
0
Views
189
Adrian1994
A
Back
Top