View Single Post
Old 12-01-2008, 12:33 PM   #4 (permalink)
basjoos
Master EcoModder
 
basjoos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Upstate SC
Posts: 1,088

Aerocivic - '92 Honda Civic CX
Last 3: 70.54 mpg (US)

AerocivicLB - '92 Honda Civic CX
Team Honda
90 day: 55.14 mpg (US)

Camryglide - '20 Toyota Camry hybrid LE
90 day: 65.83 mpg (US)
Thanks: 16
Thanked 677 Times in 302 Posts
The 165/70/13 is the OEM size for the VX and CX. The other 92-95 Civic trim lines had the 175/70/13 as their OEM size. But the 165/70/13 size is harder to find and most tire shops will quote the 175/70/13 when asked about tires for a 92-95 Civic, so most VX and CX Civics are now found with 175/70/13 tires on them.

On my car, I currently have Sumitomo HTR T4 165/70/13, but previously had Michelin Harmony 175/70/13. If anything, I have seen a slight drop in mileage in going to the Sumitomo and a distinct reduction in cornering and braking abilities than the Michelins had. When going from a wider to a skinnier tire, you have two competing effects going on. A skinner tire has less aero drag than a wider tire, but it also has a higher rolling resistance (due to the sharper bend angles of the tread rubber on each side of the footprint) than an otherwise identical wider tire. With most cars, the aero benefits trump the rolling resistance penalty of the skinnier tire, so the skinnier tires gives better mileage than the wider tires. But with my car, I have the tires so well shielded from the airflow that I'm not getting any of the aero benefits, but am getting the RR penalties, so I am not seeing any better mileage from the 165/70/12 tires. When the Sumitomos wear out I will likely go back to the Michelin 175/70/13 for their improved handling. Alternatively I could get a set of 14" rims and mount the Potenza RE92 tires used on the Insight.
__________________
aerocivic.com

Last edited by basjoos; 12-01-2008 at 12:53 PM..
  Reply With Quote