Crossover tires vs. Passenger Tires

[azjake]

Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
Originally Posted By: azjake
There are passenger tires whose designation begins with P and Light Truck tires that begin with LT. LT tires have stiffer sidewalls and support a heavier load. I'm betting the CR-V came with P, passenger tires.


The CR-V came with neither. You're talking about a P-metric tire, whose size starts with a P (such as P225/65R17). Not all passenger all-season tires are true P-metric tires. The CR-V came with Euro-metric tires, and there is no preceding P in the size (such as 225/65R17--without the P at the beginning).

This is where the load index differs. Euro-metric tires generally have slightly higher load indices than their respective P-metric sizes. That holds true here. The CR-V came with 225/65R17 tires, with a 102 load index. The P225/65R17 has a 100 load index.


Interesting and I stand corrected. 100 load is 1764lbs per tire and 102 is 1874lbs.

 

[Hokiefyd]

Originally Posted By: CapriRacer
P metric, Euro metric, and .... uh ..... Japanese metric


What is the difference in Euro-metric and Japanese-metric? Are the load indices and rated inflation pressures the same?

 

[Ken2]

Would a tire (correctly) designed for the crossover or SUV market have stiffer sidewalls to better handle these taller vehicles?

 

[CapriRacer]

Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
Originally Posted By: CapriRacer
P metric, Euro metric, and .... uh ..... Japanese metric


What is the difference in Euro-metric and Japanese-metric? Are the load indices and rated inflation pressures the same?


It's complicated and better illustrated in a graphical format - which I do here:

http://www.barrystiretech.com/loadtables.html

From the point of view of tire design - there is no difference at all.

 

[CapriRacer]

Originally Posted By: Ken2
Would a tire (correctly) designed for the crossover or SUV market have stiffer sidewalls to better handle these taller vehicles?


No. It would be a matter of how soft a ride or responsive a handling performance is desired. This is the trade-off and it would be the same regardless of the vehicle type.

What I should mention at this point is that there is very little commonality between tire sizes for Crossover and SUV's and, oh, let's call everything else a sedan.

This is similar to the days when some mid-sized sedans and small pickups used the same tire size - and they used exactly the same tire. Soft ride and crisp handling are relative terms.

 

[leeharvey418]

Originally Posted By: CapriRacer
What I should mention at this point is that there is very little commonality between tire sizes for Crossover and SUV's and, oh, let's call everything else a sedan.


Three or four years ago I would have agreed with you completely, but recently more OEMs have been rolling out passenger cars with tire service descriptions that are suitable for use on vehicles like the CRV or Equinox. Off the top of my head, I know that the Dodge Challenger SRT-8 front tires are an ideal plus fitment for my RAV4. Granted, a lot of the performance tire options aren't going to give the ride/handling/wear tradeoffs that the average crossover owner wants, but for the guy who wants to put the effort into suspension upgrades, he can get a sticky summer tire in the right rolling diameter and load rating for his vehicle.