wide vs. narrow wheels/tires

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Jordanwolf

Obviously no one knows what they are talking about here. You kids all need to start running 265/70/15 in the front and 185/35/18 in the rear for maximum grip and and acceleration.

LOL reverse those sizes to the 265 on the rear and the 185 on the front and make them both 14 inch wheels and you are very close to my old drag set up for my old R/T.


Oh, and it didn't turn worth shit!

[venturaII]

Originally Posted by asdf

for this particular wheel size, the 255/40 is a little more meat on the 9" wheel

Width-wise, yes. That doesn't affect sidewall size though, which is 99% of pothole protection.

[NoHaveMSG]

Originally Posted by venturaII

Width-wise, yes. That doesn't affect sidewall size though, which is 99% of pothole protection.

He would actually gain almost a 1/4 inch of sidewall over stock

This is the calculator I use. https://tiresize.com/comparison/

[venturaII]

Originally Posted by NoHaveMSG

He would actually gain almost a 1/4 inch of sidewall over stock

This is the calculator I use. https://tiresize.com/comparison/

The potholes are only on one side of the tire, so that's just 1/8" difference. I dunno about you, but that'd have to be a pretty finely tuned butt to feel 1/8" inch of sidewall...

[NoHaveMSG]

Originally Posted by venturaII

The potholes are only on one side of the tire, so that's just 1/8" difference. I dunno about you, but that'd have to be a pretty finely tuned butt to feel 1/8" inch of sidewall...

I accounted for that. It was .4 inch of diameter, so .2 radius which doesn't exactly translate to sidewall height but close.

[venturaII]

Ok - let's say it's .2" just for argument's sake (and the numbers DO translate 100% to sidewall height, since the wheel diameter is a constant) That's still just the difference between 3.8" and 4.0" of sidewall between the wheel and the ground, or 5% different. My original comment still stands. There would be more to gain by changing brands of tire than this small amount of distance change. Or also a possibility is because the 255 tire has more volume, thus requiring less pressure and resulting in a more compliant ride.

[Stang70Fastback]

Originally Posted by nikitopo

A comparison is always a comparison.

There are good comparisons and bad comparisons. A lot of the comparisons made in this thread fall into the latter category (such as comparing the setup of this car to a McLaren or a Ferrari.)

That's like saying, "All opinions are equal." No, all opinions are not equal. Everyone is allowed to HAVE an opinion, but that doesn't make everyone's opinion equal. Some people have terrible, uninformed opinions, and those opinions carry less weight than those of people who know what they are talking about.

[NoHaveMSG]

Originally Posted by venturaII

Ok - let's say it's .2" just for argument's sake (and the numbers DO translate 100% to sidewall height, since the wheel diameter is a constant) That's still just the difference between 3.8" and 4.0" of sidewall between the wheel and the ground, or 5% different. My original comment still stands. There would be more to gain by changing brands of tire than this small amount of distance change. Or also a possibility is because the 255 tire has more volume, thus requiring less pressure and resulting in a more compliant ride.

Your original quotes are:

Errr...how does that size protect against potholes? It's virtually the same sidewall as the stock 215/45...

and

Width-wise, yes. That doesn't affect sidewall size though, which is 99% of pothole protection.

Which is what I am referring to. Not Arguing on the effectiveness of .2 inches of sidewall vs a pothole. This thread has plenty of dumb arguments going already.

It is not the same size sidewall. And sidewall height is a percentage of tire width, so yes width effects sidewall size.

I am going to go have a beer now

[Jordanwolf]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

LOL reverse those sizes to the 265 on the rear and the 185 on the front and make them both 14 inch wheels and you are very close to my old drag set up for my old R/T.


Oh, and it didn't turn worth shit!

Yuck. Sounds like a deathtrap

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Jordanwolf

Yuck. Sounds like a deathtrap

It was horrid. No fun at all. I wouldn't recommend it to anybody.

[Jordanwolf]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

It was horrid. No fun at all. I wouldn't recommend it to anybody.

That first drop on those front wheels........ I'm sure the rush is cool, but I'd never do it more than a handful of times, just seems too taxing.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Jordanwolf

That first drop on those front wheels........ I'm sure the rush is cool, but I'd never do it more than a handful of times, just seems too taxing.

That ain't no Japanese sports car. It can take it.

[Jordanwolf]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

That ain't no Japanese sports car. It can take it.

Taxing on me!

And you talking smack about Japanese build quality?!

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Jordanwolf

Taxing on me!

And you talking smack about Japanese build quality?!

Nah you hardly even notice it. And wasn't smack about quality but two different designs and products for two different purposes. My old R/t would pick the wheels up and go really fast in a straight line but took about two football fields to make a turn. It could go through a couple of months of gas for the FRS in an afternoon. Two radically different tools for two radically different jobs. This is one of the reason I always scoff at people that say they "need" 300+ HP in the Twins.