Well i've got 19's fitted today there. 19x8 235/35 rubber. I drive a Tj advance. Am i legal or do i need an engineers cert? I'm in NSW BTW

Also people who have fitted the same size wheel, what did you do in terms of lowering?

u need an engerneers cert. and get ur self a set of hotbits coilovers from phillcom
cheers
Rhys

Hmm yeah i think Coilovers are abit expensive for me.

got any pics of the rims?
cheers
Rhys

got any pics of the rims?
cheers
Rhys

Yeah, not the greatest though. Obviously needs some lowering.

http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/4110/pics30339bx.jpg

Also how much is it roughly to get wheels engineered?

wheels looks great. if coilovers are to much for you just gor for lovells super lows for now. that will get her sitting nice.

engineers cert will cost up to $500. but if you want slap on a VRX placard. works for me

rjr vortex yes? thats what ego's got in 20's, thats what im gonna get, but in 19's like you, do you mind if i ask how much you payed, the tyre factory had them for 2200 with tyres here in w.a i think

is it just me or do your front tyre sticking out past the guard?

If not don't worry :D

is it just me or do your front tyre sticking out past the guard?

If not don't worry :D

Nope there in there by a hair. Have to lay your face on the car odor to see it but.

Ive got my car sitting pretty low on 19's no probs at all

Do you guys rekon with superlows front and rear i shouldnt have aproblem with wear and all that? Frotn guards would scrub on cornering wouldn't they?

my car sits lower than super lows and i have no probs with scrubing
and my tyres are 245/35/19

my car sits lower than super lows and i have no probs with scrubing
and my tyres are 245/35/19

same as what i had but i only has superlows in the rear and normal lows at the front.

http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a230/micjaiy/MICHAELSCAR009.jpg
http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a230/micjaiy/100_0947.jpg

"Yeah, not the greatest though. "
http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/4110/pics30339bx.jpg

I think EGO likes em :D nice rims man, where in NSW are you? instead of going the normal superlows etc... if your in sydney you should try KMAC, they make u up a set of springs to the exact height u want.

Micjaiy - your car has a nice stance about it.

VRADA - Thanks bud, i'm in Newcastle where abouts is KMAC located in Sydney? Got an address or number?

Micjaiy - your car has a nice stance about it.

VRADA - Thanks bud, i'm in Newcastle where abouts is KMAC located in Sydney? Got an address or number?

Its on the princes highway in Rockdale...
Maybe easier just getting springs shipped up to newcastle, just thought id throw the suggestion your way. i was happy with the height they got my car on the 20s... doesnt scrape anywhere.

http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h28/VRADA/4.jpg

hey man...rims look sweet as...
i got 19s on myn n yeh i need to get it lowered but yeh also cant afford coilovers so im gunna get myself sum king springs off ebay theyr pretty cheap...should do the job

The overall diameter is ok (see pdf). But unless your car came with widest optional rim width of 7", your 8" is "illegally wide". And being a FWD not even Eng Cert can over come the matter and make it legal. And u may not fit 235's on 7" rims either (should u choose to use 7" rims). That's NSW RTA for u!!
What bugs me is, that -96 TE came 6" widest, bit later models with Sports (or what ever tag on the butt) came with 7" widest. So, being otherwise exactly same car (talking about tracks!) Sports can have 8" rims, but TE not, not even with "Eng Cert". Go and figure! :nuts:


Well i've got 19's fitted today there. 19x8 235/35 rubber. I drive a Tj advance. Am i legal or do i need an engineers cert? I'm in NSW BTW

hmmm in SA you can go as wide as you like, but it isnt allowed to hit anything at full lock in either direction and has to sit inside the guards. The legallity is with the diameter, we are only allowed to go 2 inches larger in diameter but have to drop the tyre profile to keep the rim/trye diameter the same.

Well i've got 19's fitted today there. 19x8 235/35 rubber. I drive a Tj advance. Am i legal or do i need an engineers cert? I'm in NSW BTW

Also people who have fitted the same size wheel, what did you do in terms of lowering?

An engineering certificate won't help you. That sized tyre does not have the required load
rating for you car. Considering that 245/35 19 tyres only have a load rating of 93. You
need a minimum of 95. A 235/35 19, from what I could find only has a load rating of 87.

an engineers cert can re-specify your load rating :nuts:

ive got a 91 load rating on my 235/35/19

i need to get a eng cert myself.. just never gotten around to finding someone who does it.

']an engineers cert can re-specify your load rating :nuts:

ive got a 91 load rating on my 235/35/19

i need to get a eng cert myself.. just never gotten around to finding someone who does it.

Load rating of the tyres as specified on the placard is set by the vehicle manufacturer
based on its static weight (kerb mass/GVM) and dynamic weight (during acceleration and
braking). An engineering certificate can't change the weight of the car.

You guys do know that while you have the wrong tyres on your car (ie. wrong load rating) If you have an accident, regardless if it's your fault or not, it WILL be deemed your fault and the tyres blamed. Worst thing is, there will be nothing you can do and to top it off your insurance will be void. So not only will it be your fault, but you won't have any insurance to pay for anything.

You guys do know that while you have the wrong tyres on your car (ie. wrong load rating) If you have an accident, regardless if it's your fault or not, it WILL be deemed your fault and the tyres blamed. Worst thing is, there will be nothing you can do and to top it off your insurance will be void. So not only will it be your fault, but you won't have any insurance to pay for anything.
And it becomes a criminal offence if there is death or permanant disability involved for the
other party or others in your car.

Just checked the placard of my 03 TJ II Advance... Load Rating of 94. I guess my 235/40R18 91W Potenza GIII's are not up to scratch.

While I was at it, I checked a couple of other cars, like my mates 1700kg XR8. His tyres are only rated at 93 :nuts:

.wook

EDIT: And another friends 1500kg BMW 328i, front rated at 88, rear at 90... why are Magnas load ratings so high?

Load rating of the tyres as specified on the placard is set by the vehicle manufacturer based on its static weight (kerb mass/GVM) and dynamic weight (during acceleration and
braking).
Then, if you're Mitsubishi, double whatever figure seems reasonable and you've got your load rating... lol

The Load Rating on Magnas is such a load of BS.

Just checked the placard of my 03 TJ II Advance... Load Rating of 94. I guess my 235/40R18 91W Potenza GIII's are not up to scratch.

While I was at it, I checked a couple of other cars, like my mates 1700kg XR8. His tyres are only rated at 93 :nuts:

.wook

EDIT: And another friends 1500kg BMW 328i, front rated at 88, rear at 90... why are Magnas load ratings so high?

because they are grandpa cars.. every grandpa tows a trailer or boat or something lol

j/ks

You guys do know that while you have the wrong tyres on your car (ie. wrong load rating) If you have an accident, regardless if it's your fault or not, it WILL be deemed your fault and the tyres blamed. Worst thing is, there will be nothing you can do and to top it off your insurance will be void. So not only will it be your fault, but you won't have any insurance to pay for anything.

wrong.

only if the tyres are found at fault. think about it. if someone runs a red and smashes into the side of you......oh yeah, ur tyres are not the correct load rating, so its ur fault the guy ran a red and smashed into you......:nuts:

or if someone keys every panel on your car...... ur insurance agency will reject the claim cos ur load rating was off? i know mine wont......

Load rating of the tyres as specified on the placard is set by the vehicle manufacturer
based on its static weight (kerb mass/GVM) and dynamic weight (during acceleration and
braking). An engineering certificate can't change the weight of the car.

mate you can re specify almost anything on a car with an engineers cert. just coz theres a tyre placard doesnt mean it cant be re-specified. i've heard of many cases where the load rating has been changed on many cars.

']mate you can re specify almost anything on a car with an engineers cert. just coz theres a tyre placard doesnt mean it cant be re-specified. i've heard of many cases where the load rating has been changed on many cars.

Ditto.. Seen it happen!

Nearly anything can be re-specified.. Whether it be load rating or how much water in your windscreen wiper bottle..

The limits are endless if you're looking at getting and engineers certificate! Alot of the modifications on many cars nowadays CAN be passed by an engineer.. People just aren't bothered.. It wouldnt suprise me if they started cracking down on things and engineering certs. will become "Oh So Popular!"

SuFz :rant:

wrong.

only if the tyres are found at fault. think about it. if someone runs a red and smashes into the side of you......oh yeah, ur tyres are not the correct load rating, so its ur fault the guy ran a red and smashed into you......:nuts:

or if someone keys every panel on your car...... ur insurance agency will reject the claim cos ur load rating was off? i know mine wont......
Use your brain. Of course if someone keys your car it's got nothing to do with your tyres. I was referring to if you have an accident where the vehicle is written off or someone elses vehicle is written off. You WILL be held liable for the accident, your insurance WILL be void and you may even be criminally charged for negligence. It's important to do your homework before buying tyres.

Well all i can say fellas is i'm confused.

micjaiy (http://www.aussiemagna.com/forums/member.php?u=2826).... nice rims man. What are they called?

Apparnelty i should be ok coz the overall circumfrece isn't out by 15mm, it's 1 inch wider than the biggest wheel in the make, which a vrx has 17x7 and the load rating is correct for the vehicle.

wrong.

only if the tyres are found at fault. think about it. if someone runs a red and smashes into the side of you......oh yeah, ur tyres are not the correct load rating, so its ur fault the guy ran a red and smashed into you......:nuts:

Yeah but if someone runs a red light and smashes in to you its not your insurance company that foots the bill - they get all the costs back from the person who was at fault. So that's not a good example.

micjaiy (http://www.aussiemagna.com/forums/member.php?u=2826).... nice rims man. What are they called?

BSA 291s. I sold them though.

any way, lol @ this thread.. my stock rim is a 16x6 but they were a 19x8

3 inches bigger in diameter and 2 inches wider (biggest legal size in vic is 2" bigger diameter and 1" wider)... 1 inch too big either way!!!
I didn't care, plus my load rating was only 91 :bowrofl:

I showed the mitsu dealer who sold me the car and he said 91 is way too high for these cars anyway! Commodores and falcons are heavier and have lower load ratings. This doesn't excuse the leagllity of the issue.

From the reading I've been doing, the load rating is not independent of the speed rating. They are listed together, which kind of makes sense. My TJ II is rated at 94H which is 670kg at 210km/h. I currently have 91W tyres, which is 615kg at 270km/h. Given a linear ratio, my 91W rated tyres are rated higher than 670kg at 210km/h.

The maths is as follows:
94H = 670 kg * 210 km/h = 140700, 140700 / 270 km/h = 521 kg
91W = 615 kg * 270 km/h = 166050, 166050 / 210 km/h = 791 kg

So my 91W tyres are the equivalent of 99H's.

I wonder if the insurance companies will recognise this?

.wook

From the reading I've been doing, the load rating is not independent of the speed rating. They are listed together, which kind of makes sense. My TJ II is rated at 94H which is 670kg at 210km/h. I currently have 91W tyres, which is 615kg at 270km/h. Given a linear ratio, my 91W rated tyres are rated higher than 670kg at 210km/h.

The maths is as follows:
94H = 670 kg * 210 km/h = 140700, 140700 / 270 km/h = 521 kg
91W = 615 kg * 270 km/h = 166050, 166050 / 210 km/h = 791 kg

So my 91W tyres are the equivalent of 99H's.

I wonder if the insurance companies will recognise this?

.wook

Speed rating means what speed the tyres can handle for a prolonged duration before
breaking apart. Load rating is what weigth each individual tyre can handle before they
bust. You don't want a blowout while taking a corner at speed or braking hard to avoid an
accident. When you brake hard, the front tyres have to handle the extra weight due to
dynamic transfer of weight from the back to the front. When you take, say a right turn at
speed, the front left tyre have to handle the extra weight. You don't want that tyre
blowing out and you end up down the ravine, dead.

I understand the individual components of the service description. The question is whether the tyres rated to a certain load at a certain speed (i.e. 615kg at 270km/h) will meet the OE spec (670kg at 210km/h). All the reading I have done says that the components of the service description (94 H, 91 W, etc...) cannot be taken individually.

Check out this link for verification: http://www.toyo.com.au/tech_info17.html

.wook

EDIT: http://www.toyo.com.au/TechInfoPDFs/Load%20Indices%20and%20speed%20ratings.pdf

If I'm reading this correctly, the first table in Section 2 Page 6 says that my W rated tyres are actually good for 200% of my load rating at 210km/h.

I understand the individual components of the service description. The question is whether the tyres rated to a certain load at a certain speed (i.e. 615kg at 270km/h) will meet the OE spec (670kg at 210km/h). All the reading I have done says that the components of the service description (94 H, 91 W, etc...) cannot be taken individually.

Check out this link for verification: http://www.toyo.com.au/tech_info17.html

.wook

EDIT: http://www.toyo.com.au/TechInfoPDFs/Load%20Indices%20and%20speed%20ratings.pdf

If I'm reading this correctly, the first table in Section 2 Page 6 says that my W rated tyres are actually good for 200% of my load rating at 210km/h.

No, it says that the max load per tyres cannot exceed:
100% of 615kg at 210km/hr
100% of 615kg at 220km/hr
100% of 615kg at 230km/hr
100% of 615kg at 240km/hr
95% of 615kg at 259km/hr and so on for W rated tyres with load rating of 91 == 615kg.
It does not say that your W rated tyre with a load rating of 91 can carry more weight than
a H rated tyre with a load rating of 95. In fact, it means that with V, W, Y and ZR tyres,
the higher speed you go the less weight they can carry above 210km/hr.

Again, speed rating means the speed it can operate for prolonged amount of time without
disintegrating. The load rating means what weight each tyre can carry, regardless of speed
if below 210km/hr and speed related if above 210km/hr. Putting a set of tyres with a load
rating of 87 onto a statesmen will blow the tyres during hard braking or cornering.

from the pdf linked to above...

"For speeds in excess of 210 km/h the maximum load per tyre shall not exceed the load
capacity quoted in the tables (section 2, page 5), by more than the following percentages
depending on the type of tyre and on the speed capability of the vehicle."

To me that says the maximum load per tyre can exceed the load capacity quoted by up to the percentages in listed in the table.

If we take your interpretation, my 91W tyres shouldn't be classified as such, because they're only rated at 85% of 91 (615kg) at the speed rating of W (270km/h).

And again, I understand what the two components mean... that was never my question. You seem to think that you can take them separately, when everything that I've read says they are mutually dependent.

.wook

from the pdf linked to above...

"For speeds in excess of 210 km/h the maximum load per tyre shall not exceed the load
capacity quoted in the tables (section 2, page 5), by more than the following percentages
depending on the type of tyre and on the speed capability of the vehicle."

To me that says the maximum load per tyre can exceed the load capacity quoted by up to the percentages in listed in the table.

If we take your interpretation, my 91W tyres shouldn't be classified as such, because they're only rated at 85% of 91 (615kg) at the speed rating of W (270km/h).

And again, I understand what the two components mean... that was never my question. You seem to think that you can take them separately, when everything that I've read says they are mutually dependent.

.wook

Exactly what I said: "For speeds in excess of 210 km/h the maximum load per tyre
shall not exceed the load capacity quoted in the tables (section 2, page 5), by more than the following percentages depending on the type of tyre and on the speed
capability of the vehicle.

Which means that for your W rated tyre with a load rating of 91 (615kg), you cannot put
more than 100% of 615kg at 210km/hr, 100% of 615kg at 220km/hr, 100% of 615kg at
230km/hr, 100% of 615kg at 240km/hr, 95% of 615kg at 250km/hr, 90 % of 615kg at 260
km/hr and 85% of 615kg at 270km/hr. That is if you ar travelling at those speeds. If you
are travelling less than 210 km/hr, then the max load per tyre shall not exceed 100% of
615kg. Speed rating is again, to do with withstanding the high temperatures associated
with constant travell at high speeds. Load rating is to do with structural integrity
withstanding heavy weights.

sorry to but into this but what relavance has this got to do with normal driving conditions??

I don't see any of you doing 270km/h in a hurry..

An engineering certificate won't help you. That sized tyre does not have the required load
rating for you car. Considering that 245/35 19 tyres only have a load rating of 93. You
need a minimum of 95. A 235/35 19, from what I could find only has a load rating of 87.


NOT AGAIN !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

man i dunno how many times i have said this, but you can get 245/35r19 in a LEGAL load rating tyre, tyre shops who say you can't are full of ****, i have reaserched this for 12 months to find a legal tyre i have contacted many tyre manufactures and i have found a tyre that is load rated and available easily in australia , sure people may not like the brand etc, but if your worried about the load rating and want it legal you can legally have 19's

the part i find amusing is most of the people who winge thats illegal you cant have 19's on a magna coz of load rating etc roll on 18's :nuts:

oh well my 2 cents worth

NOT AGAIN !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

man i dunno how many times i have said this, but you can get 245/35r19 in a LEGAL load rating tyre, tyre shops who say you can't are full of ****, i have reaserched this for 12 months to find a legal tyre i have contacted many tyre manufactures and i have found a tyre that is load rated and available easily in australia , sure people may not like the brand etc, but if your worried about the load rating and want it legal you can legally have 19's

the part i find amusing is most of the people who winge thats illegal you cant have 19's on a magna coz of load rating etc roll on 18's :nuts:

oh well my 2 cents worth

I was talking about his 235/35r19 and was using the common load rating for a 245/35r19
tyre as an example as the latter has a higher load rating. You cannot get 235/35 with a
load rating of 94 or more.

sorry to but into this but what relavance has this got to do with normal driving conditions??

I don't see any of you doing 270km/h in a hurry..

See wookiee's previous post where he stated that his 91load rated tyre with a higher
speed capability can carry more weight than a tyre with 95 load rating with a lower speed
capability. That's why I said, at speeds below 210km/hr the second table does not apply
and at speeds above 210km/hr, the carrying capacity of a tyre diminishes linearly with
increasing speed.

vlad, your comprehension skills are not all they're cracked up to be...

shall not exceed by more than means that it may exceed, but not by more than the percentages listed... so I can exceed the load rating at the lower speeds. Like I said, your interpretation means that 91Ws aren't rated for 615kgs at 270km/h, which they obviously are. It's the by more than that is the important part of that sentence.

and micjaiy, all I'm trying to figure out is if my 91Ws meet the minimum specs for my TJ, which is 94H. I don't care about driving at 270km/h.

i have found a tyre that is load rated and available easily in australia , sure people may not like the brand etc, but if your worried about the load rating and want it legal you can legally have 19's


what brand? dont tell me its wanli or something........:rant:
do u know if theyre available in 235/35/19?

what brand? dont tell me its wanli or something........:rant:
do u know if theyre available in 235/35/19?


actually wanli is one tyre and the other is the yokohama generic brand ( same factory ) linglon dunno how ya spell it, there around $265 a corner, not available is 235's no need for 235 you would just go 245's easier and makes more sense


best part is the 19's are on a third gen 4cyl and it has the same load rating as a V6 go figure :nuts:

vlad, your comprehension skills are not all they're cracked up to be...

shall not exceed by more than means that it may exceed, but not by more than the percentages listed... so I can exceed the load rating at the lower speeds. Like I said, your interpretation means that 91Ws aren't rated for 615kgs at 270km/h, which they obviously are. It's the by more than that is the important part of that sentence.

and micjaiy, all I'm trying to figure out is if my 91Ws meet the minimum specs for my TJ, which is 94H. I don't care about driving at 270km/h.

I've just asked a few tyre places. That sentence needs to be reworded. It is a grammatical
error. I've also checked other online sites about tyres. My interpretation (however the text
was written) is the correct one. You cannot, logically put say, 200kg of weight on to an
object that is only designed to carry 100kg. Go ask any engineer who designs requirement
specifications.
That sentence should be:

"For speeds in excess of 210 km/h, the maximum load per tyre shall not exceed the following percentage amount of the maximum load per tyre as quoted in the tables (section 2, page 5), depending on the type of tyre and on the speed capability of the
vehicle.

I've just asked a few tyre places. That sentence needs to be reworded. It is a grammatical
error. I've also checked other online sites about tyres. My interpretation (however the text
was written) is the correct one. You cannot, logically put say, 200kg of weight on to an
object that is only designed to carry 100kg. Go ask any engineer who designs requirement
specifications.
That sentence should be:

"For speeds in excess of 210 km/h, the maximum load per tyre shall not exceed the following percentage amount of the maximum load per tyre as quoted in the tables (section 2, page 5), depending on the type of tyre and on the speed capability of the
vehicle.

Fair enough...

.wook