widest tyres to fit 3500

[SydneyRoverP6B]

I have been running 205/70 HR 14 tyres on my Rover since 1987. The tyre place did trial fit a 215 possibly 65 series issue onto the front, but the inside wall made contact with the swivel pillar, so 205 is the widest that will fit, assuming the correct rolling diameter is maintained.

Running spacers to move the wheels further out so as to increase clearance is illegal here in N.S.W, so not an option for those within this state.

Ron.

 

[billoddie]

Reminds me of the young/dumb/full of cum brigade who drop slam old Benzes with low profile wheels and tyres..

May I borrow this quote ?

Feel free...

Lots of people have said they want to do it, and that's as far as they've ever got :|

How did the factory do it?

 

[sowen]

I have been running 205/70 HR 14 tyres on my Rover since 1987. The tyre place did trial fit a 215 possibly 65 series issue onto the front, but the inside wall made contact with the swivel pillar, so 205 is the widest that will fit, assuming the correct rolling diameter is maintained.

Running spacers to move the wheels further out so as to increase clearance is illegal here in N.S.W, so not an option for those within this state.

Ron.

To be honest I think spacers about 3-4" wide would be needed to get the commonly fitted wheels out far enough to justify having flared arches, not to mention the issues that would cause to the steering and wheel bearings in normal driving. The OP would need to source suitable wheels first, then build the car round them.

Reminds me of the young/dumb/full of cum brigade who drop slam old Benzes with low profile wheels and tyres..

May I borrow this quote ?

Feel free...

I guess I almost fall under that category :?

Lots of people have said they want to do it, and that's as far as they've ever got :|

How did the factory do it?

As far as I'm aware the factory didn't do it, only enterprising individuals and racing teams I think. I'm yet to see a proper photo showing the technicality of fitting wide arches over the rear doors and any other modifications performed to the suspension and steering, not just pretty pictures from a distance.

 

[billoddie]

When I say factory, I particularly mean the Roy Piermont effort, which AFAIK had at least a degree of factory "sponsorship"
From past efforts it seems there have been a number of ways of approaching the problem...


I'm sure everyone is familiar with this awesome Rover, of which I don't know how he has sorted the rear wheels(but I'm sure others here do)








An excellent link with some excellent pics.
http://retrorides.proboards.com/thread/104332?page=1

Upon examination of the above link, its pretty easy to see how the "factory" achieved its end result...LOTS of cutting/shutting metal....

 

[cfcrotweiller]

The second last pic is the one I originally posted. In terms of the rear open arch and flared arches, this is very cimilar to what I am looking for. Non of the other racing additions, just the arches. I don't want larger diameter wheels/tyres so overall diamete should remain pretty much the same. I want wider, but as some of you have said, filling the "void" of wider arches seems to be tricky....
I am determined to go for it but I think once I get the car on the driveway and actually start removing stuff from the car (and actually properly engage in restoration!) then I can truely understand how difficult it will be.
Im hot on welding, Design background and taught myself mechanics (old BMW's, Saab's and now Rover V8's), so hopefully I have a (small) chance of trying to overcome some hurdles.
Problem is if I do all the work and it fails the Inspection. Then I'm well and truely trollied.

But thanks for the links, info and suggestions. I think 205 wide tyres seems to be the most common maximum width, its just a case of seeing if flared works, and by how much etc.

 

[billoddie]

Have another look at the pic labeled "The problem".
When i first joined the forum...this problem was oft spoken of...but I never REALLY understood what was involved.
I suspect you MAY be the same ...have a real good look at that base unit D post and what it MEANS for flaring the arches...in terms of
1) The rear door
2) The outer body sill/line itself

The guard is not that much of a prob...its in the base unit itself

 

[sowen]

The second last pic is the one I originally posted. In terms of the rear open arch and flared arches, this is very cimilar to what I am looking for. Non of the other racing additions, just the arches. I don't want larger diameter wheels/tyres so overall diamete should remain pretty much the same. I want wider, but as some of you have said, filling the "void" of wider arches seems to be tricky....
I am determined to go for it but I think once I get the car on the driveway and actually start removing stuff from the car (and actually properly engage in restoration!) then I can truely understand how difficult it will be.
Im hot on welding, Design background and taught myself mechanics (old BMW's, Saab's and now Rover V8's), so hopefully I have a (small) chance of trying to overcome some hurdles.
Problem is if I do all the work and it fails the Inspection. Then I'm well and truely trollied.

But thanks for the links, info and suggestions. I think 205 wide tyres seems to be the most common maximum width, its just a case of seeing if flared works, and by how much etc.

Honestly, just open the rear door, and there's the problem. The lower D-post is double skinned, and an open cavity, and sits over the top of the tyre, which is why people have trouble with 205's and over.

The first pic in Billodie's post above illustrates the problem area quite well, just follow the inner wing ling from the back to the front, where it reaches the doorpost, that's the trouble area.

IF you were to do it and fit 205 tyres, I think it will look just plain silly. The whole aesthetic reason for arches is to cover wide wheels and tyres. Minimum I would consider would be 225/235 width, and assuming you've got a v8, I'm sure tyres in the correct rolling diameter are easily obtainable.

If you could trace the owner of this and get details of what's involved it would help you a lot

I've thought about it myself long and hard and have got it all sussed out, and I could supply basic drawings of what I would do myself, I'm just unconvinced that you have the drive and enthusiasm to actually do it. My plans are very extensive, and involve another complete car which I have, and I suspect would be similar to what the factory backed team would have made.

 

[billoddie]

I considered including the yellow car...but didn't, for whilst I'm sure it took a lot of work, it looks...wrong

 

[sowen]

I considered including the yellow car...but didn't, for whilst I'm sure it took a lot of work, it looks...wrong

Whether it looks right or wrong the owner has done it, fitted proper wide wheels and tyres which have filled out the arches, which is more than what almost everyone else has ever done to a P6. For that alone, it should be regarded as one of the better examples.

Going by the height of the bubble's, I'd guess the owner did their research and built it with full clear suspension travel.

 

[corazon]

If they'd continued the bubble line to the meet the top of the lights on the back of the wing, it would look a lot less awkward.
But that car is built for racing and presumably does the job it meant to do, I imagine it was entirely function over form for them :wink:
Don't forget this one Bill http://www.garaget.org/?car=56463&image=1154148 Although there's been no updates since you first linked to it yet

Jim

 

[billoddie]

Whether it looks right or wrong the owner has done it,

Hey...hats off to them
But what Jim says...

I imagine it was entirely function over form for them

...was their guiding philosophy.
The "factory racer" is so well loved because the "look" of it just works...low, muscular, mean and purposeful...the car looks super...even today.

 

[billoddie]

From your lead Jim...the problem in a nutshell...

 

[billoddie]

Actually hadnt noticed this...

 

[chrisyork]

A little anecdote to add to the mystique of modding the rear wheel arch in the base unit to accept wider tyres. This from one of those directly involved at the time... One of the Talago's was allocated to Belgian Cobbles testing at MIRA, the test involving the completion of 1,000 miles of running over the cobbles. At 800 miles the back of the car fell off.... Two modifications were carried out as a result of this. Firstly the fuel tank was moved from the original position in the boot well to the now normal position above the axle immediately behind the back seats. Secondly the D post was considerably strengthened including the adoption of double skinning in place of the original single skin arrangement.

Worth thinking back to that next time you contemplate major surgery on the D post.....

I imagine that the deep slot up through the structure that gives space for the movement of the de dion tube was largely to blame for this weakness and over reliance on the D posts bottoms for structural integrity. Also explains why Rover were so keen to modify the de dion solution for subsequent models, both P7 and P8 having forward facing de dions.

Chris

 

[sowen]

I think Chris has raised a very valid point regarding the structural integrity of the D-post and the surrounding area of the base unit. In normal daily use it would probably be fine with very extensive modifications, if not the entire removal of the lower D-post, but in the one-off event of a serious accident, the vehicles strength could be compromised.

This is partly the reason in the UK that for radically altered/modified vehicles there is a strict inspection and registration program, to assess the vehicles construction and compliance.

That green P6 looks quite similar to what I've done to mine, except the photos make it look neater and more planned

 

[colnerov]

Hi, Chris, You raise some interesting questions in the 'Belgian cobbles' solution. The P5 is also
double skinned in the 'D' post area and yet this was conceived years earlier and had a more
conventional rear suspension set up. Did they have similar problems and move the fuel tank?
If so why did they think they could get away with it on the P6? Wouldn't moving the tank have
moved most of the weight and thus the leverage? Do the estates show any sign of distress
with the tank out the back and reduced vehicle structure over the rear axle?

Colin

 

[chrisyork]

Hi colnerov.

I think the problem with the P6 is that the "floor" is very high over the diff and de dion tube and this area extends beyond the rear 1/4 panels. So there is no contribution from the roof to hold the rear up. I don't think you can compare to the P5 as that was Rover's first attempt at a unitary body and it was over-engineered throughout. With the P6 they were trying to make it as light as possible so as to get three litre performance from a 2 litre engine. Having moved the fuel tank, you are quite right that the routine loadings are much reduced - but what happens when the owner collects a bag of cement from the builders merchants.... Or don't Rover owners do that sort of thing?

Chris

 

[billoddie]

but what happens when the owner collects a bag of cement from the builders merchants....

Or you stuff an LPG tank in the boot?
Which, apart from eliminating most of the usable space, apparently has a nasty effect on handling viz a viz increasing the polar moment of inertia.
Now you tell us it may have other undesirable consequences in regards unitary strength?

 

[Johnny E]

Or put a Morris Minor engine in the boot as Pilkie did back in June at Coughton Court!

 

[harveyp6]

but what happens when the owner collects a bag of cement from the builders merchants....

Or you stuff an LPG tank in the boot?

Or a jam packed Snap-On tool chest, full size two ton Jack, two ramps, two axle stands, plus all the other associated add-ons required to do any job kerbside.....

I can't say I had any break, but I can't say I ever gave it any thought anyway.