Jump to content
SAU Community

  

77 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

are u taking wind resistant into them calculations , i think the question is in general do wider tyres have more grip than skinny tyres not do 225 goodyears on a supra have more grip than 235 falkens on a ford at 34.6759657842 degrees

Hahaha :laughing-smiley-014:

Plus fat tyres look hektik.

  • Replies 42
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

contactpatch1.gif

Taken from the tire bible. Wider tyres don't always mean more contact area/more grip.

In general, I would assume wider tyres would have more grip.

Edited by adam-__-

Short answer, here is a good if somewhat detailed explanation.

http://www.autospeed.com/cms/A_108915/article.html - but you may need membership to acess it so i'll summarise. Grip is related to the coefficient of friction of the rubber compund of the tyre. This is in turn effected by heat. All things being equal Narrow tyres will generate more heat, thus depreciate quicker and lose grip faster, they also have less temperature stability. So a wider tyre can dissipate more heat, have greater temperature stability and should last longer. Thus given the same compound a wider tyre will generally have more grip. Pressure also plays a large role and dictates contact patch. Narrow tyes do have lower rolling resistance and are invariably better for fuel economy (once again provided they are at the correct pressure).

So yes $800 a tyre pirelli 225s will likely have an immense amount of grip due to the compound of rubber used. However as I understand it 265s can get away with a compound less advanced to result in the same amount of grip (they may also cost less), or with as advanced a compound should provide even higher grip levels and hopefully last longer (once again all things being equal).

wide tyres are always going to give a better amount of traction then skinny one's. When it comes to handling a wide tyre will give better grip, aslong as the wide tyre has wide wheels to match, the worst thing is to have tyres that bulge out over the rims alot as it gives a shit load of roll in the side wall of the tyre, which means you lose feel through the steering

when i raced karts we wernt aloud to use wet tyres at all . so if it rained we pumped the tryes right up so only the centre of tyre was on the road . less hydroplanng hence you could drive faster . not sure if i would like to try it out on my skyline tho

lol @ ^

lets face it, the broad answer to this broad question is - wider is better.

your getting too technical.

think of it this way. these two guys had a few beers, watching ralph tv, maybe some cones, and then 1 says skinny tires are better than wide.

what do you do?

*SLAP* i'm rick james bitch

You are 1000% right mate thats what happened i was have a few drinks washing my car and my mate was saying how my tyres are to big and his his skinnyer tyres griped betta, and funny enough we had another disagreement tonight about it again.

so far i have seen fatter is better and sum people have quoted which is the truest thing i have herd which is "THIS IS THE ONLY TIME IN LIFE WHEN FATTER IS BETTER"

thanks u to0 every1 so far

lol this is a big bug of mine, i HATE...absolutely cannot stand !! seeing any car that is relatively performance oriented on skinny tyres, i have 255's and i still think theyre too narrow haha, but they do look good from behind. aside from the better traction i think wider tyres give you more road presence, make your car look more beasty :)...if he wants thin tyres tell him to stick to a bike

p.s. to whoever was talking about in the wet thinner is better, im sure thats only to a certain extent, would have more to do with tread right ?

lol @ ^

lets face it, the broad answer to this broad question is - wider is better.

your getting too technical.

think of it this way. these two guys had a few beers, watching ralph tv, maybe some cones, and then 1 says skinny tires are better than wide.

what do you do?

*SLAP* i'm rick james bitch

ROFL!

i had crappy 245's, and now have federal 235's.

it grips alot more than it used to.

i guess it's all down to compound and quality!

Fat tyres man, stretched!!

Looks tough as. I got stretched 8.5" wide on the back of my R32.. soo nice when you see it cruising from behind with all that camber!

I want wider though, but 8.5" just tucks in under the guard though.

how about on the front?

does a wider tyre offer more "GRIP" during cornering compared to a skinnier tyre?

all other things being equal.

say on the same car, on the same day, same corner, same brand and compound of rubber, same speed etc..

put on a set of 255's all round, then same thing with 225's all round.

which tyre offers more "GRIP" during cornering/turning?

staightline in the dry is obvious.. bigger contact patch is better for traction.

Edited by GTST
Fat tyres man, stretched!!

Looks tough as. I got stretched 8.5" wide on the back of my R32.. soo nice when you see it cruising from behind with all that camber!

I want wider though, but 8.5" just tucks in under the guard though.

2 degrees neg camber on my rears, 18x9.5 rims with 235's stretched on there >_<

Very good way to burn through tyres and not as efficient as it could be, but it looks the goods

I showed my mate tonight and he said but im not talking about a drift car like every1 on here are. which i had to recorrect him by saying over all and he still beleave skinnyer is bettta so the 2 people who voted i rekon your skylines must look very um diffrent with 185s on it

running a fair shithouse 185mm tire on my stockies with full tread doesnt compare to running bald bridgestone grid 2's with 255's on the rear and 235s on the front.

bridgestones absoloutly shat all over these cheap as chip tyres i got on at the moment.

i voted for skinny because i have a non turbo, i like to think it handles better then it really does. especially having shitty brakes and an auto tranny.

who am i kidding? im humming for a 5 stud conversion and some decent rims and tyres......also a turbo and a manual gearbox....in other words a completely different skyline.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • @Haggerty you still haven't answered my question.  Many things you are saying do not make sense for someone who can tune, yet I would not expect someone who cannot tune to be playing with the things in the ECU that you are.  This process would be a lot quicker to figure out if we can remove user error from the equation. 
    • If as it's stalling, the fuel pressure rises, it's saying there's less vacuum in the intake manifold. This is pretty typical of an engine that is slowing down.   While typically is agree it sounds fuel related, it really sounds fuel/air mixture related. Since the whole system has been refurbished, including injectors, pump, etc, it's likely we've altered how well the system is delivering fuel. If someone before you has messed with the IACV because it needed fiddling with as the fuel system was dieing out, we need to readjust it back. Getting things back to factory spec everywhere, is what's going to help the entire system. So if it idles at 400rpm with no IACV, that needs raising. Getting factory air flow back to normal will help us get everything back in spec, and likely help chase down any other issues. Back on IACV, if the base idle (no IACV plugged in) is too far out, it's a lot harder for the ECU to control idle. The IACV duty cycle causes non linear variations in reality. When I've tuned the idle valves in the past, you need to keep it in a relatively narrow window on aftermarket ecus to stop them doing wild dances. It also means if your base idle is too low, the valve needs to open too much, and then the smallest % change ends up being a huge variation.
    • I guess one thing that might be wrong is the manifold pressure.  It is a constant -5.9 and never moves even under 100% throttle and load.  I would expect it to atleast go to 0 correct?  It's doing this with the OEM MAP as well as the ECU vacuum sensor. When trying to tune the base map under load the crosshairs only climb vertically with RPM, but always in the -5.9 column.
    • AHHHH gotchaa, I'll do that once I am home again. I tried doing the harness with the multimeter but it seems the car needed a jump, there was no power when it was in the "ON" position. Not sure if I should use car battery jump starter or if its because the stuff that has been disconnect the car just does send power.
    • As far as I can tell I have everything properly set in the Haltech software for engine size, injector data, all sensors seem to be reporting proper numbers.  If I change any injector details it doesnt run right.    Changing the base map is having the biggest change in response, im not sure how people are saying it doesnt really matter.  I'm guessing under normal conditions the ECU is able to self adjust and keep everything smooth.   Right now my best performance is happening by lowering the base map just enough to where the ECU us doing short term cut of about 45% to reach the target Lambda of 14.7.  That way when I start putting load on it still has high enough fuel map to not be so lean.  After 2500 rpm I raised the base map to what would be really rich at no load, but still helps with the lean spots on load.  I figure I don't have much reason to be above 2500rpm with no load.  When watching other videos it seems their target is reached much faster than mine.  Mine takes forever to adjust and reach the target. My next few days will be spent making sure timing is good, it was running fine before doing the ECU and DBW swap, but want to verify.  I'll also probably swap in the new injectors I bought as well as a walbro 255 pump.  
×
×
  • Create New...