Club 80-90 Forums

The merc one also gives similar results, managed to get it to work.

I think an average of the long winded one and the divide by 100 one is a good starting point, then use the one Aidan suggested as max inflation for a fully loaded trip and things are just about covered.

I should imagine measuring corner weights would be the next step.

I also found another one that takes camber angles into consideration, you think the Merc version is long winded!

Simon Baxter wrote:The merc one also gives similar results, managed to get it to work.

I think an average of the long winded one and the divide by 100 one is a good starting point, then use the one Aidan suggested as max inflation for a fully loaded trip and things are just about covered.

I should imagine measuring corner weights would be the next step.

I also found another one that takes camber angles into consideration, you think the Merc version is long winded!

All this is assuming that the inflation equipment you use is accurate ....... Its a black art! 1.5bar up front and 3.0 in the back its close enough!

To be sure.
So it is..

generally went on what looks about right when I put 2.5 bar in the front and 3 in the back tyres still looked very soft (running bfg's 215 75 on 15 Mefros) but with 3 in the front and 3.5 in the rear they look much better and have had no problems. The formulas don't include altitude when i was driving over the alps aired down slightly due to the thinner air

I think it goes unsaid that things like this are set at the only constant we have, sea level.
If you can be arsed, I seem to remeber atmospheric pressure froms 1mb per every 8m you gain in altitude.

Thats meant to say drops 1mb for every 8m you gain in altitude.

Simon Baxter wrote:Thats meant to say drops 1mb for every 8m you gain in altitude.

Clsoe enough for cash. Not linear anddepends on weather though so there is still some atmospheric pressure at 8,800m (310-360mb). So if you're checking tyre pressures at the top of Everest........