New Montero Sport 4x4, Fortuner 3.0 4x4 or Sta. Fe 4x4.

**trevvs** · March 28th, 2009 12:09 PM

kung 4x4 capabilities/functionalities ang paguusapan dun ako sa Fortuner pangalawa un MS.

**s_quilicot** · March 28th, 2009 02:05 PM

Originally Posted by XTO

:1stplace::2ndplace::3rdplace::clap: makabili nga ng March Issue

yabang ...

makabili nga rin,

**saipeme** · March 29th, 2009 12:27 AM

Originally Posted by doc vince

I dont know about that bro, but if there was no changes in the suspension compared to the old model & the only change was type of wheel diameter for the mags & new set of tires, then probably its the new kind of tires that gave some improvement on the ride of the facelifted model. But if your claiming that the ride did not change one bit when you shifted to 20 inch rims and low profile tires, then you must be kidding yourself., no pun intended. A lot of fort owners upgraded their suspension & spring to TEIN to improve the ride especially if you modified the rims to 20 inches. Mas naging matagtag kasi pagnagupgrade ka sa bigger rims & lower profile tires.

my post here is not from hearsay or from someone write in the forum and read by someone...it's from the guys i know very well who actually drive my fort oftenly. they compare the stock mags and tires to the new one and unanimously they favor to the new one, they find it quiter,smoother and it makes the steering wheel lighter...my new tire has diff tread pattern ( non directional and high performance radial)compare to stock,the design is bias more for comfort and quitness...

**alainroyce** · April 2nd, 2009 05:27 PM

Originally Posted by saipeme

my post here is not from hearsay or from someone write in the forum and read by someone...it's from the guys i know very well who actually drive my fort oftenly. they compare the stock mags and tires to the new one and unanimously they favor to the new one, they find it quiter,smoother and it makes the steering wheel lighter...my new tire has diff tread pattern ( non directional and high performance radial)compare to stock,the design is bias more for comfort and quitness...

Sir saipeme * any vehicle US, european or japanese brand when you change the tires to a bigger one with a low profile tires the riding comfort of your ride will be suffer specially you mentioned that you didnt change your shock... but i agree to you that the wider tires you have right now will be advantage on the handling and breaking of your vehcile also more smoother or less noise.. but again not the riding comfort with fort..

**XTO** · April 2nd, 2009 08:39 PM

Originally Posted by s_quilicot

yabang ...

makabili nga rin,

:shhh: nothing against the other 2 actually kasama sila sa choices ko before kaw talaga oh :cheers2:

**easyman3** · April 3rd, 2009 11:46 AM

Originally Posted by trevvs

kung 4x4 capabilities/functionalities ang paguusapan dun ako sa Fortuner pangalawa un MS.

C! and topgear (though the final statement is fortuner) have said otherwise right?

**doc vince** · April 4th, 2009 12:19 AM

Originally Posted by alainroyce

Sir saipeme * any vehicle US, european or japanese brand when you change the tires to a bigger one with a low profile tires the riding comfort of your ride will be suffer specially you mentioned that you didnt change your shock... but i agree to you that the wider tires you have right now will be advantage on the handling and breaking of your vehcile also more smoother or less noise.. but again not the riding comfort with fort..

i second this sir saipeme, that is the logic behind it, the higher the profile of the tire and the smaller the rim, the more the ride improves (comfort from potholes while driving on it), but the looks & sportiness factor decreases. On the other hand, the lower the profile of the tire and the larger the rim diameter gets, the ride worsens, but the looks and sportiness factor plus handling will definitely be on the positive note. So again sir saipeme, that would be impossible if increasing your rims to 20 plus lowering the profile of your tire will improve your forts ride, no pun intended. Dont be confused with the comfort of the ride with the easeness of maneuvering your vehicle (handling performance).

**yapoy86** · April 4th, 2009 12:59 AM

Originally Posted by pup2

Buti hindi si Yuichi ang kasabay mo sir. hehehe. Anyway, I did the math and found out that the power-to-weight figures for all 3 vehicle types are not all that different:

MMS SE = 77.43 bhp/ton Tor=335
SF CRDi = 78.53 bhp/ton Tor=343
Fort 3.0V = 83.8/ton Tor=343

Torque Figures aren't all that different either so short or long run, halos pare parehas ng potential. I conclude therefore that Yuichi was right and that you were merely not in the optimum power band/rpm.

I considered bhp more kasi as you can see, halos pare parehas ang torque figures ninyo. And while torque is good for climbs and acceleration, at the speed you were going at, basically yung 'peak' ng horsepower ang hinahanap ninyo. In other words, though they may have seemed to pass you with "ease," they were probably revving higher than you.

The good news though is that kung binagalan niyo pa ng konti, you probably would've hit the peak of your fuel-economy band.

agree...

baka mabagal lang talaga magpatakbo kaya nauunahan..

nasa 2000rpm lang kasi yung SF kaya nauunahan ng iba which surely revving at 2,500 to 3000 rpm..

**saipeme** · April 4th, 2009 07:18 AM

Originally Posted by doc vince

i second this sir saipeme, that is the logic behind it, the higher the profile of the tire and the smaller the rim, the more the ride improves (comfort from potholes while driving on it), but the looks & sportiness factor decreases. On the other hand, the lower the profile of the tire and the larger the rim diameter gets, the ride worsens, but the looks and sportiness factor plus handling will definitely be on the positive note. So again sir saipeme, that would be impossible if increasing your rims to 20 plus lowering the profile of your tire will improve your forts ride, no pun intended. Dont be confused with the comfort of the ride with the easeness of maneuvering your vehicle (handling performance).

you may perhaps right on that logic, again its my friends and my driver actual obsevation the claims could be wrong... from other forum who did notice of improvement using the same tire...
http://pinoyfortuner.14.forumer.com/...pic.php?t=2750

to me tire profile of 265/50/R20 has still enough room (132.5mm of sidewall) for giving decent ride it is relatively the same oem sidewall to most compact car...

**redorange** · April 4th, 2009 07:35 AM

Originally Posted by saipeme

you may perhaps right on that logic, again its my friends and my driver actual obsevation the claims could be wrong... from other forum who did notice of improvement using the same tire...
http://pinoyfortuner.14.forumer.com/...pic.php?t=2750

to me tire profile of 265/50/R20 has still enough room (132.5mm of sidewall) for giving decent ride it is relatively the same oem sidewall to most compact car...

But a compact car doesn't weight as much as your SUV. By going to a shorter sidewall you have less flex of the sidewall itself and in order to do the tire needs a stiffer sidewall. With the higher sidewall there is more flex of the wall and it can also absorb some of the shock when the tires hit a bump or pothole. There is a reason why off-roaders use tires with bigger sidewall, it allows them to deflate tires without the risk of losing the bead so that they can get better traction in off road conditions, and when the tires are inflated in absorbs some of the shock from the bumps off road.