Last post on Dec 04, 2008 at 12:23 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views-Archives
What is this discussion about?
Automotive News, Sedan
#55 of 59 Re: 17" or 18" wheels on a 2008 VW GLI [warhub]
Mar 24, 2008 (6:56 pm)
Ah, New York. Love the city, but it's tough on cars. I'd get the 17s.
#56 of 59 Re: Are Larger Wheels / Tires a Waste of Money? [habitat1]
Dec 02, 2008 (5:38 pm)
A real leveler would be cost per mile driven.
For your standard tires example it is $750/35,000 miles=
$ .0214285 cents.
sport tires $1,400/15,000=
$ .09333 - $ .0214285= $ .07190/ $ .09333=
77% more per mile driven. If you are used to spending $ .0214285 why would you want to spend 4.355 TIMES MORE?
So using 185/70/14 tires with most of the mileage in a plain jane everyday commute, I got 74,300 miles from oem tires. Replacement costs are a $ 49. per tire and $ 60. for removal, disposal, new valves, mount, balance or $ 256/ 74,300 miles =.0034454. The math indicates an almost obscene difference. I LOVE the MB E350, but the math is far too overwhelming to ignore, especially for commuting.
What do you think will happen when you curb a (probably forged, AKA even BIGGER BUX) exotic rim vs say the steel one used with the 185/70/14 tires? I can probably say that tops, the steel one will cost $50 and that is Fed Ex'd to the front door.
#57 of 59 TESTING... TESTING! TESTING?
Dec 03, 2008 (12:06 pm)
While I do not haunt car magazines, I very rarely see before and after testing with the performance parameters neatly laid out. (for the purposes of this discussion before and after larger wheels and tires etc,) . The closest I have seen are www.tire rack.com 's testing the variables they are usually testing for: SAME SIZED in the SAME category tire brands.
The sense I have is larger sizes in addition to the discussed higher acquisition costs, hit performance: ie.,LOWER mpg, stopping distance, hp at the wheels, ride compliance/comfort etc. So it would seem defining the purposes and then seeing if the engineering adaptation makes sense is the first order of business in the "upgrade" Indeed given the original example of oem engineered upgrades, there is STILL no definitive testing/comparison.
#58 of 59 Re: TESTING... TESTING! TESTING? [ruking1]
Dec 03, 2008 (7:20 pm)
(too bad I didn't catch it earlier)
Somebody REALLY needs to tell those retarded McLaren & Ferrari Formula One engineers that they need to replace their silly, ineffective balloon-like tires & wheels with some Stylin' Fo-shizzle Chromey DubDeuces (spinnazzzz preferably) and micro-sidewall 20-series lo-pros.
Seriously, for anyone with a logical bone in their head, there is a diminishing return with ever-increasing wheel size, and most carmakers have crossed that line.
For the same $$$ you would have spent on frequent mega-dollar re-tires, I'm convinced you could get the world's strongest & lightest forged alloys in a modest 15"-16" size, a set of dedicated track & ice tires, along with a WRC-worthy Ohlins or DMS suspension setup.
With a proper set-up of lightweight, reasonable-size running stock, you could run RINGS around the guy with the cheeeeezy dubs, and even laugh at bad pavement along the way.
#59 of 59 Re: TESTING... TESTING! TESTING? [ruking1]
Dec 04, 2008 (12:23 pm)
These huge tires are a total waste of money unless you're in it for styling. They cost a fortune, wear out more quickly, ride harsher and tend to do worse in wet or snow conditions. Interestingly though, Toyota seems to be getting big into these big wheels as in Highlander and Venza.