so the 195/50 are smaller, therefore the wheel will spin more and the odometer and speedo will read faster than normal? vice versa?

 

http://www.miata.net/garage/tirecalc.html

 

That's correct. That's one reason (among others) to get the tire size that best fits your car. 195/55-15 is better for Integras and '97-00 Civics; 195/50-15 is better for pre-'96 Civics.

 

cool thanks, got 195/55 back on, feels much better. had the 205/55 on for just today and it rubbed about 3-5 times.

between the 195/55 and 205/55 the only difference is that the tire is wider right? and the side wall is same height?
i had 1 person tell me .55x 205 and that is your side height, then someone else told me 55 is just your height regardless of the width. someone want to clear this up?

 

No.

The first person is correct, and the second person is wrong. On a tire that's 205/55-15, the height of the sidewall is 205 mm * .55 = 112.75 mm, which is higher than the height of the sidewall on a 195/55-15 tire (107.25 mm). The tire rubs because it is wider AND the outer diameter is larger.

 

ahh love ht, thanks for the clarification

i had the avids on for 1 day and it gripped really well compared to my falkens, is it because its wider or just better materials?

how does the falkens 329/912 compare kumho exsta ASX in terms of traction?

 

Yokohama makes a number of different all-season tires with the Avid name, and some are better than others, so I can't really answer your question. I can tell you that the Kumho Ecsta ASX is much much MUCH better than the Falken Ziex ZE-912. Basically, the Ziex ZE-912 is just not very good; its main attraction is that it is inexpensive to buy.

 

i have the avid a4s. the 912 were only 68 to buy, they are pretty cheap. i think theyre worth it for the money.

 

For the record I really haven't liked 195/50/15s I've tried. I prefer 195/55 because they ride better.

Good luck.

 

I think its because you were running the wrong size for your car...