Mud-club

Vehicle & Technical => Range Rover => Topic started by: Jonny Boaterboy on July 27, 2007, 18:04:05

Title: Cooper STT Vs BF Goodrich MT
Post by: Jonny Boaterboy on July 27, 2007, 18:04:05
I currently have BF Goodrich AT on my Range Rover....... all the times I have got stuck off roading has been down to lack of traction.... so I'm going for some MT..... the trouble is trying to decide which one and what size. I'm leaning towards the Cooper STT they look a little more suited to on road situations compared to the BF Goodrich. As my Range Rover is my only car and most of the miles I do is on road this has bearing on my choice.

So what does every one think? I think I have set up a poll but never done one before so not sure if it will work! I have also added the DynaPro MT which I also like the look of but dont know much about

The next problem is the size, I have 245/70/r16 on at the moment with no problems, I want to increase the ground clearance by putting taller tyres on. I have air suspension does anyone know how tall I can get away with with no modifications?

Thanks all, should be a good debate!
Title: Cooper STT Vs BF Goodrich MT
Post by: Guardian. on July 27, 2007, 18:49:04
can only comment on the bfg muds, they are a fantastic tyre in the slippery stuff, and for a mud tyre handle fantastic on the road and not that noisy.
plus for quite a soft compound do lots of miles before they are shot.
i would reccomend them 100%.
Title: Cooper STT Vs BF Goodrich MT
Post by: Bush Tucker Man on July 28, 2007, 21:35:58
I quite fancy the Coopers when the time comes
Title: Cooper STT Vs BF Goodrich MT
Post by: Brains on July 30, 2007, 16:35:18
Just had the stt's on my series and they were pretty good off-road but they had to be dropped to 20 psi to get any decent grip  :wink:  8)
Title: Cooper STT Vs BF Goodrich MT
Post by: jjsaul on July 30, 2007, 23:50:44
got bfg mt's on our 110 and theyre great both on and off road...
about the best MT i've driven on tarmac...its quieter and smoother on these than the cheap AT's we had before!
Title: Cooper STT Vs BF Goodrich MT
Post by: clbarclay on July 31, 2007, 00:37:02
The one thing going for coopers over BFG is that test have proven them to be more puncture resistant. Infact results in an Austrailian mag found coopers to be the best for puncture resistant tyres.

Having said that since filling my BFG muds with industrial tyre gunk The have performed fautlessly and before that it was just leaks round the rims which reseating sorted. I agree with james, the BFGs were cretainly no worse on the road for noise/comfort/grip than the ATs I had on before.
Title: Cooper STT Vs BF Goodrich MT
Post by: Jonny Boaterboy on August 01, 2007, 10:09:28
Well, I have had a bit of a ring around most the places I have spoken to seem to think that the BF goodrich are way better than the coopers (probable because thats what they were selling!)
But another problem has orcured..... I have 245/70/R16 AT on mine at the moment, the biggest size that I can get in the MT is 235/70/R16 (that would fit on my Range Rover without modification)this would mean if I switched to MT I would lose 3cm in the diameter..... thats 1.5cm on ground clearance...... do you think thats a concern or would the extra grip out way the lose of ground clearance?
As I dont have a pure offroader and it is my every day car little things like that count...... or am I just been a idiot!

Thanks all

Jonny
Title: Cooper STT Vs BF Goodrich MT
Post by: clbarclay on August 01, 2007, 10:40:48
What do you mean by biggest size you can get, BFG MT are certainly avalible in a 225/75r16 which is about 29.5" OD and fit a RRC without any problems or is it a case that no one bothers stocking other sizes between 235/70r16 and 235/85r16?

If you don't mind changing to 15" wheels then BFG muds also come in a 30x9.50r15 It may be a case though of having to weight for a less common size to be imported to order.


heres a good guide for varrious tyre sizes on a RRC.
http://www.rangerovers.net/outfitting/tires/classictires.html
Title: Cooper STT Vs BF Goodrich MT
Post by: Range Rover Blues on August 01, 2007, 16:50:21
I've got BFG MT and I am a tad dissapo9inted, they are not as good as my old Machos, but you can't run remoulds on a big V8.

As for the EAS, well if you have the cash for them then get a set of Arnott GIII airbags, the exchange rate is in your favour at the moment.

Try rover renovations http://www.rover-renovations.com/Range-Rover-Air-Suspension-overhaul-kit-p/overhaulciii.htm

for a set of these http://members.mud-club.com/profiles/Range%20Rover%20Blues/gallery/EAS/0/ba2fa2e00651aa239374c9fee8601a68.JPG/QSBtYXNzaXZlIDNpbmNoZXMgZXh0cmEgdHJhdmVs


Otherwise you could try fitting extra long bump stops and spacing the air springs by 35mm then fitting longer shocks.
Or lift the body.
Title: Cooper STT Vs BF Goodrich MT
Post by: Range Rover Blues on August 01, 2007, 16:51:03
Finally, due to the extra tread depth, the MT will be that bit bigger anyway, the size4s are only nomial and based on the size of the innner carcase.
Title: Cooper STT Vs BF Goodrich MT
Post by: Jonny Boaterboy on August 02, 2007, 23:45:47
Thanks Mr Blues, would love to get the bigger air springs but unless there free there's no chance! :-({|=

So back to the tires, I have been looking at the size of the BFG-MT and have noticed they do a 245/75/R16 they say that the Overall diameter is 30.7 this is compared to my BFG-AT which they say are 29.5 now I have just measured the AT's and I make them about 29........ so do you think that the MT will be about 30.2 overall? if so can I get them under my Range rover and if not when and where are they likely to catch? Im guessing they'll catch on the wheel arch when at full lock and when they on full articulation.

(Can someone just confirm...... I know this sounds stupid...... the two sizes above are both 245 wide....... ok don't take the [throw it] just asking!)

Does anyone have a rough idea how much I would get for 4 BFG AT with about 12mm of tread left?

Dont know if its worth starting another thred for this but I'm looking for a rear axle guard to protect the axle while i learn the limits of the Range Rover! I have a southdown on the front which is great, covers the stearing damper as well, and I want one for the rear that wraps around and covers the lowest point of the axle and wraps back up so as not to work as a scoop if pulled out backwards? any recommendations?

Thanks again

Jonny
Title: Cooper STT Vs BF Goodrich MT
Post by: jjsaul on August 03, 2007, 22:22:29
Never seen rear axle guards, only diff guards...i've got a 'QT copy' rear diff guard which bolts onto the diff nose and comes right up over the top of the diff...
Title: Cooper STT Vs BF Goodrich MT
Post by: Range Rover Blues on August 04, 2007, 12:31:30
I'd recomend ther Qt one too, or the copies.

http://members.mud-club.com/profiles/Range%20Rover%20Blues/gallery/QT%20Services%20Diff%20guards/0/572357-1106871076./UmVhciBkaWZm
Title: Cooper STT Vs BF Goodrich MT
Post by: anaxemurderer on August 05, 2007, 10:23:22
My vote would be for bfg but not a lot in it and for diffguards 4x4r us do a fairly comprehensive wrap around guard (although i have an old qt).

RRB why don't you try getting a set of of yokohama mt+ which are the original design for tyres like macho's, sahara's etc but obviously not a remould! Might get a set for mine next time

Nick

ps they do them in a 35 but unfortunately only in america!
Title: Cooper STT Vs BF Goodrich MT
Post by: Range Rover Blues on August 07, 2007, 13:21:53
I had thought about that but I've got to get my money's worth out of these now.
Title: Cooper STT Vs BF Goodrich MT
Post by: rangyholic on August 14, 2007, 18:35:40
Hi, i am using 265/70/16 colway a/t's on mine with a 2" lift these only catch slightly on bottom rear lip of back arches.......i realise this size is not suitable for your motor, but these are the 3rd set of colway remoulds i've used over the years with no probs whatsoever. My first set were 245/70/16 m/t's on a 24valve v6 lwb trooper.....no probs even with all that power :D
SimplePortal 2.3.5 © 2008-2012, SimplePortal