16x7 rims, +45 offset, what size es100's should I get?

**sorry mods, I can't post in the wheels/tires forum yet**

 

i use 205/45/16 on my 16's....

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by dubrand &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">**sorry mods, I can't post in the wheels/tires forum yet**</TD></TR></TABLE>

good, never make a thread there.

edit: i just realized you were probably talking about posting in one of the already created threads... yep, sorry . but i know i remember seeing a lot of threads that definately didn't belong there... at least when those forums were new!

 

205/45/16 without a doubt, 40 is too small in a g3, and 50 is too much tire.

Oh and ps Wheels/Tires Forum is for sponsors only

Heres mine with 16x7 Volks and Es100's

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by quikB18B &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">205/45/16 without a doubt, 40 is too small in a g3, and 50 is too much tire.

Heres mine with 16x7 Volks and Es100's </TD></TR></TABLE>

Also, I've found that a 215/40/16 works well as it gives more contact patch, and also a taller sidewall than a 205/40/16... I'll try to snap some pix of mine...

 

I had 215's.. but Azenis... a little bit of rub on the rear.

 

definately 215/40/16. take advantage of the 7inch width

 

Never rubeed with that drop either...

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 4U2NV &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Also, I've found that a 215/40/16 works well as it gives more contact patch, and also a taller sidewall than a 205/40/16... I'll try to snap some pix of mine... </TD></TR></TABLE>

Contact patch area remains the same regardless of tire size, given the same pressure, be it 195/50-15, 195/55-15, 205/50-15, 205/40-16, 205/45-16, 215/40-16, 205/40-17, whatever.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by PatrickGSR94 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Also, I've found that a 215/40/16 works well as it gives more contact patch, and also a taller sidewall than a 205/40/16... I'll try to snap some pix of mine...
.</TD></TR></TABLE>

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by PatrickGSR94 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">


Contact patch area remains the same regardless of tire size, given the same pressure, be it 195/50-15, 195/55-15, 205/50-15, 205/40-16, 205/45-16, 215/40-16, 205/40-17, whatever.</TD></TR></TABLE>

The contact patch between 215 and 205 is different. One is wider than the other. Ie more rubber touching the ground.

 

DO you guys have anny rubbing issues running 215's? most tire shops will say you can't run anythign larger than 205 on a Integra/civic. But I guess if there is a will there is a way.

 

205/40/16
205/45/16
215/40/16

 

check the sig - 205/45/16

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by NW Boost &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> DO you guys have anny rubbing issues running 215's? most tire shops will say you can't run anythign larger than 205 on a Integra/civic. But I guess if there is a will there is a way.</TD></TR></TABLE>

My only rubs on hardcore U-Turns... If I have to make the U-Turn pretty fast it will rub slightly, but if I take it slow enough it won't rub...

 

215/40 would be best if you can fit them. It gives you a nice wider contact patch. I rub with 215/40 on hard corners, but i'm running 17's. If you're worried about rubbing, I'd go with 205/45.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 2kgs-R &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

The contact patch between 215 and 205 is different. One is wider than the other. Ie more rubber touching the ground.</TD></TR></TABLE>

It will be wider, but also thinner. The area of rubber touching the ground is always the same regardless of tire size, given the same air pressure and the same load on the tire.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by iH8RICERZ &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">i use 205/45/16 on my 16's....</TD></TR></TABLE>

 

I'm not sure thats entirely true. Yeah the contact patch is wider but to say is thiiner (front to back) is very hard to say since every tire flattens out diffrently under the same load. Now if you over all diamiter of the tire is much diffrent yeah I would say thats true. But if you're running about the same over all diamiter I say wider is better. Oh and I've seen a couple guys round here even cram 225's under their fenders, but they were using BFG cheater slicks and were only for going down the strip so hard turning wasn't in their agenda.

 

It is true. The amount (area) of rubber that is flat on the ground (the contact patch) is determined by the tire's inflation pressure, and the weight the tire is bearing (that particular corner's weight). It doesn't matter what diameter the tire is, what width it is or anything. Assuming same inflation pressure and same weight, the area of the contact patch is always the same. The shape may change depending on width, but area does not.

Now, lower the tire pressure (like for drag racing) and THEN you get more contact patch area.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by PatrickGSR94 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">It is true. The amount (area) of rubber that is flat on the ground (the contact patch) is determined by the tire's inflation pressure, and the weight the tire is bearing (that particular corner's weight). It doesn't matter what diameter the tire is, what width it is or anything. Assuming same inflation pressure and same weight, the area of the contact patch is always the same. The shape may change depending on width, but area does not.

Now, lower the tire pressure (like for drag racing) and THEN you get more contact patch area. </TD></TR></TABLE>


There is some truth to that, but not alot. Yes with the same weight car the difference in a 205 and a 195 probably isnt much or any at all, given the same overall diameter. Changing the OD would have a much greater effect, due to the fact that vertical or height of the contact patch is changing and the width really cant change with it. Thus going from a 195/50/15 to a 195/50/17 the 17" will have less contact patch. Some people even say that changing the sidewall from say a 195/55/15 to a 205/40/17 will change the contact patch because the tire can "mush" as much and thus you lose CP. Tell me this, if I have a 195 and a 205 that have the same contact patch(meaning more width, less height) wouldnt my 205s wear out slower?

 

i get what pat is saying, each tire has the same contact point on the tire, but a wider tire will have more surface area in it's contact patch cause it's wider, there fore a 355 will definitly touching more that a 195, but they both have the same contact point on the tire, understand? i have 205/45/16 and the guy at one6motorsports said i couldn't fit the azenis, 205(really 215 cheater slicks) he said they would rub, the 205 neo gens are awesome, no squeeking and i can take turns so much harder and my car isn't even lower yet

 

I am right dammit

Assume for a moment that a tire did not deflect at all when weight is placed on it (say if you just mounted a solid metal disc of width say 7" wide on the car), then the contact patch would have no area, and would be only a straight line, 7" wide (long), and 0" depth.

But a tire does deflect a bit when weight is put on it, and creates a flat spot which is the contact patch, with a width and a depth.

Take a car with 195/50-15 tires inflated to 35 psi. Now take the same car and put on some 335/30-18 tires (assume they will fit) and also inflate them to 35 psi. The contact patch will be almost twice as wide, but the tire will hardly deflect at all because there is more rubber under that same weight. So the depth of that contact patch becomes very small. The area (width * depth) stays the same.

Just accept the fact that it's true, because it is.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by PatrickGSR94 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I am right dammit

Assume for a moment that a tire did not deflect at all when weight is placed on it (say if you just mounted a solid metal disc of width say 7" wide on the car), then the contact patch would have no area, and would be only a straight line, 7" wide (long), and 0" depth.

But a tire does deflect a bit when weight is put on it, and creates a flat spot which is the contact patch, with a width and a depth.

Take a car with 195/50-15 tires inflated to 35 psi. Now take the same car and put on some 335/30-18 tires (assume they will fit) and also inflate them to 35 psi. The contact patch will be almost twice as wide, but the tire will hardly deflect at all because there is more rubber under that same weight. So the depth of that contact patch becomes very small. The area (width * depth) stays the same.

Just accept the fact that it's true, because it is. </TD></TR></TABLE>

i agree with ya bro, im just saying that a bigger tire will touch more ground, are you disagreeing, cause why would a porshe have 3 somethings if they could have a lighter 195, plus it makes your car wider

 

Patrick is right!

Once again, contact patch AREA is the same, regardless of diameter, width, aspect ratio, etc. Contact patch SHAPE changes.

See this article.