I have a set of 4 17x9 +20 coming soon, but I'm not totally sure what size tires to run on them. From what I've found, I should be using a 235/40 at the narrowest, and a 255/40 at the widest.
I know I'm going to have to do something with the fenders, probably just a small roll, but I want to make sure that the tires are properly sized, I don't want big ballooned tires, but I don't want stretched tires either.
I'm currently running a 215/45 on a 7.5" wide wheel and I'm happy with the characteristics of the sidewall, so I'd like to be able to keep it similar with the new wheels.
Proper tire size for daily driven S13 with 17x9s
-
Nismo_Freak
- Posts: 10314
- Joined: Wed Jul 24, 2002 10:42 pm
- Car: 89 Nissan 240SX
Re: Proper tire size for daily driven S13 with 17x9s (BaliLover)
I'm a fan of identical sizes all around with identical wheels (especially on a F-R car with good weight distribution)..I'd run 245-40-17 all around can call it a day..
unless your car oversteers...but thats another issue...
-Chet
unless your car oversteers...but thats another issue...
-Chet
Re: (Chris111)
use the offset calc.
I wouldn't call it "fitting"...but I suppose if you run negative camber and roll the fender it would 'fit'...
-Chet
I wouldn't call it "fitting"...but I suppose if you run negative camber and roll the fender it would 'fit'...
-Chet
-
Nismo_Freak
- Posts: 10314
- Joined: Wed Jul 24, 2002 10:42 pm
- Car: 89 Nissan 240SX
Re: Proper tire size for daily driven S13 with 17x9s (Exar-Kun)
You need to account for the additional slip angle the rear tires will see. That way you have a neutral car under throttle, and not an oversteering car under throttle. This allows you to accelerate sooner in the corner.Exar-Kun wrote:I'm a fan of identical sizes all around with identical wheels (especially on a F-R car with good weight distribution)..I'd run 245-40-17 all around can call it a day..
unless your car oversteers...but thats another issue...
-Chet
If the car has issues with understeering then he can just learn to trail brake, it's faster anyways.
so basically, you think that on a 240sx its better to run larger rears in order to compensate for slip angles and have a relatively neutral car? I really like this forum on NICO, its good reading sometimes. I've seen a lot of the nismofreak "bigger staggered wheel/tire setups" vs. the chet/smithsr "smaller, same size all around" philosophy.
Re: (turtl631)
not necessarily...you may increase the slip angle (its really an increase in force, not necessarily slip angle in this case), but the car understeers naturally anyways due to weight distribution and supension settings, and beacuse of weight transfer, you rear tires will gain a bit more traction under throttle.
THeorhetically speaking, a slightly understeering car would, under throttle enough to maintain cornering speed, be very neutral due to the factors above.
this changes, obviously, with other conditions...but the premise is the same.
inducing more oversteer by use of extra throttle and compromising your front grip (weight transfer) isn't the best solution, IMO....unless that was a limiting factor...
In theory, the difference between the unloading of the front tires(and their grip capacity) would be the same as the loading on the rears less traction loss (driveline force)keeping the car neutral...
Coplex sequence of events...now you can induce oversteer with too much throttle(torque) loading making it reache its dimishing returns and your tires ability to resist the forces finally give and slide out...
by the end of the apex you can increase throttle naturally because cornering loads come off the tires anyway. Using throttle before that is just compensation.
larger rear tires can icrease your rear traction, but this should only be used if this islimiting your conering force, and with most 240's..that isn't the limiting factor.
-Chet
Bali: COol..its up to you....your car
THeorhetically speaking, a slightly understeering car would, under throttle enough to maintain cornering speed, be very neutral due to the factors above.
this changes, obviously, with other conditions...but the premise is the same.
inducing more oversteer by use of extra throttle and compromising your front grip (weight transfer) isn't the best solution, IMO....unless that was a limiting factor...
In theory, the difference between the unloading of the front tires(and their grip capacity) would be the same as the loading on the rears less traction loss (driveline force)keeping the car neutral...
Coplex sequence of events...now you can induce oversteer with too much throttle(torque) loading making it reache its dimishing returns and your tires ability to resist the forces finally give and slide out...
by the end of the apex you can increase throttle naturally because cornering loads come off the tires anyway. Using throttle before that is just compensation.
larger rear tires can icrease your rear traction, but this should only be used if this islimiting your conering force, and with most 240's..that isn't the limiting factor.
-Chet
Bali: COol..its up to you....your car
Re: (turtl631)
It depends. Like in most suspension/handling situations, too little throttle and the car amy understeer more when under throttle, because the weight transfer and resulting grip capacity is more than the driveline torque being applied....
If you apply too much torque, the tires can't cope, even with the weight transfer, and you 'drift'.
ONly 3 factors really affect steady state under or oversteer when you get down to it:-Weight transfer-Weight distribution-Tire characteristics
Think about it, it'll make sense.
Hopefully that clears a bit up.
If you apply too much torque, the tires can't cope, even with the weight transfer, and you 'drift'.
ONly 3 factors really affect steady state under or oversteer when you get down to it:-Weight transfer-Weight distribution-Tire characteristics
Think about it, it'll make sense.
Hopefully that clears a bit up.