LC2010 tyres

[Architect Nelson]

Hey Good day to all.
I have a 2010 GXR V6model land cruiser driven with Bridgestone Duller(285/65 R17) recently replaced with New Dunlop tyres AT20 with same spec/size. But the car looks short....i can feel the height difference while driving.... i don't know why/how this is happened???...... with Bridgestone the car looked TALLER and MASCULAR......Anyone can help me in this regard.
Thanks in advance.

 

[Architect Nelson]

30 views but no answers..............I heard that may be because of tread pattern........My question is both Bridgestone & Dunlop are 285/65 R17 but with Dunlop the car is 5 to 10cm down!!!???...

 

[flint]

Welcome Nelson. I think that I’m right in saying that the aspect ratio (in your case 65) is the ratio of the width of the tyre measured between the widest dimension of the sidewalls at normal pressure (not the width of the wheel on which the tyre is mounted) in relation to the height of the tyre from rim of the wheel to the top of the tread as a percentage so, in effect, if the tyre is taller but also wider it can still have the same specs.

(p.s. bold type often comes across as shouting which might encourage a deaf ear.)

 

[Architect Nelson]

Welcome Nelson. I think that I’m right in saying that the aspect ratio (in your case 65) is the ratio of the width of the tyre measured between the widest dimension of the sidewalls at normal pressure (not the width of the wheel on which the tyre is mounted) in relation to the height of the tyre from rim of the wheel to the top of the tread as a percentage so, in effect, if the tyre is taller but also wider it can still have the same specs.

(p.s. bold type often comes across as shouting which might encourage a deaf ear.)

Thanks Flint....I hope your answer is the best

 

[flint]

I think that I've found a better explanation of aspect ratios here (see under sidewall aspect ratio), it seems that the height relates to the sidewall rather than the tread:
https://www.tirerack.com/tires/tiretech/techpage.jsp?techid=46

 

[Architect Nelson]

I think that I've found a better explanation of aspect ratios here (see under sidewall aspect ratio), it seems that the height relates to the sidewall rather than the tread:
https://www.tirerack.com/tires/tiretech/techpage.jsp?techid=46

Thanks for the link Flint...informative

 

[StarCruiser]

Hi Nelson, and welcome.

Just a thought but 5- 10 cm is Huge. If, as you say, the tyres are the same 285/65/17 then it is impossible to get such a difference. We are talking about 2 to 4" here! That's not really possible with just the tyres unless they are not fully inflated, which I think you would have spotted.

Forgive me here but that car must have AHC automatic height control? Could it be that it has got knocked into a lower setting perhaps?
The only other possibility is that the tyres are not actually the same, though I don't know how. Have you compared the size of ones that came off to the size of the new ones, side by side? That will tell you if it's the tyres which (again forgive me) I find difficult to comprehend. Tyres do look different, but not by 2 inches.

You know, I think this calls for some photos.
Oh, and you're probably not getting too many replies as you have posted a tyre question in the 'introduce yourself' section. Great for getting to know new members and their trucks. Not so great for getting learned members to help with tyre questions, so may be a bit slow, plus not a question I've seen before.

Good to have you here anyway. Let's have some photos and some measurements would be good. Old and new tyre diameter. Height from top of tyre to wheel arch, before (OK, tricky) and after. Better still, photos. An old one with the truck parked so you can gauge height, and a new one in the same place, that sort of thing. Otherwise sorry but we've not got much to go on.

Best wishes

Richard

 

[Architect Nelson]

Thanks for your valuable comment Richard.First I will check the AHC and second will post the pics with Bridgestone Dueller H/L& Dunlop.But I am sure tyre sizes are same...in your feel which tyre is good for out of these two for LC200? Both on/off road!!!

 

[StarCruiser]

I'm afraid I don't have a 200 series, though I am a bit envious TBH as they look amazing vehicles (especially when V8 diesel when Iceland prepared ).

There are lots of threads on what tyre is best for what on here so my advice would be to have a search and a read through some of the threads where you will gain quite a bit of good information on tyre choice. If you still don't find what you need, pop a post in the 200 series section and you should get members with 200s along to help with their experiences.

In general, BF Goodrich tyres are highly regarded, as are Cooper STTs but it really comes down to what you intend to use your truck for. If it's mainly on road use then the above won't be the most suitable. If you're in Norway (we don't know much about you or your truck yet so it's a good idea to fill in the profile and add a signature line with info on where you are and what truck you have) then winter tyres may be best for at least part of the year.

Have a search and see what comes up.

 

[flint]

If it’s not the AHC as Richard suggested, could it be something to do with the depth of the tread ? A less chunky tread might make the overall diameter smaller (unlikely to be 4” though), but the visual appearance might also give the impression of loss of height ? Also different tyres might have a different “bulge” to the sidewalls at the same pressures. I find the BFGs good, but as said, if your driving is mainly on tarmac, then something else might suit you better.

 

[StarCruiser]

If it’s not the AHC as Richard suggested, could it be something to do with the depth of the tread ? I have just measured my 265/70 r16 BFG A/Ts and the 265 measurement is the diameter excluding the treads, the total height is 775mm. A less chunky tread might make the overall diameter smaller (unlikely to be 4” though), but the visual appearance might also give the impression of loss of height ? Also different tyres might have a different “bulge” to the sidewalls at the same pressures. I find the BFGs good, but as said, if your driving is mainly on tarmac, then something else might suit you better.

The 265 will be the width of the tyre. The R16 refers to the diameter in inches of the wheel rim the tyre should be mounted on and the middle number is the ratio of the tyre wall to the width. So if you increase the first number, I.e. The width, with the same ratio, then the diameter increases as well.

 

[flint]

Yep, I was talking total rubbish there. I realised just after I wrote it and edited the post, you must have got the quote just after I posted it. A bit of a mind blank first thing, especially as I’d just been looking through tyre specs. No excuse other than a late night following a bit too much Jura. I’m still in the dark for answers other than possibly the sidewalls behaving differently under load, but I can’t see that making the amount of difference stated unless the pressures are very different.

 

[StarCruiser]

Yep, I was talking total rubbish there. I realised just after I wrote it and edited the post, you must have got the quote just after I posted it. A bit of a mind blank first thing, especially as I’d just been looking through tyre specs. No excuse other than a late night following a bit too much Jura. I’m still in the dark for answers other than possibly the sidewalls behaving differently under load, but I can’t see that making the amount of difference stated unless the pressures are very different.

Consider yourself forgiven.
Especially as it was Jura.

 

[flint]

That’s very noble of you my liege, I’ll try not to make a habit of it…. ’twas a lovely drop though. One thing that did spring to mind (when what’s left of the brain cells decided to talk to each other again), was rubber composition and number and type of plies, could that have a bearing on things ?

 

[StarCruiser]

That’s very noble of you my liege, I’ll try not to make a habit of it…. ’twas a lovely drop though. One thing that did spring to mind (when what’s left of the brain cells decided to talk to each other again), was rubber composition and number and type of plies, could that have a bearing on things ?

I'm sure it could Flint. However, it's all going to be affected by inflation V vehicle weight and I just can't imaging that making as much as 50mm difference, let alone 100mm. I think visually, tread pattern, particularly that which continues round the side wall, has a huge bearing on how 'big' the tyre looks and to a certain extent the vehicle. But again, we need photos or measurements, preferably both to be able to get to the bottom of this one. We are relying on Nelson to do some detective work and fill in some blanks.

 

[Architect Nelson]

If it’s not the AHC as Richard suggested, could it be something to do with the depth of the tread ? A less chunky tread might make the overall diameter smaller (unlikely to be 4” though), but the visual appearance might also give the impression of loss of height ? Also different tyres might have a different “bulge” to the sidewalls at the same pressures. I find the BFGs good, but as said, if your driving is mainly on tarmac, then something else might suit you better.

@flint, I will go with your comments...I hope, this is happened bcos of the tread pattern and side wall bulge ...This may vary brand to brand...I have seen all cruisers with Dunlop standing in the same height of my cruiser...Yesterday, saw one LC200 with Bridgestone standing taller/muscular than other all...Anyhow I will upload the car with Bridgestone and Dunlop....
Since I am a Architect by profession....visual height differences can be easily identified....for example when i stand in front of the car with bridgestone , Dashtop will not be seen clearly....but now with Dunlop dashboard top is clear....

 

[Architect Nelson]

with Bridgestone

 

[Architect Nelson]

with Bridgestone

 

[flint]

The photo with the Bridgestones on isn’t showing here Nelson. I couldn’t find a pic of a UAE market LC200, but one from the Australian brochure does seem to have a different stance, but difficult to tell as the camera angle is not the same. The specs seem to differ on models for different markets, but do you have a height control switch on yours ? If so, does it change the ride height ?

You can find a manual covering the systems here:
http://www.moranbahweather.com/toyota/ncf/pdf/m_ch_0114.pdf

the location of the height control switch is illustrated on page CH-128. Hope this helps.

Edit:
Just to add, if the other 200s with the same Dunlops on that you’ve seen are running at the same height as yours, then it must be down to the tyres. But if you did want to change them, then BFG A/Ts are certainly chunkier (technical term). I’ve not used mine on sand yet, but with pressures dropped, reports on their performance seem favourable.

 

[wobbly]

Looking at the LC in your picture, no way has tyre bulge lost you 100mm or 4".

The tyre would have to be virtually flat to lose 100mm - think about it, a 285/65 has a sidewall of 185mm, if you've lost 100mm your rim would be 85mm from the road, its clearly not.

So, could it be the the AHC, almost certainly I reckon.

To check, measure from the lowest point of the wheel (wheel, not tyre), to the point on the arch above it.

This gives you the suspension height from two fixed points irrespective of tyre size.

Now compare it to a same model car running the same 17" wheels (tyres are irrelevant).

If yours is lower, your suspension has dropped and needs raising (are these airbags, if so I would suspect the regulator as faulty).