Tall tire test (taller gearing advantage offset by wider, heavier wheels/tires?)

[Bill in Houston]

Originally Posted by SentraSE-R

That's a possible option - to put taller tires on the stock wheels. 195/65-15s would be 5% taller while only weighing 37 lbs.

Ya, sure, that would be cool. So many options, so little money to try them out with!

[California98Civic]

Originally Posted by SentraSE-R

That's a possible option - to put taller tires on the stock wheels. 195/65-15s would be 5% taller than stock while only weighing 37 lbs.

This is exactly what I have been wondering about... using my stock wheels but putting larger tires on. Right now it has 185/65-R15s. I have been considering an LRR 195/65-R15 set. A 25" diameter instead of maybe 24.5." But they'll be slightly wider too, yes?

[SentraSE-R]

The problem is 195/65-15s are only 2.09% taller than the 185/65-15s you're running, and barely roll 2.125% less/mile, so you won't see much improvement using them.

[California98Civic]

Originally Posted by SentraSE-R

The problem is 195/65-15s are only 2.09% taller than stock, and barely roll 2.125% less/mile, so you won't see much improvement using them.

I hear you. I'll have to consider the Bridgestone Ecopia 100 in 205/65-R15. It is available.

[mcrews]

I'm not a math guy but here is my thought pattern...or random thought forced together!!!

there is static wieght which is the car at rest. 2400 including tires
when the car moves, the the weight of the wheel is compounded because it is rolling
the stock car is designed for that so that is the base line

The new combo is 12lbs heavier. Given your design, probably 90% of the added weight is at the uotside edge of the diameter. There is a formula that says adding mass on the end increase the moving weight 3-4 times (someone posted on wnother post)
Sitting still the new weight is 2400+(12x4 tires)
When the care rolls, the static weight of the car is the same 2400, but the spinning weight at the end is 3-4 times greater 2400 + 4(12x4)

Thats why tire weight is really so important.
uotside of trucks(whole different concersation) cars with +2 sets ups tend to eat thru brake and suspension parts.

Now, I realize you drive easy, but moving spinning mass is spinning mass.
sorr I don't have specific formulas but they have posted by others.

[mcrews]

Originally Posted by SentraSE-R

The problem is 195/65-15s are only 2.09% taller than stock, and barely roll 2.125% less/mile, so you won't see much improvement using them.

Darrel is right. you really need 4-5% change and minimal weight addition.

There is no doubt that it is a fine line.

But again, that is what is so great about this forum!!!

[SentraSE-R]

When I get around to it, I'll find a set of four used 195/65-15s, and mount just two of them. Then I'll have two 185/60-15 stockers, two 5% taller 195/65-15 tires with a 2 lb. weight penalty, and my 12 lb heavier and 5.6% taller 205/50-17 newbies to compare. We know how the stockers and 17s will do, so the question is how much difference will we see with the taller tires w/o the weight penalty. In theory, I could test the 195/65-15s just against the 17s, but I think we'd all want to see the stockers in the comparison test.

If it doesn't work out like expected, I'll only be out the cost of two used tires and the mounting. I probably don't need to balance them for 30 mph driving for 10 miles.

[deathtrain]

I have used this for a tire calculator

Tire Size Comparison

it will show tire % plus you can compare side by side different tire sizes.

[SentraSE-R]

I tanked up today, about 400 freeway miles coming home from my mom's, and 100 local miles. 504.8 miles on 9.733 gal, for a 51.9 mpg average.

[mcrews]

Originally Posted by SentraSE-R

I tanked up today, about 400 freeway miles coming home from my mom's, and 100 local miles. 504.8 miles on 9.733 gal, for a 51.9 mpg average.

good!