DG Rider
Member: Triple Clutch Club
Lifetime Member
What do you mean by "real data"?
Anytime you go to taller tires, you effectively raise the gearing and reduce the torque that can be put to the ground, and the 700 doesn't have a lot to give up. A lot of people run 27" and seem ok, but I don't think I'll ever go over the 26" I just installed.
Anytime you go to taller tires, you effectively raise the gearing and reduce the torque that can be put to the ground, and the 700 doesn't have a lot to give up. A lot of people run 27" and seem ok, but I don't think I'll ever go over the 26" I just installed.
Last edited:
Thanks, What i mean by real data is actual foot pounds of torque loss numbers. I use mine for all sorts of pulling and dragging. I'm looking for a bit of lift (clearance) and additional "grip" if that makes sense.
livefromthetree
It was a damn good ride. Seriously good.
Supporting Member
I dont have any real data, but other than the extra hop to get in the cab, I can honestly say I would not have known the difference between my factory tires and my 27s
DG Rider
Member: Triple Clutch Club
Lifetime Member
You're welcome. Someone posted some numbers from a formula in the last few days, but I can't seem to find it now. I think they found it on a Rzr forum, so maybe google it.
I've never seen actual torque figure for the 700, only HP (36 HP from the C.A.R.B. site). The few people who have had a 700 on a Dyno seem to want to keep it a secret for some reason.
B
I honestly think the weight and how aggressive the tires are is more of a difference than the size
I have 27 on mine. Wanted to go to 28's . But, after two season with mine. Decided I will be ok. You talking about pulling. I think a 26 with good bite would pull just as good as a 27. Maybe even better with lower gear ratio with shorter tires.
Backwoods
Ambassador of Crocs / Speaker of truth & facts /
Lifetime Member
Glock21user
" Nothing succeeds like excess "
Lifetime Member
Did you wind up going with 26’s or 27’s? I was stuck between 27’s and 28’s and decided to go with 27’s. I haven’t been able to tell of any noticeable power loss.
advertisement
R
This is the thread by BarRZR on RZRforums.net and is where I got my figures. I think the 700 is running 36hp? That is the number I used in the formula in the thread below.
Think of the tire the same way as a sprocket or a gear, the circumference of which will, obviously, travel further per revolution with a relatively bigger tire than a smaller. So, extending that analogy, by mounting a larger-diameter tire, you are effectively "raising" the gear-ratio. "The difference in travel can be calculated by applying the circumference formula: C=pi X D, where pi=3.1416 and D=diameter. Now, the loss in power with this new "gear-ratio" can be, to a first-order approximation, calculated by dividing the circumference of the smaller tire by the circumference of the larger tire, which will produce a decimal fraction. This decimal fraction multiplied by the gross power that you had before the tire-change will (again, to a first order) be a good approximation of how much power remains after the increase in tire diameter.
I found somewhere there was a formula for weight also but cannot find it again. I think I agree with the above statement that I am not going over a 26 on mine. I don't try to climb Everest but do haul 4 guys with and a deer hanging off the back rack through the bottoms in Louisiana so do need to keep my power up as much as possible. When I can afford it I will put new shocks on. I need those. I would love portals but that ain't gonna happen at those prices and I know a guy. It will even be a while before I can afford new shocks and tires much less portals.
Think of the tire the same way as a sprocket or a gear, the circumference of which will, obviously, travel further per revolution with a relatively bigger tire than a smaller. So, extending that analogy, by mounting a larger-diameter tire, you are effectively "raising" the gear-ratio. "The difference in travel can be calculated by applying the circumference formula: C=pi X D, where pi=3.1416 and D=diameter. Now, the loss in power with this new "gear-ratio" can be, to a first-order approximation, calculated by dividing the circumference of the smaller tire by the circumference of the larger tire, which will produce a decimal fraction. This decimal fraction multiplied by the gross power that you had before the tire-change will (again, to a first order) be a good approximation of how much power remains after the increase in tire diameter.
I found somewhere there was a formula for weight also but cannot find it again. I think I agree with the above statement that I am not going over a 26 on mine. I don't try to climb Everest but do haul 4 guys with and a deer hanging off the back rack through the bottoms in Louisiana so do need to keep my power up as much as possible. When I can afford it I will put new shocks on. I need those. I would love portals but that ain't gonna happen at those prices and I know a guy. It will even be a while before I can afford new shocks and tires much less portals.
Last edited:
Mudwisel
Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
A light 27 will lose no more torque than a heavy 25 or 26. I actually prefer the 27 inch when cruising. I may even go 28 if I decide to change tires but I like the bighorns right now
I don’t have 27s so can’t talk for them but I do have 28” tusk terrabites and definitely can tell a difference. Not 100 percent sure if it’s because of the difference in weight (they are 8 ply) or size most likely both. I love the extra ground clearance and look. If I were to do it again I would try and get a set of 27s but find an 8 ply try and the lightest tire option. Would not recommend 28s.
