I have just removed my Blizzaks from my '95Q and replaced them with my well worn Michelin Pilots because I couldn't decide what to do about new wheels/tires. I have successfully driven myself crazy and decided I needed some more time to decide. Here is my dilemma that hopefully you all can help with.
#1 - stick with OE 15" wheels and go with some of your recent suggestions (Pilot XGT's, Firestone Firehawks, Kumho's). By the way, what is the width of these wheels? 7"? 6.5"?
#2 - buy new wheels/tires, but what size? 17"? 18"? 7" or 8" wide?? Also, if so, I guess forged is the way to go. Any suggestions on wheelmakers to consider? avoid?
Clearly I need new rubber but I also have other goals - looks and better handling. I've always wanted a tighter ride without being too harsh - especially on those long, sweeping bends when, at high speed, you you hit a dip and I feel like I'm wallowing.
I welcome any and all advice - even tho it'll probably confuse me more.
:help
Tires/Wheels/Handling
-
Q45tech
- Moderator
- Posts: 14296
- Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2002 3:19 am
- Car: 1990 Q45 342,400 miles 22 years ownership with original engine
1995 G20t 5 speed 334,000 miles 16" 2002 wheels - 205/50/16 Sr20ve vvl
Wallowing is 90% shocks and 10% sidewalls as even 65 series sidewalls have a spring constant of 1200 pounds per inch vs front car springs of 146 pounds per inch [measure how much the tire depresses when you let the weight of car down on it to determine tire spring constant at what ever psi you use].
90-96 oem wheels are all 15x6.5".
It is a problem for all of us now that there are fewer than 3-4 suitable [tolerable] 15" tire models available.
16x8" is still the sweet spot tire cost vs rim cost vs availability...as 225/55, 235/60, 245/50 or 255/50 in 16" will all work well.................hopefully decent tires will be available for 5 years more in these sizes......
Some premium Z rated dual ply sidewalls may have 1400-1500 lbs/in spring constant.http://www.hunter.com/pub/unde...3.htm
90-96 oem wheels are all 15x6.5".
It is a problem for all of us now that there are fewer than 3-4 suitable [tolerable] 15" tire models available.
16x8" is still the sweet spot tire cost vs rim cost vs availability...as 225/55, 235/60, 245/50 or 255/50 in 16" will all work well.................hopefully decent tires will be available for 5 years more in these sizes......
Some premium Z rated dual ply sidewalls may have 1400-1500 lbs/in spring constant.http://www.hunter.com/pub/unde...3.htm
-
AZhitman
- Administrator
- Posts: 54541
- Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 2:04 am
- Car: 58 L210, 63 Bluebird RHD, 64 NL320, 65 SPL310, 66 411 RHD, 67 WRL411, 68 510 SR20, 75 280Z RB25, 77 620 SR20, 79 B310, 90 Z32, 91 GTi-R, 92 Silvia Qs, 98 S14, 23 Z.
- Location: Surprise, Arizona
- Contact:
Mike - Look for some take-offs from a later-model Q (97-01) as they are lighter and stronger than comparable aftermarket wheels, and attractive on a Q. Several of us have 16's on our Q's, but the 17's from a 97-01 "t" model would be nice as well.
You should be able to get a set for under $300. Add some nice 245 or 255 width rubber and you're well on your way.
Dennis is right about the shocks. If you're still riding on old shocks, I have access to NEW Tokico Blue high-performance shocks for the Q for a great price.
You should be able to get a set for under $300. Add some nice 245 or 255 width rubber and you're well on your way.
Dennis is right about the shocks. If you're still riding on old shocks, I have access to NEW Tokico Blue high-performance shocks for the Q for a great price.
Re: Tires/Wheels/Handling
The stock wheels are 6.5" wide. The problem with staying with 15" wheels is that they are an "obsolete" size, and availability of good 15" tires is getting worse and worse. Most new "performance" tires don't come with 15" sizes.Michael Dennison wrote:I have just removed my Blizzaks from my '95Q and replaced them with my well worn Michelin Pilots because I couldn't decide what to do about new wheels/tires. I have successfully driven myself crazy and decided I needed some more time to decide. Here is my dilemma that hopefully you all can help with.
#1 - stick with OE 15" wheels and go with some of your recent suggestions (Pilot XGT's, Firestone Firehawks, Kumho's). By the way, what is the width of these wheels? 7"? 6.5"?
Quote »#2 - buy new wheels/tires, but what size? 17"? 18"? 7" or 8" wide?? Also, if so, I guess forged is the way to go. Any suggestions on wheelmakers to consider? avoid?[/quote]
Another option is to get 16 or 17" wheels from a second generation Q. I got a set of 16 x 7" wheels from a 98ish Q, and am very happy with them. They are much better looking than any of the first generation Q wheels IMO, but are OEM quality and hubcentric, which many aftermarket wheels aren't. You can pick them up fairly cheap on ebay too. I got a set of cosmetically nearly perfect wheels for $300 I really wanted a set of the five spoke 17" touring wheels, but they are pretty rare. I only saw one set on ebay in months of looking, and they were very expensive (like $900-1000 I think)
Quote »Clearly I need new rubber but I also have other goals - looks and better handling. I've always wanted a tighter ride without being too harsh - especially on those long, sweeping bends when, at high speed, you you hit a dip and I feel like I'm wallowing.[/quote]
I really like the change on my car going from a 215-65-15 to a 225-55-16. The rear end used to wiggle around under the conditions you mention as well as on the highway at high speed, and that's gone with the new wheels/tires, but I'm not sure if that's due to the tire or the tire size. I'd guess it's the tires since my previous 93 didn't have the same feeling with 15" wheels/tires.
-
greg_atlanta
- Posts: 1111
- Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2002 4:37 pm
- Car: 2008 G35 Journey Sedan, silver/black (no sunroof), 1992 Q45 (in a past life)
Cost effective solution is Yokohama AVS Intermediate in 225/60/15, only $44 each at http://www.tirerack.com (about $225 shipped plus $50-75 for someone to mount/balance).
Very fun tire, very strong, and you'll have so much fun you won't care about the worn out shocks.
That'll hold you over for a while. Nothing worse than spending $2000 on shocks, wheels, tires and still not having a perfect car.
Very fun tire, very strong, and you'll have so much fun you won't care about the worn out shocks.
That'll hold you over for a while. Nothing worse than spending $2000 on shocks, wheels, tires and still not having a perfect car.
-
Michael Dennison
- Posts: 7
- Joined: Fri Feb 07, 2003 8:33 am
You know I'll never forgive myself - last year (at about 90k miles) I had the car in at the dealer and they recommended shocks. As I was under-the-gun, timewise, I didn't ask questions, and something was installed. I'll never let that happen again. All the recent talk about Tokico blues has assured they will be installed as soon as I can see my way clear.
From the sounds of it, if I was smart and not vain, I'd just get 4 15" Yokohama AVS's and be done with it. But since I'm not smart ... where would you find 4 17" wheels from a '97-'01 "t" for $300? Also, anyone have a picture of them? I'm sure when I see them I'll go "Oh yeah" but right now I'm drawing a blank.
Thanks for all the suggestions, guys. Great input. I appreciate it.
From the sounds of it, if I was smart and not vain, I'd just get 4 15" Yokohama AVS's and be done with it. But since I'm not smart ... where would you find 4 17" wheels from a '97-'01 "t" for $300? Also, anyone have a picture of them? I'm sure when I see them I'll go "Oh yeah" but right now I'm drawing a blank.
Thanks for all the suggestions, guys. Great input. I appreciate it.
-
Q45tech
- Moderator
- Posts: 14296
- Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2002 3:19 am
- Car: 1990 Q45 342,400 miles 22 years ownership with original engine
1995 G20t 5 speed 334,000 miles 16" 2002 wheels - 205/50/16 Sr20ve vvl
Nothing wrong with oem shocks [with stock springs][other than retail price of the rear] brand new they are perfect just that after 2 years/30,000 miles they are worn [like all shocks]. [discount price $74 each for fronts]
The added stiffness of the blues gives you the ILLUSION of better handling since the added rebound reduces the side to side body sway during changes of direction. If you can ignore the sway the handling [as measured in G's] will be the same.......but most people can't and they backoff when body sway occurs........this is the designed in CLUE for nonprofessional drivers.
Nothing one can do to change the weight shift AMOUNT other than widening the track [distance between center to center of tires] or lowering the center of gravity {cg/track} thus a 1 inch wider track is 3 times better than a 1" lowering.....why spring changes do little maybe 2.5-3% at best!
Ratio wise reducing the vehicle weight [or passenger weight or trunk junk] by 250 pounds is the eqivalent of the best tires or suspension modification one can do.
The new BMW 745 had to add back some sway because the new active sway bar did its job too well. Drivers were out driving the massive 19" tires with passsengers aboard.
The 2004 Jag XJ will be 3550 vs 4400 for the BMW 745 thanks to an all aluminum body/suspension.
You gotta loose control [in a safe place] to know what the limits are for your tires and psi and ambient temperature.This does not mean they will be the same for even 5,000 miles after the test as many tires seem to go to hell after 8-10,000 miles of use because of the way they are designed to meet tire testing requirements.......there are no requirements for tires to last 20,000 miles under stress!
Same with tires sidewall stiffness...shorter sidewalls [17"] are stiffer thus the tire tries to remain flat against the road IF the SUSPENSION ALLOWS IT.............most of it is BETTER FEEL against better true handling numbers.
The added stiffness of the blues gives you the ILLUSION of better handling since the added rebound reduces the side to side body sway during changes of direction. If you can ignore the sway the handling [as measured in G's] will be the same.......but most people can't and they backoff when body sway occurs........this is the designed in CLUE for nonprofessional drivers.
Nothing one can do to change the weight shift AMOUNT other than widening the track [distance between center to center of tires] or lowering the center of gravity {cg/track} thus a 1 inch wider track is 3 times better than a 1" lowering.....why spring changes do little maybe 2.5-3% at best!
Ratio wise reducing the vehicle weight [or passenger weight or trunk junk] by 250 pounds is the eqivalent of the best tires or suspension modification one can do.
The new BMW 745 had to add back some sway because the new active sway bar did its job too well. Drivers were out driving the massive 19" tires with passsengers aboard.
The 2004 Jag XJ will be 3550 vs 4400 for the BMW 745 thanks to an all aluminum body/suspension.
You gotta loose control [in a safe place] to know what the limits are for your tires and psi and ambient temperature.This does not mean they will be the same for even 5,000 miles after the test as many tires seem to go to hell after 8-10,000 miles of use because of the way they are designed to meet tire testing requirements.......there are no requirements for tires to last 20,000 miles under stress!
Same with tires sidewall stiffness...shorter sidewalls [17"] are stiffer thus the tire tries to remain flat against the road IF the SUSPENSION ALLOWS IT.............most of it is BETTER FEEL against better true handling numbers.
Michael Dennison wrote:You know I'll never forgive myself - last year (at about 90k miles) I had the car in at the dealer and they recommended shocks. As I was under-the-gun, timewise, I didn't ask questions, and something was installed. I'll never let that happen again. All the recent talk about Tokico blues has assured they will be installed as soon as I can see my way clear.
From the sounds of it, if I was smart and not vain, I'd just get 4 15" Yokohama AVS's and be done with it. But since I'm not smart ... where would you find 4 17" wheels from a '97-'01 "t" for $300? Also, anyone have a picture of them? I'm sure when I see them I'll go "Oh yeah" but right now I'm drawing a blank.
Thanks for all the suggestions, guys. Great input. I appreciate it.
Actually, q45t has got 17" weels in 99 year only. So that's why not a big chance to find it. To my taste they look too heavy for the first gen q45, which has very fine lines, but fit great for 97-01.
97-98t have 16x7 light alloy wheels, the same as on 98-99t I30, so they are not rare. They don't look fantastic either.
16" would be ok, as Dennis stated not once here.
-
Q45tech
- Moderator
- Posts: 14296
- Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2002 3:19 am
- Car: 1990 Q45 342,400 miles 22 years ownership with original engine
1995 G20t 5 speed 334,000 miles 16" 2002 wheels - 205/50/16 Sr20ve vvl
Strong almost never looks elegant except BBS.We see too many non oem wheels BENT and wobbley and no machined rim for clip on weights.Heavy doesn't mean strong, just cheap heavy cast metal!
Factory engineers always pick strong because of customer compliants even though they aren't covered for road hazards.
Factory engineers always pick strong because of customer compliants even though they aren't covered for road hazards.
-
Q45tech
- Moderator
- Posts: 14296
- Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2002 3:19 am
- Car: 1990 Q45 342,400 miles 22 years ownership with original engine
1995 G20t 5 speed 334,000 miles 16" 2002 wheels - 205/50/16 Sr20ve vvl
What junk [a cost saving trick] no machined lips for external weights.........notice MB and BMW and Audi and most Lexus still have lips for weighs..........those 7 gram stick ons never get it perfect and the build up of adhesive as you change then every 90 days .....by 5 years the inside is nothing but gooey!
-
csoluri92Q
- Posts: 35
- Joined: Wed Jul 31, 2002 2:23 am
- Car: Wine Collecting and my burgundy 92 Q with forged 17 x 8 SSR wheels
If you decide to spend some bucks on new wheels, I can highly recommend the forged SSR 17 x 8 wheels from TireRack with 245/45 17s. They are extremely light at about 18lbs. very strong, and look great as well. I have had them on the car for 10k miles now with no complaints on the wheels. I have pics posted under my profile page.
I have had some issues with the Yoko AVS dBs. When new, they ride great with low highway noise and handle well. However, when the tires start to wear and the outside edge starts to cup, the road noise level starts to rise. They have a new version of the AVS dB to address the cupping issue. It turns out that I also had 2 tires which failed the Hunter road force test, so I had them replaced under a prorated warranty for about $80 for both (a good deal considering $150 new). The two wheels came from Tire Rack with about 3 ounces of weight each, which I thought was strange for an expensvie new setup. However, they were extremely smooth on the highway, so I never worried about it. I didn't even need them rebalanced until about 8k, which is when they discovered that the 2 with lots of weight failed the road force.
I have to say that it was the best money I ever spent on my Q. In any event, good luck with your decision.
I have had some issues with the Yoko AVS dBs. When new, they ride great with low highway noise and handle well. However, when the tires start to wear and the outside edge starts to cup, the road noise level starts to rise. They have a new version of the AVS dB to address the cupping issue. It turns out that I also had 2 tires which failed the Hunter road force test, so I had them replaced under a prorated warranty for about $80 for both (a good deal considering $150 new). The two wheels came from Tire Rack with about 3 ounces of weight each, which I thought was strange for an expensvie new setup. However, they were extremely smooth on the highway, so I never worried about it. I didn't even need them rebalanced until about 8k, which is when they discovered that the 2 with lots of weight failed the road force.
I have to say that it was the best money I ever spent on my Q. In any event, good luck with your decision.