JforJonathan

Ok I have been trying to decide which tire size to put on my crv for 4 days straight now. my 98 crv is all stock, stock suspension and stock 15" steel wheels. of my 3 choices...which tire size do you think i should do and why? I want the bigger tires, but i just wanna be sure that i wont be rubbing all the time.

215/70-15

225/70-15

215/75-15

Help me decide!! Thanks

The Chazzer

OEM
there is no reason for bigger tires.
none.
if you want it to look better, lower it a little bit.

JforJonathan

yeah, lowering springs aren't hard to find for these cars...that may be an option...

kokopelli

another consideration for you- 205/75/15. Firestone destination AT, General Grabber AT2 and Uniroyal Liberator AT (wal Mart) have this size. I looked at the Liberator next to a 205/70 today at walmart and there is a noticeable difference to the tire's height- looks good.
I like the Destinations- I've had those on a Jeep Cherokee and an Element...about $100 more out the door than the Uniroyals...

HNDA_4SHOOR

this. Focus on quality

ARMED

why people have to be so damn difficult....


225/70

kokopelli

225 is too wide in my opinion...

ARMED

225 is fine in my opinion

kokopelli

any pics of a 225 on stock rims?

DA_teg04

Lmao, this response really makes no sense at all...how is there "no reason for bigger tires," yet in the same breath you suggest lowering an SUV when there is just as little if not less of a reason to do so. If you have not yet realized, the beauty of this hobby is when cars are built according to the personal preferences of their respective owners, and not according to the opinions/standards of others. With that said if the man wants bigger tires on his V so be it, unless you have logical reasonings as to why it shouldn't be done (ie functionality issues such as clearance) then imo you shouldn't have anything to say about the matter.

Now back to the issue at hand...to the OP, your only real issue with going with bigger tires on factory suspension would be clearance as the tires may rub when turning or hitting bumps. BUT, it has been done, a perfect example would be the this V pictured below...



The specs on these tires according to the guy who owns them are 235/75/15 Firestone Destination M/T. As he posted in another thread he says there is minimal rubbing...if you wanted to eliminate all rubbing you could go with a slightly shorter/narrower tire so 225/70 as suggested would be ideal. Or you could always lift the car too. Goodluck

The Chazzer

just because I didn't say it...
I like that you wrote a whole paragraph to tell me to **** off.

Funny that you posted the blue V on huge tires: that's exactly what I thought of when I posted in this thread the first time. **** looks awful. The guy is not only making his car look worse, but making it function worse to boot. I didn't troll his thread, nor post that picture here, because I'm not an *******.
I suggested this guy might lower it because to do so would eliminate some wheel gap (a possible reason bigger tires were considered), while retaining functionality - and it's a lot cheaper if you just put on springs.
All bigger tires get you is less MPG and a big dent in your walet - all for nothing.

To each his own.
JforJonathan: if you want your V to look like the blue one, by all means. It's your car.
But for ****'s sake people...these are not offroaders. They're jacked up cars with AWD. Enjoy them for what they are and move on. If you want an "SUV" you made the wrong purchase.

DA_teg04

You are still basing the majority of comments on your own personal opinion, to which you are of course entitled to. But, the bottom line is that both options of lowering or going with bigger tires each come with their own pros and cons. Just as bigger tires may have a negative effect on mpg, lowering the crv will have a negative effect on the suspension, undoubtedly shortening their lives of the dampers and requiring sooner and more frequent replacement. In addition, ride quality will be sacrificed and the car has more of a chance of bottoming out and damaging not only the undercarriage but also other vital suspension components.

But on another note, to say "off-roaders" are the only vehicles that should be allowed to run large tires is ridiculous. As the majority of "real" "off-roader" trucks and suvs that most people put large tires on never in fact go off pavement. Instead the tires are put on them to achieve a certain look, as is the case with the blue V, and I'm assuming with the op. And that again is their own personal preference and right to do so.

The Chazzer

Indeed.
But that doesn't change the fact that they are more-or-less the proper vehicles for going offroad. Although it is dumb that people do the mods then don't go offroad...at least they could.
Lifting a CR-V and/or putting on big tires is just poser-status.
That doesn't mean someone can't beef-up a CR-V to be competant off road or on trails. But suspension and wheels is far from getting you there.

I understand that a lot of this is is subjective. But what I'm talking about here is not. If you think a CR-V belongs off road, you're high. It was designed to be a road-car with clearance and traction for inclement weather and very light duty off tarmac. That's why I own one! That's why a lot of people own them. They're good for what they're designed for. Pretending they're something else is ridiculous, but if pretending is what you wanna do...go for it. It's yours.

From what I have read and what I know about lowering with a set of springs only, this is mostly untrue.
Coilovers - depends on how you use 'em.

kokopelli

Hi! My name is Kokopelli, and I'm a poser!



Ironman lift springs are being delivered today. Windows tinted tomorrow. Then I'm adding front skid plate, bull bar, driving lights, fog lights, nerf bars, safari roof rack and a dead Thompsons Gazelle strapped across the hood.

DA_teg04

:facepalm: Was there a point somewhere in there?? (rhetorical question)


Really? Maybe you should tell that to these guys...(and by the looks of it, this particular one looks to be on factory suspension and factory spec sized tires)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LyimRnoeBk

Again, really? Because in looking to the majority of your statements thus far, most all of them are in fact subjective to your own opinion...example

And again your own statement below negates your previous one suggesting to lower the car as it would result in a lower ground clearance, thus defeating the original intent of the vehicle (according to your opinion).

Also you might want to tell this guy to stop pretending his grocery-getting snowmobile is suitable for auto-xing...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0cmPiUTZIvE

And this is why you should really check your sources and brush up on suspension 101. Because in the amount of money that one spends on the appropriate suspension setup to achieve a lowered car of any kind without having to sacrificing ride quality and maintaining/increasing functionality will end up costing a lot more than a set of larger tires, and that sir is a normative, fact based statement.

The OP originally asked for help in deciding between three tire sizes already stating that he wanted to go with bigger tires. He didn't request opinions as to whether or not he should get bigger tires or how it looked, he requested information regarding which tire size would allow him to go bigger without rubbing...which has already been answered. That said, opinions/subjective statements are worthless in this case. I apologize if I come off as being an ***, but it really just bothers me when people try to pass off their personal opinions/preferences as fact, especially when opinions were never requested to begin with.

LDForget

Im sorry, but im going to have to go with "the chazzer" with this one. Although he has a terrible name, he statements mostly align with my opinions on the vehicle. Anyone thats done offroading, then thinks that their crv can not only play with the big boys, but last afterwords, is just fooling themselves. The AWD system in the CRV is not built for offroading, wether its rock crawling, mudding, or any mixture. I wouldnt even want to think about trying to get this thing unstuck without ripping the unibody in half. Not only is the AWD system not made for use more than wet pavement or a bit of ice on the road, but the motor is severely underpowered for big heavy mud tires. stressing the motor trying to turn those tires in the sticky mud is just asking for trouble. Not only the motor that would be stressed, but the transmission, and the rear diff. The u-joints on this thing are made from twigs as well, they cant take the beating that a full size u-joint on a real suv/truck can take. Trying to compare his statement of its not an offroader, to your statement of its the same as telling the other guy its not an auto-x'er, is just ridiculous. The CRV is a lot closer to a auto-x'er than an offroader any day of the week. First of all, its based off of a car (civic), then AWD was added (great for ON ROAD TRACTION WHEN NEEDED), and a bigger motor (b20) was added. 3 things making it better at auto-x, but not in the same class for offroading. Regardless of what your doing with your vehicle, if its not regular daily duties, your gonna beat it up a bit. Depending on what your doing, it can be beat up a bit, or beat up a lot. Dont kid yourself, and dont try to wheel your momma's CRV. If you want to wheel, buy a real SUV.

The Chazzer

Thank you. Well put.
I'm not even going to reply piece-for-piece to that guy like he obviously wants me to. This sums it up proper.

hahaha...I hate choosing SNs. I never choose well.

DA_teg04

You guys are completely missing the point, and seem to be attempting to argue for the sake of arguing as you are both still getting caught up on the notion of off-roading. But what you are both not realizing is that it has absolutely zero relevance to the OP's question. He never once mentioned "off-roading" in this thread. He seems to want bigger tires to suit his aesthetic preference for the CR-V. The problem came when Chazzer tried to impart his aesthetic preference for the vehicle to the OP in saying "if you want it to look better, lower it a little bit." Again, the bottom line is that going with bigger tires is a personal preference, and certain larger sizes are just as functional as factory spec, as seen on Kokopelli's and others on the boards...so yes, to each their own! If your opinion differs as to what looks good and what kind of certain look belongs where so be it, but it doesn't justify you telling others they are wrong based on your personal preferences and opinion of the car's purpose.

And Chaz, I wasn't looking for a response, and if you thought I was, you obviously didn't read the last statement in my previous post. We're supposed to be helping each other here, not telling someone not to do something bc "the car wasn't made for that" if that we're the case, what the hell is the point of modifying cars in the first place.

The Chazzer

The point of modifying cars is to improve the cars' ability to do what it is designed to do.

My GTI for example: sure, it's a mid-90s econobox with a big engine. But it was designed to be an all-purpose, functional, fun to drive road car. By adding a set of coilovers, better tires, and other smaller modifications, I have improved my car's abilities to better perform in its designed function. It is more fun to drive than it was when it was stock - I can still load it up to the headliner with stuff and drive it practically anywhere, only now I can take corners at twice the speed as I could when it was stock, AND with the lowered suspension it looks a whole lot better, too.

If you think that modifying what you drive only contributes to the way it looks and not the way it works and how it is intended to be used - well that's your business. I like to actually improve what I'm driving by spending extra money and time on it.

So you take a CR-V. You lift it and put bigger tires on it. Sure it may look cool in some peoples' minds, but it also makes it accelerate, brake, and handle worse. Worse MPG, more wear on the drivetrain that is already underpowered, and I'm willing to bet the offroad performance gains are worse too, if it were indeed taken offroad. Big tires and lifted suspension does not automatically make offroad capability increase.
It's spending money to make the car perform worse. To me, that's insane.
But you're right. To each his own...not the first time I've said this in this thread, either.

*edit*
so I looked into your signature.
one of the first things on there is "Function>Form".
do you even know what that means?

DA_teg04

Because it seems that you have had problems comprehending what I have stated up to this point I leave you with this...



And I won't even entertain this ignorance with a response.

The Chazzer

you, the person who has "function over form" in his signature, and is defending the idea of form over function.....are calling ME ignorant.

smartguy.

DA_teg04

Because you still seem to be having issues comprehending, I will spell it out for you. I have not been defending form over function, I have been defending the man's right to build his car according to his tastes. Function over form is what I apply to my own personal builds, yet I don't feel the need to get on a soap box to try and convert others to my way of thinking like some kind of religious zealot.

^^^ This again is an opinion, a misguided and narrow-minded one, but an opinion nonetheless. Do yourself a favor, go back and re-read what has already been stated in this thread and take some time to re-evaluate your argument. If you any reasonable bone in your body, you will realize the error of your ways. With that said, this will be my last word on the matter, because I really don't have the time to continue to go back and forth with you as I can only lead you to water, I can't force you to drink it.

And if you for some reason feel you must have the last word on this subject, by all means, I will allow you to have it

The Chazzer

wow you're easy.