Jump to content

BJP Wheels


missingsid

Recommended Posts

This months Totall Off Road is carrying an advert for BJP Wheels.

Link

They look very familiar!

post-1119-1204496093_thumb.jpg

What does the panel think?

Are these Kosher or copies?

I am not supporting or critisising, just supprised.

If the Mods don't agree with this post please remove it!

Marc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few years ago at the south west shoot out I was pitting next to a chap with a TMC 100" special, he had made his own wheels the looked very similar to M5's as he owned a specialist steel fabrication company so why not.

It could be the same chap

if the high build quality of his racer was anything to go by I would imagine the wheels will be a good standard.

I'm not sure if its the same chap so dont' quote me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

but the Mach 5s arent E marked anyway are they? so you cant use them on the road... whereas these are pending TUV approval which would mean you can... therefore regardless of copy or not, they would be the 'better' product :huh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Matt lee makes the Mach 5 exclusively for D4x4. These are not Mach 5's. They're a shameless copy.

Not a subsidiary of Scrapiron Racing then!

Of course they now sell ZU alloys in the same style which are a tad cheaper and TUV rated.

Fortunately the ZU's can be sourced from alternative suppliers.

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not a subsidiary of Scrapiron Racing then!

Of course they now sell ZU alloys in the same style which are a tad cheaper and TUV rated.

Fortunately the ZU's can be sourced from alternative suppliers.

John

Zu rims are cast alloy, Mach 5's and the "copies" in this thread are fabricated steel. On the subject tho, nothing wrong with copies, its what pushes people to lower prices, better production and actually helps us lot as the end user/consumer - also being TUV approved/pending, they are almost certainly better, shame they are only in 15" tho.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had a look at these and they looked better than the mach 5s, the steel was thicker, the bead is more open so they wont rust inside the rolled bead and the welds looked good.

I wonder if they will be as prone to cracking as the mach 5s (wheres the can of worms?)

I am just waiting for them to start making the 16" ones so I can order a set and find out how long they last!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK so there are interesting comments here.

I guess that if you are the second person to make something then you get to add improvements.

This aspect is one of the reasons that the first manufacturer dislikes copies, not only does the first person pay for the design he also pays for the feild trials. All the second manufaturer has to do is listen to the comments and make the changes!

The alternative is to spend Millions on secret testing prior to launch which of course would kill the small market design work that is able to be designed via Forums like this.

Sorry I'm not trying to start up the whole Scrapiron thing.

Marc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i dont really think that's fair comment as such. yes the other companies can make the improvements, but why cant Matt Lee make the same improvements to his own product? If it cracks, someone makes a stronger version, why isnt he also making a stronger version?? No excuse as far as I see it other than keeping margins as low as possible and people putting stock in a brand name.

I also think there is no excuse for the Mach 5s to have not been made well enough to pass E marking or TUV accreditation when all the others seemingly do. :(

I would call it shooting oneself in the foot personally

At least the consumer is no longer losing out on a good product, even if it comes by another name.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i dont really think that's fair comment as such. yes the other companies can make the improvements, but why cant Matt Lee make the same improvements to his own product? If it cracks, someone makes a stronger version, why isnt he also making a stronger version?? No excuse as far as I see it other than keeping margins as low as possible and people putting stock in a brand name.

I also think there is no excuse for the Mach 5s to have not been made well enough to pass E marking or TUV accreditation when all the others seemingly do. :(

I would call it shooting oneself in the foot personally

At least the consumer is no longer losing out on a good product, even if it comes by another name.

Early Mach 5's did have cracking issues - mine included. The wheels were improved and stenghtened a few years ago. Mine were replaced FOC - no quibbles.

Lee

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mach 5's were designed as an off road wheel, where there is no need for an E or TUV mark. If the buyer decides to use them on the road it's their own problem.

that's as maybe... but i would ask, if a wheel is SEEMINGLY not strong and well made enough to warrant 'E' or TUV for road use, then how can it be trusted to be put through the abuse of off road use.

at no point am i saying that it isnt strong, that it isnt suitable, but i AM saying that BJP etc are filling the gap that Mach 5s need not have left themselves. I find it puzzling, that's all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mach 5's were designed as an off road wheel, where there is no need for an E or TUV mark. If the buyer decides to use them on the road it's their own problem.

Thankfully not many manufacturers take that approach as it is short sighted, irresponsible, and potentially very dangerous, not to mention leaves any such business in a place where they could be liable for millions of pounds of damage and compensation should the worst happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just because a product is TUV approved, does not make it a "better" product for a given job,

Just means a sample of that product has passed a series of tests !!, However i do think Matt Lee should have submitted his wheels / design for approval, even for his own sake, if the worse should happen

In the past , I have bent, buckled, and destroyed, standard steel & Disco steels, , bent Wolf & Modular rims etc

Since using M5's, for the last couple of years had no problems

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tim,

yes mate i can fully appreciate what you're saying there about the TUV etc not making a product 'better' necessarily,

but im taking my stance from the point of view of joe public. I know myself when I see something TUV approved beit suspension components, wheels, spacers etc, it looks a whole lot more attractive to me than without, if only because we live in a day and age where we pay through the nose for insurance, and then should the worst happen, the insurance do their damnedest to wriggle out of a payout and land us in the proverbial

thus further agreeing with your second comment re: why leave yourself open

Smo, well put mate!

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We use cookies to ensure you get the best experience. By using our website you agree to our Cookie Policy