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)
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)
Fear keeps you alive. Fearless gets you killed
Herman
Vin#076 pics, Black, modified and with 234 RWHP and 276 lb/ft (275 BHP and 440 Nm @ flywheel)
FJ1200, DynoJet Stage 1, K&N filter
Alfa MiTo 1.4 Cloverleaf, 170 BHP, Alfa Rosso.
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
Keith Alexander, Ellesmere, Shropshire UK,
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 ?
Fear keeps you alive. Fearless gets you killed
Herman
Vin#076 pics, Black, modified and with 234 RWHP and 276 lb/ft (275 BHP and 440 Nm @ flywheel)
FJ1200, DynoJet Stage 1, K&N filter
Alfa MiTo 1.4 Cloverleaf, 170 BHP, Alfa Rosso.
According to Nic the hairpins weren't good enough - https://www.two-sixties.co.uk/mgoc26...=4688#post4688
Justin - Ex-website button-pusher
2003 MG ZT260 SE No. 144
2018 Mini Cooper Clubman
2010 Suzuki GSX1250FA
197? Triumph 'Mostly'
1975 Montesa Cota 175
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
Fear keeps you alive. Fearless gets you killed
Herman
Vin#076 pics, Black, modified and with 234 RWHP and 276 lb/ft (275 BHP and 440 Nm @ flywheel)
FJ1200, DynoJet Stage 1, K&N filter
Alfa MiTo 1.4 Cloverleaf, 170 BHP, Alfa Rosso.