Rim rims rims...

[JPC]

I don't know specific measurements off the top of my head but hoped my descriptions can go some way to differentiating the two types.

I find it easier to refer to part numbers regarding the rims rather than what vehicle they were fitted to, as we know there were no hard rules with Land-Rover.
Generally IIBs seem to have had the 569203s, and 1-Tons had 569203s or 569204s. I don't think we can get any more specific than that.

I was hoping Mr.Wit would be along with some more info as he has looked into this more than I have...

OK Mr Vulcan, I hope we can apply some form of logic here.

What do you mean by "generally"?, 50%?, 90%?, does it include also just a handful of vehicles built on special order?

I think we can easily get more specific than that by just following the parts manuals which clearly indicate 203 as a 2B rim, and 204 as a 1-Ton rim, with no mention of "optional". Thus my 203s are 2b rims, even though the first couple of 2bs were fitted with 543384s.

Why could this forum not compile a definitive guide to LR steel rims? This thread of a "lesser" forum (your words) http://****.createaforum.com/technical- ... t-numbers/ had the potential of developing into a very informative resource for enthusiasts, until it got hi-jacked. It will also provide some respite from the regular POM, E-bay notices and "clique" banter. It is really not that difficult to measure and work out the offset of a rim, and we all can contribute where we can. Why should it be a MR Wit project, again?

[22900013A]

If you read back through the thread we have discussed previously the fact that 569203 rims were also often fitted to 1-Tons at the factory, therefore they should not be named IIB rims as they are not unique to IIBs. The parts books do not accurately reflect the way the vehicles were built.

I can't do a thread on the rims types as I only have a set of 569203s to hand, and at the moment we can't seem to even agree on what to call them...with enough info I would be happy enough to put something together, that was in the beginning, the very point of this thread...

We are ploughing a new field here with this research and we need to let go of the old wives tales etc which have clung on for long enough.

It is logical to just describe the rims by the part numbers allocated to them. They went out of production over thirty years ago, and there are probably more sets running around now on swb IIAs than anywhere else, we have next to no chance of accurately cataloguing which vehicles had what set of rims and describing them in those terms.

The ONLY way we can come close on that score is when people post up details of their vehicle which is original and info on what rims were fitted.

[fuckwit]

Why could this forum not compile a definitive guide to LR steel rims? This thread of a "lesser" forum (your words) http://****.createaforum.com/technical- ... t-numbers/ had the potential of developing into a very informative resource for enthusiasts, until it got hi-jacked. It will also provide some respite from the regular POM, E-bay notices and "clique" banter. It is really not that difficult to measure and work out the offset of a rim, and we all can contribute where we can. Why should it be a MR Wit project, again?

Have a star.

The problem
When i wrote that thread, I had a pretty good idea of what-was-what, when others clearly didn't,. In fact since writing it I've found more variations, and it does contain some small inaccuracies. I have been collecting the info. Your comment made me smile, because the problem is that those with bits of the jigsaw are not contactable, or won't take pics or measure, so it grinds on. I've had to piece it together. I have volunteered to do a rewrite and I will.

It really is not that difficult to measure and work out the offset of a rim...
Agreed, but how do you get them together to do it, and without this how do you ensure you have a common datum for measurement? And... how do you know you have the variations? The heaps of useless offset measurements around the various forums prove this. Some rims are so rare, and until you have them altogether you can't. I am now fairly certain there are four, perhaps five versions of the mythical 569203 rim for example, and you definitely can't refer to a 569204 or a 569203 by the vehicle you think it comes off. This has proven to be a fallacy.

And you definitely can't put it into a simple graphic or table.

Strangely as i write this, there are two sellers on ebay right now selling the 'real-deal', proper 569203 with the full deepset, looking at that you'd get the impression these rims were actually common-place. So, if you've the will, you're on your way to a set within the fortnight... 'tis only the third time (I think) this year that I've seen 'real' rims like these, but therein lies the vagaries of ebay.

ebay link

Another eBay link

another other eBay link

If you want to notified of these via email use this search and save it via your ebay account.

ebay search link

Repeat after me, DO NOT MIX & MATCH TUBELESS TRIMS & TYRES with TUBED TYRES & RIMS. The principal reason is the inner friction. If you want these rims you want tubed tyres.

[edited to contract eBay links to make it a bit more mobile friendly, all seems to be working correctly - Das]

[22900013A]

A genuine yellow 503 rim...awesome. Perhaps off a GPO FC or 1-Ton?

[fuckwit]

I don't know which of us is the greater anorak!

I have collated a lot more stuff, but in the meantime, what with this thread and er, that one, most should have a pretty good idea.


3 x rims I see, I will be a wochin' and a wunderin'....

Will anyone else see them? Took me near three years to get my first three, now someone minded enough, could ahve it on a plate.

[fuckwit]

And more. Peoples is short of cash methinks.

Where are all these things suddenly coming from?

I write this in early December. It must be blokes wanting some Xmas money. It has to be said, a friend of mine says he gets all his motorcycle parts this time of year, and into Jan. Hey-ho, time to buy it seems.

Now me, I can do a mean typo, known for it, but Jeez...

Clicky eBay link

'Cansel' (sic).

When the guy feels no need of basic punctuation, you're left rather wunderin' who you're really buyin' from.

Modmin Sire: You'll have to show me the HTML for contracting the link, looked in the source and I can't see the trick. I see a postlink tag?

Edit: you can make short links with url= followed by the link in the opening tag, whatever you wan the link to say, then the usual closing tag.
You'll see how it works if you quote this post.

[22900013A]

As to reducing the link, I am not sure if it is possible with this forum software, perhaps Tim (muddyweb) can illuminate on that issue?

[22900013A]

A post on another forum has set me thinking - apparently a wolf rim has the same measurements as a 569203 rim, but obviously a wolf rim has holes in etc. I don't see how this can be correct? I could accept a wolf rim being close to a 569204 or an old style 130 rim (ie before they swapped to wolf rims) but not a 569203 surely? Does anyone know where they fit in the order of things? I have Wolf/HD rims on my 110 and obviously SEB has 569203s, and they certainly don't look anything even close to the same to me. Sure the wolf is a 6.5" rim, but I think the commonality stops at that point.

[antarmike]

Spotted these deep dish rims and wondered what they were Dated 03 03 (I presume 2003)






A modern product of the UZEL tractor factory in Turkey?

[JPC]

A post on another forum has set me thinking - apparently a wolf rim has the same measurements as a 569203 rim, but obviously a wolf rim has holes in etc. I don't see how this can be correct? I could accept a wolf rim being close to a 569204 or an old style 130 rim (ie before they swapped to wolf rims) but not a 569203 surely? Does anyone know where they fit in the order of things? I have Wolf/HD rims on my 110 and obviously SEB has 569203s, and they certainly don't look anything even close to the same to me. Sure the wolf is a 6.5" rim, but I think the commonality stops at that point.

Obvious differences seems to be the holes, the material thickness and the well being on the outside as opposed to it being on the inside as with a 204.