205's on a VX, ideal or no? - Fuelly Forums

Android Users - Coming Soon! - Migrating from aCar 4.8 to 5.0

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 03-05-2009, 08:12 AM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 22
Country: United States
205's on a VX, ideal or no?

Hey guys,

I was out shopping for tires and at the local Kaufman Tire they have a set of 205's/70/13 tires on clearance for $100 and I'm wondering how much of a negative effect the 205's will have on the performance (if there is any) and fuel efficiency? I gotta admit, $100 for a set of brand new tires is tempting, but at what price?

Thanks.
__________________

DUBPL8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2009, 08:43 AM   #2
Supporting Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 318
Country: United States
You will lose significant mpgs, and it will likely be much more difficult to engage and sustain lean burn. Say 5-10mpg less.
__________________

budomove is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2009, 09:19 AM   #3
Registered Member
 
IndyFetch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 627
Country: United States
Location: Indianapolis
I doubt the difference in MPG would be much more than 5 mpg, unless you drive at high speed much of the time.

When I bought my VX, it had 185/70R13s without much tread and I put on a set of lower rolling resistance 175/70/13s. I noticed a 4 mpg difference with the same driving. Note that the older tires were smaller, so that would make up for part or all of that difference.

What worries me is that 205/70R13 tires would have a LOT of sidewall. The tires would be much taller than the ones specified. If you switched to a 205 width with a lower aspect ratio (maybe 50), it would be closer to the same rolling circumference.

I would also get an idea of the rolling resistance of the tire. A good indicator is the mileage warranty. The general rule is: The longer the warranty, the harder the tire. The harder the tire, the less rolling resistance. An aggressive tread pattern also adds rolling resistance, and in turn, hurts FE.
IndyFetch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2009, 09:48 AM   #4
Registered Member
 
IndyFetch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 627
Country: United States
Location: Indianapolis
There is a 7.3% difference in rolling circumference between sizes 175/70R13 and 205/70R13.

There is a 0.2% difference between sizes 175/70R13 and 205/60R13. For a 205 width, an aspect ratio of 60 gets you closest to the original tire size (for a '95 VX).

I just thought of problem #2: Would a 205-width tire FIT on your rims? The stock VX rims may be too narrow to safely mount a tire that wide.
IndyFetch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2009, 09:58 AM   #5
Registered Member
 
theholycow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 6,624
Country: United States
Send a message via ICQ to theholycow Send a message via AIM to theholycow Send a message via MSN to theholycow Send a message via Yahoo to theholycow
It's impossible to compare Rolling Resistance when changing tire model AND size at the same time. Load, pressure, size (width, height, wheel size), wear, model, and probably something else are all variables that affect RR and changing more than one at a time makes it very hard to compare.

I'm not convinced that narrower is more efficient. With tube type bias ply tires (as found on old cars and on most bicycles), there is a direct relationship between width and RR -- wider has less RR, because at a given pressure and load you're going to have the same size contact patch, but a wider tire won't have to deform as much of its sidewall to make that contact patch. I used to be very confident that the same concept applies to tubeless radials, but the small amount of data I've been able to find is questionable.

The height (sidewall, circumference, diameter, however you want to look at it) is guaranteed to have a significant effect on FE. I don't know how the VX is affected by changing circumference, though any car will have a different effect based on a given driver's style/route/traffic conditions. When changing height, you cannot compare FE unless you calculate in the difference in mileage before calculating your FE (or adjust your odometer for the new tire size).

I think Fetch is right about rubber compound. I think softer tires probably have less RR. Another thing to consider is tread depth; it is known that a worn tire will have less rolling resistance than a brand new tire of the same exact model.

IMO, there's just not enough data to make an informed decision. The strategy I recommend is:
  • Change size only if you want the change in gearing or if you can't get the right size at a decent price
  • Choose long-wearing tires (unless you expect to junk the car before the tires wear out)
  • Choose tires that can handle higher pressure (unless you've already found the maximum comfortable pressure)
  • Choose tires that are cheap
Obviously, you have to do that within your own comfort level of quality, traction, etc.

Doing it that way, you know you will be saving money. So, addressing the tires you're specifically looking at...do you think your FE would benefit from taller gearing? Do you drive on the highway or at high speeds a lot, or do you do more city driving at low speeds?
__________________
This sig may return, some day.
theholycow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2009, 10:50 AM   #6
Registered Member
 
vxdude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 93
Country: United States
Send a message via Yahoo to vxdude
I say stick with the Sumitomo HTR T4. I have them on my VX, great tire.
vxdude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2009, 11:16 AM   #7
Registered Member
 
IndyFetch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 627
Country: United States
Location: Indianapolis
I have Michelin Destiny tires on mine size 175/70R13 on the original VX rims. I paid $52 or $56 per tire at Tire Barn. They have an 80,000-mile warranty. They're quiet, smooth (even when overinflated), and I cannot make them squeal even when I try. They were outstanding in the snow, too (the outer tread blocks have no connecting band of rubber. This makes them slightly louder, but pays huge dividends in the snow).
IndyFetch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2009, 11:47 AM   #8
Registered Member
 
vxdude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 93
Country: United States
Send a message via Yahoo to vxdude
fetch, whats the max psi ratings on your tires? Mine are 51psi
vxdude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2009, 12:03 PM   #9
Registered Member
 
IndyFetch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 627
Country: United States
Location: Indianapolis
Don't remember. My wife has the car. I usually inflate them to 40-45 psi.
IndyFetch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2009, 08:26 AM   #10
Registered Member
 
IndyFetch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 627
Country: United States
Location: Indianapolis
Max pressure is 44 psi. I checked it last night.
__________________

IndyFetch is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Is there a OBDI or OBDII conversion for older vehicles? kozaz General Fuel Topics 3 11-13-2007 08:32 PM
Better gas mileage for an RV 73challenger General Fuel Topics 5 10-31-2007 05:08 AM
Hello All GasSavers_MikeD Introduce Yourself - New member Welcome 3 07-23-2007 11:34 PM
Blast from the past: Mobilegas Economy Runs? Spule 4 General Fuel Topics 8 11-20-2006 08:47 PM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:07 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.