Wheel Arches

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Doug C
    Low Range
    • Jan 2008
    • 13

    Wheel Arches

    1969 Siia 109.

    I don't know how I just now noticed this, but on the passenger side of my rover the wheels/tires sit about 4 inches inside the wheel arches, i.e. they are not flush with the body like on the driver side even though everything is the same on all 4 wheels; same rims and tires. I know that it is probably not a big deal, and living in Dallas I really have no other series to compare my series to, but it just seems to me that all 4 wheels should be flush with the body. Is this completely out of the norm? Thanks, Doug.
  • Momo
    3rd Gear
    • Dec 2006
    • 347

    #2
    It would help for you to post photos, but it sounds like you have different offset wheels on either side, or the driver's side wheels have been flipped to give a wider offset (a common el cheapo mod on old LRs).

    You say your truck is a 69 109 which tells me it is not US spec but probably a recent UK import.

    The English do funny things to Land Rovers... thus it occurs to me that maybe you have two Series I wheels and two later wheels. Someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the series I wheels were 16 inch but way narrower than the later models.

    In any event your wheels and tires shouldn't be flush with the body. It's normal to have several inches of inset. In fact the old skinny bias ply tires back in the Sixties made Land Rovers look a bit weak, with the body hanging way out past the wheels like they did.
    '60 SII Station Wagon
    '64 SIIA 109 Regular
    '68 SIIA 88 Station Wagon

    Comment

    • Doug C
      Low Range
      • Jan 2008
      • 13

      #3
      It's actually a 66 LHD, I don't know why I put 69. Anyhow, maybe that is the situation where someone down the line flipped the wheels on the drivers side and for some reason did not do the same on the passenger side. In any regard, you're saying that it is normal to have the tires inset several inches from the wheel arches. I'm going to post some photos tomorrow just to confirm that the whole body isn't out of whack. I appreciate the reply.

      Comment

      • SafeAirOne
        Overdrive
        • Apr 2008
        • 3435

        #4
        I'm with Momo...I'd take off a left wheel, measure the backset, then do the same for a right wheel. I'll bet you get 2 different measurements.

        In my opinion, the wider offset looks better than the narrow ones, and is better for almost every aspect of rovering, too.
        --Mark

        1973 SIII 109 RHD 2.5NA Diesel

        0-54mph in just under 11.5 minutes
        (9.7 minutes now that she's a 3-door).

        Comment

        • Eric W S
          5th Gear
          • Dec 2006
          • 609

          #5
          Originally posted by Doug C
          It's actually a 66 LHD, I don't know why I put 69. Anyhow, maybe that is the situation where someone down the line flipped the wheels on the drivers side and for some reason did not do the same on the passenger side. In any regard, you're saying that it is normal to have the tires inset several inches from the wheel arches. I'm going to post some photos tomorrow just to confirm that the whole body isn't out of whack. I appreciate the reply.
          Yes, it is normal for tires to be inward of the outer wings. Google vintage land rover photos and you'll get a good example of just how dinky the original tires were.

          I have 7.50 x 16's and they still sit inward of the tub and wings.

          EwS

          Comment

          • Alaska Mike
            Low Range
            • Oct 2007
            • 34

            #6
            Take a measuring tape and see how far the frame is from the body on each side- may be some misalignment there due to a frame/body swap. Also check that the leaf spring centering pins are properly centered on the axle housing. If that and the wheel options fail, chalk it up to British "character" and drive it.

            Comment

            • SafeAirOne
              Overdrive
              • Apr 2008
              • 3435

              #7
              It's amazing how FEW pictures there are of the REAR of series rovers on the interweb. Just last week I saw a perfect example of a rover with a very narrow track width due to skinny wheels on rims with the deep backset. I'll be darned if I can find it now.

              I ended up taking a photo of my rear (well, my rover's rear, anyhow) and photoshop-ing the wheels a few inches inboard. The effect still isn't the same, becuase I run NATO wheels and thick tires, but you can get the idea of the effect of the different wheel backspacing...

              The left rover's wheels are 2-3 inches inboard compared to the one on the right in the photo:
              Last edited by SafeAirOne; 12-28-2008, 06:30 PM.
              --Mark

              1973 SIII 109 RHD 2.5NA Diesel

              0-54mph in just under 11.5 minutes
              (9.7 minutes now that she's a 3-door).

              Comment

              • Doug C
                Low Range
                • Jan 2008
                • 13

                #8
                It really does look dinky, honestly. Mark, what do you mean when you say measure the backset?

                Comment

                • SafeAirOne
                  Overdrive
                  • Apr 2008
                  • 3435

                  #9
                  Originally posted by Doug C
                  It really does look dinky, honestly. Mark, what do you mean when you say measure the backset?
                  Pop off the wheel, lay it down so that the inner surface is pointing toward the ceiling, put a straight edge across the lip of the rim (where tire bead is) and measure down to the middle of the rim where it rests against the brake drum.

                  I think you'll find this measurement is different for the rims on the left side of your rover when compared to the ones on the right side, based on your description.
                  --Mark

                  1973 SIII 109 RHD 2.5NA Diesel

                  0-54mph in just under 11.5 minutes
                  (9.7 minutes now that she's a 3-door).

                  Comment

                  • Doug C
                    Low Range
                    • Jan 2008
                    • 13

                    #10
                    Outstanding... thanks for explaining that for me.

                    Comment

                    • highmile
                      Low Range
                      • Nov 2007
                      • 93

                      #11
                      Not the best photos of the narrow track, but it might shed a little light on the subject. You can see the inset.



                      Former owner of 1967 Series IIA 109 NADA
                      1996 Land Rover Discovery SE7
                      1995 Range Rover Classic SWB

                      Comment

                      Working...