NOTICE: Incorrect Rear Tire Size
04-12-2005, 02:11 PM
#21
Registered User
This is my take on the situation. The balance of the stock sways and stock s-02's is THE GOAL.
In using after-market 225/50/16 for the rears, the tread width is thinner than the stock s-02's. This would induce oversteer because the tread width to rear sway bar ratio would decrease, thereby increasing oversteer (more like losing control, rather than "oversteer"). In order to maintain the balance of tire traction to sway bar stiffness, we would need as much traction in the rear as the stock s-02's provided. It seems that the answer is to get a street tire with EXTREME sidewall stiffness at the size of 245/45/16. If going with aftermarket 225/50/16, I would think we would need to soften the rear sways so that the car would be less prone to losing control.
The logic that excessive center wear on 245/45/16 makes sense, but how many people are actually experiencing this and on what tire?
I personally am going with the Hankook RS-2 Z212 for my next set of tirees, 205/55/16 fronts and 245/45/16 rears. Hopefully the balance is similar to stock s-02.
In using after-market 225/50/16 for the rears, the tread width is thinner than the stock s-02's. This would induce oversteer because the tread width to rear sway bar ratio would decrease, thereby increasing oversteer (more like losing control, rather than "oversteer"). In order to maintain the balance of tire traction to sway bar stiffness, we would need as much traction in the rear as the stock s-02's provided. It seems that the answer is to get a street tire with EXTREME sidewall stiffness at the size of 245/45/16. If going with aftermarket 225/50/16, I would think we would need to soften the rear sways so that the car would be less prone to losing control.
The logic that excessive center wear on 245/45/16 makes sense, but how many people are actually experiencing this and on what tire?
I personally am going with the Hankook RS-2 Z212 for my next set of tirees, 205/55/16 fronts and 245/45/16 rears. Hopefully the balance is similar to stock s-02.
04-13-2005, 08:07 AM
#22
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Pembroke
Posts: 3,951
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
very interesting discussion.
Someone did raise a flag when they mentioned that "if you're putting a 245 on a 7.5" rim, how is it that the optimal tire for a 9" rim is 255??
1.5" = 38mm - something is weird there.
And another point, does Bridgestone know their 225 is supposedly a 245? Isn't there some sort of government standard in terms of labelling a tire a certain size?
Is there not a public safety issue if a company is mis-labelling their tires?
For the record, I'm running 255 on a 9" rim and am getting perfect consistant wear thru out.
Someone did raise a flag when they mentioned that "if you're putting a 245 on a 7.5" rim, how is it that the optimal tire for a 9" rim is 255??
1.5" = 38mm - something is weird there.
And another point, does Bridgestone know their 225 is supposedly a 245? Isn't there some sort of government standard in terms of labelling a tire a certain size?
Is there not a public safety issue if a company is mis-labelling their tires?
For the record, I'm running 255 on a 9" rim and am getting perfect consistant wear thru out.
04-13-2005, 08:30 AM
#23
Registered User
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Fair Oaks
Posts: 912
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 03_AP1,Apr 13 2005, 08:07 AM
And another point, does Bridgestone know their 225 is supposedly a 245?
Tread width varies tremendously for the same size tire. The OEM RE050 17" fronts for instance have a published tread width of 6.7". The same size S03 has a published tread width as 8".
The Dunlop sp 9000 have a published tread width wider than the OEM S02 rears in the same size.
04-13-2005, 09:11 AM
#24
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Pembroke
Posts: 3,951
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Then what the hell does the 225 stand for if not the tread width?
EDIT: Never mind, found it on tire rack, however, this value is calculated from sidewall to sidewall when mounted on a specified width wheel. (quoted from tirerack)
So how wide is this specified width wheel?
EDIT: Never mind, found it on tire rack, however, this value is calculated from sidewall to sidewall when mounted on a specified width wheel. (quoted from tirerack)
So how wide is this specified width wheel?
04-13-2005, 09:19 AM
#25
Registered User
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Fair Oaks
Posts: 912
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 03_AP1,Apr 13 2005, 09:11 AM
Then what the hell does the 225 stand for if not the tread width?
04-13-2005, 09:31 AM
#26
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Pembroke
Posts: 3,951
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yeah, i just saw that.
But the site also said that the "225" , or any size for that matter, is measured while the tire is mounted on a specified width wheel (I assume a group of several standardized widths for various tire size groupings)
So if the 225 was measured on a standardized width wheel, say 7"....so obviously the the tread width may be different than as mounted on a 7.5" rim...hence this debate.
Anyone have a clue on these "standardized rims"??
But the site also said that the "225" , or any size for that matter, is measured while the tire is mounted on a specified width wheel (I assume a group of several standardized widths for various tire size groupings)
So if the 225 was measured on a standardized width wheel, say 7"....so obviously the the tread width may be different than as mounted on a 7.5" rim...hence this debate.
Anyone have a clue on these "standardized rims"??
09-27-2008, 01:23 PM
#27
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 4,531
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
good read guy. I was wondering the same thing. I had a discussion with my friend a while back about contact patch. Contact patch doesnt depend on the tire WIDTH at all...(omg, sounds stupid right? it makes sense though...)it all depends on the sidewall stiffness and the PSI you pump up your tire too.
IF the sidewall stiffness for the tires are the same..no matter HOW WIDE you go, you will have the same ...read it, SAME contact patch for the same PSI. think about it! the car is XXX lbs. sidewall will hold up XXX amount. the remainder must be held up by the tire pressure..which if its the same, f=p*area, area is your contact patch.! = SAME.
on the other hand, for cornering it'll be better to have a "wider, shorter" contact patch than a "skinnier, taller" contact patch since it'll be less likely to 'hop'
just my 2 cents.
i will be going with EAGLEF1's and im probably going to try out 215/235..somewhere in the middle...and then go up. and then go down. im sure we all have to figure out our OWN preference as well...
ps. ill still be calling jim@tirerack. hope he gets onthis thread eventually
it'd be great to know for sure instead of using my butt dyno.
IF the sidewall stiffness for the tires are the same..no matter HOW WIDE you go, you will have the same ...read it, SAME contact patch for the same PSI. think about it! the car is XXX lbs. sidewall will hold up XXX amount. the remainder must be held up by the tire pressure..which if its the same, f=p*area, area is your contact patch.! = SAME.
on the other hand, for cornering it'll be better to have a "wider, shorter" contact patch than a "skinnier, taller" contact patch since it'll be less likely to 'hop'
just my 2 cents.
i will be going with EAGLEF1's and im probably going to try out 215/235..somewhere in the middle...and then go up. and then go down. im sure we all have to figure out our OWN preference as well...
ps. ill still be calling jim@tirerack. hope he gets onthis thread eventually
it'd be great to know for sure instead of using my butt dyno.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post