Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > EcoModding Central
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 12-27-2017, 01:56 PM   #1 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 1,168

Sport Utility Prius - '10 Toyota Prius II
90 day: 52.98 mpg (US)

300k Sequoia 4WD - '01 Toyota Sequoia Limited 4wd
90 day: 20.19 mpg (US)
Thanks: 352
Thanked 265 Times in 212 Posts
Can I do a 4.27% tire stagger on a Prius?

195/65/15
175/65/15
Taller is 4% shorter and turns more revolutions**

You guys think a 4.27% smaller diameter tire on the rear of the prius will still allow the abs tcs system to function?
2010 Prius (Gen III)
The tire is load permitting and it would be nice to see a further 9.62% reduction in rear rolling friction coefficient for basically free since I'm needed to replaced 7 year old wide non lrr tires on my prius.
Its basically the same type of crazy tire stagger stuff the really range restricted electric cars do to pick up range
I'm thinking it will make the car see the front wheels are turning slower and could affect abs/tcs intervention but could be positive or negative.
This car is allergic to front wheel slip tcs wise its too restrictive. It would rather not move at all than allow wheel slip (aka dont park on grassy hills, very embarrassing to punch in a cheat code in your car for 5 minutes to be able to move). So it could possibly improve the situation.
But it could also just be such a great difference it shuts the system off right off the bat like the C5 corvettes when going from stagger to no stagger...
Thoughts?

__________________
"I feel like the bad decisions come into play when you trade too much of your time for money paying for things you can't really afford."
  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 12-27-2017, 02:00 PM   #2 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Ecky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 5,005

ND Miata - '15 Mazda MX-5 Special Package
90 day: 42.54 mpg (US)
Thanks: 2,866
Thanked 2,501 Times in 1,547 Posts
You'll also be lowering the back of the car, which will negatively impact aerodynamics. I wouldn't do it. Maybe if you went with something like 175/75r15.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2017, 02:10 PM   #3 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 1,168

Sport Utility Prius - '10 Toyota Prius II
90 day: 52.98 mpg (US)

300k Sequoia 4WD - '01 Toyota Sequoia Limited 4wd
90 day: 20.19 mpg (US)
Thanks: 352
Thanked 265 Times in 212 Posts
Well the car already has a huge rake so it still will sit with a rake and not level if it matters.
Rear only drops 0.51"
__________________
"I feel like the bad decisions come into play when you trade too much of your time for money paying for things you can't really afford."
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2017, 02:28 PM   #4 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Ecky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 5,005

ND Miata - '15 Mazda MX-5 Special Package
90 day: 42.54 mpg (US)
Thanks: 2,866
Thanked 2,501 Times in 1,547 Posts
Why does it have a rake? What tire sizes do you have on it now? It should be level from the factory.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2017, 03:02 PM   #5 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 1,168

Sport Utility Prius - '10 Toyota Prius II
90 day: 52.98 mpg (US)

300k Sequoia 4WD - '01 Toyota Sequoia Limited 4wd
90 day: 20.19 mpg (US)
Thanks: 352
Thanked 265 Times in 212 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ecky View Post
Why does it have a rake? What tire sizes do you have on it now? It should be level from the factory.
Most cars do it to look cool. It supposed to look "more aggressive"
Some designs even have a rake built into the body so the car looks like it has a rake to it when it is level.
195/65/15 Cooper CS3.

I think I've decided on 185/65/15 up front and 175/65/15 in the rear. Only a 2% difference which should work and will let me reduce my rolling coefficient how I want to. Think load support is unchanged, but lateral grip is decreased. For the most part its not a race car so I'll accept it.
Ill go from 6.2" tread width dry rotted non LRR tires front and rear to: 5.6" & 5.2" combo front and rear that Is LRR. So It should give me the double bonus of a better compound and narrower width. Also OEM speedometers are 2% faster than normal so It will put it back to spot on.
__________________
"I feel like the bad decisions come into play when you trade too much of your time for money paying for things you can't really afford."
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2017, 03:27 PM   #6 (permalink)
Corporate imperialist
 
oil pan 4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: NewMexico (USA)
Posts: 11,175

Sub - '84 Chevy Diesel Suburban C10
SUV
90 day: 19.5 mpg (US)

camaro - '85 Chevy Camaro Z28

Riot - '03 Kia Rio POS
Team Hyundai
90 day: 30.21 mpg (US)

Bug - '01 VW Beetle GLSturbo
90 day: 26.43 mpg (US)

Sub2500 - '86 GMC Suburban C2500
90 day: 11.95 mpg (US)

Snow flake - '11 Nissan Leaf SL
SUV
90 day: 141.63 mpg (US)
Thanks: 269
Thanked 3,522 Times in 2,796 Posts
I did it on my wife's hyundai when I went to large tires. 2 of them still has some life left on them.
But traction control on hyundai cars I'm 2008 was kind of basic.
__________________
1984 chevy suburban, custom made 6.5L diesel turbocharged with a Garrett T76 and Holset HE351VE, 22:1 compression 13psi of intercooled boost.
1989 firebird mostly stock. Aside from the 6-speed manual trans, corvette gen 5 front brakes, 1LE drive shaft, 4th Gen disc brake fbody rear end.
2011 leaf SL, white, portable 240v CHAdeMO, trailer hitch, new batt as of 2014.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2017, 06:24 PM   #7 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
oldtamiyaphile's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,510

UFI - '12 Fiat 500 Twinair
Team Turbocharged!
90 day: 40.3 mpg (US)

Jeep - '05 Jeep Wrangler Renegade
90 day: 18.09 mpg (US)

R32 - '89 Nissan Skyline

STiG - '16 Renault Trafic 140dCi Energy
90 day: 30.12 mpg (US)

Prius - '05 Toyota Prius
Team Toyota
90 day: 50.25 mpg (US)

Premodded - '49 Ford Freighter
90 day: 13.48 mpg (US)

F-117 - '10 Proton Arena GLSi
Pickups
Mitsubishi
90 day: 37.82 mpg (US)

Ralica - '85 Toyota Celica ST
90 day: 25.23 mpg (US)

Sx4 - '07 Suzuki Sx4
90 day: 32.21 mpg (US)

F-117 (2) - '03 Citroen Xsara VTS
90 day: 30.06 mpg (US)
Thanks: 325
Thanked 452 Times in 319 Posts
Someone ran over sized front tyres on a Prius and found that the CVT will compensate as the ~2700rpm cruising speed coincides with BSFC. I don't think ABS/TCS was mentioned though.

My Prius speedo is pretty much dead on vs GPS.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ecky View Post
Why does it have a rake? What tire sizes do you have on it now? It should be level from the factory.
Most cars have rake so they sit level when loaded. The smaller the car the more noticable the rake.
__________________






  Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2017, 08:09 PM   #8 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 1,168

Sport Utility Prius - '10 Toyota Prius II
90 day: 52.98 mpg (US)

300k Sequoia 4WD - '01 Toyota Sequoia Limited 4wd
90 day: 20.19 mpg (US)
Thanks: 352
Thanked 265 Times in 212 Posts
Yeah its nice I don't have to worry about tire diameter for rpms. The motor is essentially disconnected from the wheels completely. The car sits around 2000rpm at 70 in flat terrain.

__________________
"I feel like the bad decisions come into play when you trade too much of your time for money paying for things you can't really afford."
  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com