15" Wheels on Lots of New VW Cars in Showroom

[SwampSurvivor]

Originally Posted By: barryh
I'm glad VW have seen sense.

The fad for ultra low profile tyres had gone much too far. I know the manufacturers were supposedly pandering to buyers tastes but it was as if the only people buying new cars were 14 year olds who couldn't see past the "look".

Having owned my last car for 21 years I had something of a time warp experience when moving to a new one. Sure they handle better but the ride of most new cars is truly appalling. And the thing is today's buyers don't seem to realise how bad the ride is because they have never experienced a car that rides well. I ended up with a Blue Efficiency model with relatively skinny 195/60 R16's. It's still firm but rides better than the models with lower profile tyres.


Another thing , in addition to the less prone to damage and better ride, is that they are cheap to buy! One can get a good set of Michelins for $400 in 195/60R15 or a cheaper set for under $200. It's so cheap to buy tires that you don't have to run them to the wear bars!

 

[UG_Passat]

Originally Posted By: CR94
13" wheels worked just fine on earlier Jettas and Golfs.


13" wheels isn't going to clear the 11.3" rotors & its caliper up front.

 

[Hokiefyd]

My Ridgeline needlessly has 18" wheels. I've gone back and forth about putting 17s on it, but would really prefer 16s (but 16s won't fit over the brakes).

My 2011 Camry had 215/60R16 tires, and I thought they were about perfect for that type and size of car. Good sidewall for cushion, but still agile enough to support the car in corners. I wouldn't have wanted 17s on it, and I also had no desire to swap them for 15s.

 

[zzyzzx]

Originally Posted By: CR94
13" wheels worked just fine on earlier Jettas and Golfs.


+1 for the above comment.

 

[SeaJay]

And to think, a few decades ago 14 inch rims were standard on many full sized cars of two tons or better. 13 inchers on the econo-boxes.

 

[Bgallagher]

Originally Posted By: JC1
Originally Posted By: Bgallagher
Cutting cost considering the millions and millions they are paying in lawsuits to the EPA.


Yes and next year they might upgrade those rims to 14 inches. Lol



+1 hahaha

 

[Quattro Pete]

Nothing wrong with smaller rims on a car that is supposed to be functional and not for show.

The huge rims with ultra low profile tires offered on some of the family grocery-getters these days are really getting out of hand, IMO. They typically don't match the performance of the car, are easier to damage, and more expensive to replace, and actually hurt performance and fuel economy.

 

[Traction]

I will never will forget how fn fast my 77 VW Rabbit was auto crossing, and on the street with 175/70-13 Yokohama A001R tires with a tread wear rating of 50. That car still would still be fast with good 13 inch tires, compared to newer cars with 17's or bigger.

 

[sciphi]

Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Nothing wrong with smaller rims on a car that is supposed to be functional and not for show.

The huge rims with ultra low profile tires offered on some of the family grocery-getters these days are really getting out of hand, IMO. They typically don't match the performance of the car, are easier to damage, and more expensive to replace, and actually hurt performance and fuel economy.



The looks, the looks! Can't have a dinky little 15" wheel on the ginormous brick of car today! Folks would think it was the cheap version, and we can't have that! 18's at a minimum, or dubs even better!

/snark.

I have a love/hate relationship with the 17" wheels on both cars. They look pretty good without looking too big, but tires are indeed $$$. $500 retail for a decent set. At least the 55-series sidewalls on the Cruze help it handle much better than any fuel-sipper has any right to.

 

[andyd]

I find this encouraging. I'm just commuting , not driving the Nurnburg Ring.I drive 200 miles a day in SE Mass. The number of car tire carcasses littering the roadside has gone sky high in recent yrs. When cars ran on 75 aspect tires. you never saw them. 800 14 was the stock tire size on full sized Fords in the early 60s.

 

[Jetronic]

17" is the smallest size that fits over my 13" front brakes. So that's what I got.

 

[firemachine69]

Originally Posted By: stephen9666
Were these mostly low-end Jettas?

The current U.S. Jetta is a decontented model aimed at a low price-point. They move lots of the base S models. I just checked the VW website and the Jetta S comes with15" wheels as standard equipment.

EDIT- looks like low-end Golfs also have 15" wheels.

That's the bummer about my Cruze Eco. I don't like 17" wheels. I wish it came with the 16" aluminum wheels found on lower trims. More tire options and better prices for the 16" size.



I specifically didn't want the 18" wheel option on my Outlander, for lack of poor tire choice, and cost to replace compared to the 16".

 

[surfstar]

Originally Posted By: AirgunSavant
Am I the only one seeing the improved 0 to 60 time??????


Originally Posted By: Silverado12
Originally Posted By: Nebroch
Maybe VW engineers have seen this?

I would have never guessed there would be a 2 mpg difference. My Mustang has 19" tires and while they look and handle good, the ride is rough.

http://www.caranddriver.com/features/effects-of-upsized-wheels-and-tires-tested
Nope. I see it too.

Also the 'handling' advantage is negligible for 99.9% of daily driving.

Big wheels are for show.

I'm very happy to have efficient, economical 15s on my Sportwagen.

16s would have been a good compromise, but they need to separate out the 'base' S model from the others. So spend more and get fancy looking 17-18" wheels. Or go "cheap" and get 15s.

My 15s get great MPG. I usually have stuff in my wagon, so the handling disadvantage would be rarely ever verified. I'll be quite happy when it comes time to price out new tires, also.

 

[Mr Nice]

15 inch wheels will absorb lots of road imperfections and slim risk of damaging wheel.

Zero need for 17 or 18 inch wheels on a econobox.

 

[slacktide_bitog]

There is nothing wrong with this

Small cars like the Mirage and Smart only need 12-13 inch wheels, then 14-15 in cars like the Civic and Corolla, and 15-16 in midsize cars like the Camry and Accord.

 

[Mr Nice]

19 inch factory wheels look great on 2016 Accord Sport.
Zero need for gigantic wheels on an Accord.

19 inch wheels on supercharged AMG Benz is appropriate.

 

[Jetronic]

19" wheels are gigantic, imo...

 

[DoubleWasp]

Originally Posted By: Jetronic
17" is the smallest size that fits over my 13" front brakes. So that's what I got.



That's the rub, right there. You're not going to get good-sized brakes under a 15" wheel.

 

[pezzy669]

I had a '15 Jetta S with the 15" wheels wrapped with Continental ProContact TX tires. The ride was incredible and it was only during extreme cornering that the tires would flop over onto the sidewall.

I had ZERO issue with the 15" tires and when I looked at replacement cost I was pleasantly surprised. You could easily get good brand name (Continental, Goodyear, etc.) tires for $50-65/each. ~1/2 what it would cost for a 17 or 18" tire.

Fortunately my newest ride ('09 C300) has a 17" setup and you can still get good brands (Hankook, Sumitomo, etc.) for ~$80/each. It did come with brand new Michelin Premier A/S ($161/each) so fortunately I won't have to worry about it until they dry rot (~5-6k year mileage).

Put me in the camp of 15" wheels not being a single issue unless you drive on a track every day.