Steering wheel shake at 50-55 not wheel balancing problem.

[GeorgeYu27]

Going to take it back to see if they can balance it again. Wheel manufacturers saying need a lot of weight to balance. We will see.

 

[Michael Gain]

What size spacer are you using? The spacer is my issue. It's small enough not to have an extended hub ring. So it takes 5mm off of the hub. I found that this is just short enough to fall into the beveled region of the rim (77ish mm), and not into the 72.56mm bore. Basically creates a non-hub-centric condition.

Guidance from another forum suggested slowly tightening the lugs while rotating the wheel. I'm going to try this next weekend when I have time:
1) tighten all lug nuts finger tight.
2) utilizing the normal, star, tightening pattern, tighten the top bolt a 1/4 turn; rotate the wheel until its opposite nut is on top, tighten a 1/4 turn; continue in a star pattern, rotating the wheel until the opposite nut is on top and tightening the bolt.

If that doesn't work, I'll get smaller spacers. I think 2.5mm will still clear the calipers and allow the wheel's bore to properly seat on the hub.

Hope that helps. I also thought about modifying a set of plastic, hub-centric rings to take up the space in the beveled area of the rim.

Hopefully, that helps you think through trouble shooting a little more.

 

[BeemerNut]

Going to take it back to see if they can balance it again. Wheel manufacturers saying need a lot of weight to balance. We will see.

Hope the tyre shop has the proper cones allowing the rims to spin concentric and true.
With the adjustable bolt pattern "spider" adapter tyre shops use for oddball bolt circles aka 5 x 165 mm LR D1's example should their cone setup not work with the big concentric bores of the rim, you'll end up with a perfectly balanced wheel being mounted eccentric on their balancing machine. Them spider adapter linkages are sloppy period.
A wheel requiring a lot of weighs to balance, shame on that shop if they didn't rotate the tyre on rim cancelling out or reducing the imbalance problem first before adding weights.
Michelin's which I run (tight street tread considered a M & S) street only use have always required very little weigh additions to balance. These tyres are almost perfectly balanced, alloy rims the same. Depending on the tyre manufacture several other brands require more weights to balance. Better quality control by Michelin? Sidewalls will crack and rot before the treads become worn out is my problem.
.....~~=o&o>.......

 

[BeemerNut]

Michael Gain,
the "Guidance from another forum suggested" is a hit and miss wet dream with mostly a miss guessing game with parallel body lug nuts vs cone nuts. Any non repeatable mounting like that is asking for vibration problems like others had encountered with 30 mm Terrafirma wheel spacers. I found a solution for my Terrafirma spacers.
Plastic hub centric spacers are garbage, they usually fit too loose to begin with, distort being too soft not solid like a metal ring made of aluminum or steel. They were a joke on the BMW's that had them. Anti seize compound a must at the rim centric contact and rim face to hub areas if playing submarine as well general dry street use. Steel vs aluminum dissimilar metal corrosion comes to mind, aka rust welded rim removal problems later.
A thin flat spacer, why bother plus they do not allow hub centric to the rim.
"IF", you must run the thin flat spacer now causing rim's chamfer floating and too far away from the hub centric lip mentioned.
Machine steel rings the ID a slide fit over the hub centric lip, length the thickness of the thin spacer plus an additional 0.375" to 0.500" X 0.125" or thicker wall thickness for a hub centric lip. Bore out the alloy rim's hub centric bore matching the machined ring's OD.
Light press fit the rings into the thin spacers, fusion Tig weld the back side together, no weld buildup. The rim's factory chamfer is a lot larger in OD than the enlarged 0.250" OD bore increase of the machined steel concentric rings. Concentric rings for alignment with plus the clamping force of lug nuts handling the vehicle's weight and cornering loads.
Never understood why LR went from 165 mm bolt circle to 120 mm, added wider rims, tyres plus heavier vehicles vs LR D1's lower stressed by larger bolt circle wheel stud pattern? Another form before function thing.
You have enough lug nut threads to be safe when adding thin spacers or did you replace them with longer studs?......~~=o&o>......

 

[GeorgeYu27]

So new wrench, been cooler in Atlanta last few days. When cooler. Shaking improves dramatically. Seems like it gets worse with heat.

Tire ship I went to has tried to balance with cones and fingers.

 

[BeemerNut]

So new wrench, been cooler in Atlanta last few days. When cooler. Shaking improves dramatically. Seems like it gets worse with heat.

Tire ship I went to has tried to balance with cones and fingers.

Had the large tyre shop in my area tell me my rims were bad using their "spider" or as you mentioned "fingers". Whole wheel set all four jumping around as if on an eccentric.
Solved ALL balancing problems by machining out a 3/8" thick steel disc, ID bore a slide fit on their machine, OD snug fit into the rim's concentric centering area.
Screwed together to the steel disc a 3/16" thickness aluminum disc of 9" diameter allowing seating of the rim against the balancing machines rear cone. Rims spinning dead true repeatable 100% of the time, perfect balance jobs. Also made an aluminum disc of 4.446" diameter (same as the 3/8" steel centering disc), glued on 1/8" thick hard rubber material to protect the rim's finish before the big nut they use securing the rim on their rmachine.
I first mount my tyres and check radial balance on the motorcycle wheel balancer I made to first find the rim's light spot then place the tyre's heavy spot together cancelling out the radial imbalance before having them spun balanced.
On another note by 4-5,000 miles the tyres flexed having their natural flexing established plus now worn perfectly round. At that mileage time radial rebalancing on the static motorcycle balancer correcting with weight placed dead nuts between both rim beads. No axial imbalance created which is your left to right steering wheel shimmy. Usually only a 1/10th to 1/4 ounce minor correction needed. Turbine smooth floating down the highway results.
BTW having the tyre shop placing all their weights (stick on) inboard behind the rim's spokes never see outboard weights as well damaging the rim's factory paint.
Mounted tyres, driven 10 to 15 miles, removing the wheels while tyres are still warm with no flat spots vs sitting overnight with flat spots before balancing. It's all in the details.

Your "When cooler. Shaking improves dramatically", has me thinking and questing the quality of tyres your running? Safety comes to mind like General's 9.50 x 16.5 Americasteel tyres with known tread delamination problems years ago. A 4" diameter by 1 3/4" tall blister failures at 75 mph, three out of four of General's tyres failing. Changed brands, 4th wheel as a spare only.
Michelin's not cheap but also require the least amount of weights to balance I have found plus never had a Michelin requiring a lot of weights to balance. No relation gain between me and Michelin tyres. Other tyre brands I have seen 5 to 8 plus ounces to balance. Most tyre shops will not bead break and rotate new tyres better canceling out rim to tyre imbalance problems. The ****** calling the 95 D1 a truck with more expensive balance job fees vs a standard car wheel balance. Sorry end of novel again but needed to explain myself.....~~=o&o>......

 

[fozzie]

BeemerNut We have a bonnet you have a hood , we have a boot you have a trunk, as the french say "vive la difference " , have you ever considered putting a pratt and whit into the ford ? , bet that would make the highway patrol sit up and take notice . If my memory is correct they fitted a p&w into early sherman tanks until someone realised that aviation gas burns very quick !!!! as lots of poor guys found out during ww2 . Fozzie

 

[BeemerNut]

fozzie;

That would be the GAA 1100 cu/in DOHC engine Ford built trying to get the government contract which they did not get as a new airplane engine. Round engines won out.
Second choice selling them for the Sherman M4 tanks as power.
I recall a friend of dad that had two tanks, he used them to crash through and demo old houses clearing the land quick as he can. One engine kicked a couple rods, the other tank parked in his front yard for several years, that engine still ran. Got to be around it when it was fired up,as a kid, never forgot that moment.
Sherman's used the nine cylinder Wright 975 cu/in radials not P & W engines, also recall something like app 50K of them powered the tanks. Yes 50K tanks, we the USA out produced the enemy.
Later the GAF of 1100 cu/in in 8 cylinder I recall powering the Pershing tanks back in 1944 a come lately addition.

Sikorsky's H-5 hilocopter. Howard DGA -11,Beechcraft Staggerwing and Beechcraft Model 18, Lockheed Electra 10 all time favorite planes to have flown in plus certified working on P & W 985 engines powering these planes. Almost forgot the 985 powered Waco a first love plane vs the PT 17 Stearman
In the early 70's worked in an engine shop rebuilding 1830's and 2800 P & W engines before getting into 501 D13 Allison turboprop engine rebuilding which powered C130 aircraft, another history aircraft like the C47 DC3 in my book.
Then came the 4360 a troubled child of an engine, too complicated with issues and i'm a P & W person but must give the Wright 3350 top honors after it was finally perfected. Jet age took over, so sad.
Dad a German citizen was certified as Lead Mechanic on P38's and P51's (USAAC), he only had 1710 Allisons in India and China. RR Merlin powered aircraft in Europe as the German's were "playing hard ball for keeps". Tuning the 1710 beyond factory specs squeezing every bit of performance out of that engine was dad's motorcycle racing passion coming out.
Planes under his control flew faster than others in the same outfit. Hot Rodder all his life looking for that last missing horsepower. Maybe explains why i'm a gear head with an A & P license. Takes a gear head to own, keep, improve plus cherish owning a Land Rover proving they will and can perform properly as well better than the day produced. Talking the push rod era engines before LR received the rights to produce the 60's era (Buick Olds engine) becoming the 3.5 then 3.9 to a 4.6 now in the D1. No LS Chevy butcher job. Still run a distributor able to alter the timing curve. Big follower of the Olds 215 engine. The D1 doesn't have 29 cup holders, not dealing with expensive $5-$9,000 (USD) 5.0 litre keep it alive with faulty expensive timing chain BS repair bills. New is not always better. ......~~=o&o>.......

 

[avslash]

I want BeemerNut to balance my tires, rotors and hubs now.

Please tell me where to ship them.

 

[Michael Gain]

+1