Forgive my ignorance about this, but why may I ask do larger wheel sizes
keep being pushed? My 03 Ram has 17's which seem plenty big enough. I
keep getting asked though, why not put 20's on it? I can see that it
would be good for top end speeds but it sure would seem to be a lot more
work getting there IMO.
Thanks in advance.
Seems to be a new thing to want more metal and less rubber. I think a
truck or SUV with 20"+ wheels looks down right funny. Why do some
people think more rim looks better than more rubber? Whats more is that
the rather low profile sidewalls of such tires have got to mess up
handling and ride comfort.
My 2004 Durango has 17" and thats fine for me. My Ram has 16". I'd
rather have 16" on my Durango as new tires for it were expensive and
selection very limited. No reason for the 17".
15" is fine for smaller trucks and cars. I think they're too small for
full sized trucks and SUV's. Thing about the new 20"'ers is the overall
diameter of the tire isn't increased much. Just more rim, less rubber.
ive had several full sized half ton trucks that performed fine under load
with 15" wheels. although i agree you can get larger brakes under a 16 or 17
wheel i still see little added benefit other than the larger brake
capability with the larger wheel.
Wheel size is not circumference. Short side walls provide less sidewall
shift to the sides when cornering and therefore are more surefooted when
cornering under high speed conditions, but they do so at the cost of comfort
and load carrying ability. Your 17" wheels were an upgrade from 16s to
provide more crearance for larger brakes. If you have a 2500 or 3500 with an
8 lug bolt pattern, you can find conversions for 19", 22" and 24" 10 bolt
truck wheels. These have the load bearing ability and go fast wheels do not.
Which makes little sense. Mopar brakes have never been very good.
Other manufactures still use 16" with fewer problems than Dodge. Main
issue is that the Mopar rotors are junk. Rather than make them larger
diameter Dodge should have focused their efforts on just making them
At 35K the Rotors on my 2004 Durango need replacing. They've already
been turned twice by the dealer under warranty and probably have little
metal left. Same problems with my 2001 Ram. Come on Dodge, make a
frigg'n decent rotor!!
That can happen but I still think that Mopar rotors are junk. Most
dealers and independent shops I've been too have signs posted all over
saying lug nuts are hand torqued.
Why did this become such a problem lately? Or was it that sometime in
the late 80's or 90's shops failed to hand torque? I never ever had
rotor issues back then like I do now.
A store tried to convince me that after 30K, our
Neon needed new rotors. I was extremely dubious.
After a bunch of back and forth, I finally got it
out of them that the rotor thickness was below spec
to face it. I asked to see the book. They assured
me over and over that Dodge rotors are crap, and it
was almost unheard of that rotors could be "turned."
When I finally got the caliper readings and the
book side by side, it turns out they were looking
under the "new" column. Duh. No wonder. How many
rotors are still at "new" thickness by the time you
need pads changed? The question is... was it
intentional, or were the folks there just idiots? I
complained to the AAA (which this place was approved
by), it closed, but then reopened under another name
This may not be very common, but I bet it happens
more than people might want to believe.
ive seen them also have their "own" rotor spec book and if they dont have
the specs for your rotors in their book then its a automatic replacement in
their minds. never try to look in the FSM to findout what detriot has to say
about discard thickness.
Please don't think I'm being condescending, but I drove a chevy s10 for 10
years and changed pads twice, never the rear shoes. Both the rotors and the
drums looked almost new. On my '96 Dodge Ram I changed the pads twice, never
touched the drums and shoes. At 132,000 the rotors and drums looked new. You
probably drive like my daughter, she eats brakes too. The key is
anticipation. Dodges have fine brakes.
Not me. Like I said I've never had brake troubles until my two Dodges.
My 2 1993 Nissans both had over 140,000 and I only replaced the pads
once. Rotors were fine. I'm pretty light on brakes, coasting to stops
rather than going straight from gas to brake as some do...or ride the
brakes and alot of snowbirds do here!
No, they don't have "fine" brakes! The 94-2001 Rams were known for
having poor brakes. And that has nothing to do with rotor quality, they
needed bigger rotors and better calipers even more. When they decided to
put 20" wheels as an option, better brakes were a necessity.
I've been driving, and buying new cars and trucks since 73. I never had
a warped rotor, period, until my 1988 S10 Blazer got them at about 12K.
The dealer turned them, and they were ok, until about 30K, when it came
back, right after I had to replace both front tires after running over a
huge pile of screws in the street. This time, I had to have rotors and
the dealer replaced them under warranty. No more problems.
My next vehicle, a 93 Grand Cherokee, warped the fronts by 6K, and had
to have new rotors at 15K. They were so bad turning wasn't an option.
Mopar gave me those, but refused to go for another pair about a year
later when they were even worse than the first ones. I bought some
hugely expensive aftermarket ones, and they were fine until I got rid of
it in 99, when I bought a new GC, and it warped them by 7K, and needed
new ones, that DC did do under warranty, at 14K. They were as bad as the
first ones, but aftermarkets weren't so $$, so I went with them, and
solved the problem.
The seats in the 99 killed my back, so I traded it on a 2000 GMC Sierra,
and warped both front and rears within 6 months. The rears never warped
again, but the fronts were turned twice and replaced under warranty.
They warped really suddenly and really severely one morning during a
rainstorm. I went and bought some cheap aftermarkets, and the problem
was solved. Not to say the brakes, the ABS on the rears ever worked
right, a small bump made the whole system freak out, and it's amazing
that the govt hasn't made them recall them and fix it.
When the Sierra was wrecked, I got my present 2003 Ram QC 4X$, and at
about 7K, the shakes and pulling started again. The dealer turned the
rotors, and they were ok until 24 K, when they warped again. They turned
them again, and they just were legal(I saw the reading). I will need
front pads next spring, and rotors too. I will try powerslots or some
other decent aftermarket rotors before wasting my money on
factory junk ones. When the rotors are straight, my truck stops
amazingly fast, and straight..
Side by side, the difference in rotors, even some of the crappiest
aftermarket ones are noticeably heavier than the stock ones, and appear
to be machined a lot better too. The difference between the stock Sierra
rotors and the cheap aftermarkets was so obvious, just by looking at
them side by side, it was clear the 25 buck each aftermarkets blew away
the factory ones. They were much heavier too.
Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.