Toyota LC 4WD basics... help needed.
Martin
I have a Toyota LJ70 1989 LandCruiser. It has options on the gear ratios
of H2, N and L4. I also have a button (H4) to change from 2 wheel drive
to 4 wheel drive. On the front wheels are manual locking hubs.
I understand the gear ratios so that's fine. The confusion is knowing
when I am in 4wd or not.
The mechanic that gave me the keys for the LC at the garage said that
once the button H4 was pressed in I would be in 4 wheel drive and that I
only needed to lock the hubs if I got 'really' stuck. This seemed fine
and I assumed that once the button was depressed that I was in 4WD.
However, as a Newbie, I bought the book "4-Wheel Freedon" which states,
"p9 Locking Front Hubs
Putting the transfer case into 4WD won't do any good if the front hubs
are unlocked and the front wheels are freewheeling. The front hubs must
be moved from the unlocked position to the locked position before the
front wheels can provide drive for the vehicle."
I bought the LC handbook and the info seems ambiguous.
Could anyone please clarify all this for me?
Any help appreciated.
Martin
mar...@level.co.uk
www.level.co.uk
Willem-Jan Markerink
Martin <mar...@NOSPAM.level.co.uk> wrote:
>This will probably sound a little basic but I'm confused and need help.
>I have a Toyota LJ70 1989 LandCruiser. It has options on the gear ratios
>of H2, N and L4. I also have a button (H4) to change from 2 wheel drive
>to 4 wheel drive. On the front wheels are manual locking hubs.
>
>I understand the gear ratios so that's fine. The confusion is knowing
>when I am in 4wd or not.
>
>The mechanic that gave me the keys for the LC at the garage said that
>once the button H4 was pressed in I would be in 4 wheel drive and that I
>only needed to lock the hubs if I got 'really' stuck. This seemed fine
>and I assumed that once the button was depressed that I was in 4WD.
Mechanic was clueless....no 4wd without engaging the hubs ('Lock', instead
of 'Free').
Apart from that, 4wd is then also visible by a green light on your dash (I
think), IOW both after pushing that button, and shifting the lever to L4.
And *ONLY* with engaged hubs you can engage 4wd on the fly with this
button, IOW at speed....never ever do this with unlocked hubs, since mucho
grinding of teeth will be your gain....8-))
--
Bye,
Willem-Jan Markerink
The desire to understand
is sometimes far less intelligent than
the inability to understand
<w.j.ma...@a1.nl>
[note: 'a-one' & 'en-el'!]
Stephan Rothstein
>
> In article <39E1AB95...@NOSPAM.level.co.uk>,
> Martin <mar...@NOSPAM.level.co.uk> wrote:
> >This will probably sound a little basic but I'm confused and need help.
> >I have a Toyota LJ70 1989 LandCruiser. It has options on the gear ratios
> >of H2, N and L4. I also have a button (H4) to change from 2 wheel drive
> >to 4 wheel drive. On the front wheels are manual locking hubs.
> >
> >I understand the gear ratios so that's fine. The confusion is knowing
> >when I am in 4wd or not.
> >
> >The mechanic that gave me the keys for the LC at the garage said that
> >once the button H4 was pressed in I would be in 4 wheel drive and that I
> >only needed to lock the hubs if I got 'really' stuck. This seemed fine
> >and I assumed that once the button was depressed that I was in 4WD.
>
> Mechanic was clueless....no 4wd without engaging the hubs ('Lock', instead
> of 'Free').
>
> Apart from that, 4wd is then also visible by a green light on your dash (I
> think), IOW both after pushing that button, and shifting the lever to L4.
I agree that the mechanic is clueless. The hubs need to be locked for
the four wheel drive to work. I think he would be in 4-high just from
locking the hubs and pushing the button. He should only need to shift
the lever to L4 for the 4 low position, if he needed more torque from
the extra gearing. I just wanted to clarify this since your post could
be read as must be in 4l to get 4 wheel drive. But you could be right
and me wrong, since I have never driven the Toyota's.
Steve Rothstein
Priscilla Denney
Martin
exception of about 10 minutes when I got a bit stuck and locked my hubs
and put it in low ratio.
Nice to know.
Is there a 'rough' speed limit to driving with the hubs locked? Or do I
have to get out and unlock as soon as I reach a faster section of
terrain?
If the hubs are locked and I go into h2 (via releasing the h4 button)
will this cause problems? Again I'm talking short term, whilst on a
faster section.(or is it better to keep it in h4 whilst the hubs are
locked?)
Thanks again in advance
Martin
Roger Brown
Assuming there are no problems in the front end, then driving with front hubs
locked and in 2WD should be fine. In fact it is a good idea to do this once
every few weeks just to keep the moving parts lubricated. As long as your
front driveline angles don't cause any vibration, then the only downside to
driving this way is a bit of added drag and some additional wear and tear on
the front end. When I go up skiing in the mountains, I'll lock my hubs when I
stop for gas at the base of the mountains, about 50 miles from the summit.
Then, if conditions warrant, I can flip the lever into 4Hi and continue on.
I've driven 65-70MPH for 100 miles at a time with locked hubs w/o problem.
Just don't forget you have the hubs locked and leave it in 4WD on bare
pavement.
--
Roger Brown http://reality.sgi.com/rogerb/4Runner.html
"If Chewbacca lives on Endor, you must acquit! The defense rests."
Martin
Looking forward to a winter in the French Alps with my new Toy.
Martin
Pieter
> Looking forward to a winter in the French Alps with my new Toy.
>
> Martin
>
Make sure you have the right tires (tyres for you). All this knowledge and
experience getting power to the wheels doesn't do anything if you cannot get
it from the wheels to the surface you're driving on.
And if you post that question, you'll get at least 10 times the response.
It's probably most controversial topic in 4-wheel driving.
Cheers, Pieter
Martin
I think you must have read my mind as this is my next question.
As I probably mentioned I just bought the LandCruiser [LJ70 '80] and it's my
first 4x4.
It has 2 new rear tyres which are Challenger Invader III (Tubeless M+S 31x10.50
R15)
I looked at quite a few sites and no one sells these so I'm guessing they're
cheap.
The 2 front tyres are still road legal with about 5 or 6mm of tread but even I
can see that when push comes to shove they'll be short on traction. They are
Dunlop SP RV Major (10 R 15 M+S) and at a guess I'd even say they were the
tyres that came on the vehicle when new.
I've seen that there are 3 main types of tyres (route, mixed and all terrain)
and guess that I'm a 'mixed' kind of user.
I will however be living in the Alps for 4 months and the norm is snow and ice
with road trips also.
I would not relish a 'snow-chain' option.
My sum total knowledge of tyres is that M+S stands for Mud and Snow and I guess
this is what I need; and the numbers tell me what size I need.
If a tyre is MT (Mud Terrain?) is it less good on snow? Tyre adverts don't seem
to mention M+S so is this standard?
So the question:
What tyres shall I buy and do I need 2 or 4 (ie are the Challengers ok)?
I don't want to spend loads but if there is going to be a noticable difference
I will break into my piggy-bank.
Cheers
Martin
(Englishman in France)
Pieter
> I think you must have read my mind as this is my next question.
Not really, just that I've already gone through the same process.
If it only was that simple that there were three types of tyres. OK, here we
go:
Most major manufacturers offer 4-6 different types of tyres for 4wd cars,
for mainly road use (with subcategories of all-season, winter,
high-performance, and whatever else the marketing guys dream up). Then there
is a group of "all-terrain" typically indicated by 50/50 road/off-road use,
the group of terrain/mud-terrain/off-road, and then you have the hard-core
off-road stuff. Finaly you have sand tyres, a specialty in itself.
Tyre basics you need to know first are suitable size(s), load and speed
index, and the intended use.
My strong opinion is that "all-terrain" tyres are useless: they do not
perform off-road, and on-road they are louder, a bit harsher, and more
expensive than pure road tyres. I want to make an exception for expedition
tyres such as the Michelin XZL or OZL: road tyres designed for very bad
roads, but not specifically to go mud-driving if you can avoid it.
For my Land Cruiser I have a set of road tyres (came with the car, Michelin
LTX M/S, 275/70R16) and my experience is they are very good on-road, summer
and winter. But do not take these off-road, the tread clogs and after 200
meters you have slicks. As a second set I have a BFGoodrich (BFG) M/T
285/75R16. A good off-road compromise tyre, and not too bad on-road if you
keep speed below 120 km/h. Above that they are noisy. I'm actually trying to
find a set of Super Swamper Boggers for the real off-road stuff, but those
are difficult to find in Europe. Also the size I want is only just announced
(33x12.50R16).
I think the best strategy is to have two or three sets of tyres (with
wheels!) so you can actually select the kind of footwear your car needs -
just like for yourself. But it does cost money. If you insist on a
compromise tyre I would strongly recommend you study what Michelin has to
offer and select either a good road tyre with good winter performance, or
one of the expedition tyres that have incredibly good wear on good roads.
Another good thing to do is go visit the different menufacturers websites
and compare what they have to offer. Here are some of the more interesting
ones. Michelin has a good infirmation section on road tyres. The ony real
off-road tires you'll find in the truck section (XML, XL)
www.michelin.com
www.bfgoodrichtires.com
www.goodyeartires.com
www.intercotire.com
there are a bunch more, just use a search engine.
I have just bought another Land Cruiser (a 70 series), and apart from the
wheel size (16"), characteristics are similar to your LC70. It comes with
265/70R16 Grand Treks (nickname: Grand Slicks), so I'll use those on-road
only. The second set can be either the BFG's from my other Cruiser (the
wheelbolt pattern is the same), or I'll go straight for one of the models
from Interco. Compared to Boggers, BFG M/T are street tyres!
Cheers, Pieter
PS: I'm off to Tashkent tomorrow, so I will not see the newsgroups for the
next two weeks or so.
Willem-Jan Markerink
No, you are right, I was dabbling about the light, not the interaction
between button and stick (you indeed don't need the 4wd button in L4,
unless you modify the wiring to have L2 as well (it's an electro-activated
dogclutch afterall)).
Willem-Jan Markerink
Yes, ok.
(assuming it was a question, not a statement....:))
Willem-Jan Markerink
Martin <mar...@NOSPAM.level.co.uk> wrote:
>Well that means I spent my first off-roading weekend in 2wd with the
>exception of about 10 minutes when I got a bit stuck and locked my hubs
>and put it in low ratio.
>Nice to know.
>Is there a 'rough' speed limit to driving with the hubs locked?
No....only a sensible speed limit for engaging 4wd, since 'lockable hubs'
means parttime 4wd, which means a binding drive train on grippy
roads....not catastrophic at low speeds, going straight, but very unwise at
high speed, or in corners.
>Or do I
>have to get out and unlock as soon as I reach a faster section of
>terrain?
>If the hubs are locked and I go into h2 (via releasing the h4 button)
>will this cause problems? Again I'm talking short term, whilst on a
>faster section.(or is it better to keep it in h4 whilst the hubs are
>locked?)
No, you can shift on the fly at virtually any speed.
(although most manufacturers will state something like 60 or 80km/h for
some common sense....if you can much faster, there hardly is a need for
4wd other than stability (and stability might just as well get quircky at
such speeds with a binding drivetrain)....but be damn sure your hubs are
locked when engaging, otherwise teeth will grind....8-))
Willem-Jan Markerink
Martin <mar...@NOSPAM.level.co.uk> wrote:
>Thanks for your advice.
>Looking forward to a winter in the French Alps with my new Toy.
Any good/cheap chalet/appartment to rent from you during
say Christmas/Newyear?....;))
Willem-Jan Markerink
Martin <mar...@NOSPAM.level.co.uk> wrote:
>Pieter
>I think you must have read my mind as this is my next question.
>
my
>first 4x4.
>It has 2 new rear tyres which are Challenger Invader III (Tubeless M+S
31x10.50
>R15)
>I looked at quite a few sites and no one sells these so I'm guessing
they're
>cheap.
>The 2 front tyres are still road legal with about 5 or 6mm of tread but
even I
>can see that when push comes to shove they'll be short on traction. They
are
>Dunlop SP RV Major (10 R 15 M+S) and at a guess I'd even say they were the
>tyres that came on the vehicle when new.
>I've seen that there are 3 main types of tyres (route, mixed and all
terrain)
>and guess that I'm a 'mixed' kind of user.
>I will however be living in the Alps for 4 months and the norm is snow and
ice
>with road trips also.
>I would not relish a 'snow-chain' option.
But, as you probably know, you must have them with you, as they might be
compulsory at certain times & road sections.
>My sum total knowledge of tyres is that M+S stands for Mud and Snow and I
guess
>this is what I need; and the numbers tell me what size I need.
>If a tyre is MT (Mud Terrain?) is it less good on snow? Tyre adverts don't
seem
>to mention M+S so is this standard?
M+S is one of the most meaningless descriptions in the tire
industry....their only purpose I have found is that you can run them with a
low-speed index on German cars, as winter tire, with a warning sticker on
the speedo (this is only allowed for M+S tires, IOW: with winter in mind,
if M+S wasn't so criminally non-descriptive....even the GrandTrek's Pieter
mentioned are M+S, and riding on a bar of soap gives more grip in rain and
winter).
>So the question:
>What tyres shall I buy and do I need 2 or 4 (ie are the Challengers ok)?
>I don't want to spend loads but if there is going to be a noticable
difference
>I will break into my piggy-bank.
I would definately buy 4 new tires, if possible (for a relaxed mind perhaps
even 5, ie a similar spare too).
Good all-season tires are Michelin XPC (lots of siping) and Cooper
Weathermaster (I run a set of 265/75x16 myself, tallest tire with siping on
the market, and quite large voids, larger than Michelin, nice against
aquaplaning), more winter specialisation can be had from Bridgestone
Winterdueler DM02 and Nokian Haakapellitta (forget the spelling).
And a more aggressive profile doesn't help much if you must ascend or
descend a road with packed snow or ice....only soft rubber and siping will
help you there....deep/agressive profiles only help in deep snow, most of
these tires have a too hard compound of rubber....like that bar of
soap....8-))
Mike Romain
Canada at least is not allowed for inspection purposes.
If you get in a fender bender with mis-matched tires, you will get a
ticket as the 'at fault' driver if the cop notices, and cops check tires
when they pull you over up here for anything and have almost always
commented on their condition to me. From a "groan" to, "your tires look
like nice tread, how do they grab?" I'm talking over 25 years of
driving and going through 'routine check stops' for alcohol, seat belts
and safety on highway on ramps and hidden intersections. (It's allowed
in Canada)
The different brands have different sidewall flex and can throw the
handling Waaay off, either diving in the front on a turn or the arse end
breaking loose.
In my opinion the AT (all terrain) tire class is superior to the M+S.
They are a bit noisier and don't last as long, but not by much, but when
one needs ice and snow traction or off road dirt/mud trail grab they are
the way to go.
We have 235 aggressive AT's on our Cherokee and BFG muds on our CJ7 and
in the winter on snowy/icy paved roads the Cherokee can run circles
around the CJ7. It runs the same trails too.
Get into anything over 6" or on the trails and things reverse quickly.
Both are good and both have their strong and weak points. The muds
handle great at slower speeds, no big problem, just don't over drive
them.
If you plan on deep snow and lots of off road the mud is the way to go,
if you need street manners with snow and ice bite then an AT is the way
to go in my opinion.
M+S are just an 'all season' tire that is a compromise from a 'winter'
tire to a 'summer' tire.
I also had 10.5 muds and found them to spin too easy, not enough weight
on the ground for my torque in the snow. Went to 9.5's and there is a
real nice difference in the sand, dirt, mud and rain bite. Still
waiting for snow.
I wouldn't want to run any type of tire in the alps that was 10.5 wide.
Had a set of them on a Chevy I bought in the Rockies. They were long
gone by the second winter, that's for sure. I ran with sand bags and
steel plates, nothing worked for more than 80 kph.
Chains on a 10.5 are a bugger too. They have a nasty habit of eating
inside fenders.
In winter conditions where I expect snow, (I have lived coast to coast
and 8 years in the mountains) I drive my Jeep CJ7 or any other 4x4,
with the front hubs locked at highway speeds. When I hit a snow patch,
I just shift on the fly to 4H.
The steering is a bit heavy, but you quickly figure out that you have to
Turn the wheel back to center, the pump ain't gonna do it on most.
4L requires one to come almost to a complete stop to engage it.
My $0.02,
Mike
86 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail
88 Cherokee 235 AT's
Build and Trips Photos:
http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=1161190
Martin wrote:
>
> Pieter
> I think you must have read my mind as this is my next question.
>
> As I probably mentioned I just bought the LandCruiser [LJ70 '80] and it's my
> first 4x4.
> It has 2 new rear tyres which are Challenger Invader III (Tubeless M+S 31x10.50
> R15)
> I looked at quite a few sites and no one sells these so I'm guessing they're
> cheap.
> The 2 front tyres are still road legal with about 5 or 6mm of tread but even I
> can see that when push comes to shove they'll be short on traction. They are
> Dunlop SP RV Major (10 R 15 M+S) and at a guess I'd even say they were the
> tyres that came on the vehicle when new.
> I've seen that there are 3 main types of tyres (route, mixed and all terrain)
> and guess that I'm a 'mixed' kind of user.
> I will however be living in the Alps for 4 months and the norm is snow and ice
> with road trips also.
> I would not relish a 'snow-chain' option.
>
> My sum total knowledge of tyres is that M+S stands for Mud and Snow and I guess
> this is what I need; and the numbers tell me what size I need.
> If a tyre is MT (Mud Terrain?) is it less good on snow? Tyre adverts don't seem
> to mention M+S so is this standard?
>
> So the question:
> What tyres shall I buy and do I need 2 or 4 (ie are the Challengers ok)?
> I don't want to spend loads but if there is going to be a noticable difference
> I will break into my piggy-bank.
>
> Cheers
> Martin
> (Englishman in France)
>
> Pieter wrote:
>
> > > Thanks for your advice.
> > > Looking forward to a winter in the French Alps with my new Toy.
> > >
sbest
wrote:
><LOTS GOOD COMMENTS SNIPPED>
>Chains on a 10.5 are a bugger too. They have a nasty habit of eating
>inside fenders.
I agree and also find that the chains tend to roll sideways much easier
on wider tires than they do on skinny tires. I totally agree with Mike
that skinny is the way to go for winter. More loading to scratch through
to the hard stuff below.
Steve Best, Nova Scotia, Canada
4x4 van website:
http://www.glinx.com/users/sbest
Sign up for the 4x4van newslist:
http://www.onelist.com/community/4x4van
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Paul Hovnanian Ž
>
> Pieter
> I think you must have read my mind as this is my next question.
>
> As I probably mentioned I just bought the LandCruiser [LJ70 '80] and it's my
> first 4x4.
> It has 2 new rear tyres which are Challenger Invader III (Tubeless M+S 31x10.50
> R15)
> I looked at quite a few sites and no one sells these so I'm guessing they're
> cheap.
> The 2 front tyres are still road legal with about 5 or 6mm of tread but even I
> can see that when push comes to shove they'll be short on traction. They are
> Dunlop SP RV Major (10 R 15 M+S) and at a guess I'd even say they were the
> tyres that came on the vehicle when new.
If you have part-time 4WD, its a really good idea to keep the tires on
the
front and on the back matched. Not only the same type and size, but you
should rotate them to keep their tread wear equal.
You can get into trouble if the front and rear tires have different
radii
and you don't have a center differential. The front and rear axles will
try to turn at slightly different speeds. You will end up with a lesser
version of what happens when you corner in 4WD. The front or rear axle
wheels will be forced to slip slightly, reducing their traction.
--
Paul Hovnanian | (here) mailto:hovn...@bcstec.ca.boeing.com
Software Conflagration | (there) mailto:Pa...@Hovnanian.com
Control | (spam) mailto:postm...@mouse-potato.com
-----------------------+---------------------------------------------
"I bet the human brain is a kludge."
-- Marvin Minsky
Martin
preference here.
I cannot afford to run 2 sets of wheels/tyres especially as it's early days for me
(one month old at this
game).
I gather I should buy a set of 4 the same tyres, and that for a mixed bag of
snow/ice (5 months a year); on road and weekend/vacation off-road fun a good
compromise is an AT tyre (Pieter - this is considering
that I can only run 1 set).
It seems the tyre most recommended on the newsgroups is the BFGoodrich All Terrain
KO.
Then I just need to understand the size issue. If narrower are recommended how do I
know what tyres I can use. Currently I have 31x10.5 R15. (Is the R15 my wheel
size??)
Would a 31x9.5R15 be a smaller tyre that fits?
Is the smaller tyre going to give better grip through ice/snow and better road
efficiency at the compromise of less traction in mud?
Thanks again,
Martin
(I am amazed by the depth of knowledge and readiness at which it is shared on the
4x4 newsgroup.)
sbest
wrote:
>I gather I should buy a set of 4 the same tyres, and that for a mixed bag of
>snow/ice (5 months a year); on road and weekend/vacation off-road fun a good
>compromise is an AT tyre (Pieter - this is considering
>that I can only run 1 set).
>It seems the tyre most recommended on the newsgroups is the BFGoodrich All Terrain
>KO.
The BFG A/T KO is a bit of a compromise for snow as is even the BFG A/T.
I'll restate my often heard bias for the Michelin LTX M+S as a long
wearing snow dominating tire with very good rain traction.
All 4 the same brand, size and type is best but not really necessary on
a part-time truck. The reason is this: you typically don't engage 4WD
until it is slippery and then a LITTLE tire size difference won't matter
anyway. If you run mixed tires, always put the maximum traction tires on
the rear. This prevents sudden oversteer.
>Then I just need to understand the size issue. If narrower are recommended how do I
>know what tyres I can use. Currently I have 31x10.5 R15. (Is the R15 my wheel
>size??)
>Would a 31x9.5R15 be a smaller tyre that fits?
Yup, 31 is the overall diameter (31 inches) and 9.5 is the width of the
tire at its widest point. "R" indicates it is a radial and the 15 is the
rim size.
The metric designation is a bit different. for example LT 235/85R16
LT indicates Light Truck which is a tougher tire than a P = Passenger.
235 is the width of the tire at its widest point in millimeters.
85 is the aspect ratio of the tire, ie the height above the rim is 85% of
the width, or about 200mm or roughly 8 inches.
and of course the R is radial and 16 is the rimsize.
To figure height you add the 8" on the bottom and te 8" on the top to the
16" of rim and you get a 32" tall tire.
>Is the smaller tyre going to give better grip through ice/snow and better road
>efficiency at the compromise of less traction in mud?
It is not really a smaller tire, since the diameter is the same, but a
narrower tire. It will give good grip mud and ice/snow as long as there is
something under it to grab. If the mud or snow is bottomless, wider is
better as you try to "float" over it. Another inch won't help much with
float.
In Iceland they use 38" to 44" tall (and very wide) tires to crawl over
deep snow. For deep mud you generally use extremely tall narrow tires on
farm tractors and the like.
>(I am amazed by the depth of knowledge and readiness at which it is shared on the
>4x4 newsgroup.)
Ahhh, which way? Deep or shallow?
Martin
I really appreciate the advice.
Thanks
Martin
Martin
However, the BFG A/T KO is the one I'm looking at, and I came to this conclusion due to
the need for a tyre for all types of terrain and weather.
As I mentioned I'm on road mostly, in the Alps for 4/5 months a year (variable but
snowy) and then there's the weekend/vacation off roading (I'm new to this).
In an earlier post it was mentioned that A/T was better than M+S and I assumed this
included for snow. Is this not the case?
Cheers
Martin
sbest wrote:
>
>
> The BFG A/T KO is a bit of a compromise for snow as is even the BFG A/T.
>
> I'll restate my often heard bias for the Michelin LTX M+S as a long
> wearing snow dominating tire with very good rain traction.
>
>
>
MWhite4981
better on typical highway snow and ice. The AT is much better than the
Michelin off road. The Michelin is much more quiet, smoother ride and has
slightly better highway handling.
Jerry Bransford
great snow tire. It is rated M+S but it's not a great road tire for
when you're doing lots of snow or ice-covered roads. Michelin and a few
others make much better snow tires. For all-around road and off-road
conditions the BFG AT KO is a great tire but if it's mainly going to be
used on slick roads, there are other much better choices.
Jerry
--
Jerry Bransford
PP-ASEL KC6TAY
The Zen Hotdog... make me one with everything!
Geezer Jeep: http://www.jjournal.net/jeep/gallery/JBransfordsTJ/
Martin
I read customer reviews @
http://www.tirerack.com/tires/michelin/mi_ltxms.jsp
and they seem very favourable.
The Michelin LTX A/T seems to be good in the snow too (according to tirerack) but noisier on
the road.
Having said that I live in France and it looks like Michelin sell a different range here. (I
can't find them on any 'local' websites.) The French tyres are the 4x4 XPC and the 4x4 A/T.
Does anyone know how they compare with the U.S. tyres?
From the tirerack.com survey I see the Yokohama Geolander + came out well. Any advice on
these tyres?
Cheers
Martin
Willem-Jan Markerink
Martin <mar...@NOSPAM.level.co.uk> wrote:
>I guess it's the Michelin LTX M/S is a more realistic option in terms of
my probable usage.
>I read customer reviews @
>http://www.tirerack.com/tires/michelin/mi_ltxms.jsp
>and they seem very favourable.
>
>The Michelin LTX A/T seems to be good in the snow too (according to
tirerack) but noisier on
>the road.
>
>Having said that I live in France and it looks like Michelin sell a
different range here. (I
>can't find them on any 'local' websites.) The French tyres are the 4x4 XPC
and the 4x4 A/T.
>Does anyone know how they compare with the U.S. tyres?
XPC comes stock on many 4x4's sold/made in Europe, including Mercedes G and
Range Rover....
I had a set of 255/75x15 on our HDJ-80 Land Cruiser, but changed to Cooper
Weathermaster 265/75x16 last year....at that time I thought it was a more
dedicated winter tire, hence shift back to the XPC's in summer....however,
they held up fine over the summer (including a trip to Spain in spring), so
the worn XPC are gathering dust.
But: these Coopers have significantly larger voids in the thread, which
makes them better for snow than the XPC....
In hindsight the Mastercraft Glacier Grip in the same size, and from the
same factory, is probably a really dedicated winter tire, unlike the Cooper
(the name doesn't suggest winter either).
I wouldn't compromise winter qualities if I spend 4-5 months in the French
Alps....so the AT's are out IMHO....and if your summer offroad adventures
are serious, I really would look for a second set, by then.
(posted & mailed)
sbest
Steve Best, Nova Scotia, Canada