Dixie Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 We bought our 2008 Sunlight T66 (transit base), 3 months ago. It came without a spare, just a 'gunk' pack, so we are currently keeping an eye on Ebay for a suitable wheel. However, we have a problem deciding what tyre to go for as the van currently has different tyres front and back: Front : Continental Vanco 8. 215/75R 16 C 113/111R. Rear : Hankook RA08 215/75R 16C. Rims are all the same 5.5J x16x56. So two questions for the experts out there: 1. With only 8000 miles on the clock I guess the van left the Dethhleff works with different tyres front and rear. What's that about? 2. Given the French(?) dislike for mixing tyres, what should we put on the spare? Many thanks, John. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robinhood Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 Dixie - 2011-02-11 10:17 AM We bought our 2008 Sunlight T66 (transit base), 3 months ago. It came without a spare, just a 'gunk' pack, so we are currently keeping an eye on Ebay for a suitable wheel. However, we have a problem deciding what tyre to go for as the van currently has different tyres front and back: Front : Continental Vanco 8. 215/75R 16 C 113/111R. Rear : Hankook RA08 215/75R 16C. Rims are all the same 5.5J x16x56. So two questions for the experts out there: 1. With only 8000 miles on the clock I guess the van left the Dethhleff works with different tyres front and rear. What's that about? 2. Given the French(?) dislike for mixing tyres, what should we put on the spare? Many thanks, John. It may well be cock-up; I can think of one logical explanation, but it may not apply in your case.If your 'van has an MAM of 3850kg (which it could be ordered with, but the standard is 3500kg), then the maximum allowed rear axle loading may well be (or have been uprated to be) above the 2300kg mark that would be legal on 113 rated tyres. (116 rated tyres are OK up to 2500kg max axle loading). Patently, any upgrade may have been an original specification, or may have been performed by a previous owner.A check of your vehicle's VIN plate might should reveal this.It seems pretty odd to me that different tyre ratings are fitted to a vehicle front and back, BUT, it in't in itself illegal, and as a result of previous tyre discussions on here, a peruse of my Ford handbook implies that they might ship 'vans in some circumstances with lower rated front tyres (as the front axle has a lower maximum allowance than the back). There are some tyre pressure/tyre combinations quoted that are only valid for the front!The tyre profiles are exactly the same, so the tyre to get for the spare will depend on your maximum axle loads from the VIN plate (make sure there isn't a second one as a result of an upgrade!).If both the front and back are anything up to 2300kg, then a 113 rated tyre is fine (and may well be cheaper than a 116). If the rear axle is allowed above this (but up to 2500kg), then a 116 rated tyre is needed (and will be legally usable on either the front or the back - though I wouldn't advise running mixed on an axle long-term). HTH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Jones Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 Dixie - 2011-02-11 10:17 AM So two questions for the experts out there: 1. With only 8000 miles on the clock I guess the van left the Dethhleff works with different tyres front and rear. What's that about? My best guess? Money - somehow or other! 2. Given the French(?) dislike for mixing tyres, what should we put on the spare? Whichever you put on, don't let them see it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 I agree. Check the load rating for the Hankooks, because they are available at 111/113 and 114/116. If 114/116 have been fitted, because, as Robin suggests, of increased rear axle load, you really only have two choices. Stick with the goo pack or, if you really want a spare, fit the Hankook 114/116 rated tyres to the new spare plus both front wheels. You may be able to do a deal with a tyre fitter on the front axle Contis, if you can find one who handles both brands.Like Robin, I'd be very wary of mixing an 8PR tyre with a 10PR tyre on the same axle. Not sure whether that infringes the rules over mixing tyres of differing construction on the same axle. Both radial, both "summer" tyres, but is the "construction" of both the same, within the meaning of the regulations? One for Derek, perhaps? :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robinhood Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 Brian Kirby - 2011-02-11 12:41 PM I agree. Check the load rating for the Hankooks, because they are available at 111/113 and 114/116. If 114/116 have been fitted, because, as Robin suggests, of increased rear axle load, you really only have two choices. Stick with the goo pack or, if you really want a spare, fit the Hankook 114/116 rated tyres to the new spare plus both front wheels. You may be able to do a deal with a tyre fitter on the front axle Contis, if you can find one who handles both brands.Like Robin, I'd be very wary of mixing an 8PR tyre with a 10PR tyre on the same axle. Not sure whether that infringes the rules over mixing tyres of differing construction on the same axle. Both radial, both "summer" tyres, but is the "construction" of both the same, within the meaning of the regulations? One for Derek, perhaps? :-) I am certainly not an expert in this field, so the following is only a (partially researched) opinion, but AFAIK, if the two different tyres on an axle are of the same wheel size, ratio and basic construction (and I don't think the ply-rating applies in the last case - as you ARE allowed a mix of steel and fabric belted radials!), and both have a weight rating sufficient for the maximum axle weight (albeit possibly different), then it would be (at least UK) legal, and would pass the MOT. If this is true, then simply buying a 116 rated tyre as a spare would suffice, and would be usable on either axle.Even if it is legal, however, if applied to the front I would be inclined to use it much like a spacesaver spare wheel, i.e. short-term use only, and I would ensure that the wheel/tyre was replaced with one of the original rating asap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robinhood Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 I must admit my original posts were oriented towards the rear being 116 rated, as I had misread the 16C in the original post as 116. If they are, as I would now read, 111/113 tyres then much of what I've written is irrelevant, and probably rubbish (plus ca change :-S).Ford certainly use both Hankook and Continental tyres as original fit, so it may just be what they had in hand at the time.If so, a spare rated at 113 of either type would do, and if you want to keep symmetry, simply replace the (when utilised) spare with a repaired or new tyre of a type to match the other one on the axle.BTW: there wasn't a factory-fit upgrade for this vehicle, so if it has been upgraded with 116 rated tyres, it would have been aftermarket. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Uzzell Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 As far as I'm aware the FWD Transit-based version of the Sunlight T66 was only marketed in 3500kg MAM form and I'm doubtful that this chassis would be suitable for uprating. The mix of tyre-makes is certainly odd given the low mileage (assuming it's correct!) Gut feeling tells me that the Vanco-8s are original and the Hankooks have been fitted later. I can't see Ford fitting different-make tyres as original equipment, though plainly it could happen. It's possible that two of the original tyres were damaged beyond repair and needed replacement. (This happened to my neighbour's car when he hit debris on a motorway at night.) This theory might be tested by checking the tyres' dates of manufacture - if they are all roughly the same, then they have all probably been on the motorhome from Square One. If, say, the Hankooks have significantly later dates than the Continentals, then the Hankooks are probably replacements. Markings on the rims where balancing-weights have been moved are also clues that tyres have been replaced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
747 Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 I sourced a rim and tyre as I had no spare when I bought the van. It has new Michelin Agilis fitted all round (on 16" rims) A local tyre firm were offering good prices on tyres and the owner was quite knowledgeable about motorhomes. He said that the Agilis (111/113) were a borderline case for being overloaded on my van and said I should have 114/116 tyres on the front in case of overloading (he does know motorhomers as well :-D ) I ended up with a Mohawk rated at 114/116 at a very good price.It is fine as a spare. He was right in what he said as I believe a van like mine (Fiat based Burstner tag, on Al-Ko chassis) had to have uprated coil springs because they carried a heavier front axle load. Overloading the axle can be achieved quite easily. I have removed the mattress from the overcab area as we only use it for bedding storage. Add the fact that there is a 75 litre fuel tank, 120 litre fresh water tank and 100 litre waste water tank, all well forward, then problems can arise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterrosey Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 My Eurostyle came with Hankook RA08s from the factory, so it could be that the rears are the replacements. It's equally likely that a supplier changed at some point and yours was the changeover van. I've seen all sorts of odd specs of vehicle leave manufacturing plants. I remember working for Nissan at one point when they changed models of Micra - the last batch of the old-shape models came through with all sorts of odd mixes of specs. It's better to have the higher load rating of tyre as a spare, but with any odd tyre on an axle I'd just treat it as a 'get you to a tyre centre / home' tyre and get the damaged one replaced as soon as practicable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterrosey Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 Eurostyle is a Sunlight with different trim, BTW... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dixie Posted February 11, 2011 Author Share Posted February 11, 2011 Many thanks for all those responses. The Vin plates (ford and the builder) both indicate a GVW of 3500, so there doesn't appear to have been an upgrade. Rear axle weight on both plates is 2250. So as suggested, either the mix of tyres is the result of a changeover at Ford, or there have been two damaged and replaced. I'm reasonably sure that the 8000 miles is correct as the van still feels like a 'new' vehicle. I guess I'll go for a spare to be regarded as a 'get you to a tyre depot'. The upside of that is that I'm no longer too concerned at what make of tyre is fitted if I buy a second hand wheel.... John. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
747 Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 Your next problem is buying a 16" rim. I hope Ford parts are cheaper than Fiat parts. Best of luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tracker Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 What tread depth do you have on them? The front driven wheels will probably have used roughly 2 or 3 mm of the origonal 7 to 8 mm when new tread and the non driven rear wheels hardly any - maybe 1 mm in 8000 miles. My first thought was maybe an ex hire van clocked or seriously damaged or maybe a speedo failure? Modern vehicles do not show the evidence of high miles like the older cars used to and I recently drove a 140000 mile Mondeo diesel which drove better than a 50000 mile version of the same year car - but valuedat less than halp the price! Anyway I would be deeply suspicious of the situation and would be couteously but firmly asking the supplying dealer for a full explanation. Life's experiences have justified my cynicism! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flicka Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 Is the Ford Transit the Rear Wheel Drive model. ? Are the Hankooks a "Winter" or "M&S" tyre Is it possible the previous owner has gone for "winter" tyres for touring abroad in winter or simply for better grip on wet pitches ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robinhood Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 flicka - 2011-02-11 9:40 PM Is the Ford Transit the Rear Wheel Drive model. ? It's FWD Transit platform cab. Whilst 'clocking' is a possibility, frankly I've done 40,000 miles plus on similar tyres and got nowhere near replacing them - so it would have to have been going some. Service records aren't conclusive, but should provide some clue. My money would be on a mismatch from the factory (as I've said, Ford fit both Continental and Hankook as OE), or the two-tyre mishap as mentioned elsewhere. (A friends Morris Marina (ugh) took both tyres and wheels out on the motorway in the dim and distant past by hitting a baulk of wood). I assume the back tyres *are* 111/113? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 OK. If the Tranny hasn't been modified, and if the Hankooks are the same load rating as the Contis, you have essentially similar tyres front and rear, so the spare could be of either kind.Cost of wheel? I bought one from a Ford main dealer in 2007, to be sure of getting the same offset etc, and it was £56 + VAT.In view of the mismatch between front and rear tyres, which does seem odd, I wonder if it is possible to contact the previous owner to see if he can explain why? Failing that, do you have the receipts for servicing etc, which may indicate what was bought and when, or whether any suspension work has been carried out.The Transit platform cabs are all, AFAIK, made in Turkey. Ours, which was specified by a German converter, came on (I think Czech made) Continental Vanco 8s all round. I'd be a bit surprised if vans are emerging from the factory shod with odd tyres, the production systems are, after all, highly automated. If they can deliver a van on odd pairs, it would seem to me to indicate some failure of their QA procedure. I'm sure it is possible, but it seems so improbable that it might be safer to assume an alternative reason. Maybe Ford can confirm if they fit/have fitted Hankooks to Transits?It also seems improbable that the tyres can have been damaged while being driven, because whatever one end passed over, the other end must also have struck. To blow two tyres, it would have needed to be a huge thump, and I would have two concerns from that. First, that the remaining original tyres, that must have taken a similar whack without blowing, will have been damaged. Second, that such a severe whack may have knocked the suspension at either/both ends out of alignment. So, if you can't get to the bottom of what actually happened I would suggest you get the tyres, and the suspension alignment, fully checked for any signs of damage.A more simple answer may be that the van was driven, or reversed, onto something that cut the tyres, such as wet broken glass, leaving them irreparable, or that they were slashed - but then why walk round a van to slash one each side, when it would be easier and quicker to do two on one side? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tracker Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 Brian Kirby - 2011-02-12 12:04 AM they were slashed - but then why walk round a van to slash one each side, when it would be easier and quicker to do two on one side? If they were slashed then regardless of which two were damaged the owner would replace and re pair them to match front and rear - in which case tread depth between the two original tyres might differ? Maybe one tyre was damaged but the owner was agreed to buy a matching pair to maintain the balance - in which case someone might still have the one original tyre as a spare? The last owner should know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robinhood Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 Brian Kirby - 2011-02-12 12:04 AM Maybe Ford can confirm if they fit/have fitted Hankooks to Transits As I've posted previously, they do. Ford Brochure pictures show Mk7 transits fitted with Hankooks, and the Transit forum confirms they were/are OE fit. If you lose two tyres, regardless of having a spare or not, you are (probably) dependent on having them replaced wherever you are as a matter of urgency, and will thus take whatever make tyres of the correct spec you can get. I'm with Rich on the method of replacement. Slashing, or road accident to two is most certainly more likely on the same side, but if you get two different-make replacement tyres, the sensible thing to do is to switch around to match by axle, especially if it was low-mileage and therefore little difference in wear. It's interesting to ponder one of life's little mysteries, but I suspect we, and the OP will have difficulty finding out the truth. :-s Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Uzzell Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 The "Vehicle" option on the FordsEtis website http://www.etis.ford.com/ would allow Dixie to confirm (via the motorhome's VIN number) what the Transit chassis's Turkish-factory build-date was. Logically, if the Continental or Hankook tyres were factory-fitted to the Transit chassis, the tyres' dates of manufacture (shown on the side-wall of the tyres) will be shortly prior to the chassis's build-date. If any of the tyres have a date of manufacture after the build-date of the chassis, then those tyres MUST have been fitted to the vehicle after it left the Ford factory. One might expect the Sunlight's previous owner to be able to offer information about the unusual Continental/Hankook combination, as it would be difficult to believe that this tyre mixture would have gone unnoticed for around 2 years. As peterrosey and Robinhood have confirmed, Ford does factory-fit Hankook RA08 tyres to Transits. However, I've never seen them as original equipment on FWD Transit-based coachbuilt motorhomes. These have always had Michelin or Continental tyres, either of 'camping-car' or standard 'white van' type. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 Robinhood - 2011-02-12 9:31 AM ......... If you lose two tyres, regardless of having a spare or not, you are (probably) dependent on having them replaced wherever you are as a matter of urgency, and will thus take whatever make tyres of the correct spec you can get. I'm with Rich on the method of replacement. Slashing, or road accident to two is most certainly more likely on the same side, but if you get two different-make replacement tyres, the sensible thing to do is to switch around to match by axle, especially if it was low-mileage and therefore little difference in wear. ..................... Agreed, the same thought occurred to me shortly after posting. Durrrrr! :-)You'd (logically) transfer the already used pair to the front and, in accordance with current thinking, put the new tyres on the rear. Speculative, but Hankooks on rear are newer than OEM Contis on front. At only 8,000 miles in two years, damage of some kind seems the most probable explanation. Question is, was it vandalism, just bad luck, or might the presence of two new tyres, and a low mileage, suggest the van may have been off the road for a while for repairs?I'm still inclined to think I'd want to get to the bottom of why, just in case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
How Much Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 It easy enough to damage tyres on the same axle by simply driving or reversing over something - especially in poor light. I reversed up to a fence in a field. There was longish grass almost a metre out from this fence - which had stock on the other side of it. It was topped with barbed wire, and in this long grass not a metre from my rear wheels was a load of old rusty barbed wire! It was physically possible for me to back right against the fence, and to run over this wire had i 'overshot' in poor light. Fortunately, i always back to within a yard or so of where i want to be, then get out and view the space behind. I have a reversing camera, but only use it for general viewing, not precision positioning, i prefer to do this by eye/mirrors. And, the camera would never have spotted the wire anyway. So, damage to one axles tyres at the same time is eminently possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brambles Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 If the vehicle has a coach builder fitted ALKO chassis the Motorhome builder would have fitted the wheels and could have got the stock from Ford muddled up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Uzzell Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 Brian Kirby - 2011-02-12 12:25 PM ...Speculative, but Hankooks on rear are newer than OEM Contis on front.... However do you know that Brian? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Uzzell Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 Brambles - 2011-02-12 2:31 PM If the vehicle has a coach builder fitted ALKO chassis the Motorhome builder would have fitted the wheels and could have got the stock from Ford muddled up. It hasn't. No Ford Transit-based motorhomes have AL-KO chassis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 Derek Uzzell - 2011-02-12 7:03 PM Brian Kirby - 2011-02-12 12:25 PM ...Speculative, but Hankooks on rear are newer than OEM Contis on front.... However do you know that Brian? I don't, my Dear Watson, which is why I said speculative. ;-) It is a deduction based on my assumption that the Contis are OEM, two being damaged at some time post delivery from Ford, and being replaced with the Hankooks. Using Hankooks in place of matching Contis, suggests that at the time of replacement there was little actual choice as to brand of tyre, so having to settle for what was available there, and then. This further suggests the theory of damage while in the hands of the first owner is probably correct, and that his tyres were vandalised, probably by a male aged between 15 and 25, and almost certainly in an urban area, in the UK. Elementary. :-D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.