I sometimes wonder how today's tires would have improved the handling of the MG's I used to own. But it is getting out of hand. I bought 4 snow tires and wheels for our Mazda3. On TireRack's recommendation I went for smaller and skinnier. Or so I thought! The OEM Goodyears spin out on wet roads, so I went from 17" 205/50s to 16" 205/55 and when putting them on noticed they looked wider. I measured the OEMs as having tread width of 7" and the new ones as 7 1/4"! I just got steel wheels and they said if I had TPMs the light would stay on all the time. Well, it doesn't come on at all! I am more confused than ever...
Large tire + wheel size is ridiculous
- Thread starter spiderbypass
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: Footpounds
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Dude, huge wheels are the BOMB. The extra 500 lbs of these baby's helps snow traction.
Unless these people re-gear (yeah, right) with these huge wheels, isn't their performance (i.e. acceleration) going to be, shall we say, lacking?
Yo dawg, you're supposed to chill and take it slooooooow!
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Dude, huge wheels are the BOMB. The extra 500 lbs of these baby's helps snow traction.
Unless these people re-gear (yeah, right) with these huge wheels, isn't their performance (i.e. acceleration) going to be, shall we say, lacking?
Yo dawg, you're supposed to chill and take it slooooooow!
I don't see the point of having large wheels and super-low profile tires on a street car. I'd rather not have to slow down for rough roads or be afraid I'll wreck the wheels because I tapped the curb. You can still get better handling, responsive steering, and overall grip of a lower profile by switching to a higher performance tire. I've been testing my theory on my Saturn with 185-65HR-14 BFG Traction T/As. So far they've been phenomenal. To put it simply, I have not found the limit of these tires in cornering yet, and they were still much cheaper than if I had +1 or +2. Plus the ride is still pretty good. A little rougher with a stiffer sidewall, but not like if I had LESS sidewall.
My Mazda 6 came with 16" steel wheels (205/60/16 tires). Though I'm going to switch out to alloys at some point soon, I'm most likely going to stick with 16's. Most of them came from the factory with 17" alloys. I test drove that combination, and didn't see much difference (other than the tires just sliding at the limit, no squeal). I think a 50 series tire is the absolute limit for the street based on the ride, how they handled rough roads, and the likelihood of damage. What I find interesting is a few members of the mazda6club forums have downsized to 16's, but went with a 7.5" or 8" wide wheel and 225 to 245 wide tires and have reported all around better grip and acceleration than with 17" or 18" wheels.
My Mazda 6 came with 16" steel wheels (205/60/16 tires). Though I'm going to switch out to alloys at some point soon, I'm most likely going to stick with 16's. Most of them came from the factory with 17" alloys. I test drove that combination, and didn't see much difference (other than the tires just sliding at the limit, no squeal). I think a 50 series tire is the absolute limit for the street based on the ride, how they handled rough roads, and the likelihood of damage. What I find interesting is a few members of the mazda6club forums have downsized to 16's, but went with a 7.5" or 8" wide wheel and 225 to 245 wide tires and have reported all around better grip and acceleration than with 17" or 18" wheels.
Has anyone put a tire on with a larger sidewall, everything else equal? I'm thinking of going from stock 185/65 R14 to a 185/70. More tire choices and I figure maybe a bit better ride and traction. Plus, my speedo reads about 5 mph too fast at 75 mph anyway so this will help that and get the rpms down maybe a 100 or 200 rpm at highway speeds.
Drew,
Wouldn't you get a little worse handling with the taller, possibly softer sidewall?
Wouldn't you get a little worse handling with the taller, possibly softer sidewall?
Drew, I use 195/60-14 on a car that takes 185/60-14. I'd try that size rather than 185/65-14. Even at the same ride height, a wider tire will help ride quality too. When in doubt, just put the 2 sized tires next to each other.
Originally Posted By: wantin150
Drew,
Wouldn't you get a little worse handling with the taller, possibly softer sidewall?
Probably, but my car leans over like a sunken battle ship around corners as is!
AJ, I've thought about doing that but the tire choices in a 195/60-14 are very limited. 185/70-14 seems to be a more standard size than 185/65-14. The former is used on Civics.
Drew,
Wouldn't you get a little worse handling with the taller, possibly softer sidewall?
Probably, but my car leans over like a sunken battle ship around corners as is!
AJ, I've thought about doing that but the tire choices in a 195/60-14 are very limited. 185/70-14 seems to be a more standard size than 185/65-14. The former is used on Civics.
Its the auto industry adding price not value- Nav systems are the same thing
Originally Posted By: Mr. Boston
Many resemble a Conastoga wagon lumbering down the road...
Yeah -- and usually the ones with those wagon wheels sport fake portholes, limo-tint windows, and windshield decals with the car's name in Olde English script -- and the car needs a paint job or body work!
Translation: Stupid people getting driver's licenses.
Many resemble a Conastoga wagon lumbering down the road...
Yeah -- and usually the ones with those wagon wheels sport fake portholes, limo-tint windows, and windshield decals with the car's name in Olde English script -- and the car needs a paint job or body work!
Translation: Stupid people getting driver's licenses.
Based on this thread and other considerations, I decided to sell my OE BMW syle 32 17" wheels (never put on my car)and keep my 15" factory wheels.
I thought a daily commute car did not need potentially rough riding tires that wear out quickly while costing more than stock.
I thought a daily commute car did not need potentially rough riding tires that wear out quickly while costing more than stock.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: mrsilv04
A buddy who is a salesman for a Chevy dealership actually has customers who ASK for the SMALLER wheels when there is a choice.
On his own Suburban, he has the 16" tires and wheels, even though 17's were available for that year. When I asked him about it, he said he ordered it with 16's because the tires are cheaper.
My Avalanche got the 17" factory rims because it was the higher end model. I replaced the tires with BFG AT TA's 285 75r 17's. These are generally an expensive all terrain tire. I found the pricing comparable to the same tire in 16". I kind of like the +1 rims because I usually increase my tire size by one size. Having the +1 rims size makes the sidewall shorter on bigger tires, and you lose a bit of the mushy feel of those bigger tires.
Of course 17" rims are small by today's standards. Some models of the new F150 have 20" as the minimum wheel size with options for a factory 22" rim.
This seems/looks goofy for a truck (IMO), especially a 4x4.
I kind of miss the '91 pontiac firefly that an old girlfriend owned. I bought her new 13" tires (a whole set) mounted, balanced and installed for around $95 at wally world (of course, she didn't know it was that reasonable). I was the hero that day. These days $95 buys at most half a tire for any of my vehicles, of course we get "hosed" in Canada.
A buddy who is a salesman for a Chevy dealership actually has customers who ASK for the SMALLER wheels when there is a choice.
On his own Suburban, he has the 16" tires and wheels, even though 17's were available for that year. When I asked him about it, he said he ordered it with 16's because the tires are cheaper.
My Avalanche got the 17" factory rims because it was the higher end model. I replaced the tires with BFG AT TA's 285 75r 17's. These are generally an expensive all terrain tire. I found the pricing comparable to the same tire in 16". I kind of like the +1 rims because I usually increase my tire size by one size. Having the +1 rims size makes the sidewall shorter on bigger tires, and you lose a bit of the mushy feel of those bigger tires.
Of course 17" rims are small by today's standards. Some models of the new F150 have 20" as the minimum wheel size with options for a factory 22" rim.
This seems/looks goofy for a truck (IMO), especially a 4x4.
I kind of miss the '91 pontiac firefly that an old girlfriend owned. I bought her new 13" tires (a whole set) mounted, balanced and installed for around $95 at wally world (of course, she didn't know it was that reasonable). I was the hero that day. These days $95 buys at most half a tire for any of my vehicles, of course we get "hosed" in Canada.
Originally Posted By: Benzadmiral
Originally Posted By: Mr. Boston
Many resemble a Conastoga wagon lumbering down the road...
Yeah -- and usually the ones with those wagon wheels sport fake portholes, limo-tint windows, and windshield decals with the car's name in Olde English script -- and the car needs a paint job or body work!
It's a shame when their wheel / tire package is worth more than their home. I'm not kidding.
Originally Posted By: Mr. Boston
Many resemble a Conastoga wagon lumbering down the road...
Yeah -- and usually the ones with those wagon wheels sport fake portholes, limo-tint windows, and windshield decals with the car's name in Olde English script -- and the car needs a paint job or body work!
It's a shame when their wheel / tire package is worth more than their home. I'm not kidding.
When I bought my Mazda 6 it came w/ the original equipment 215/45VR18 tires - upon further research these tires have a tread life of about 15,000 miles and are $213 each to replace - I had the dealer replace them w/ the 17 inch rims/tires off another 6 on the lot - I am much happier w/ this combo, especially after finding out about the negative rear camber that is killing the tires on my other Mazda.
Originally Posted By: carguy996
When I bought my Mazda 6 it came w/ the original equipment 215/45VR18 tires - upon further research these tires have a tread life of about 15,000 miles and are $213 each to replace - I had the dealer replace them w/ the 17 inch rims/tires off another 6 on the lot - I am much happier w/ this combo, especially after finding out about the negative rear camber that is killing the tires on my other Mazda.
Despite the camber, only the front tires on my Mazda3 have ever shown noticeable wear (I blame the burning rubber smell that occasionally happens). I almost never have any weight in the back though; unless you do, I don't know if you should be blaming the camber yet.
When I bought my Mazda 6 it came w/ the original equipment 215/45VR18 tires - upon further research these tires have a tread life of about 15,000 miles and are $213 each to replace - I had the dealer replace them w/ the 17 inch rims/tires off another 6 on the lot - I am much happier w/ this combo, especially after finding out about the negative rear camber that is killing the tires on my other Mazda.
Despite the camber, only the front tires on my Mazda3 have ever shown noticeable wear (I blame the burning rubber smell that occasionally happens). I almost never have any weight in the back though; unless you do, I don't know if you should be blaming the camber yet.
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Probably, but my car leans over like a sunken battle ship around corners as is!
AJ, I've thought about doing that but the tire choices in a 195/60-14 are very limited. 185/70-14 seems to be a more standard size than 185/65-14. The former is used on Civics.
I agree, the choices in 195/60-14 is usually a "Corolla +" type of performance grade, H rating all season. The only better choice is Yoko AVS ES100.
If you want cheaper type, 175/65-14 is the same diameter but 20 narrower.
Probably, but my car leans over like a sunken battle ship around corners as is!
AJ, I've thought about doing that but the tire choices in a 195/60-14 are very limited. 185/70-14 seems to be a more standard size than 185/65-14. The former is used on Civics.
I agree, the choices in 195/60-14 is usually a "Corolla +" type of performance grade, H rating all season. The only better choice is Yoko AVS ES100.
If you want cheaper type, 175/65-14 is the same diameter but 20 narrower.
On my Acura I went from the stock 235/45/17 to a 255/40/17. I hated how the stock tires looked way too skinny on the TLs and I wanted to better the already great braking. They look stock from the side and don't look out of place at all from behind. I was a little shocked at what 17s cost.
Please excuse the dirty car. It really is black...
Please excuse the dirty car. It really is black...
BuickGN,
Aren't those OEM rims 7.5" wide?
The reason I ask is that most mfgs of tires in size 255/40/17 require the rim to be betw. 8.5" and 10" wide. Obviously, those tires will still fit on 7.5" rims (as seen in your pictures), but I wonder if they're getting stretched past their design limits and therefore negatively affecting handling and wear...
Aren't those OEM rims 7.5" wide?
The reason I ask is that most mfgs of tires in size 255/40/17 require the rim to be betw. 8.5" and 10" wide. Obviously, those tires will still fit on 7.5" rims (as seen in your pictures), but I wonder if they're getting stretched past their design limits and therefore negatively affecting handling and wear...
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
BuickGN,
Aren't those OEM rims 7.5" wide?
The reason I ask is that most mfgs of tires in size 255/40/17 require the rim to be betw. 8.5" and 10" wide. Obviously, those tires will still fit on 7.5" rims (as seen in your pictures), but I wonder if they're getting stretched past their design limits and therefore negatively affecting handling and wear...
Rims are 8". I've had the chance to put over 20K miles on them and no problems. I've also put them to the test through the corners and braking and they're much, much better than stock. The pictures make the sidewalls look like they bulge out more than the really do. Looking at them in person, the sidewall is pretty much even with the rim. Stock 235s had that "stretched" look that I hate.
BuickGN,
Aren't those OEM rims 7.5" wide?
The reason I ask is that most mfgs of tires in size 255/40/17 require the rim to be betw. 8.5" and 10" wide. Obviously, those tires will still fit on 7.5" rims (as seen in your pictures), but I wonder if they're getting stretched past their design limits and therefore negatively affecting handling and wear...
Rims are 8". I've had the chance to put over 20K miles on them and no problems. I've also put them to the test through the corners and braking and they're much, much better than stock. The pictures make the sidewalls look like they bulge out more than the really do. Looking at them in person, the sidewall is pretty much even with the rim. Stock 235s had that "stretched" look that I hate.
Originally Posted By: BuickGN
Rims are 8".
Thanks. It did not look like a 7.5" rim. I don't know where I read that it was 7.5. My bad.
Quote:
Stock 235s had that "stretched" look that I hate.
Hmm... I have 235/45 tires on 17x8 rims and they don't look stretched to me, but I guess it's a personal preference... I have considered going up to 245/45/17, but the wider the tires, generally the more noisy they get once they wear down some. Plus, I think this width would be overkill for this car/engine.
As a matter of fact, I had 225/45/17 on 8" rims in my old A4 and it didn't really look stretched either. But I know some tires run wider than others in the same size.
Rims are 8".
Thanks. It did not look like a 7.5" rim. I don't know where I read that it was 7.5. My bad.
Quote:
Stock 235s had that "stretched" look that I hate.
Hmm... I have 235/45 tires on 17x8 rims and they don't look stretched to me, but I guess it's a personal preference... I have considered going up to 245/45/17, but the wider the tires, generally the more noisy they get once they wear down some. Plus, I think this width would be overkill for this car/engine.
As a matter of fact, I had 225/45/17 on 8" rims in my old A4 and it didn't really look stretched either. But I know some tires run wider than others in the same size.
- Status
