Jump to content

these could work

IntercooledFlatty

By IntercooledFlatty,
in Just plain ol' B.S.

 Share

Recommended Posts

scubanut Newbie

scubanut

Posted
Posted
Not saying they are all bad, but my dad, ex-wife, and I all had brand new sets of kumhos put on our vehicles. We all had to replace at least one after about 5k miles because a belt let loose in them. Different service stations too. Left a bad taste in my mouth, won't go back too them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
infamos Newbie

infamos

Posted
Posted
These will work for me. I've been looking for the widest tires for 16" rims and only found some corvette tires 255/50r16. I much better prefer these. I plan on widening a pair of rear wheels to be 11" wide but was undecided since I couldn't find any tires.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Burton Newbie

Burton

Posted
Posted

ive run them on several cars, currently have them on mine, never had an issue with kuhmo

 

 

Same here. I have them on my Starion now, as well as my Grand Am, and have put 30k on the Starion ones, and over 50k on the ones on the Grand am without a single problem. I've had them on other cars too, but got rid of those cars before I had put 20k on them. I don't know how they held up for the next owner, but they hadn't given me any problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ucw458 Grand Master

ucw458

Posted
Posted

A wider contact patch makes more side wall flex?

 

 

If the rim stays the same size yes. That tire is wider than the rim so the rim has less control over the sidewall. When the rim and tire are matched then both sides of the rim are trying to keep the sidewall from deflecting. Both sides are being pushed away from their mounting point on the rim equally. When the tire is bigger than the rim only one the trailing side is trying to keep the sidewall in check. The leading side of the tire is being pushed towards the rim causing slack in the sidewall. Not only that but the tread can deform causing loss of traction.

 

 

Here's a crude, over exaggerated paint drawing describing what I'm talking about.

 

http://i463.photobucket.com/albums/qq352/ucw458/Starquest%20saves/Tiredescription.jpg

 

 

 

For a real world example,

I had 255/50/16 on my rear 8s when My SQ was stock. My car could slide effortlessly with the flick of the steering wheel. I got a set of SHP 9s and swapped the same tires onto those rims. With the 9s it too alot more effort to slide the car. Wasn't just a flick anymore I had to crank the steering wheel over and floor the gas to get it to slide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
taeisallin Newbie

taeisallin

Posted
Posted

Yea they look great. I agree with ucw. I had 245's with 8. Rears and the car wobbled side to side on hard corners and bad roads like we have here in ny.

After going to 9's and using 245's, I feel much more connected to the road and less wobble side to side.

I guess everyone has their preference, looks or performance, but after noticing the big difference, I would not go back.

But the 265's look great!

 

Tae

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JohnnyWadd Newbie

JohnnyWadd

Posted
Posted (edited)

when it balloons over the wheel lip it does...

 

 

Oh that make more sense. I guess comparing section width of the tire to wheel width would be a good idea

245mm = 9.65 inch (thats rear shp size)

225mm= 8.86 inch (thats rear non shp size)

265mm= 10.4 inch on a rear 9 inch rim thats a difference of 1.4", compare that to a difference of .65" on a 245 tire mounted on a shp 9".

 

Yea they look great. I agree with ucw. I had 245's with 8. Rears and the car wobbled side to side on hard corners and bad roads like we have here in ny.

After going to 9's and using 245's, I feel much more connected to the road and less wobble side to side.

Tae

 

Those 245's where a 1.65" difference so i can see that. Not to mention the 245 equipped cars came with 9 inch rears anyway.

 

I had 255/50/16 on my rear 8s when My SQ was stock. My car could slide effortlessly with the flick of the steering wheel. I got a set of SHP 9s and swapped the same tires onto those rims. With the 9s it too alot more effort to slide the car. Wasn't just a flick anymore I had to crank the steering wheel over and floor the gas to get it to slide.

 

I can see why, thats even worse, a difference of 2.04" as you have a 8" wheel and a 10.04" wide tire. Plus it was a 50 series with is way to tall a aspect ratio for a 255. You where two steps up in width over stock, and one step up in aspect ratio. That number 50 means its 50 percent of the width is what the side wall height is....

 

If the rim stays the same size yes.

 

Not exactly. Thats only if you are already near the max width for your rim. If you are under sized for example a 205/55/16 on a rear shp 9 incher and go to a proper 245 the tire will look more like your "matched tire and rim" drawing.

 

We can look at those 265's on a 9 inch rim as a good possibiity with only a 1.4" difference. Especially if you look at the aspect ration and figure out how tall the tire is at 645mm (only 20mm over stock)

 

Not trying to shoot anyone down but i think if we are gonna educate folks on anything we should be thourough and not make general statements that are only true if other unmentioned factors are present. I get it all the time at Les Schwab people are told they cant go wider or cant go narrower because they budy or there dad read this or that in the internet or that the tires will throw off there speedo etc etc

 

You have to look at over all height of the tire too, by reading the numbers. That 255/50/16 tire is also taller than stock at 661mm compared to a 245/45/16 at 627mm so the car is higher of the ground 30mm as well wich give the can more leverage against the tire.

 

Cliff notes version,

 

A tire that is too wide or too narrow for the rim it's on will have less cornering traction than the proper size tire for the rim.

 

x2

Edited by JohnnyWadd
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...