Alright... i want to know what the performance differences in the 195/50/15 comparing to 205/50/15 tires. IE. response, grip and etc.

I'm running a 15x6.5 rim. so what you guys think?

 

The only real difference is that you're probably going to pay a little bit more for the 205-50-15's. Other than that, they are a better tire all around

 

I cracked 2 SSR type X running 195/50/15 kumho. 205 is worth protecting your investment. Not exatcly a performance answer, but just it's worth sharing.

 

Don't forget the 205 50 will be taller...

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by drdisco69 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Don't forget the 205 50 will be taller...</TD></TR></TABLE>

why would 205 be taller? isn't the 205 is the width of the tire?

and how would i protet my tire with 205?

i'm curious about these theories. i've never heard of it

 

You are correct, 205 is the width of the tire. But the 50 is the ratio of the width to the height. So the side wall of the tire is 50% of the width. Obviously, 50% of 205 is more than 50% of 195.

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/...e.jsp

 

It's been established that the 195/205 is the tire width. 205's will give you more tire contact area to the road, more than a 195 tire. Although, it will probably go unnoticed. more surface area = more grip/better handling.

On the N1/Super Taiku circut racing in Japan, some of the guys run staggered wheel setups:

16x7 w/38 offset in the front w/a 205 (or wider) tire
15x6.5 w/45 offset in the rear w/195 tire

..again this is for better/more responsive handling characteristics.

Different tire companies have different tire styles. For instance, Falken Azenis have a thick sidewall, which create less flex when cornering and also protect the lip of a rim pretty good too. Whereas, other tire companies have thinner sidewalls which are more flex prone and don't quite protect the rim lip as much.

50 would be the tire height.
In Japan, usually with cars running a 15" wheel, for some odd reason they like using 55 series tires. Probably has something to do with better acceleration & final drives.

 

i think u mean 195/55/15. Thats teh stock size found on some hondas (EM-1)

going wiith the 205/50 will not be taller.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by K@man &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">It's been established that the 195/205 is the tire width. 205's will give you more tire contact area to the road, more than a 195 tire. Although, it will probably go unnoticed. more surface area = more grip/better handling.

On the N1/Super Taiku circut racing in Japan, some of the guys run staggered wheel setups:

16x7 w/38 offset in the front w/a 205 (or wider) tire
15x6.5 w/45 offset in the rear w/195 tire

..again this is for better/more responsive handling characteristics.

Different tire companies have different tire styles. For instance, Falken Azenis have a thick sidewall, which create less flex when cornering and also protect the lip of a rim pretty good too. Whereas, other tire companies have thinner sidewalls which are more flex prone and don't quite protect the rim lip as much.

50 would be the tire height.
In Japan, usually with cars running a 15" wheel, for some odd reason they like using 55 series tires. Probably has something to do with better acceleration & final drives.</TD></TR></TABLE>

yor absolutely right, i just purchased a set of mugen rnr's that came with japanese goodyears 195/55/15 .

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by drdisco69 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">You are correct, 205 is the width of the tire. But the 50 is the ratio of the width to the height. So the side wall of the tire is 50% of the width. Obviously, 50% of 205 is more than 50% of 195.

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/...e.jsp</TD></TR></TABLE>

Okay, so a 205/50 is taller comparing to a 195/50. How much taller will it be?
I think you got the concepts wrong because a 235/35 series tire is not taller than a 225/35.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Mischiefek &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I think you got the concepts wrong because a 235/35 series tire is not taller than a 225/35.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Yes it is. Did you read the Tire Rack site? Look at some 265 70s on a Tahoe. Then look at some 265 35s on a Porsche. Then tell me they're the same height.

The second number is a ratio. A percentage. Takes a little math, but it's true.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Mischiefek &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Okay, so a 205/50 is taller comparing to a 195/50. How much taller will it be?</TD></TR></TABLE>
The back has the taller side wall. 205/50/15 (r) 195/50/15 (f) Don't ask why. It's fixed now.

 

There you go. The 205 is .3 inches taller than the 195, giving it 1.24 inches more rolling diameter. And making the car look funny.

 

oh okay. i didn't check out that link. learn something new today

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by drdisco69 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">You are correct, 205 is the width of the tire. But the 50 is the ratio of the width to the height. So the side wall of the tire is 50% of the width. Obviously, 50% of 205 is more than 50% of 195.

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/...e.jsp</TD></TR></TABLE>this guy knows his tire size differences