Tyre trade ins?
Submitted: Monday, Jun 07, 2010 at 21:49
ThreadID:
79164
Views:
7682
Replies:
13
FollowUps:
29
This Thread has been Archived
Member - Mark P (NSW)
Hi all,
I have just purchased a 2006 Landcruiser Sahara. It has 5 x brand new 285/75/17 Cooper ST tyres on it. The spare is brand new (never been on the ground) the other 4 have done about 2,000km. The trouble is they are too big for the truck (the OD is greater than the maximum safe size recommended for the vehicle). The guy I bought it from fitted them to sell the car and I guess fitted this size to increase the ground clearance, which they do but the thing handles badly on the road and I'm pretty sure there are insurance issues with being oversized.
What I am wondering is if anyone knows of somewhere in
Sydney where I might be able to trade these tyres in on the correct size and get a decent trade in price for them.
The other option is to try sell them here or on E bay but I don't want to have to buy 5 new tyres to get these off the truck on the off chance they don't sell.
Anyone got any suggestions on replacing the tyres or how I can make the truck feel more secure on the road? (I've tried various pressures)
thanks
Mark
Reply By: Member - Tour Boy ( Bundy QLD) - Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 07:46
Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 07:46
I don't know why the size would make the vehicle handle badly. I usually use 285/75/16's on my cruisers and the vehicle performs the same.
How does it handle badly?
How many km on the vehicle?
285's are generally the same diameter as the skinny tyres fitted to working class cruisers so they wouldn't be considered to be too large for the vehicle imo.
I would be looking at bushes shocks, alignment and accident history before worrying about new tyres (unless coopers are now worse than they used to be)
Cheers
Dave
AnswerID:
420008
Follow Up By: get outmore - Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 09:10
Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 09:10
Yea but hes got 17 inch rims
and the 285x75 x16 are a 33 inch diametre and the stock skinnys are a 32 inch
FollowupID:
690171
Follow Up By: Member - Tour Boy ( Bundy QLD) - Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 09:33
Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 09:33
I know he has 17's, shouldn't the placard say 16's? Has he got 200 series rims on it?
I did say generally the same size as the skinny's (depends more on brand)
If the wheel / tyre combo is the same as what is in the main rig
pic then they don't look too large to me.
I still don't know why they would make it handle badly, I still feel it is a mecanical issue.
Cheers
Dave
FollowupID:
690175
Follow Up By: get outmore - Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 10:17
Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 10:17
your right 'from that rig pick nothing looks untoward like 37 inch tyres or 4 inch lift
FollowupID:
690180
Follow Up By: Member No 1- Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 10:17
Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 10:17
2006 have 17 inch rims
FollowupID:
690181
Follow Up By: get outmore - Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 10:19
Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 10:19
ahh i nearly was going to ask what he had before hand and lower he says its his first cruiser
FollowupID:
690182
Reply By: Member - Alan H (QLD) - Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 07:55
Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 07:55
You don't say what your original size was. (sticker on driver side B pillar)
My 200 GXL has 285/65/17
If yours is the same fitting 285/75/17 increases diameter by 57mm which is huge. I believe in QLD we can only vary tyre diameter by 15mm.
I would have though those tyres must interfere with steering.
Alan
AnswerID:
420012
Reply By: Member - Mark P (NSW) - Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 10:09
Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 10:09
Hi everyone, thanks for your comments so far.
The recommended tyre size as per the placard is 275/65R17 (Its a Sahara so it has 17 inch alloys on it).
As for the handling i should confess that this is the first crusier i have ever driven so I don't know what it should feel like. It is quite 'boaty' if you know what i mean but it does weigh a stack with all the aftermarket stuff on it.
The main handling issue is when I'm turning at slow speed (U turns etc), where a vehicle ould normally pull the steering wheel straight as you come out of the U turn this beasty tends to pull the wheel further into the U turn until it hits the steering lock, I then have to stop and turn the wheel straight before i drive off. I am assuming its the excessivly high side walls on the tyres flexing when the weight of the truck is on them in the turn, I imagine this changes the steering geometry and so on during the slow speed turns.
cheers
Mark
AnswerID:
420035
Follow Up By: get outmore - Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 10:20
Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 10:20
that sounds more like a steering geometry thing
definitly not right and not tyre related
FollowupID:
690183
Follow Up By: Member - Mark P (NSW) - Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 10:25
Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 10:25
I just spoke to a guy at Bob Jane T Mart. He tells me the Overall Diameter (OD) of the standard tyres for my truck is 804mm and the OD of the ones I have on is 833mm, a difference of 29mm. He tells me that in NSW apparently you can go up to 50mm greater and be legal for insurance and the fun stoppers. It also makes the speedo read high (at 100KMH I'm actually doing about 108 KHM on the GPS).
Given this information and your comment 'Get Outmore', I'll take it somewhere and get the front end looked at.
I'll keep you posted.
thanks everyone.
Mark
FollowupID:
690186
Follow Up By: Member - Howard (ACT) - Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 11:24
Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 11:24
I think your bob jane man better go back to primary school maths
833 mm is the diameter for a 285/75/16 tyre not a 285/75/17 which is 859mm
ie 285 X 75 % =213.75 X 2=427.5 plus (17 X 25.4=431.18)=859 to nearest mm
also a 265/75 /17( your std fitting) is 828 mm not 804mm.
I know depending on manufacturer lots of tyres actually measure different to the pure mathematical size but if your worried about legals of fitment they willl adopt the mathematical result.
BTW like others have mentioned already I dont thinks tyres size will be causing your problem .
cheers
Howard
FollowupID:
690189
Follow Up By: Member - Mark P (NSW) - Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 11:50
Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 11:50
Hi Howard,
i don't think he was doing maths, he was looking in the cooper tyresa book he had there. Maybe he looked at the wrong tyres?? who knows.
I have just spoken to the guy I bought the truck from to confirm what has been done to the
suspension. It still has the original Sahara airbags on it with the height adjuster button still working plus it has OME shocks all round with constant 400kg springs on the front and constant 200kg springs on the back. It has a 20mm lift at the front and a 40mm lift at the rear. he tells me it started to do the weird U turn stuff after he had the
suspension fitted. It also has a little positive camber as part of the lift so I would imagine that contributes as
well.
Mark
FollowupID:
690191
Follow Up By: Muntoo - Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 13:55
Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 13:55
''also a 265/75 /17( your std fitting) is 828 mm not 804mm.''
But he said his recommended tyre size was 275/65/17 not 265/75/17. Which would be closer to 804mm OD.
Im pretty sure larger tyres will do this, and sometimes fitting a return to centre steering damper will fix it. But i honetly cant see these tyres as being to big for a 100 series. Take it to a wheel alignment joint or
suspension joint and explain the problem.
FollowupID:
690201
Follow Up By: Dave(NSW) - Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 14:57
Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 14:57
Mark,
200kg springs in the rear are to lite for the job, You have 222lt fuel tank & 55lt
water tank that alone will be very close to 177kg then add weight of draws and anything else you've added to the car will put you on or over the spring rating, You need to talk to a
suspension specialist.
Cheers Dave..
FollowupID:
690210
Follow Up By: Member - Mark P (NSW) - Wednesday, Jun 09, 2010 at 11:49
Wednesday, Jun 09, 2010 at 11:49
Hi Dave,
my mistake. I wrote them the wrong way around. It has 200kg at the front and 400kg at the rear.
thanks
Mark
FollowupID:
690316
Reply By: Tenpounder (SA) - Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 15:02
Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 15:02
Sounds to me that the goods may not be "of merchantable quality", and thus that the rectification may be the seller's responsibility, not yours. It also occurs to me that the vehicle may need a full inspection for signs of major repair or chassis rebuild, rather than just a
suspension check.
Why else would someone spend heaps on a vehicle just to sell it? It does not add up, in my book.
AnswerID:
420061
Follow Up By: get outmore - Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 15:52
Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 15:52
not with a private sale its not
cheapest thing will be a wheel alighnment and tell them your issue
as long as there 1/2 competant they should be able to pick up any geomatary issues
return to centre issues would most likely be caused by incorrect castor
FollowupID:
690214
Follow Up By: Tenpounder (SA) - Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 16:12
Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 16:12
I suspect you're wrong there, since the Sale of Goods Act seems not to be limited to commercial transactions. It will be true as far as I know that the Trade Practices Act and the State Fair Trading legislation does not apply to private sales, but the Sale Of Goods Act, as far as I know, appleis universally.
But then I am not a lawyer
FollowupID:
690215
Follow Up By: get outmore - Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 17:09
Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 17:09
defintly not
the sale of goods act expressly refers to comercial transactions
SALE OF GOODS ACT 1923 - SECT 62
Definition
62 Definition
In this Part, "consumer sale" means a sale of goods (other than a sale by auction) by a seller in the course of a business where the goods:
(a) are of a kind commonly bought for private use or consumption, and
(b) are sold to a person who does not buy or hold himself or herself out as buying them in the course of a business.
FollowupID:
690221
Follow Up By: Tenpounder (SA) - Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 17:32
Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 17:32
Sorry, but you are quoting selectively from the NSW Act. In that Act, s62 relates specifically to a class of contracts, not to contracts generally. I am not a lawyer, but I am aware of
the hazards of relying on specific sections of law rather than the effect of the whole of the law. I am not going to debate you over this channel any further.
FollowupID:
690225
Follow Up By: get outmore - Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 18:14
Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 18:14
Good onya for getting all huffy but thems the breaks
this is from the legasl
services from your own state
http://www.lsc.sa.gov.au/handbook/ch08s03s01s03.php
The Sale of Goods Act, 1895 only applies to contracts for the purchase of goods. There is no maximum value of the contract where protection stops nor does it apply only to consumers, it applies to all buyers, even companies. Although the conditions of 'fit for purpose' and 'merchantable quality' only apply to goods that are sold by traders, other implied conditions and warranties even apply to private sales.
basically meaniing unless the seller makes false statements to sell the vehicle and has allowed the inspection of the vehicle to the buyers satisfaction
a private buyer has no further comeback
FollowupID:
690232
Follow Up By: Tenpounder (SA) - Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 18:26
Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 18:26
OK. I 'got huffy' because you didn't seem willing to discuss the facts, but rather confront me with yet another 'definitely not' response. Your latest response confirms my basic point that there ARE remedies for private contracts, even though the consumer affairs bureaucrats tend to concentrate on the 1970s comsumer laws more than the common law remedies.
In this case, I was concerned that the buyer needs to know there are some basic rules in terms of representation, passing off etc. and equally some remedies at law, so I didn't want you queering my pitch with unwelcome complications. OK???
Have fun!!
FollowupID:
690238
Follow Up By: Member - Mark P (NSW) - Wednesday, Jun 09, 2010 at 11:58
Wednesday, Jun 09, 2010 at 11:58
Hi Tenpounder,
I bought the vehicle off an ARB distributor. It was their 100 series demonstrator. They have now purchased a new 200 series and decided to sell the 100 series. I just happen to walk in while they were discussing it and said I was interested; It went from there. Also, I didn't get it cheap so I am sure they made money on all the ARB stuff on it. Given they are a very reputable ARB dealer in
Sydney I doubt they would sell a dodgy vehicle, I cant imagine they would risk a disgruntled buyer spreading bad things about them on this and many other forums.
I have fixed the problem now, please see the formal post below.
cheers
Mark
FollowupID:
690317
Follow Up By: get outmore - Wednesday, Jun 09, 2010 at 12:06
Wednesday, Jun 09, 2010 at 12:06
sorry cant see any post to this effect (I am fairly blind though)
woud be interested in finding out what the issue was
FollowupID:
690319
Follow Up By: Member - Mark P (NSW) - Wednesday, Jun 09, 2010 at 12:12
Wednesday, Jun 09, 2010 at 12:12
Sorry,
its there now, you were too quick for me :)
FollowupID:
690321
Reply By: Member - Graham H (QLD) - Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 16:50
Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 16:50
Looking at all its got on it I would weigh the thing because with all the extra weight it may well be so heavy it wont be able to tow a decent size van anyway.
277 litres extra plus 95 in main= about 370kg inc L/R tank for a start plus steel bars at both ends and the
drawers and stuff
Allow 275 for a decent ball weight and its probably overloaded and you and mum arent even in it or any gear in the back either.
All the fruit is fine but it all weighs in the end.
AnswerID:
420068
Reply By: Charlie - Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 17:38
Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 17:38
As others have said its a problem in the
suspension and or the brakes , take it to ARB and have them sort it out, changing the tires will only reduce the problem
In NSW your allowed a max of 50mm increase in tyre size, that's if an engineer signs off on it which is relatively inexpensive you just have to get the speedo adjusted and a letter confirming it's correctly calibrated. A greater than 50mm is not possible without a brake test and a rather bill from the engineer.
AnswerID:
420072
Reply By: tojofixa - Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 19:08
Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 19:08
If your car has had a
suspension lift as you mentioned, & particularly if the rear has been lifted more than the front, then in my opinion the front
suspension has far too much negative castor angle. This will cause the directional stability to become very erratic, (wandering or tram tracking as you drive in a straight line) & also cause the problem you have referred to.
My suggestion is to take the car to a reliable steering &
suspension specialist & have them correct the steering geometry.
Although the tyres are bigger in diameter than the original fitment I don't think they are your problem.
Cheers.
AnswerID:
420083
Follow Up By: get outmore - Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 21:40
Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 21:40
I agree the castor would be a prime suspect but if it is due to the rear being lifted far more than the front I would be looing to correct the
suspension
having said that the vehicles with RTC problems ive driven have been due to bending of
suspension stuff in prangs
as you said - definitly needs a look at by proffesionals before just changing stuff
FollowupID:
690271
Reply By: Member - Shakey (QLD) - Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 22:13
Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 22:13
There may be more to this than there first seems. You say it is a Sahara and it has the adjustable height
suspension. You also say it has had a lift. If this is so then there has been an adjustment to the height sensors and the geometry of the front would need to have been set up properly, which by the sounds of it, hasn't been done. Also, they aren't airbags, it is a hydraulic system and nobody seems to know too much about it other than Darren at Auto Craft as far as I could find. He set mine up about 12 months ago.
AnswerID:
420102
Follow Up By: Member - Shakey (QLD) - Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 22:16
Tuesday, Jun 08, 2010 at 22:16
Hmmmm, but then you say it has OME shocks on it....... That doesn't make sense if you do indeed have the adjustable height feature. Do you also have a selector next to the gearshift that allows you to set the firmness?
FollowupID:
690274
Reply By: Member - Mark P (NSW) - Wednesday, Jun 09, 2010 at 12:09
Wednesday, Jun 09, 2010 at 12:09
Hi everyone,
thank you all for your replies, especially those who suggested getting the steering geometry checked.
I took the truck to a steering specialist this morning who conducted a 4 wheel alignment on it.
The guy said afterwards that it was 'all over the
shop'. he needed to adjust the camber, thrust and toe to get it correct. He also checked under the truck for damage, crash damage and repair work and found nothing wrong.
I then drove it along a few KM of twisty rode and did a few U turns in both directions. It now handles beautifully, it feels more like a car to drive and the wheel 'self centers' correctly coming out of a U turn.
Obviously I will be keeping the large tyres now :)
The best thing is it's now perfect for the tiny sum of $66!
cheers everyone,
Mark
AnswerID:
420147
Follow Up By: get outmore - Wednesday, Jun 09, 2010 at 16:25
Wednesday, Jun 09, 2010 at 16:25
latest issue of 4wd action has a little article specificlly mentioning lifted 100s which can suffer what you described
- good to hear it was an easy fix
FollowupID:
690353
Follow Up By: Member - Mark P (NSW) - Wednesday, Jun 09, 2010 at 16:51
Wednesday, Jun 09, 2010 at 16:51
Thanx for the heads up, I'll have a look at it :)
FollowupID:
690355
Follow Up By: Richard W (NSW) - Wednesday, Jun 09, 2010 at 18:18
Wednesday, Jun 09, 2010 at 18:18
Mark,
Good stuff.
Money well spent.
Couldn't add any value on your problem.
FollowupID:
690365
Follow Up By: mikeyandmary - Thursday, Jun 10, 2010 at 09:36
Thursday, Jun 10, 2010 at 09:36
Where did you take it to get it fixed???
FollowupID:
690436