Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

A quick Q about tyre profiles.

With the AWD system, what happens if you run say 35 profile tyres on the front and 45 on the rear?

Or even if you have 35, 40, or 45 all round, but have an underinflated tyre?

How would that affect the AWD system?

Someone asked me last night, and I really didn't have a close enough/accurate answer.

:blink:

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/214253-tyres/
Share on other sites

  • Replies 44
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

A quick Q about tyre profiles.

With the AWD system, what happens if you run say 35 profile tyres on the front and 45 on the rear?

Or even if you have 35, 40, or 45 all round, but have an underinflated tyre?

How would that affect the AWD system?

Someone asked me last night, and I really didn't have a close enough/accurate answer.

:blink:

This has been covered before in detail somewhere; basically attesa does not like this, unless you can very closely match the rolling radius. Some people have been getting vibration through the s/wheel, 4wd lights coming on etc. from using mismatched rolling radius's. I believe it will handle a millimetre or two (ie. treadwear) but 16's on the front and 17's on the back for instance no good (ymmv)

Just also thinking. If you're running 17" or 18" or 19" rims and you get a flat and fit the 16" spare, how does that affect things too?

:)

Again shouldn't drive very far like this, attesa (and your diff's I suppose) will not like this; only a 'limp home' solution.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/214253-tyres/#findComment-3783595
Share on other sites

Okay so thats obvious, mismatched rim sizes is BAD :)

What about 17" rims with 35 profile front and 40 profile rear?

Or even same profile all round, but spanking new 40 profile on the front and 50% worn 40 profile on the back?

:blink:

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/214253-tyres/#findComment-3783599
Share on other sites

I've only had issues when there was a 50% or more difference in wear between the front and rear, and it showed itself as a steering shudder on light throttle corners, and even then, only intermittently. Personally, I wouldn't mess with different profiles, but different wear of the same profile shouldn't be too bad...

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/214253-tyres/#findComment-3783613
Share on other sites

Hmm,

Out of curiousity I just checked my tyres. I purchased two sets of rubber on Tuesday and didn't think about mismatching profiles. Never gave it a second thought. Seems I'm running 40 on the front and 45 on the rear on 18" rims. I'm not experiencing any shudder or side effects, but I guess I should grab another set of 45s today for the front.

I only fitted the rims last night, and drove a whole of 8.5kms to work in 50-60kph zones, so I should be safe for today.

I'm gunna buy my friend a beer for bringing up the discussion. :blink:

Still on another note: it seems pretty silly designing an AWD system where unevenly worn tyres will result in more wear/stress on the AWD system. :) There must be some 'slip' there somewhere?

Edited by RubyRS4
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/214253-tyres/#findComment-3783698
Share on other sites

Here's what I found. They don't have to be exactly the same tyres. As long as the rolling dimension is the same or within something like a 2% tolerance (don't quote me on the exact percentage) it's fine. This is to allow for uneven wear and tear. i have different profile tyres front and back but the rolling dim is nearly the same (R - 235/45/17, F - 215/50/17)

there are a few websites to calculate rolling dimension (tyre circumference) that are quite good, here's one i googled. some other ones give you the actual % too.

http://www.club80-90syncro.co.uk/Syncro_we...0calculator.htm

EDIT: Here's a better one

http://www.nitinchordia.com/upsizing.htm

Edited by webng
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/214253-tyres/#findComment-3783886
Share on other sites

I'd rather not.

WHY?

yuo have a Stagea, yoru not going to be breaking traction any time soon taht coudl be dangerous, less parasitic drag on your drivetrain.....

i mean, unless you drive in snow on a regular basis, is there a reason not to?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/214253-tyres/#findComment-3783897
Share on other sites

Here's what I found. They don't have to be exactly the same tyres. As long as the rolling dimension is the same or within something like a 2% tolerance (don't quote me on the exact percentage) it's fine. This is to allow for uneven wear and tear. i have different profile tyres front and back but the rolling dim is nearly the same (R - 235/45/17, F - 215/50/17)

there are a few websites to calculate rolling dimension (tyre circumference) that are quite good, here's one i googled. some other ones give you the actual % too.

http://www.club80-90syncro.co.uk/Syncro_we...0calculator.htm

Thanks for that :blink:

I've done the calculations and the F circum is 1968mm compared to the R circum at 2040mm. Thats a 3.6% difference in circumference. At 100kph thats a difference between the two of 0.2kph.

I'll still play it safe and get another 2 235/45 tyres

:)

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/214253-tyres/#findComment-3783910
Share on other sites

WHY?

yuo have a Stagea, yoru not going to be breaking traction any time soon taht coudl be dangerous, less parasitic drag on your drivetrain.....

i mean, unless you drive in snow on a regular basis, is there a reason not to?

Because its my car not yours, and you are only speculating on how I drive now. So ... I'd rather not. :blink:

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/214253-tyres/#findComment-3783923
Share on other sites

When I first bought the car it had more then 2% difference on the circumference between front and rear which lead to a funny "farting/groaning" sound when I turned the engine off, and a strange shuddering at about 70kph. The Attessa reservoir dropped pretty quickly too but once i topped that up and got new tyres all was good.

re: rwd vs awd... I personally prefer awd, otherwise i would have bought the RS version wouldn't i. Much prefer the security of the awd, especially when wet.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/214253-tyres/#findComment-3784002
Share on other sites

WHY?

yuo have a Stagea, yoru not going to be breaking traction any time soon taht coudl be dangerous, less parasitic drag on your drivetrain.....

i mean, unless you drive in snow on a regular basis, is there a reason not to?

Parasitic drag? In order for my Stagea to proceeed down the road the front wheels have to turn, whether that's by 4wd or via the rear wheels and the road. So all you are talking about is the small effort required to turn the drive shafts and the front diff, neither of which are excessively large (weight and drag). Especially in comparison to wheels, tyres, brake rotors etc. Lowering a Stagea too much soaks up more power than that. :down:

Cheers

Gary

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/214253-tyres/#findComment-3784334
Share on other sites

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

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...