Anybody regret going with 35's?

[dclee]

that's all of 75 lbs then.
do you also feel a night and day difference when you have a small passenger added?
could be more the rolling resistance, maybe?

Unsprung weight, and probably rolling resistance as well. That's why all the street guys want superlight forged alloy wheels. Reducing unsprung weight is one of the best things you can do for acceleration and handling.

15 pounds per corner is probably more than a 10% improvement, and that's what I call significant...

 

[hoser]

E9999-
Think 15lb boots vs 15lb backpack.

Christo-
Do those speedo gears you carry work for the 98-02 100 series?

 

[Colicious]

yea unsprung weight is equal to that of about 4 times normal weight. coming from the go-fast car area, if we get 4lbs lighter wheels, thats only 16lbs total. but because the weight is sprung, its like losing 64lbs from the body or interior. not to mention everything else is improved to turn-in speed, acceleration, braking, and handling.

 

[hoser]

Well, we ARE talking about acceleration and deceleration, so it's really rotating mass that we are concerned with and not unsprung weight. Yes, the rotating mass is related to unsprung weight but not the same. The weight of the axle and brakes are also considered unsprung weight and those have little to do with acceleration/deceleration. Now if we were talking about on-road suspension then yes, it's all about unsprung weight.

Colicious and dclee, I know you know what I'm talking about... I'm just trying to make the thread "accurate."

Btw, I went from 58lb wheels to 116lb wheels. HUGE difference!

 

[Colicious]

116 for one wheel im used to that amount of weight being too much for all 4 wheels


and yea, the rotating mass is what i meant, just used to refering to it as the unsprung weight.

how heavy is, say a 295/75/18 tire compared to a 315/75/18 tire (thats 33" and 35", right?)?

 

[SINCITY100]

116 for one wheel im used to that amount of weight being too much for all 4 wheels


and yea, the rotating mass is what i meant, just used to refering to it as the unsprung weight.

how heavy is, say a 295/75/18 tire compared to a 315/75/18 tire (thats 33" and 35", right?)?

Brand, model and tread design is EVERYTHING when it comes to a tire`s weight... But I know those Toyo (MTs) are real heavy tires...My buddy`s 33x13.5 OpenCountry MTs are NOT fun to take on/off his rig

 

[hoser]

285/75-16 (33") BFG AT weighs in at 55lbs
315/75-16 (35") BFG AT weights in at 68lbs

As said, weights vary quite a bit depending on construction. Tires with a higher load rating will have more plys, more steel etc and hence more weight.

Tirerack.com lists all the weights of their tires.

 

[SINCITY100]

BTW.. I dont know about the rest of you guys in here but...

The weight/rolling resistance difference between my "stock" 18`s and the Goodyear MTR 33"s was instantly noticeable, Especially when I backed off the gas pedal a bit while cruising @ highway speeds my 100 scrubs off speed much faster..so much that at first it felt like the E-brake was engaged !

I am starting to think that the largest tire my 100 will ever see will be something in the 34" range

 

[dclee]

I just did 3000 miles on my truck with 325/60/18 (33" Nitto's) towing a trailer. Personally I think 4.88's with 33's will be to much. I run 2750/2800 rpm at around 80/85mph. OK, I have a turbo and that helps to not notice the larger tire size, but I think 4.88's will be to much gear for 33's if you like to cuise at higher speeds.

Christo - That's the truck you had at SnT, correct? Are you running the wheel spacers on that truck as well? Stock gearing (was that year 4.1 or 4.3?)?

Thanks,

 

[sleeoffroad]

Yes, I have 1.25" spacers on the front, however I do not like it. I would like to go to 3/4". We are looking at making them. We can't seem to source them anywhere. Gearing is stock 4.3

 

[dclee]

Colicious and dclee, I know you know what I'm talking about... I'm just trying to make the thread "accurate."

Cool with me dude!

 

[dclee]

Yes, I have 1.25" spacers on the front, however I do not like it. I would like to go to 3/4". We are looking at making them. We can't seem to source them anywhere. Gearing is stock 4.3

Cool, thanks. What don't you like about the 1.25"? Does it tramline more now, or exhibit other strange behavior? I was thinking about 1" in front, 7/8 in back. Didn't want to worry about grinding the stock lugs, just too lazy. But we'll see.

My stock gearing is 4.1, do you think it will be too bad to go up with 33's with the stock gearing, or would you recommend I re-gear to maybe 4.56? I plan on doing ARB's eventually, so figure I might as well re-gear while the thirds are out.

 

[hoser]

Derek, check out this thread. Your 4.1/5sp combo still has a LOWER first gear than our 4.88/4sp combo (and we run 35's). Acceleration shouldn't be a problem with 33's but you might find it searching more between 4th and 5th on the freeway... or maybe not.

 

[Snook]

I'm happy with my 4.88 and 35" MTR tires. (3/4" spacers would be cool)

The ONLY regret is I had to pick up my dog, Tundra and put him in my truck.

Cheers,

 

[Letsgomoreplaces]

Driveline angles did not change when I did the 4.88 conversion. However I replaced all front bearings, races, seals, CV axles, rear axle bearings, seals plus the pair of R&P, the front ARB locker & 315 MT/R's (from 285 MT/R's) and all four u-joints (all parts sans the R&P & locker are OEM Toyota). I have removed the front drive shaft and driven it...and 95% of the noise and vibration/buzz is gone. Now I have to pull the rear shaft and try it that way to try to narrow it down. I suspect the u-joints...but nothing more than a hunch right now. The noise is a low level rumble that oscillilates...just like a worn u-joint from past experience with GM's. And the noise and vibe comes and goes in intensity...it is not always at the same dB or RPM range necessarily. One of the LC experts on this forum said they have trouble with lifted 80's now and then...some of these rigs run smooth and silent after driveline changes (lift and/or regear) and some don't.

Your correct, the driveline angles did not change with the gear change, but the speed of the driveshafts did. It is possible that the problem existed before the gear change, but was not noticeable until the increased driveline speed. I see this all of the time.

 

[Jim_Chow]

Well, we ARE talking about acceleration and deceleration, so it's really rotating mass that we are concerned with and not unsprung weight. Yes, the rotating mass is related to unsprung weight but not the same. The weight of the axle and brakes are also considered unsprung weight and those have little to do with acceleration/deceleration. Now if we were talking about on-road suspension then yes, it's all about unsprung weight.

Colicious and dclee, I know you know what I'm talking about... I'm just trying to make the thread "accurate."

Btw, I went from 58lb wheels to 116lb wheels. HUGE difference!

Yeah, the scientific term is the "inertia" (rotational mass). IIRC, it's like I~mR^2, where m=mass, R=radius (there are more complicated variants). Note that the radius is squared, so if you double the radius, your inertia increases 4-fold. In other words, the further out the weight is from the center of the wheel, the worse off you are. None of this takes into account the additional rolling resistance of MT tires. That's icing on the cake. I think this is why Toyota had to change the front calipers/pads on the '03+ LC/LX's...bigger 18" wheels worsened the braking.

 

[HiFiGuy]

Nevermind. Good post, Jim.

 

[e9999]

too lazy to do the calcs but I would think that the inertia of the entire vehicle would dwarf so much the (rotational) inertia of the wheels that the latter would not matter much at all if one is talking about weight difference between 33s ATs and MTs...

 

[FirstToy]

e9999,
it only takes a couple ounces to mess up the balance of a wheel.

75lbs is a HUGE difference in unsprung weight!
With tires, all the weight is at the outer diameter of the rotating mass which has the worst effect on performance.

75lbs unsprung is alot more than 75lbs in the cab. 75lbs at the tire is alot more than 75lbs at the hub.

put a 10lb weight on the rim lip and see how it affects your performance. It's huge.

This type of weight is an obsession in motorcycle, bicycle & auto racing. max weight loss of unsprung weight, minimal rotating weight-most weight centralized at the hub if at all possible.

this doesn't apply so much to offroad tires imo, b/c the tradeoff of sidewall strength/protection and tread design/overall toughness overrides the concern for weight loss jmo

 

[Cj80cruiser]

Almost 4 years later....Is it still thought that 35's and stock gearing=bad news for your tranny or any part of your driveline? Most recommend regearing on an 80 but that's more from a performance stand point. I doubt anyone would argue that the 80's driveline couldn't handle the upgraded tire size. I'm not wanting to debate 80 vs. 100 but just wanting to know if the stock driveline on the 100 can handle the 35's and some mild offroading.