Traction on 20's?

[Norm Peterson]

Considering Build'em went to the hundredths of a mile when telling us the mpg changes by going from 16's-19's (he said it decreased mpg by 2.34), I think a tenth of a second is noteworthy on a quarter mile run.

A tenth is a tenth, not the whole second claimed. What I'm saying is the ability of short sidewall 19's to launch could possibly be that much poorer than taller sidewall 16's of the same OD. Maybe this hurts some people more than it does others.

Incidentally, the V6 and 4.6/GT rear brakes are both 11.8" rotors, meaning that nothing special needed to be done to run the 16" tires at least in the rear for acceleration purposes. Launch bite, remember, which does not depend on front tire size (yeah, it would be nice if we knew whether a single set of front tires was used for every test).


I don't take anybody's mpg numbers to anything finer than whole mpg's, so I agree with you that at least that part cannot be as precise as implied.

What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. Build'em didn't post a shred of evidence to back up his claims, why should anyone lift a finger to try and disprove said claims?

So let's see if he comes back in to provide further description.


Let me remind you how I phrased it. Emphasized.

If the extra second was because the 19's launched that much more poorly, a 1-second gap would follow every one of those zero-to-speeds and follow pretty close on ET.

There is a lot we don't know yet. Too much. What I'm mainly interested for the original purpose of this thread is limited to the difference in rotational inertia (which is small and can be estimated pretty closely) and in launch bite (which is unknown and tire dependent).

Beyond that, some peoples' launch technique almost certainly suffer more than others' when the tires won't take a brutal launch. While you probably can't see with the naked eye any sidewall wrinkling to absorb shock in any of the street tires Build'em used, the effect is still there and will still give the tall sidewall tire an advantage. I can't put a number on this, unfortunately.


Norm

Sponsored

 

[scottpe]

Infact, we took a 2006 mustang GT with 16" wheels oem and did all the testing involving accel, braking, cornering, fuel, etc, etc. then we tested the numbers for EVERY 1" increase in wheel height. When we got to 19" whlz,the car was 1 full sec slower in all acceleratin categories, got 2.34mpg less mpg and took 2.8 feet more to stop. Skid pad went from .87g to .89, negligible really.

I want to know what equipment and testing methodologies were used and how you possibly could have measured to the accuracy of 1/100th of a mile for MPG or a fraction of a foot for the stopping distances?

And saying that you changed ALL acceleration categories by a full second simply by going from 16" wheels to 19" sounds REALLY far fetched (I'm being kind here). In my experience, the average E/T improvement when going from street radials to SLICKS on a street car, irrespective of wheel size, is 1 second or less in the quarter mile. An OEM 2006 GT would probably be closer to .5 seconds. So you're trying to tell us that you got a better improvement by simply going from a 19" to a 16" street tire (internal diameter) than one would get going to full slicks?? Are you sure you didn't mean .1 seconds??

And your claim that wider tires do not help straight line grip/traction is even more dumbfounding. If that's the case, when I get my 2015 Mustang, I'm pulling the 275s off in the rear and putting 195s on there when I go to the strip!

I'm not a scientist, but I have drag raced and watched plenty of them to know that something sounds really off about your claims...

 

[MPH]

I want to know what equipment and testing methodologies were used and how you possibly could have measured to the accuracy of 1/100th of a mile for MPG or a fraction of a foot for the stopping distances?

And saying that you changed ALL acceleration categories by a full second simply by going from 16" wheels to 19" sounds REALLY far fetched (I'm being kind here). In my experience, the average E/T improvement when going from street radials to SLICKS on a street car, irrespective of wheel size, is 1 second or less in the quarter mile. An OEM 2006 GT would probably be closer to .5 seconds. So you're trying to tell us that you got a better improvement by simply going from a 19" to a 16" street tire (internal diameter) than one would get going to full slicks?? Are you sure you didn't mean .1 seconds??

And your claim that wider tires do not help straight line grip/traction is even more dumbfounding. If that's the case, when I get my 2015 Mustang, I'm pulling the 275s off in the rear and putting 195s on there when I go to the strip!

I'm not a scientist, but I have drag raced and watched plenty of them to know that something sounds really off about your claims...

 

[3rdRGR]

I live in Southern Indiana and we don’t get much snow down here and the road clearing when we do is very efficient. I’m running 275/35ZR 20s Conti Extreme Contact summers on 20x9.5 wheels. I’m wanting to go with some simple, reasonably priced All Seasons to put on my existing wheels for the late fall/ winter months. Will probably park it if any real accumulation.

Wife has a Murano so I can use that in the bad stuff if we get it. So it will mainly be to combat cold pavement and temps. I won’t be flogging the thing at crazy speeds, more just A to B so I’ll trade price for 200 MPH rating. Any recommendations? Thanks in advance!

 

[m3incorp]

Super old thread...but man there are dozens of wet/cold weather tires that are recommended. You only plan to drive in mild cold weather, so pick your brand (reasonably priced) and go with them.

I live in Southern Indiana and we don’t get much snow down here and the road clearing when we do is very efficient. I’m running 275/35ZR 20s Conti Extreme Contact summers on 20x9.5 wheels. I’m wanting to go with some simple, reasonably priced All Seasons to put on my existing wheels for the late fall/ winter months. Will probably park it if any real accumulation.

Wife has a Murano so I can use that in the bad stuff if we get it. So it will mainly be to combat cold pavement and temps. I won’t be flogging the thing at crazy speeds, more just A to B so I’ll trade price for 200 MPH rating. Any recommendations? Thanks in advance!

 

[3rdRGR]

Super old thread...but man there are dozens of wet/cold weather tires that are recommended. You only plan to drive in mild cold weather, so pick your brand (reasonably priced) and go with them.

Yeah sorry for the super old resurrection. I'm just wary of starting new threads, and this came up in a search and I didn't notice how old it was. I'm going through reviews now, just thought maybe some folks had bought this t-shirt and had some specific recommendations. Thanks man.

 

[m3incorp]

I have the Continental Extreme Contact DWS06 on one car and the Michelin Pilot Sport AS 3 Plus on another car for Colorado driving and both perform great.

 

[3rdRGR]

I have the Continental Extreme Contact DWS06 on one car and the Michelin Pilot Sport AS 3 Plus on another car for Colorado driving and both perform great.

Some awesome roads there man. Spent some time near Golden last year for work, but unfortunately just had a rental...

 

[m3incorp]

Oh yes, definitely a lot of good roads to drive. My son goes to college in Golden. His WRX has the Michelins on it and he said they performed great in the light snow. He learned to take the summer Dunlops off early, after doing a 360 one chilly morning.

Some awesome roads there man. Spent some time near Golden last year for work, but unfortunately just had a rental...

Sponsored