Why not just run the TJ Rubicon Moab rims since they are the correct bolt pattern?

LEAD_NOT_FOLLOW wrote:

---

Why not just run the TJ Rubicon Moab rims since they are the correct bolt pattern?

---

I found a deal for the 17" rubicons (very cheap)

I like the rubicon style wheel they look great on xj's

alot of people have factory take off's in the 17" size
just looking for a deal...or something a little different.

thanks for the photo, sharp xj !

 

I love that wheel design.

Unless the 17" JK Moab's were almost just given to me I don't think it's cost effective. Here is why;

1) You'll have to run spacers to fit them. A good set of hub-centric spacers is going to run you minimal $150/pair. So you now have $300 just in spacers.

2) 17" rubber is a TON more expensive than 15" or 16". For the same size tire for a 17" rim vs. a 16" rim your looking at aprox $50/more a tire. So factor in 4, that's $200 more in tires for the exact same size as a 16" one.

Now these are just guesstimates, but to go from a 16" TJ Moab that will bolt right on to a 17" JK Moab your looking at ~$500 to just go with a 1" larger rim. Just does not seem cost effective to me when you can pickup a set of TJ 16" Moab's that will bolt on for ~$500 or less w/tires already on them.


Also Mamba Offroad makes a rim called the MR-1 that looks identical to the Moab's in a 16", 17", and 18" with the correct bolt pattern (5 on 4.5) in a few different finishes.

I like the 16" mamba... gosh I despise tire prices for the new lower profile tires these days. Its sick.  And I have yet to see a set of rubicon wheels go for cheap.

I also believe that in most cases, a a larger rim on a tire weighs more than a tire of the same size (OD and width) on a smaller wheel (obviously tire would be different per wheel diameter). I also read that 1 pound of unsprung weight is equivalent to 3 pounds of sprung weight.

-- Edited by ChevelleSSLS6 on Monday 12th of April 2010 01:51:35 AM