RangeRovers.net Forum banner

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
1970-1995 Range Rover Classic
Joined
·
83 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hi all,

I'm debating whether or not to lift my Range Rover.
This existential crisis started when I noticed cracking on my tire sidewalls. I've been looking for something replace the 225/75R16 Dunlop Radial Rovers that came with the car - I've always found them proportionally awkward anyway.
However, it dawned on me that I have a set of Terra Firma medium-load springs from when I replaced the shock absorbers earlier this year.
I figure that while I'm getting new tires, I can take the opportunity to install new springs as well.

From what I've read though, the Terra Firma springs are going to add anywhere between 1.75" and 2.5" of lift (unladen), which leaves me with some questions:
  • Will extra lift affect steering or fuel economy?
  • Will adding up to 2.5" affect the drivetrain? Will I need double-Cardan driveshafts?
  • What tires would go with a lift like this?
The other option is to keep things stock. What size were the original, stock tires? What else looks good and drives well?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
130 Posts
Mine has a 2 inch lift and I have to be honest, wouldn't be in a rush to do this to another. Makes it more marauding and spoils the look a little...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
521 Posts
Ours is running red/white higher rate rear springs to assist with loading as we pack so much stuff in it for holidays. Slight increase in unladen ride height but not much.

Tires are Michelin Latitude Cross 255/65 R16 113H on std classic alloys and fit without clearance problems. We run alot of higher speed distance miles and these are really quiet, stable and generally refined. Running them at 27psi front and 32psi rear for maximum load, they steer really neutrally and seem to compliment the chassis feeling with really good stability.

They're not going to match a more open pattern mud tire but suit our mix of use, not been stuck with it yet either.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
521 Posts
To add, part of the tire decision was because they are within 1% of original circumference dimensions and they don't have a really aggressive wide and squared shoulder profile.

Its that moderate shoulder dimension that gives less risk of contact on full lock and axle articulation, plus they don't give a lot of road noise from having that rounded shoulder instead of a much squarer cross section.
 

·
Registered
1970-1995 Range Rover Classic
Joined
·
30 Posts
I just replaced my OEM shocks and springs with Bilstein shocks, Red/White springs in the rear and Green in the front. This lifted the truck 1.25" from stock. The tires are 245/70/16. They do rub on lock but over all the ride is very very compliant and comfortable while still retaining the OEM aesthetic which was my overall goal as this is an on road use only truck.
If you are on Instagram my page is MEMPHISRRC, you can see the before and after photos.
I will be replacing the tires this fall and will 99% stay with the current size. Might experiment with 30mm spacers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
521 Posts
As above, I've used Bilstein all round.

Kept standard springs front as I wasn't after lifting but just load capacity rear. It rides slight tail down when fully loaded so didn't wish to have front any higher. Decent compromise for our use and loading so happy with that.

I really like the bilstein, I know there's some view of slight harness which I can see when vehicle is unloaded. But their capacity to control body overall is exemplary in my view.

They also, on front axle, have a high speed control and valving rates (that's linear speed of shock movement, not road speed) that prevents "death wobble " scenario. It's this particular control of wheel mass and undamped tire rebound that is effective in this area of response. I'd pick these every time for vehicles without serious lift.
 

·
Registered
1970-1995 Range Rover Classic
Joined
·
83 Posts
Discussion Starter #8 (Edited)
For the time being I'll stick with the stock springs and save the Terra Firma's for when/if I add a roof rack and bull bar.

I think tire-size has got to be the #1 issue plaguing any auto-enthusiast forum. Naming my kid was less of a philosophical quandary than choosing a tire.
I'm left trying to decide between three sizes:
  • 205/80 - Closest option to stock. Can only find Pirelli Scorpions in that size. Maybe too small?
  • 215/85 - Looks great on RRC's but also has few offerings. Fun fact: very close to what was used for the Trans-American Expedition in '72. Only available in an LT rating, I'm not sure what to make of this.
  • 245/75 - Same diameter as 215/85 but with a much wider range of choices and will probably look fine whether the vehicle is lifted or not. I'm only worried about a spare of this size fitting in the back properly...
Input? Suggestions?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
378 Posts
FYI - the new Cooper AT3 LT in 225/75 barely fit in the stock spare location. I doubt you will fit a fully inflated 215/85.

Also, FWIW, I prefer load range E on my LWB, and my previous D1. Road feel is much better and no actual downsides in my book.
 

·
Premium Member
1970-1995 Range Rover Classic
Joined
·
1,486 Posts
My '95 has a 2" lift with OME coils and shocks. I'm also running Cooper Discover ST/MAXX 245/75R16s, no rubbing. If you go beyond 2" you'll need to look at double cardens. Highway cornering is much more nerve-racking than with the 205s and EAS.

I just saw somewhere that Michelin is going to make 205s again. I'll definitely by 5 for when I go back to EAS from the coils.
 
  • Like
Reactions: shastacaster
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top