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

View Poll Results: Are wide tires better?
Great invention. 6 21.43%
Ok. 4 14.29%
OK for off road and racing. 10 35.71%
Make vehicles more expensive with no benifit. 8 28.57%
Voters: 28. You may not vote on this poll

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 07-10-2011, 09:37 PM   #31 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: asheville
Posts: 11
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by diesel_john View Post
I will admit that the choices I gave for the survey are pretty lame. And probably violated every rule in surveyology. I am just tic'd that 13" tires are being phased out.
diesel_john
It is like they are trying to put the biggest flywheels they can on every corner.
A great strategy for killing urban cycle mileage.Potholes eat small wheels like 13".I run 14" steel on my 95 civic.I don't think 13's would be a good choice on the roads here for my use.But I also notice when wheel shopping most choices are for 15" and up.Fewer choices in 14 for my car.So I will stick with the stock steel.
Some of the new cars have good drag numbers...but they come with expensive flywheels at each corner...arrrrggggghhhhh!

  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 07-10-2011, 11:40 PM   #32 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 119

Laura the Lancer - '81 Mitsibishi lancer LX
Thanks: 0
Thanked 28 Times in 8 Posts
well they do help with traction, for example my car has 155/70/12\s on it at the moment,
I can get my car slideways very easily (if i want to but i'm a safe driver most the time)
with 175/70/13's i cant get my car sideways no matter how hard i try, i cannot do "skids" and no matter how hard i take a corner the dam things wont lose traction unlike the smaller tyres, so they do help, but i assume that it does get to a point where the difference becomes minimal
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2011, 03:21 AM   #33 (permalink)
Blow stuff up
 
phunky.buddha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: DFW Metro, TX
Posts: 70

S2000 - '03 Honda S2000
Team Honda
90 day: 24.42 mpg (US)
Thanks: 2
Thanked 5 Times in 4 Posts
Wider is better... for me. Here's my rationale- more grip = higher cornering speeds = less acceleration after a turn. So far I'm hitting 1.05G sustained on my morning commute. No need to slow down for cloverleafs or really anything else at all. No slowing = no acceleration = more saved gas. Um. Yeah.

__________________
Intercrew Auto Salon
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2011, 08:54 PM   #34 (permalink)
MP$
 
diesel_john's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SW Ohio
Posts: 595
Thanks: 5
Thanked 19 Times in 14 Posts
Send a message via MSN to diesel_john
I wanted 155's. The local dealers wanted me to have 175's. that led me to the bigger conspiracy. the auto manuf. just know you need 4wd because they specd tires that won't go when we really need too.

Last edited by diesel_john; 07-11-2011 at 09:02 PM.. Reason: to confuse
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2011, 10:10 PM   #35 (permalink)
Do more with less
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: North Eastern Missouri
Posts: 930

OD - '05 Ford Econoline
90 day: 18.64 mpg (US)

Joetta - '86 Volkswagen Jetta Turbo Oil Burner
TEAM VW AUDI Group
90 day: 49.71 mpg (US)

Benzilla - '85 Mercedes Benz 300D
90 day: 28.08 mpg (US)
Thanks: 66
Thanked 177 Times in 112 Posts
Diesel John I had the same problem with my mechanic. At his suggestion I decided to go to tire rack order the 155x13 tires and have him put them on and balance.

I got some winter firestones and really like them It goes like a tractor in the winter. They are quiet. Probably will melt down some this year but I can get a couple of years I will be happy.
__________________
“The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it.” George Orwell

“Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe.

The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed.”

Noah Webster, 1787
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2011, 10:10 PM   #36 (permalink)
dcb
needs more cowbell
 
dcb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: ˙
Posts: 5,038

pimp mobile - '81 suzuki gs 250 t
90 day: 96.29 mpg (US)

schnitzel - '01 Volkswagen Golf TDI
90 day: 53.56 mpg (US)
Thanks: 158
Thanked 269 Times in 212 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by phunky.buddha View Post
Wider is better... for me. Here's my rationale- more grip = higher cornering speeds = less acceleration after a turn. ... Um. Yeah.
Sarcasm noted, clarification offered:
wider tires scrub more when not going in a straight line, and have more aerodynamic and rolling resistance (to a point).

If you start coasting for the corner sooner on narrower tires and take it at something less than 1G, it will more than make up for the scrubbing and hysteresis and constant loss of wider tires.
__________________
WINDMILLS DO NOT WORK THAT WAY!!!
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2011, 01:33 PM   #37 (permalink)
Blow stuff up
 
phunky.buddha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: DFW Metro, TX
Posts: 70

S2000 - '03 Honda S2000
Team Honda
90 day: 24.42 mpg (US)
Thanks: 2
Thanked 5 Times in 4 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcb View Post
Sarcasm noted, clarification offered:
wider tires scrub more when not going in a straight line, and have more aerodynamic and rolling resistance (to a point).

If you start coasting for the corner sooner on narrower tires and take it at something less than 1G, it will more than make up for the scrubbing and hysteresis and constant loss of wider tires.
Yup, definitely more aerodynamic and rolling drag. I lost about 5% efficiency with this latest tire change, but to me it was worth it. You assume scrubbing, but I don't really have any understeer to worry about- more grip for me means more braking and higher turning speeds. My primary priority is grip and handling- any gains I can make towards economy are a bonus that I try to achieve later with driving habits and drafting on long trips.

I went from 225/50-16 front and 245/45-16 rear to 255/40-17 all around with a 140 treadwear rating and I absolutely love it.

As far as wider tires being a conspiracy- I think NO. Car manufacturers try to design their cars to hit certain performance/efficiency targets, so they try to size their tire selection accordingly. Usually a larger diameter tire will net efficiency gains in the drivetrain by allowing lower rotation speeds before the wheel, and larger wheels look better for the consumer, plus clear larger brakes for heavier cars with more safety equipment and cargo capacity...

I guess we could all go back to the original Minis with their 10" wheels.
__________________
Intercrew Auto Salon
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2011, 04:18 PM   #38 (permalink)
UFO
Master EcoModder
 
UFO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 1,300

Colorado - '17 Chevrolet Colorado 4x4 LT
90 day: 23.07 mpg (US)
Thanks: 315
Thanked 179 Times in 138 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by phunky.buddha View Post
... You assume scrubbing, but I don't really have any understeer to worry about- more grip for me means more braking and higher turning speeds. My primary priority is grip and handling- any gains I can make towards economy are a bonus that I try to achieve later with driving habits and drafting on long trips.
Tires "scrub" anytime you turn them, they don't have to be slipping. In fact a sliding tire is actually losing less energy as you are no longer changing the vehicles direction as much. Not that that is a smart way to take corners....
__________________
I'm not coasting, I'm shifting slowly.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2011, 05:02 PM   #39 (permalink)
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,762

Blue - '93 Ford Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Ford Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 honda gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,585
Thanked 3,555 Times in 2,218 Posts
Quote:
and larger wheels look better for the consumer
This is the main reason.
__________________


  Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2011, 05:05 PM   #40 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NY
Posts: 865
Thanks: 29
Thanked 111 Times in 83 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by phunky.buddha View Post
Yup, definitely more aerodynamic and rolling drag. I lost about 5% efficiency with this latest tire change, but to me it was worth it. You assume scrubbing, but I don't really have any understeer to worry about- more grip for me means more braking and higher turning speeds. My primary priority is grip and handling- any gains I can make towards economy are a bonus that I try to achieve later with driving habits and drafting on long trips.

...I guess we could all go back to the original Minis with their 10" wheels.
13" tires certainly cost a lot less than 16" or 17" tires do. Many of the people here are interested in saving money as a top priority. I am too, but I'm not willing to sacrifice good handling for it - which is why I won't buy narrow 80 series tires, no matter what small amount of fuel they supposedly save.

  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread






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