ZT-T 260 for sale in America on youtube

[MichaelG]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfu4kcHiJvc

does anyone want to tell them it has the incorrect wheels not rated for the 260?

[Herman]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfu4kcHiJvc

does anyone want to tell them it has the incorrect wheels not rated for the 260?

Not sure if they were not rated for the 260. They were never an option.
If they work on the 190 there is no reason why they couldn't be on the 260.


Would be good to seee something official to say not to use.............

[MichaelG]

Good point, I was just repeating popular opinion from forum posts (rather than any official document) that the hairpin was not tested regarding extra weight/torque from the 260 and was only tested as safe to fit to the 190.

[Herman]

Good point, I was just repeating popular opinion from forum posts (rather than any official document) that the hairpin was not tested regarding extra weight/torque from the 260 and was only tested as safe to fit to the 190.

Wheels normally have a load rating similar to tyres (not a torque rating). As for the hairpins, if they can stop a 190 with similar front brakes as the 260 and almost as heavy(about 150kg difference), surely they would work on the 260 as well. At least they seem able of taking the braking torque of a heavy car. Axle load is similar for both models ZT

[MG260SEV8]

Last time I saw this car for sale, it was about $24,000

It featured in a MG Car club magazine some time ago and I think I was told it ended up in the states as a development car for the V8

[2V8s]

Herman, I thought as per Michael that it was common knowledge the Haripins are potentially not strong enough for the torque? Beause yes braking is high stress but over 4 wheels wheras max torque is through 2 wheels so more force.

Maybe they are ok on a standard 260 but I guess they were avoided for the supercharged cars?

If this is not true and its simply a mith and just that they were not an option offered, where's the evidence either way? Just interested, as personally I actually prefer the haripin alloys!

[Herman]

Herman, I thought as per Michael that it was common knowledge the Haripins are potentially not strong enough for the torque? Beause yes braking is high stress but over 4 wheels wheras max torque is through 2 wheels so more force.

Maybe they are ok on a standard 260 but I guess they were avoided for the supercharged cars?

If this is not true and its simply a mith and just that they were not an option offered, where's the evidence either way? Just interested, as personally I actually prefer the haripin alloys!

I am aware of the common opinion but haven't seen it backed up by an official statement. I am tempted to try the Hairpins as I like the look of them. So unless someone can convince me otherwise............someday I'll have some

[ColinE]

Think MikPeirce has the gen on this

[reverie158]

It used to belong to 'one of us', and was the car of the month back in Jan 2007!

http://www.two-sixties.com/cotm0107/

[mikpeirce]

Think MikPeirce has the gen on this

No further info, Nick (Rincewind) confirmed that the hairpins never went through the official Rover approval process (which was probably just Nick doing doughnuts in the car park!) to be fitted to the V8's. I used a set of these on mine for about 6 months while I had my original 11 spoke's refurbed with no issues, although I was aware of using non-certified wheels so drove accordingly (flat out everywhere! :D )

[Herman]

Wonder how that would work with aftermarket alloys as they all were never offically tested by Rover.
I'm still sure that if they are good enough for the 190 they will serve the 260 as well.

(until someone shows me different that is of course)

[Keith]

technically the hairpins if not approved probably fit in the after market wheel category for insurance purposes as they will obviously need to charge you a lot more for your self inflicted risky modification of fitting unapproved and untested non standard wheels......................

Plus a loading because clearly you have made the car more attractive (in your eyes) and hence more nickable

Plus a loading because by modifying your car you must be a boy racer.

Seriously though I thought it was the much higher side loading from the 260 during cornering that made the hairpins a no no

[Herman]

I think there are quite a few opinions around with regards to the hairpins.

Can't it just be as simple as that MG never offered them as an option for the 260?

The multispokes were there for the 'normal' ZT as well as the 260, and IIRC even available before the 260 was launched.

Can't the fact the they were never offered as an option led to all the speculation as to why they are not for the 260 ?

[reverie158]

According to Nic the hairpins weren't good enough - https://www.two-sixties.co.uk/mgoc260/html/f0rum/showthread.php?1175-Wheel-style&p=4688#post4688

[Herman]

According to Nic the hairpins weren't good enough - https://www.two-sixties.co.uk/mgoc260/html/f0rum/showthread.php?1175-Wheel-style&p=4688#post4688

Interesting is it's about the load. Just did a quick check and axle load on the 190 is 1100 for the front and 1060 for the rears (ZT-T) and 1000 rear for the ZT
For the 260 it is 1120 for both axles (excl ZT-T) and 1190 for the ZT-T. Difference seems well within a normal safety margin.

Both cars show 91 as load index for the tyres (91 = 615 kg) so total 1230 per axle max
Wouldn't make sense to put a tyre on a wheel that can't cope :)

Anyway, enough of the science, there is no documented evidence and that leaves it up to the individual to make their choice