LR2 Talk about the Land Rover LR2 within.

Load Rating for Replacement Tires

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jun 23, 2011 | 02:16 PM
  #1  
jeff.marsh's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Overlanding
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Default Load Rating for Replacement Tires

Hey all,

Well, just like everyone else I've hit 30,000 km on my LR2 and the OEM Continental Contact 4x4's on it are just about worn out. I started to look for new tires and was shocked to discover what a limited selection there is out there in a 255/35R19 rated at 105H or better. Being here in Canada but not doing that much driving I'm looking for a All Season that is decent enough in snow. I've noted the suggestions folks have made in previous posts but haven't seen anything that meets or exceeds the above specification that is at all decent in snow.

One tire that I am very impressed with is the Yokohama Parada Spec-X:

Yokohama Parada Spec-X

The problem is that this tire is only a 101V (so the speed rating is fine but the load rating isn't)

It seems that a lot of folks are replacing their tires with 101H or 101V's but is this actually safe. I've talked to several tire dealers and I'd say about 80% (including my local Land Rover Dealer) recommend 101H or 101V tires right off and say that there is no problem with the reduced load rating when I raise the concern. Land Rover Canada on the other hand says stick with a tire that meets or exceeds the OEM tires and unfortunately there is nothing in the vehicle specifications that indicates the minimum load rating required. The question that it comes down to then is whether the 105H rating represents the minimum required or simply the specification to which the chosen OEM Continental's happened to be designed to that exceeded the vehicle requirements.

Doing some calculations suggest that it should be fine:

Load rating 101 implies a max load of 2039 lbs

Load rating 101 implies a max load of 1819 lbs

According to the manual, the GVWR (The maximum permissible weight of the vehicle including passengers and load) is 5520 lbs - or 1380 lbs per tire

Further considering the per axle GVWR's everything is still okay leaving quite a bit of cushion:
Front GVWR is 2885 lbs - or 1442.5 lbs per tire
Rear GVWR is 2995 lbs - or 1497.5 lbs per tire

The only scenario I can dig up where the load rating of the tire would be exceeded is the suggestion by the John Mahler of the Toronto Star that:

"Remember under heavy panic braking as much as 70% of the cars weight can transfer onto the front tires. Those two tires’ sidewalls have to take that load, or bang and you’re in a ditch"

New tire must keep load rating of original rubber | Wheels.ca

70% of the GVWR distributed across 2 tires is 1932 lbs which exceeds the max load by about 100 lbs but is still within the load rating of the OEM tires.

Anyone got an theoretical comments on this? How about practical experience running 101's on an LR2? How about under emergency driving conditions? Even just general thoughts?

I don't want to create a safety issue but at the same time if I were to simply replace the OEM tires with the same, their really poor performance (especially in the snow) is a safety hazard in it's own right!

Thanks,
\|/ Jeff \|/
 
Reply
Old Jun 24, 2011 | 07:56 PM
  #2  
m1964's Avatar
Three Wheeling
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Default

2 years ago I installed Michelin Latitude tires, and still happy w/ them after 30K miles, hope to get another year out of them. They ride a lot more comfortable then OEM Contis. Mine are 18" tires.

The OEM tires are XL (extra load) tires, and have really stiff sidewall.

I think that if you don't go off-road, and do not drive like a maniac, the 101 rated tires should be fine, however I would not go for Yokohama, I would either get Michelins or Continentals, the cheaper tires will affect the ride quality/noise/wet handling/etc.

If you can afford it, get Michelins.
 
Reply
Old Jun 28, 2011 | 01:18 PM
  #3  
jeff.marsh's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Overlanding
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Default

Thanks for the feedback M1964! You've hit on another thing I was sort of wondering about but didn't express in my initial - whether LR jacked up the tire specs to XL to better enable their trademark offroading. That I don't do but as the crumby gas mileage I get attests to I am pretty hard on the vehicle in day-to-day driving. If I was a less aggressive driver I'd already have the 101's without worrying about it.

It is good to know that you've had good luck with the Latitudes - which in the 19 inch are 101's. And as far as price goes I can get them for the same as a new set of Conti's
 
Reply
Old Jun 30, 2011 | 08:00 PM
  #4  
angelis745's Avatar
Drifting
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Default

If you have a connection at a continentil dealership then continental makes an off road tire that they don't sell in the US. You can order through the dealer. It's a Conti A/T
 
Reply
Old Jul 21, 2011 | 09:46 PM
  #5  
jeff.marsh's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Overlanding
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Default

Hey all,

Thanks for the feedback - I think I'm gonna go for the Yoko's I mentioned above - I'll post once I've been on them for a while to say what I think.

\|/ Jeff \|/
 
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Savannah Buzz
Off Topic
22
Feb 18, 2013 10:34 AM
dgess
LR3
5
Oct 12, 2009 01:06 PM
andrewmcoffin
Discovery II
17
Apr 12, 2008 01:18 AM
Terry W
Discovery II
8
Dec 25, 2007 01:22 AM
b c
Discovery II
20
Nov 9, 2007 03:27 PM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:36 AM.