95.5-2004 Tacomas & 96-2002 4Runners 4th gen pickups and 3rd gen 4Runners

Fitting 35's on a 3rd gen without going sky-high.

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 01-29-2006 | 07:51 PM
  #21  
Flygtenstein's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 4,216
Likes: 1
From: Fort Collins, CO
Looks good.

Beadlocks are not illegal anywhere. They are not legal anywhere either.

I have some really sweet streetlocks from OMF as well.

If you are thinking of buying fake ones, please do. That way those of us with real ones can get off the hook.
Old 01-29-2006 | 08:02 PM
  #22  
SEAN_at_TLT's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 746
Likes: 0
From: USA
Originally Posted by Flygtenstein
Looks good.

Beadlocks are not illegal anywhere. They are not legal anywhere either.

I have some really sweet streetlocks from OMF as well.

If you are thinking of buying fake ones, please do. That way those of us with real ones can get off the hook.
That's kinda what I thought. I seem to remember that those big rig style 2-piece rims are illegal and people were confusing that with beadlocks or something. Anyway I'm not worried about it as we've run beadlocks for years, first some Barts on the jeep and then OMF's on the Tacoma and now these and we've never been hassled once.
Old 01-29-2006 | 08:03 PM
  #23  
northfacer581's Avatar
Contributing Member
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,006
Likes: 0
From: charlotte
wow those pictures are awesome.

i got streetlocks! ill be sure to let the officers know!
Old 01-29-2006 | 08:11 PM
  #24  
SnoViking's Avatar
Contributing Member
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 798
Likes: 0
From: Reading PA
i want them!
Old 01-29-2006 | 08:12 PM
  #25  
Flygtenstein's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 4,216
Likes: 1
From: Fort Collins, CO
Really, truck looks good.

Schaefer's rig worked tits that low with IFS too.

Perhaps beadlock discussion deserves another thread, but I got rear-ended out here and the cop made an effort to say nice wheels when he was looking over my truck.
Old 01-30-2006 | 06:39 AM
  #26  
Crux's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 842
Likes: 0
From: Castle Rock, CO
What bumper is that?
Old 01-30-2006 | 09:17 AM
  #27  
99_Runner's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,153
Likes: 0
From: Westminster, CO
Very good job.
Old 01-30-2006 | 03:09 PM
  #28  
deathrunner's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 2,969
Likes: 1
From: San Diego CA
Looks AWESOME, man!
Old 01-30-2006 | 03:13 PM
  #29  
BajaRunner's Avatar
Contributing Member
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 7,122
Likes: 6
From: 5th Gen San Diegan, California
Sweet looking Sean!
Old 01-30-2006 | 09:38 PM
  #30  
Silver_Truck's Avatar
Contributing Member
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,817
Likes: 0
From: B'ham, WA
Wow I love the rig, looks great those 35s really set it off. Great job!
Old 01-31-2006 | 06:30 PM
  #31  
SEAN_at_TLT's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 746
Likes: 0
From: USA
Originally Posted by Crux
What bumper is that?
Hanson Enterprise. It's a prototype at this point based loosely off of an XJ bumper call the shop and tell them you want them to make it production. They need a little motivation
Old 01-31-2006 | 06:32 PM
  #32  
SEAN_at_TLT's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 746
Likes: 0
From: USA
Originally Posted by Flygtenstein
Really, truck looks good.

Schaefer's rig worked tits that low with IFS too.

Perhaps beadlock discussion deserves another thread, but I got rear-ended out here and the cop made an effort to say nice wheels when he was looking over my truck.
I also pulled the 1" BL out a few months ago so the truck is really low, maybe 4" over stock or so. I figure 2" from the tires and another 2" from the suspension. Sidehills still scare me though.
Old 10-16-2006 | 05:26 PM
  #33  
AH64ID's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,655
Likes: 0
From: Idaho
Older thread, but it was linked in a newer one.. .looks sweet.. 34's and low COG... very nice...

but FWIW, BFG 35's are 34.8, that a bit more than a hair larger than 34...
Old 10-18-2006 | 10:28 AM
  #34  
SEAN_at_TLT's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 746
Likes: 0
From: USA
Originally Posted by AH64ID
Older thread, but it was linked in a newer one.. .looks sweet.. 34's and low COG... very nice...

but FWIW, BFG 35's are 34.8, that a bit more than a hair larger than 34...
I have a brand new BFG 35/12.5/17 sitting right next to my brand new spare Maxxis 305/70/17 and they are damn near exactly the same height and width (maybe 1/8" off at most). Both tires are mounted on 8" wide rims as well.
Old 10-18-2006 | 10:45 AM
  #35  
AH64ID's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,655
Likes: 0
From: Idaho
Well then your Maxxis are taller than advertised.. My 35 BFG Muds are about 1.25" taller than my old 33 TSL swapmers.. which are 33.7...

The Maxxis advertises 34.0 Tall, the BFG 34.8...
Old 10-18-2006 | 10:53 AM
  #36  
KyleT's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,080
Likes: 0
From: Fort Worth, TEXAS
Originally Posted by SEAN_at_TLT
Hanson Enterprise. It's a prototype at this point based loosely off of an XJ bumper call the shop and tell them you want them to make it production. They need a little motivation
heck yeah, its nice. i replied to your pm again also.
Old 10-22-2006 | 09:12 PM
  #37  
rcars4life's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
From: Phoenix,AZ(home) Rexburg, ID (school)
Just wondering what everyone thought of having such big tires, I want to do it but I'm afraid of more damage to joints bearings cv's brakes etc due to the heavier mass. Whats everyones experiences, pro's con's. Thanks!
Old 10-23-2006 | 03:26 AM
  #38  
914runner's Avatar
Contributing Member
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,097
Likes: 0
From: Tigard, Oregon
Originally Posted by rcars4life
Just wondering what everyone thought of having such big tires, I want to do it but I'm afraid of more damage to joints bearings cv's brakes etc due to the heavier mass. Whats everyones experiences, pro's con's. Thanks!
If your not a skinny pedal junky, and dont spin the tires to much when they are in the air and come down on it you should be fine is what I have gathered.
Old 10-23-2006 | 04:03 AM
  #39  
AH64ID's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,655
Likes: 0
From: Idaho
Originally Posted by rcars4life
Just wondering what everyone thought of having such big tires, I want to do it but I'm afraid of more damage to joints bearings cv's brakes etc due to the heavier mass. Whats everyones experiences, pro's con's. Thanks!
I went to 35's about two years ago, but maybe only have 5000 miles on em, but some wheeling time too.. I love em. On road there isnt much differnce between 33 and 35, but offroad its HUGE, I dont remember 33's being this much better than 31's.... As far as the front end, if you drive smart you shouldnt have a problem. I have a 22RE, and breaking a CV was the last thing on my mind, but when I went to 35's I did start carrying a spare on long runs. Just have to be concious, full throttle runs at full lock.. maybe not a good idea. Before I decided to sell my 92 I was going to crawlerbox it, the added gearing in my mind would have made it harder to break the CV, as I would be able to go slower with more control.

As far as bearings.. I dont think its an issue. 3rd gens do have sealed bearings, so they might wear sooner. But on my 92 I just repack em every year in amsoil grease and they are fine.

You do notice it braking thou.. and I have 4runner brakes on my p/u.
Old 10-23-2006 | 08:12 AM
  #40  
BajaRunner's Avatar
Contributing Member
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 7,122
Likes: 6
From: 5th Gen San Diegan, California
I think my front bearings are going. I hear a "squeek squeek squeek" now. I have no idea how to fix the squeak though, its driving me nuts!



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:36 AM.