i was thinking of running a 225/45/17 up front and a 205/45/17 out back in hopes of reducing understeer. the vehicle is a 96 accord EX 5-speed if it matters. i was hoping someone here had some experience with a similar setup. any responses would be greatly appreciated.

 

For what purpose? And what tires?

 

I think its a good idea

RJ - waiting for 225/45/15 RA1's so he can feel "JDM"

 

I wish Hoosier made a 23 inch-ish 195/50-15...or Toyo...or???

Scott, who's more JDM all the time...at least in the tire sizing department.

 

It helps, but it really isnt that big of a change. It wont solve all your understeer problems.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by .RJ &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I think its a good idea

RJ - waiting for 225/45/15 RA1's so he can feel "JDM"</TD></TR></TABLE>

ur slow


Modified by paRRRker at 2:30 PM 12/1/2004

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by paRRRker &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

ur gonna hurt ur gearing you t00l</TD></TR></TABLE>

Its 'shorter' than a 205/50/15, dumbass.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by deadbymorning &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">i was thinking of running a 225/45/17 up front and a 205/45/17 out back in hopes of reducing understeer. the vehicle is a 96 accord EX 5-speed if it matters. i was hoping someone here had some experience with a similar setup. any responses would be greatly appreciated.</TD></TR></TABLE>

less camber in the rear is oneway u can get rid of a lil understeer

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by TeamSTEALTH GSR &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

less camber in the rear is oneway u can get rid of a lil understeer</TD></TR></TABLE>

That would really depend on where the camber was to begin with, the type of tire and how hard the car is driven (and low speed turns I doubt there is a ton or rear loading anyway). You might see more effect at turn-in w/ toe out than w/ camber changes I'd think. I would also add that a smaller width tire in the back in some cases might build heat more quickly so you might have more grip sooner. Also if that's on a 6" rim vs. a 7" rim or wider, again things might change. I'd think you are better off tuning out understeer by springs and swaybars for the conditions the car will see (auto-x vs. track) if at all possilble. JMO and YMMV and MC-n-HNY

 

I tried runnign 225 RA-1s fron tiwth year old and nearly corded 205 Victos in the rear. (did not change camber)

Car felt way better, way easier to rotate anyway, but lap times were noticably slower. (vs 225 RA1s all around)

 

Where are you guys finding 225/45/15 RA1s? The only thing I see listed anywhere is 225/50/15.

 

those are supposedly going to be released early next year.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by deadbymorning &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">i was thinking of running a 225/45/17 up front and a 205/45/17 out back in hopes of reducing understeer. the vehicle is a 96 accord EX 5-speed if it matters. i was hoping someone here had some experience with a similar setup. any responses would be greatly appreciated.</TD></TR></TABLE>

during spring season i was planning on running 225/50/15 up front and 205/50/15 in the back..all 4 on 15x7 rims...this is on my 5th gen accord..but i probably have a different setup than you to begin with...and i guess you can't wait for my feedback till then

but now falken might not be releasing the new azenis in 225/50/15 anymore..the rep better be wrong

 

I don't see the point in staggering tire sizes with street tires unless you are severely restricted by rules or something.

Shouldn't you maximize grip at one end of the car before you start taking it away at the other end?

 

You can also mess around with air pressures, crank up the rears.

if you really want to get the rear end loose, put on some really hard tires in the rear and some really sticky tires in the front.

 

I agree with some of the others here saying that a "proper" suspension (proper being a suspension that makes the car handle with less understeer than the one you've got) comes before you stagger tires. When you can't change the suspension anymore due to $ or rules or $, then look into alternatives. Judging by your tire sizes, it seems that you could improve some things before you start putting skinnies on the back.

I apologize for using "proper" twice in a post without speaking with an English accent.

 

well my plan of running staggered is really an experiment (what isn't eh) ...i'm running 12k rear and 10k front omnipowers with a s/t rear swaybar, no front and slight toe out front and rear and about 1.5 degrees camber front .5 in the rear...i loved the way the car behaved with 205/50/15 on both front and back..forgot tire pressures...i can't adjust my shocks and i can't adjust my swaybar

but next season i'm going to be running 0 toe (daily driver) with hopefully 2 degrees camber and a stock ex front swaybar (wanna see how i like it with the front bar)...i'll be running sts so going wider than 225 is illegal...i'm scared that the new allignment and front bar will cause it to understeer more than my previous setup so i was thinking about staggered sizes...still playing with the idea though

btw, new azenis will be available late spring says another rep...this and the news of no 225/50/15 makes me sad

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by GSpeedR &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I agree with some of the others here saying that a "proper" suspension (proper being a suspension that makes the car handle with less understeer than the one you've got) comes before you stagger tires</TD></TR></TABLE>

Why?

You need less tire in the rear than in the front...

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by .RJ &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
You need less tire in the rear than in the front... </TD></TR></TABLE>
In theory, yeah . . . but in practice, can any car (except for maybe ITC or something) ever have enough tire under it, regardless of how much each end proportionally needs? From what I've seen in my short, limited experience with racing, I'd say no.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Targa250R &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
In theory, yeah . . . but in practice, can any car (except for maybe ITC or something) ever have enough tire under it, regardless of how much each end proportionally needs? From what I've seen in my short, limited experience with racing, I'd say no.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Depends on lots of things. Example: my ITA miata is significantly faster on 205 hoosiers than 225 hoosiers at Rd. Atlanta. Like over 1 second per lap. Same track, same temp, same day.

That said, if I go to a handling track (Roebling) I will be back on the 225s in a second, they just suck trying to get them down that looooonnng straight at RA.

 

I dont know if you've tried this yet, but lowering the pressure in the falkens is a good way to get some more rotation. The good part is unlike using over inflation, the lowered inflation has a more gradual effect, so it helps your steady cornering without making initial turn-in crazy.

I believe it is because as the outside rear tire is loaded with weight, it gradually deforms and goes from having some contact to having less contact. With overinflation, it always has little contact. I also think staggering wheel widths could allow for more rear-tire-deformation and enhance this effect, but air pressures should do the trick.

Have you thought about going with 8 or 9 K springs in the front? Have you removed the front sway bar yet?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by RacerBowie &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Depends on lots of things. Example: my ITA miata is significantly faster on 205 hoosiers than 225 hoosiers at Rd. Atlanta. Like over 1 second per lap. Same track, same temp, same day.

That said, if I go to a handling track (Roebling) I will be back on the 225s in a second, they just suck trying to get them down that looooonnng straight at RA.</TD></TR></TABLE>
That's a good point that I failed to consider. The track layout and surface will almost always make a difference.

I didn't think the increase in resistance would be that significant. Guess I can still learn a thing or two from drag racers after all

 

It's probably a combination of rolling resistance and extra pounds (you're talking about 205/55-14 and 225/50-14 right?)

Staggered tires on my car did not change the way it handled at all. It just went about a quarter of a second faster on a 50 second autocross course than 205 hoosiers all around. Same deal on Matt Grainger's ITR, we bolted on 225's to the front after running 205's and picked up a half second with no ill handling effects (it was evil on cold tires no matter what).

To me, the stagger is not for significantly changing balance of the car. It's to A) increase front grip and B) reduce weight and rolling resistance from the round things keeping the rear bumper from dragging on the ground.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by .RJ &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Why?

You need less tire in the rear than in the front... </TD></TR></TABLE>

True, but a poorly tuned suspension will reduce grip in both the front and rear, since you can't really talk about suspension from only one end of the car. The "handling" of the front and rear suspensions are coupled.

It's not that tire stagger won't make a car with a shitty suspension faster, but that benefit is smaller. In the end, rules are rules, and its a viable option.