Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Is the Range Rover Sport the apex in arsehole wheels ?

Is the Range Rover Sport the ultimate in arsehole wheels ?

  • Yes

    Votes: 82 56.9%
  • Yes

    Votes: 51 35.4%
  • Yes

    Votes: 51 35.4%
  • Yes

    Votes: 55 38.2%
  • No, I have an Audi and I claim that title

    Votes: 13 9.0%
  • I dont know as I do not drive

    Votes: 23 16.0%
  • I live in the country and I find it useful for the 2 frosts we get each year

    Votes: 9 6.3%
  • Comedy Option

    Votes: 15 10.4%
  • Fuck you, you snotty middle class cycling shitbag

    Votes: 39 27.1%

  • Total voters
    144
I heart 4x4 pandas - they are Steyr built IIRC? I do remember a back to back test done in the late 80s with a panda and a RR off road in some car mag- the panda shit on the RR that cost about 8x the price. the electrics on the fiat are probably on par with the RR TBF

I would get a old panda in a heartbeat but ULEZ and shit in London
 
951259.jpg


Dual dually Chev Silverado with a Cadillac Escalade grill.
 
There now follows a genuine question

Looking at the tyres on the jeep conversion above. TO MY EYE they look on backwards. I know they're not but they look like they'd grip better ie dig in if the V of the tread was going the other way. It's the same with tractors the V points backwards

Why am I wrong. Or is it simply I just am
 
There now follows a genuine question

Looking at the tyres on the jeep conversion above. TO MY EYE they look on backwards. I know they're not but they look like they'd grip better ie dig in if the V of the tread was going the other way. It's the same with tractors the V points backwards

Why am I wrong. Or is it simply I just am

The pattern of grooves is designed to clear water off the wheels, not to 'dig in' to the ground.
 
The pattern of grooves is designed to clear water off the wheels, not to 'dig in' to the ground.
But tractor tyres are oriented the same way

OK the jeep isn't a great example. Just refer in this case to tractors tyres where dispersal of water at speed isn't a requirement but getting grip / digging in very much is
 
But tractor tyres are oriented the same way

OK the jeep isn't a great example. Just refer in this case to tractors tyres where dispersal of water at speed isn't a requirement but getting grip / digging in very much is

You don't actually want tyres to dig up the ground though, you want them to flatten it to improve traction. Traction comes from weight, ie downward force, rather than any lateral force exerted by the tyres.

Think of a train, which has smooth wheels on smooth rails but still creates traction just by being really heavy. It fundamentally doesn't work above a certain gradient mind you, as too big a fraction of the weight force will be pulling the train backwards. This is where the increased friction gives tyres an advantage, but still that friction won't be there if you dig away the surface under you as you apply force.
 
Last edited:
There now follows a genuine question

Looking at the tyres on the jeep conversion above. TO MY EYE they look on backwards. I know they're not but they look like they'd grip better ie dig in if the V of the tread was going the other way. It's the same with tractors the V points backwards

Why am I wrong. Or is it simply I just am

This thing will have so much mechanical grip form its vast contact patches that the tyre orientation will be irrelevant.
 
It’s to confuse people who are really bad at tracking things. They would follow the arrows on the ground and do go the wrong way. It’s like those Clarke’s animal footprint shoes…
 
Back
Top Bottom