BitBucket

The thing you must look out for is the offet of the "Stout" vs the "Dual" axels. If you wish to put on duals, then the inner rim is reversed, and sits well into the axel. On the "Stout" the rim could hit the frame, the shock, or even the brake drum/cable. Single-tire and dual-tire hubs are purpose-designed so that the center of tire contact is approximately under the center of bearing surfaces. Two-tires-and-reversed-rims moves that center a bit (as motor home folks discover to their dismay when bearings fail). So, while in the junk - uh recycle - yard, you rolls up & mounts a beefy single, mark the center of the patch that would touch the ground. Then you rolls up some duals and mount them, compare. If the *centerlines* are the same, and the inner tire won't rub against anything (allow for sidewall flex and consider mud buildup and room for chains if you're going in snow) then you would be good to go. Of course, CA is a bit far to go to test out an axel for you. A shallow rim with offset-inserts (as messed with by off-roaders) allows you to get the correct center-to-center location for any axel/tire combination. I've seen THREE tires per side. Hard on the rubber when turning on pavement. But they did get the center-to-center correct (brakes were Corvette, which mount next to the differential). When considering the opposite (going from two to one tire in the rear), one of the existing dual rims cannot be used either "inny" or "outy", because either way it will greatly affect the center-to-center measurement (purpose-built rims, you see). Also, using just one tire means it has to carry the load of two, so must be rated accordingly. Usually, two LT duals will be less expensive than on HT single (not to mention the price of a new HD rim). The final consideration would be reading the laws of your state which dictate how many tires are *required* for your axel weight on the roads and bridges you drive. Probably not a consideration with your particular vehicle, but YMMV.

Because I'm in the market for a Winnebago or Itasca (321RB or 320RB), which by definition is a V6, I asked my mechanic what repairs he had to do with the 3.0L engine. Now, just to give you his credentials, this man repairs everything from electric cars to diesel dumps and busses, and they get repaired correctly the first time. My credentials are that I used to build *winning* race cars. Mechanic builds *winning* drag tractors. He and I have built some rather strong vehicles these past years. So I was a bit surprised to learn that the V6 head gasket is not something to be concerned about (provided you don't over-heat your engine, which means keeping the cooling system working well). Instead, he cautioned me that what he fixed the most (over a dozen of the 3.0L v6 engines) was valve seats destroyed by valves pressing too hard on the head because the driver continually lugged the engine. Toyota's replacement parts (seats, valves, guides, keepers etc) are better than original, but my mechanic shakes his head & says "It's a nasty job David, costs about $2,500 & I hate doing it. It's not a simple job." So today I challenged him "I bet not one of those engines were in front of an auto, they all were on 5-speed manual trans." He pondered, said "Could be. I don't recall any automatics, now that you mention it. Mostly 4Runners pulling large trailers..." That auto's ECT button, for uphill and in surging traffic, looks better and better to me. As for the engine "going the distance", I've come across Toyota-chassis Winnebagos & Itascas with odometers at 107k, 120k, and 137k. Suckers are still running. Recognize that trying to drive from Albequerque to Flagstaff at 75 uphill against a wind with 6.5k lbs total load (6k being max which doesn't leave much for gear, food, water, waste, and of course mere people), a quart low of old oil, a cup low on antifreeze, the A/C pumping on "high", the outside temp 105deg, and the octane at 85 (let's hear it for corn) well you can probably count on the engine getting a little bent out of shape and letting you know about it.