[strawdog]

Originally Posted by Fargo

My biggest hesitation besides worrying about vibes and driveshafts is just the extra weight. I'm hoping to keep my Jeep light,

Yes some added weight...... But remember LOW weight is GOOD weight.... Think of the keel on a sail boat.

[06rubicon]

Originally Posted by Fargo

I'm just reposting this fro 06rubicon. IT was posted in the thread linked above.

I tend to agree with you on that and I like the idea of going the TT route. My biggest hesitation besides worrying about vibes and driveshafts is just the extra weight. I'm hoping to keep my Jeep light, but this might be a worthwhile trade off. The clearance would sure be nice. Do you think your 265s would fit ok with only the body lift and no suspension lift?

Yes I believe they would, I did get some rubbing at full turn on the lower control arm and had to place a thin washer under the steering stops. I will use two washers when I go with 285's instead of spacers.

[patricknolan]

The fact of the matter - 33's are still better than 32's off road. Enough said.

[quattrogato]

Originally Posted by patricknolan

The fact of the matter - 33's are still better than 32's off road. Enough said.

This seems like a pretty bold statement for a mere 1/2 inch additional pumpkin clearance and 1 inch more width (assuming you are talking about 33 x 12.5 shoes). I have never been anywhere on my 32s where being on 33s would have made the slightest bit of difference, and in situations where bigger tires were really required, I would have needed 35s or better for it to have even mattered...

[lupinsea]

The TT is a good way to go with a longer wheel base LJ.

Some guys pick up 2". I managed to pick up 3 extra inches of ground clearance. Here's the stock skid vs. the aftermarket I picked up:

[patricknolan]

Originally Posted by quattrogato

This seems like a pretty bold statement for a mere 1/2 inch additional pumpkin clearance and 1 inch more width (assuming you are talking about 33 x 12.5 shoes). I have never been anywhere on my 32s where being on 33s would have made the slightest bit of difference,

You obviously don't wheel your rig to its limits.

and in situations where bigger tires were really required, I would have needed 35s or better for it to have even mattered...

Ok? I know 35's are bigger and therefore give more clearance. This thread is about whether 33's are necessary. My argument was that they are bigger than 32's and therefore will provide more clearance, and more capability.

Edit: I run 33x13.5's by the way.

[quattrogato]

Originally Posted by patricknolan

You obviously don't wheel your rig to its limits.



Ok? I know 35's are bigger and therefore give more clearance. This thread is about whether 33's are necessary. My argument was that they are bigger than 32's and therefore will provide more clearance, and more capability.

Edit: I run 33x13.5's by the way.

You obviously don't know (and couldn't possibly know) anything about how I wheel my rig, but as long as we are "guessing", I am willing to wager you have never run anything in New Jersey that taxes your rig anywhere near what it would see on an “average” trip here in the Rockies,

The OP has his reasons for wanting to stick to 32s, and for the infinitesimal difference in size between 32s and 33s, it is my assertion and experience after 3+ decades of wheeling in the Colorado high country that it would make no difference to him whatsoever given the trail types he says he would like to run.

In my opinion, a blanket statement like yours is just about as ridiculous as someone saying for instance that “6 inches of lift is better than 4 inches of lift – enough said” , when clearly that is not the case, as a lot of folks are now looking at LCG builds.

Also in my opinion and experience, the roughly 3 percent difference in tire size from 33s to 32s doesn’t mean jack compared to being able to pick the right line on the trail – if you can’t find a good line to navigate on 32s, 33s are not going to save you…

[Fargo]

Originally Posted by 06rubicon

Yes I believe they would, I did get some rubbing at full turn on the lower control arm and had to place a thin washer under the steering stops. I will use two washers when I go with 285's instead of spacers.

Wow, I thought 265s would clear without any rubbing at all.

That body lift/tummy tuck setup is really starting to appeal to me. Especially if I can run 265s with only that setup.

[06rubicon]

Originally Posted by Fargo

Wow, I thought 265s would clear without any rubbing at all.

That body lift/tummy tuck setup is really starting to appeal to me. Especially if I can run 265s with only that setup.

If you cant you havn't wasted any moves...just add the 1" spacer to the front springs.

[Unlimited04]

Originally Posted by Fargo

Wow, I thought 265s would clear without any rubbing at all.

That body lift/tummy tuck setup is really starting to appeal to me. Especially if I can run 265s with only that setup.

11.25" from the ground to the flat tummy tuck:


9.5" from the ground to the lower control arm mount:

[Fargo]

Originally Posted by lupinsea

The TT is a good way to go with a longer wheel base LJ.

Some guys pick up 2". I managed to pick up 3 extra inches of ground clearance. Here's the stock skid vs. the aftermarket I picked up:

That looks nice. I hadn't looked at the go fer it skids before. So I had to check them out. Unfortunetaly they don't have one for a Rubi Unlimited.

[Fargo]

Originally Posted by Unlimited04

11.25" from the ground to the flat tummy tuck:


9.5" from the ground to the lower control arm mount:

OK I took my measurements. I am at 10.5 on the lowest tip of the front control arm bracket and 10.0 at the lowest point on the tranny skid. So my skid is 1/2" lower than my lowest point on the control arm.

Your control arm is 9.5 and your tummy tuck is 11.25 so your skid is 1.75" higher. So it seems that you gained about 2.25"

Is yours the Rockman setup? Also I thought you had a 2" lift? How is my stock Jeep sitting 1" taller than yours.

[bigj1974]

I think i remember Jerry saying something once about 35s rolling over stuff better than smaller tires.

every since I had my jeep, it's been on 30s, 32s, and now 33s. I can say that the 33s are the best, because for whatever reason, they do just roll over things a lot better. and the aftermarket suspension helps. with 33s, I had to order wider wheels, and that helps me maintain some sense that I won't roll over when off-camber, like I did when I had 32s and a very narrow stance on the stock Canyon wheels. I'll take my 33s any day over the 32s.


although....it's be neat to take a stock Jeep and keep it on 30s, add a TT, armor, and ARBs and see where it goes....

[GEM1N1]

I personally love the drivability of the 265/75/16's over the 33's. They seem to be the perfect match for the 4.10 rear end. It is a night and day difference and they don't measure a ton bigger than the factory 245's but they look a ton bigger on the jeep.

Plus I obviously don't do any major off roading and I'm currently chasing a DAMN vibration that I can't find so don't take my word for it.

[Fargo]

Originally Posted by GEM1N1

I personally love the drivability of the 265/75/16's over the 33's. They seem to be the perfect match for the 4.10 rear end. It is a night and day difference and they don't measure a ton bigger than the factory 245's but they look a ton bigger on the jeep.

Plus I obviously don't do any major off roading and I'm currently chasing a DAMN vibration that I can't find so don't take my word for it.

It sounds like you've had both and are speaking form experience. I've wondered too which size will match up better with the 4.10 gears, but since I have the 6 speed I figure I should be ok either way.