thunder039
Forum Member
^ dont worriy about that untill you get caught :iconwink:
tire preference for 1st gen foz
- Thread starter thunder039
- Start date
Ratbag
Administrator
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2012
- Messages
- 7,483
- Location
- Bayside, Melbourne, Vic
- Car Year
- MY06, MY10
- Car Model
- Forester SG & SH
- Transmission
- 5MT/DR & 4EAT Sports
Gidday Mr T
It's just been changed Australia wide, mate. Thanks for your concern.
I hardly think that Cooper Tyres are the final arbiter of these things but check it out here:
https://www.coopertires.com.au/index.php?page=news&id=22
This document is somewhat more legally sound IMNSHO:
https://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/NR/...mber8Guidetomodificationsformotorvehicles.pdf
Allows & standardises all sorts of modifications, including suspension lifts and tyre lifts.
Not before time, IMFAO.
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but this allows me to run 215/70 16" as less than 25.4 mm increase in tyre diameter.
BTW, T39. Don't worry about the Police: be very worried about voiding your insurance policy for both your own cover and TPPD in your comprehensive insurance.
Under most (all?) policies you are required to keep your car in a roadworthy condition, which necessitates that it complies with all relevant legal requirements ...
I'm not sure about how it works where you are Ratbag, but in NSW, that size won't be legal
I know in NSW that you are allowed a +/- 15mm (I think thats right) on what's OEM.
Might be worth checking that out too mate :iconwink:
Regards
Mr Turbo
It's just been changed Australia wide, mate. Thanks for your concern.
I hardly think that Cooper Tyres are the final arbiter of these things but check it out here:
https://www.coopertires.com.au/index.php?page=news&id=22
This document is somewhat more legally sound IMNSHO:
https://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/NR/...mber8Guidetomodificationsformotorvehicles.pdf
Allows & standardises all sorts of modifications, including suspension lifts and tyre lifts.
Not before time, IMFAO.
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but this allows me to run 215/70 16" as less than 25.4 mm increase in tyre diameter.
BTW, T39. Don't worry about the Police: be very worried about voiding your insurance policy for both your own cover and TPPD in your comprehensive insurance.
Under most (all?) policies you are required to keep your car in a roadworthy condition, which necessitates that it complies with all relevant legal requirements ...
Last edited:
mr turbo
Emeritus Forum Staff and Founders' Friend
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2008
- Messages
- 6,935
- Location
- Sydney, AUSTRALIA & ORS.com
- Car Year
- MY17
- Car Model
- Forester
- Transmission
- manual
I had a look at the link & if I'm reading it correctly, it's 25mm (25.4mm) for width .... not diameter.
If you look at 13.3.2 Option 2 (No 2 -1 & -2) the +/- the 15mm still applies if I'm not mistaken.
But as I said, I could be reading it wrong
But as you say, it's the insurance part of it that really matters.
Regards
Mr Turbo
Ratbag
Administrator
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2012
- Messages
- 7,483
- Location
- Bayside, Melbourne, Vic
- Car Year
- MY06, MY10
- Car Model
- Forester SG & SH
- Transmission
- 5MT/DR & 4EAT Sports
Gidday Mr T
I think that the following document may be the definitive source for VSB 14 LS parameters:
https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/r...Tyres_Suspension_Steering_V2_1Jan_2011 v3.pdf
All modification documents are here:
https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/roads/vehicle_regulation/bulletin/vsb_ncop.aspx
All very tricky stuff!!
I am too buggered to wade through it tonight. Maybe at the w/e.
I had a look at the link & if I'm reading it correctly, it's 25mm (25.4mm) for width .... not diameter.
If you look at 13.3.2 Option 2 (No 2 -1 & -2) the +/- the 15mm still applies if I'm not mistaken.
But as I said, I could be reading it wrong
But as you say, it's the insurance part of it that really matters.
Regards
Mr Turbo
I think that the following document may be the definitive source for VSB 14 LS parameters:
https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/r...Tyres_Suspension_Steering_V2_1Jan_2011 v3.pdf
All modification documents are here:
https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/roads/vehicle_regulation/bulletin/vsb_ncop.aspx
All very tricky stuff!!
I am too buggered to wade through it tonight. Maybe at the w/e.
mr turbo
Emeritus Forum Staff and Founders' Friend
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2008
- Messages
- 6,935
- Location
- Sydney, AUSTRALIA & ORS.com
- Car Year
- MY17
- Car Model
- Forester
- Transmission
- manual
Yes, it's tricky indeed.
I'm that tired at the moment to even try reading & understanding that link tonight. Once I've had some sleep, I'll be able read it in more depth
Regards
Mr Turbo
I'm that tired at the moment to even try reading & understanding that link tonight. Once I've had some sleep, I'll be able read it in more depth
Regards
Mr Turbo
Ratbag
Administrator
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2012
- Messages
- 7,483
- Location
- Bayside, Melbourne, Vic
- Car Year
- MY06, MY10
- Car Model
- Forester SG & SH
- Transmission
- 5MT/DR & 4EAT Sports
Gidday Mr T
You are dead right about the 15 mm diameter increase. The tyre size cannot be more than that.
Our vehicles are specifically excluded from other classes of FWD vehicles which are allowed up to 50 mm increase in overall rim + tyre diameter
Re-read the above this morning.
Seems to be covered here:
Rims + tyres fitted to Turbo models are specifically excluded from this calculation, unless one also changes all or most of the drive and suspension components as well. That would make it a very expensive exercise ...
.
Yes, it's tricky indeed.
I'm that tired at the moment to even try reading & understanding that link tonight. Once I've had some sleep, I'll be able read it in more depth
Regards
Mr Turbo
You are dead right about the 15 mm diameter increase. The tyre size cannot be more than that.
Our vehicles are specifically excluded from other classes of FWD vehicles which are allowed up to 50 mm increase in overall rim + tyre diameter
Re-read the above this morning.
Seems to be covered here:
4.2.4 Overall Nominal Diameter
The overall diameter of any tyre fitted to a passenger car or passenger car derivative must not be more than 15mm larger or 26mm smaller than that of any tyre designated by the vehicle manufacturer for that model.
The overall diameter of any tyre fitted to a passenger car or passenger car derivative must not be more than 15mm larger or 26mm smaller than that of any tyre designated by the vehicle manufacturer for that model.
Seems that the only "out" is if Subaru has ever fitted a larger diameter rim + tyre to the N/A Forester of this model range (SG). Then we are limited to that larger diameter (if it exists) plus 15 mm or less increase.
Rims + tyres fitted to Turbo models are specifically excluded from this calculation, unless one also changes all or most of the drive and suspension components as well. That would make it a very expensive exercise ...
.Under these rules, I cannot even go to 215/65 16, as this involves a 21.5 mm increase in diameter.
stilson
Forum Member
Probably a fair rule as the same factors effecting your motors ability to accelerate your car with larger tyres also effect the brakes ability to decelerate it.
Pretty conflicting information to that on the coopers website.
Pretty conflicting information to that on the coopers website.
Ratbag
Administrator
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2012
- Messages
- 7,483
- Location
- Bayside, Melbourne, Vic
- Car Year
- MY06, MY10
- Car Model
- Forester SG & SH
- Transmission
- 5MT/DR & 4EAT Sports
Gidday ST
These rules were introduced progressively to stop maniacal things being done to cars in my youth.
One of my mates fitted a de-tuned Spitfire engine (1600 BHP ... ) into a bloody FJ Holden!!
The Police took him and it off the road after catching him doing over 100 mph in a 35 mph suburban area ...
BTW, brakes work by converting the kinetic energy of the car into heat in the discs. Brake fade is caused when the discs (or drums) cannot radiate the heat away as fast or faster than the friction between the pads and disc are building the heat up in the disc.
The bigger the disc, and the better the design (relative size of pad to swept area; ventilated disc; ventilation to the disc via specific air scoops or better wheel design), the faster the vehicle will stop.
One of the things I always appreciated about Roo1 was that Subaru had shoved the biggest ventilated disc into the 14" rims that they could. Roo2 has a similarly excellent braking system, AFAICT so far. Didn't matter that the rear brakes were drums on Roo1. Rear brakes are mainly there to provide stability to the vehicle under braking.
In both wet and dry, the tyres then (and only then) became the limiting factor. I never once had brake fade, even when towing a fully loaded, un-braked 7x4 trailer down what was effectively a 30 km downhill run.
On a completely dry surface, a completely bald tyre will give the best handling and braking, assuming that the casing is not compromised.
Of course, add some water, snow, sand, dirt, mud, etc into the equation, and all of a sudden we need a tread pattern to handle those things. Otherwise the wheel has nothing to grip with ....
What the Cooper's site states, but not very clearly, is that these rules do not apply to vehicles unless they are "proper" 4WDs as defined by law. That is to say, vehicles designed on a truck chassis, not a passenger vehicle chassis (floor pan ... ).
It misled me too, until Mr T corrected me.
These rules were introduced progressively to stop maniacal things being done to cars in my youth.
One of my mates fitted a de-tuned Spitfire engine (1600 BHP ... ) into a bloody FJ Holden!!
The Police took him and it off the road after catching him doing over 100 mph in a 35 mph suburban area ...
BTW, brakes work by converting the kinetic energy of the car into heat in the discs. Brake fade is caused when the discs (or drums) cannot radiate the heat away as fast or faster than the friction between the pads and disc are building the heat up in the disc.
The bigger the disc, and the better the design (relative size of pad to swept area; ventilated disc; ventilation to the disc via specific air scoops or better wheel design), the faster the vehicle will stop.
One of the things I always appreciated about Roo1 was that Subaru had shoved the biggest ventilated disc into the 14" rims that they could. Roo2 has a similarly excellent braking system, AFAICT so far. Didn't matter that the rear brakes were drums on Roo1. Rear brakes are mainly there to provide stability to the vehicle under braking.
In both wet and dry, the tyres then (and only then) became the limiting factor. I never once had brake fade, even when towing a fully loaded, un-braked 7x4 trailer down what was effectively a 30 km downhill run.
On a completely dry surface, a completely bald tyre will give the best handling and braking, assuming that the casing is not compromised.
Of course, add some water, snow, sand, dirt, mud, etc into the equation, and all of a sudden we need a tread pattern to handle those things. Otherwise the wheel has nothing to grip with ...
.What the Cooper's site states, but not very clearly, is that these rules do not apply to vehicles unless they are "proper" 4WDs as defined by law. That is to say, vehicles designed on a truck chassis, not a passenger vehicle chassis (floor pan ... ).
It misled me too, until Mr T corrected me.
stilson
Forum Member
Yes, right you are again, RB.
I Don't see why they would allow heavier, higher c o g vehicles to increase tyre size and not us.
Shame on me for expecting logic from a government department.
I Don't see why they would allow heavier, higher c o g vehicles to increase tyre size and not us.
Shame on me for expecting logic from a government department.
Ratbag
Administrator
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2012
- Messages
- 7,483
- Location
- Bayside, Melbourne, Vic
- Car Year
- MY06, MY10
- Car Model
- Forester SG & SH
- Transmission
- 5MT/DR & 4EAT Sports
G'day again ST
There is some sense in this, if one thinks about it.
Those vehicles are far more crude than passenger vehicle based ones like ours. As such, they are less susceptible to variations in tyres, rims, suspension modifications, etc.
I have said once before here that Roo2 is the most 'balanced' vehicle I have ever driven, out of all the really flash stuff I have managed to talk myself into the driver's seat of. Someone must have noticed that I have a bit of a talent at this ...
.
THIS is perhaps the reason why that 'balance' must not be interfered with ... Not by fitting larger tyres; not by changing the suspension; not by almost anything.
THIS is the price we pay for having such superbly designed vehicles (for what they are ... ). They don't "appreciate" any sort of modifications. It upsets the 'balance'.
While I agree with you totally in principle ... :ebiggrin:
Maybe, just maybe, they have got things pretty right this time.
Looks as if I'm going to have to go with the 215/60 16" AT-s.
There is some sense in this, if one thinks about it.
Those vehicles are far more crude than passenger vehicle based ones like ours. As such, they are less susceptible to variations in tyres, rims, suspension modifications, etc.
I have said once before here that Roo2 is the most 'balanced' vehicle I have ever driven, out of all the really flash stuff I have managed to talk myself into the driver's seat of. Someone must have noticed that I have a bit of a talent at this ...
.THIS is perhaps the reason why that 'balance' must not be interfered with ... Not by fitting larger tyres; not by changing the suspension; not by almost anything.
THIS is the price we pay for having such superbly designed vehicles (for what they are ... ). They don't "appreciate" any sort of modifications. It upsets the 'balance'.
While I agree with you totally in principle ... :ebiggrin:
Maybe, just maybe, they have got things pretty right this time.
Looks as if I'm going to have to go with the 215/60 16" AT-s.
taza
Forum Member
I have said once before here that Roo2 is the most 'balanced' vehicle I have ever driven, out of all the really flash stuff I have managed to talk myself into the driver's seat of. Someone must have noticed that I have a bit of a talent at this ...
THIS is perhaps the reason why that 'balance' must not be interfered with ... Not by fitting larger tyres; not by changing the suspension; not by almost anything.
THIS is the price we pay for having such superbly designed vehicles (for what they are ... ). They don't "appreciate" any sort of modifications. It upsets the 'balance'.
I find that my Foz is the 'right balance' for me. Power being a dangerous issue due to the lack of and sadly my L-series has a much much better 3rd adn 4th and possibly 5th gear pull. Making merging or pulling out of interesctions quite dangerous. I would like slightly less body roll too but I can live with what I have as I know I made it worse by lifting it. But the balance of the whole vehicle as being a daily driver, great hiighway cruiser, great size and good offroader is perfect :biggrin:
I thought in WA we had different laws to those about tyres??
Ratbag
Administrator
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2012
- Messages
- 7,483
- Location
- Bayside, Melbourne, Vic
- Car Year
- MY06, MY10
- Car Model
- Forester SG & SH
- Transmission
- 5MT/DR & 4EAT Sports
Gidday Taza (aka "HB" ... :lol
The document I found is for all of Australia (Federal law).
Except maybe in NSW where the rules are tighter, apparently.
Seems it is OK for the States to have tighter rules, just not looser ...
However, I don't claim to be an authority on this; let alone the ultimate authority ...
The document I found is for all of Australia (Federal law).
Except maybe in NSW where the rules are tighter, apparently.
Seems it is OK for the States to have tighter rules, just not looser ...
However, I don't claim to be an authority on this; let alone the ultimate authority ...
taza
Forum Member
Gidday Taza (aka "HB" ... :lol
HB??
Ok I will have a read over it when I finish my uni assignment, if I make it off this website first
Ratbag
Administrator
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2012
- Messages
- 7,483
- Location
- Bayside, Melbourne, Vic
- Car Year
- MY06, MY10
- Car Model
- Forester SG & SH
- Transmission
- 5MT/DR & 4EAT Sports
Gidday Taza
Lookie here:
https://www.offroadsubarus.com/showpost.php?p=39501&postcount=12
:iconwink: :rotfl:
Yeah mate. You are going to have to ditch a LOT of stuff if you want to do well in your Uni course.
Trust me.
You have to make Uni your first, second and third priority.
Lookie here:
https://www.offroadsubarus.com/showpost.php?p=39501&postcount=12
:iconwink: :rotfl:
Ok I will have a read over it when I finish my uni assignment, if I make it off this website first
Yeah mate. You are going to have to ditch a LOT of stuff if you want to do well in your Uni course.
Trust me.
You have to make Uni your first, second and third priority.
Last edited:
Ratbag
Administrator
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2012
- Messages
- 7,483
- Location
- Bayside, Melbourne, Vic
- Car Year
- MY06, MY10
- Car Model
- Forester SG & SH
- Transmission
- 5MT/DR & 4EAT Sports
Gidday Mr T
Sorry, missed this the first time around.
Thanks for that info.
I got 56,000 kms out of the really awful Michelin Certis tyres on Roo1. If I had realised that they were made in Thailand, I would never have bought them ...
What's the one part of a tyre you can save money on (i.e. pocket the difference ... )? The compound ... After only about 7~8 years on the car, the tread compound was hard and crumbly. The Michelin tech rep who inspected them (and paid for a full alignment on the Camry - 54,000 kms) said "They weren't the best tyres we ever made ... ". I have to agree with him!
Previous Michelins had returned between 95,000 and 75,000 kms on Roo1.
I would expect to get at least 55~60,000 kms out of the AT-s to even consider them.
I recall someone saying they had got far more than this from them on an SG Fox. Something like 60,000 miles, IIRC.
Whatever. I will have a full alignment done when these are fitted, as the car is second hand, and I do not know its history in this regard.
It will be interesting to see if the (presumably) better rolling resistance of the AT-s have a noticeable effect on fuel economy either way.
It is currently patently on its second set of tyres at 103,000 kms. I reckon that the Pirellis only have about 10,000 kms maximum left on Roo2.
That last sentence is probably the most important, going as it does to safety and intended use.I'm about at the same stage as you taza with mine
Mine currently have about 36k on them & I'd say they are about 66% (33% or 18k-20k left) Thus giving me 54k-55k out of them
I should & might even be able to squeeze a little more out of them too if I'm lucky :iconwink:
As for noise, I don't find them to be loud at all. If anything, they are quieter than I thought they'd be.
However, if you corner hard, they do growl a little, but nothing major
Yes I'll most definitely 2nd that :biggrin:
They're brilliant offroad, fantastic in the wet & great in the dry
Sorry, missed this the first time around.
Thanks for that info.
I got 56,000 kms out of the really awful Michelin Certis tyres on Roo1. If I had realised that they were made in Thailand, I would never have bought them ...
What's the one part of a tyre you can save money on (i.e. pocket the difference ... )? The compound ... After only about 7~8 years on the car, the tread compound was hard and crumbly. The Michelin tech rep who inspected them (and paid for a full alignment on the Camry - 54,000 kms) said "They weren't the best tyres we ever made ... ". I have to agree with him!
Previous Michelins had returned between 95,000 and 75,000 kms on Roo1.
I would expect to get at least 55~60,000 kms out of the AT-s to even consider them.
I recall someone saying they had got far more than this from them on an SG Fox. Something like 60,000 miles, IIRC.
Whatever. I will have a full alignment done when these are fitted, as the car is second hand, and I do not know its history in this regard.
It will be interesting to see if the (presumably) better rolling resistance of the AT-s have a noticeable effect on fuel economy either way.
It is currently patently on its second set of tyres at 103,000 kms. I reckon that the Pirellis only have about 10,000 kms maximum left on Roo2.
taza
Forum Member
Ohhhh, ok. Now I get it. I actually don't hoon like I used to. 95% of the time I drive like 'you' normal people :lol: but I do have my music loud. Not to annoy people just to enjoy myself while im driving.
I am managing so far but this site is very addicting. I am finding myself spending abuit less time on here though
Ratbag
Administrator
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2012
- Messages
- 7,483
- Location
- Bayside, Melbourne, Vic
- Car Year
- MY06, MY10
- Car Model
- Forester SG & SH
- Transmission
- 5MT/DR & 4EAT Sports
Hi Again Taz
These Internet things are.
I have weaned myself off a photographic site where I have been one of the top posters for about 4 years ... Over 11,000 posts. Like crack!! . I haven't posted there for about two weeks now.
Perhaps you need to set yourself a target. Something like 30 minutes twice a day? Use a kitchen timer to time yourself. The "Ten Steps", anyone? LOL :rotfl:.
Not that you have to turn into a reclusive book worm. There is time for other things. But you do have to be disciplined about how you use your time.
For old lags like me (read = "mature age students" = MAS), Universities and lecturers/tutors are generally far more forgiving with handing up assignments on time, etc, than they are with younger students (= 18 to 25 y.o. ... ).
I always reckoned that I passed all my qualifications (3x) on public transport. Amazing how much reading you can do there. I am actually a very poor student, because I am too easily distracted by things that are not the topic of the subject, even if related.
The University TELLS YOU what is going to be on the exam paper. It's called the syllabus ... If a subject runs for a 30 week study year, and they devote 10% of the time to point A; 35% to B; 40% to C and 15% to D then you will find that about 10% of the exam is on point A; 35% on B ... etc. A handy guide for those new to Uni, IMO. I wish someone had told me that in 1966 ... Would have saved me from a hell of a lot of grief and wasted time and energy.
All the other interesting stuff is just that: Interesting. NONE of it will be on the exam paper ...
I got started writing a book about it "How to Succeed at University by Really Trying". It is still very much in draft form. Needs quite a bit of fleshing out ...
Another thing, if you don't understand something, DON'T ask another student. Chances are they don't know either ...
Ask your lecturer, or if you cannot get hold of your lecturer (they tend to be somewhat less available than they are for mature age students - simple reason, about 90%+ of MAS finish, pass and do well; only about 50% of young students (first-timers) finish and pass), ask one of the tutors ...
This has the added advantage that they then know who you are - not just another number ...
I am managing so far but this site is very addicting. I am finding myself spending abuit less time on here though
These Internet things are.
I have weaned myself off a photographic site where I have been one of the top posters for about 4 years ... Over 11,000 posts. Like crack!!
. I haven't posted there for about two weeks now.Perhaps you need to set yourself a target. Something like 30 minutes twice a day? Use a kitchen timer to time yourself. The "Ten Steps", anyone? LOL :rotfl:.
Not that you have to turn into a reclusive book worm. There is time for other things. But you do have to be disciplined about how you use your time.
For old lags like me (read = "mature age students" = MAS), Universities and lecturers/tutors are generally far more forgiving with handing up assignments on time, etc, than they are with younger students (= 18 to 25 y.o. ... ).
I always reckoned that I passed all my qualifications (3x) on public transport. Amazing how much reading you can do there. I am actually a very poor student, because I am too easily distracted by things that are not the topic of the subject, even if related.
The University TELLS YOU what is going to be on the exam paper. It's called the syllabus ... If a subject runs for a 30 week study year, and they devote 10% of the time to point A; 35% to B; 40% to C and 15% to D then you will find that about 10% of the exam is on point A; 35% on B ... etc. A handy guide for those new to Uni, IMO. I wish someone had told me that in 1966 ... Would have saved me from a hell of a lot of grief and wasted time and energy.
All the other interesting stuff is just that: Interesting. NONE of it will be on the exam paper ...
I got started writing a book about it "How to Succeed at University by Really Trying". It is still very much in draft form. Needs quite a bit of fleshing out ...
Another thing, if you don't understand something, DON'T ask another student. Chances are they don't know either ...
Ask your lecturer, or if you cannot get hold of your lecturer (they tend to be somewhat less available than they are for mature age students - simple reason, about 90%+ of MAS finish, pass and do well; only about 50% of young students (first-timers) finish and pass), ask one of the tutors ...
This has the added advantage that they then know who you are - not just another number ...
Last edited:
NachaLuva
Product Developer
Thats what I had on mine, only few years old, heaps tread left.
I took em off cos they are crap! ... Crapstone!
& less superior doesnt mean cheaper lol. I'd call a few tyre places, get an idea of what you're up for
They're brilliant offroad, fantastic in the wet & great in the dry
AFAIK, Geolander AT-s are the only offroad tyre to have silica, which both improves grip esp on wet bitumen AND gives longer life.
Don't be fooled into thinking a bald tyre is like a slick...it isnt. As the tyre wears, the rubber changes chemistry...it becomes harder! Harder means less grip. So a tyre that has worn so much it's bald will actually have LESS grip than a brand new tyre with full tread, even though the treads blocks will squirm. Thats on a dry road with a good grippy surface. Anything else & its diabolical lol.