Tire width?

[ka50]

Ok, how wide should I go on my next set of tires? I was thinking 255/50R16 or 245/50R16... however... is THAT wide really better? Since in physics, the larger the patch of contact, the less the pressure-per-point... thus decresing pressure contact with road... I currently have 235/55R16 Eagle GA... they stick pretty nicely, but they are worn and don't grip well in the rain (I can spin wheels through second gear).

[gregmondro]

stock z28s come with 245/50/16s

i have that size on my car, looks great, hooks decent, etc.

i'm gonna go wider when I change my tire size. Probably 255s like you said [img]smile.gif[/img] If anything, move on up to 245s, it's not that much of a difference in price, they're wider, and you can't go wrong with that.

What kind of tires are you thinking of getting?

[speedy-v6-camaro]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by ka50:
Since in physics, the larger the patch of contact, the less the pressure-per-point... thus decresing pressure contact with road.<hr></blockquote>

No. The tire contact patch at 60mph on your average tire is about the size of a quarter so it won't be that much different, just wider. The force applied to the tire from the ground is less over a larger area. Wider is most always better.

[Dominic]

True, basic physics dictates that the frictional force is not related to the surface area of the contact patch.

However, dynamics takes into effect the SLIP ANGLE of the tire as you corner on it, and by increasing the width you minimize this angle, which increases your cornering capability :D

Wider is better.

Good article: http://www.shanepitkin.com/velocity/...cornering.html

[ May 30, 2003: Message edited by: Dominic ]</p>

[Akuma]

I have 255's and love them. I say go with those.

[V6Bob]

Tires don't follow basic physics very well. The rubber is soft and the road irregular and they act somewhat as gears meshing together, instead of smooth surfaces sliding.

As people said, tire size doesn't change the size of the contact patch, but its shape. Generally narrower gives better traction and stability on slippery surfaces and wider works better on dry pavement.

The tire design affects traction, too. Generally tire manufacturers make their wider tires stickier, with tread designed more for dry pavement. The exact tire you choose is probably more important for traction than what size you pick.
http://www.tirerack.com/tires/surveyresults/index.jsp has nice tables with people's ratings for dry/wet/snow traction. Your GAs were rated at 5.8 (not good) for wet traction.

[Arctc Wolf]

if you want a larger contact patch, get a taller rim/tire package. like corvette's, they have either 275-40-18 or 295-40-18 rim/tire combo's, giving them a slightly larger contack patch front/back, not just wider contact patch left/right.

[97chevycamaro]

I have 245/50/16 in the front and big *** drag radials on the back that stick out 2 inches cause of the offset. It looks cool [img]graemlins/burnout.gif[/img]

[gregmondro]

right now i'm running
215/60/16s in front
and
245/50/16s in rear

the rear is wider, and they are almost the same size (give or take .5 inch) but you can't tell.

the only reason I did this is because I needed to replace the back tires and the others were fine.

I can tell a major difference in how the 215/60s/16 and the 245/50/16s hook though.

The tire brand is also different though, so that probably makes a major difference

[SixBanger]

I heard that the wider the tire, the worse gas mileage.

[gregmondro]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by SixBanger:
I heard that the wider the tire, the worse gas mileage.<hr></blockquote>

stock our cars come with 235s from the factory
245s aren't going to affect the gas mileage enough for you to actually notice it.

[SixBanger]

Well what about this... http://v6camaro.homestead.com/BFG_VR4s.html

Read the part about performance loss.

[gregmondro]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by SixBanger:
Well what about this... http://v6camaro.homestead.com/BFG_VR4s.html

Read the part about performance loss.<hr></blockquote>

they said the 255/50/16s were the best switch.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>
i'm gonna go wider when I change my tire size. Probably 255s like you said If anything, move on up to 245s, it's not that much of a difference in price, they're wider, and you can't go wrong with that.<hr></blockquote>
that's what I suggested :D

I don't quite see how much that the difference from 245/50/16s to 255/60/16s would affect it all that much. the aspect ratio isn't changed much at all, probably less than half an inch.

also notice this from that page however
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>However, the VR4s are noisy & the 255 width may be a bit too much...the car feels a little "squishy" at the limit & it tends to wander or pull to one side over imperfections in the pavement. The increased rolling resistance & the additional weight of the 255s seemed to make the car accelerate slower & increased my 0-60 times...Not a good thing. Also, the 255s sling more debris on the sides of the car (pic coming soon). 245/50s may be a better choice.<hr></blockquote>
notice how he said it seemed to make the car accelerate slower, it doesn't necessarily mean that it actually did. New tires in a different brand mean they won't be exactly the same as your previous tires, and you'll need to perfect your technique on launching the car accordingly.

[ May 30, 2003: Message edited by: gregmondro ]</p>

[SixBanger]

good point.

[Arctc Wolf]

yea, tire brand matters. more sidewall will make cornering a bit worse. 245's are good for cornering, cuz they have 1/4 inch less sidewall than the 255-50's. 255-50's didn't kill my mileage at all, still for 15 in town and 30 on highway.