Just Ordered 19.5" Rickson Wheel Set

[South Dakota]

That is a great looking combination! How does it ride/handle compared to stock wheels/tires.

 

[DPeltonen]

Let me see if I can answer the three previous replies. .



The truck does ride stiffer. Seems that I feel pretty much all the irregularities on the road. Can't really tell regarding handling, don't push the envelope on cornering too often. I would have to say with a 2"-3" wider track, the cornering may be improved. The tires are not significantly noisier than the stock Michelins. I can hear a vary faint sing to them at around 40 mph but the ambient noise exceeds that when you go faster. As far as driving off road, I don't know yet, only been on for a few days and have not visited any off road sites yet. I will add flares eventually, but I think the MOPAR flares may not cover the tires. I want something that looks stock, not looking to stick out of a crowd. Any ideas?

 

[LesStallings]

"The old wheels weighed in at 75 lbs. The new ones are a hefty 125 lbs each. "



I would be worried a bit about the brakes and bearings. A 66% increase in weight, a one inch offset further out, and a 3" increase in diameter is significant. Loading increases by a square of the radius increase. Loading increases obviously with the weight. Leverage on the assembly increases due to sticking out another inch.



Don't get me wrong. I absolutely love the wheels!! They really look good and I'm sure much stronger than stock. Just be careful with braking, keep your bearings well lubed (hard to do with the stock setup), and watch out for death wobble.



There is always something to consider when changing from stock configurations. But the really look good!!!

 

[DPeltonen]

"The old wheels weighed in at 75 lbs. The new ones are a hefty 125 lbs each. "



I would be worried a bit about the brakes and bearings. A 66% increase in weight, a one inch offset further out, and a 3" increase in diameter is significant. Loading increases by a square of the radius increase. Loading increases obviously with the weight. Leverage on the assembly increases due to sticking out another inch.



Don't get me wrong. I absolutely love the wheels!! They really look good and I'm sure much stronger than stock. Just be careful with braking, keep your bearings well lubed (hard to do with the stock setup), and watch out for death wobble.



There is always something to consider when changing from stock configurations. But the really look good!!!

Those are excellent points to consider before you make a change. I did do some math and gave this change a great deal of consideration. I had a Phd who works for me help out with the calculations based on current configurations of these components on the 3500 series. As far as the brakes go, I am not worried about that at all. These trucks will run almost 3000 lbs heavier than my stock truck when in a DRW 3500 configuration with the same brakes. The actual weight increase is just under 3% for the vehicle (please don't ask me to show the differential math regarding the mass/energy of the spinning tires and the weight of the vehicle ). As far as the bearings go, I am confident in the strength of the current units due to the fact that CD allows and approves of the installation of plows for these vehicles that can easily add more than 1500 lbs to the front axle for several months out of the year. Combine that with extensive 4WD activity and you have a tremendous strain on those bearings. I realize I am attempting to justify a modification that was never intended for the vehicle, but what else can I do..... I already bought the things!!! Besides they do look good. :-laf I suppose I could have mounted the steel wheels, but they are even heavier (an extra 31 lbs each) even though the offset is almost perfect.



When I decided to look for an enhanced wheel tire package, I was pretty much between a rock and a hard place. With my 5th wheel, I was at the limit for rear axle weight (wheels and tires), and needed to enhance my safety margin. I could have gone to a larger (285/70-17) tire, but still had the lower rating on the wheel (3500). Plus there is the towing stability issue, the Hankooks are very stiff in the sidewall, whereas the larger 17's are still an E rated tire with a much weaker/softer sidewall. Rather that push the limits all the way around, I chose these wheels and will have to accept the risk of premature wear on my bearing and brake components (steering, suspension etc. ). Like you said, I need to make sure I pay attention to my preventative maintenance. Since I prefer to do my own, I'll never have to worry about the dealer missing an item that is showing premature wear.

 

[LesStallings]

You sound like you are the kind of person that will make this work easily.



I'm envious! I'd love 19. 5's...

 

[MAshley]

I just noticed on Ricksons web site that the DRW setup is really low on the rim ratings, 3500 lbs max on steel rims, but on the SRW you can get 4500- 5000 lbs What gives? I know in the rear I have 4 tires-rims but what about the front, 3500 isn't much of an improvment.



So if I see it right,

SRW front 10,000 and 10,000 rear 20K total Steel

SRW front 9,000 and 9,000 rear 18K total Aluminum



DRW front 7,000 and 14,000 rear 21K total Steel

DRW front 6,000 and 12,000 rear 18K total Aluminum



Is there really an improvment on the DRW truck Especially with the front?



52% front 48% rear distribution my truck 3500 DRW tips the scales at 9000 lbs typical weight.

4680 front and 4320 rear.



After upgrades to 19. 5 I get

2320 left on the front not much but to compare the single rear truck gets 5320 LBS. up front

9680 left on the Rear WOW nice improvment.





I don't know what my truck would weigh if I had a big camper on the back. but the rims don't seem to really have an advantage for the front tires.



Am I wrong?

Am I missing something?

Could I really overload the front, IE if I pulled a goosneck, loaded a camper would the front gain that much weight? I know the back would be over kill but is there a real improvment for the front?



Thanks

 

[LesStallings]

My loaded gooseneck puts a full 2,000#-2,500# right over the rear axle. It compresses the rear springs, with the overloads touching the main springs and I notice a change in the headlamp alignment. The truck sits level or with the rear slightly raised, depending on load. The front is not lowered much at all, so I really don't think there is a lot of additional load on the front. With a camper, you would be putting a decent amount of additional load on the front. Same with a snow plow.



Assuming the front aluminum wheels have the same load rating or better than stock, I would like to keep the un-sprung weight as low as possible. I'm not 4 wheel drive and don't go off road, so over the road is my only concern. I'm not going to overload the stock wheels, so I would not be overloading aftermarket wheels either.



Offsetting the heavier 19. 5s would be my desire, along with the ability to run 19. 5 tires.

 

[DPeltonen]

As with any of these truck pulling a big load, there does not seem to be any significant increase in primary load on the front axle. Most 5th wheel and goose necks are directly over the rear axle. The major load on the front is from weight transfer on stops. With your (trailer) brakes set up properly, that should not be significant. My reasoning (excuse to buy great looking wheels) is for rear axle capacity. When I weighed my rig with the 5th wheel attached, the front axle weighed the same as empty. The rear, however, showed a 3000 lb increase. Any junk in the forward storage, or water in the tank would have easily put me over the safety edge.



As far as the DRW's are concerned, it's all about the rear axle, that's where all the muscle is. Based on how they are set up, the front axle is almost a gimme (almost... ... . I never take anything for granted).