Why do some people have different size tires for F & R?

[Datsrboi]

I just picked up a set of wheels today. Fronts are 17x8 and rear are 17x9. I am guessing 32 offset on all 4 wheels.. The confusing is why do some people put smaller tires on the front then the rear. Wouldnt that cause the car to drive weird? My tires on the front is 225/45/17 and the rear are 235/50/17. Why would someone run 45 then out of no where a pair of 50 for the rear?

Also out of topic.. Do the 50 fit fine for the rear and 45 front? I feel like my wheels look big (Biggest I have ever own and my first rear wheel drive) My car is drop on ebaich springs (spelled wrong)

 

[swaq]

The staggered tire sizes is common for cars with rear wheel drive and a good amount of power. The larger rear tires help with traction during acceleration. It could also be done for handling balance, I suppose.

As far as running a 50 profile in back and 45 in front, that would make the rear tires have a larger diameter than the front. I can't see why you'd want to do that unless it was designed like that stock, or maybe if you were trying to raise the rear...

 

[Datsrboi]

The staggered tire sizes is common for cars with rear wheel drive and a good amount of power. The larger rear tires help with traction during acceleration. It could also be done for handling balance, I suppose.

As far as running a 50 profile in back and 45 in front, that would make the rear tires have a larger diameter than the front. I can't see why you'd want to do that unless it was designed like that stock, or maybe if you were trying to raise the rear...

I brought them like that for cheap so didnt know til I got home. Does anyone else does this? 50 rear fits right?

 

[IJ.]

265/35/18 & 285/35/18's are the biggest I can squeeze in without them rubbing anything.

I prefer using the same sidewall profiles F/R as I find it's easier to balance the handling.

 

[johnathan1]

Staggered fitment is common on RWD cars...wider tire=more traction.

 

[IJ.]

^ Actually it's more to do with larger diameter = great contact patch the width doesn't do a whole lot for straightline traction and is more of a benfit for cornering

 

[johnathan1]

^ Actually it's more to do with larger diameter = great contact patch the width doesn't do a whole lot for straightline traction and is more of a benfit for cornering

Hmm...interesting...I always thought of the wider tires' primary purpose being to improve straightline traction. But I suppose it would also improve cornering ability as well...

I'm guessing width of the tires is proportional to the weight of the car?

 

[IJ.]

Johnathan: Correct and while I have no hard data to back that up I can say the Fat one at 4012 lbs feels under tyred on 265/285's whereas my 240z at 2300 lbs felt great on 265/265's.

 

[Datsrboi]

wide-wise I can understand so far.. But what about size wise like 45 thick front and 50 thick rear on 17s.

 

[johnathan1]

Johnathan: Correct and while I have no hard data to back that up I can say the Fat one at 4012 lbs feels under tyred on 265/285's whereas my 240z at 2300 lbs felt great on 265/265's.

Interesting...how much did your 240Z weigh?

wide-wise I can understand so far.. But what about size wise like 45 thick front and 50 thick rear on 17s.

I'm assuming that they were thinking that a 50 on the rear would give the rear wheels more traction...even if only slightly more...LOL

 

[IJ.]

Dats: Taller sidewall will generally give more flex/bite on launches.

Johnathan: ummm 2300 lbs

 

[johnathan1]

Johnathan: ummm 2300 lbs

LOL, the same as my Porsche. I guess I need to get rid of the 185/60/14's it has on it...:naughty: With a whopping 95hp...I could really use the extra traction. :sarcasm:

 

[Poodles]

the MKIV has larger tires in the back and it handles more nuturally than the MKIII from what I've heard...

the ass end isn't as easy to breakaway on corners and makes it quite easy to control...

 

[suprabad]

the MKIV has larger tires in the back and it handles more nuturally than the MKIII from what I've heard...

the ass end isn't as easy to breakaway on corners and makes it quite easy to control...

I'm not sure if that will apply to a mkiii, but if that line of thinking is correct, than it would be more effective to go to a 17" front and 18" rear wheel or 18"/19". Bigger diameter means more contact surface (assuming the widths are the same).

Frankly, there's so many variables, that without thorugh R&D and fine tuning of chassis/suspension by Dr. Science types, your shooting in the dark.

I think you're more likely to muck up the handling than to improve it by playing with staggering.

 

[swaq]

I'm not sure if that will apply to a mkiii, but if that line of thinking is correct, than it would be more effective to go to a 17" front and 18" rear wheel or 18"/19". Bigger diameter means more contact surface (assuming the widths are the same).

Frankly, there's so many variables, that without thorugh R&D and fine tuning of chassis/suspension by Dr. Science types, your shooting in the dark.

I think you're more likely to muck up the handling than to improve it by playing with staggering.

You don't need to increase the wheel diameter to increase the tire diameter though, just change the tire profile.

 

[suprabad]

You don't need to increase the wheel diameter to increase the tire diameter though, just change the tire profile.

Agreed. But, I think most people would rather keep the sidewall height of the tires uniform, and so wheel staggering (rather than tire) would be a more attractive option. IMHO.:icon_bigg

 

[boosted17]

Some people do it for looks. Some say for traction. Larger contact patch in the rear will help hooking up as long as it is a sticky tire. Cheap tires you will still spin. It could help your car handle better to if done right.

 

[TurboStreetCar]

bigger contact patch will help cornering and straight line traction, the tread doesnt care whether its lateral or longitudinal. The difference is the sidewall, smaller thinner sidewalls help lateral traction by holding the tread flat with more stability under the wheel where a bigger thicker sidewall will flex and absorb shock for better traction when launching at the 1320.

wider tires will only give worthwile traction gains if the pressure inside the tire is reduced. a wider tire at the same pressure will have more square inches of contact patch witch will push on the road harder and put more curve in the bottom of the tire taking away from the front to back dimension of the contact patch.

say you have 10 square inches of contact patch on the road at 30psi on a 225. 5 inches across and 2 inches front to back. you install a 275 at 30psi, you would still have 10 square inches of contact patch because you have 6.5 inches across and 1.5 inches front to back. Drop the pressure in the 275 to 15psi and then you have 24 square inches because the tire flattened out to 8 inches across and 3 inches front to back. (all numbers hypothetical and for example use only)

Visual of Example

 

[novaboy009]

Let me tell you, I'm really concerned about the cornering ability on my bracket car

295/60 14 out back and 195/70 up front. Drives like a nitrous fed 383 should

Kev

 

[blackout_89t]

275/40 and 245/45

I choose that combo because for the tires I have, with the different widths they are identical heights with those aspect ratios.