PP2 real life pictures

OP
OP
Prokiller

Prokiller

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2018
Threads
3
Messages
293
Reaction score
291
Location
Eastern PA
Vehicle(s)
1994 Mustang GT & 2018 Mustang GT PP2
i have michelin pilot sport 4s on order so i can drive this thing in the rain. and despite the two pages of conversation on tire widths, i'm doing 305/30 up front and 325/30 in the rear
 

Silver Bullitt

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2018
Threads
17
Messages
2,359
Reaction score
2,170
Location
Parkville, MO
Vehicle(s)
2018 GT Coupe PP2
i have michelin pilot sport 4s on order so i can drive this thing in the rain. and despite the two pages of conversation on tire widths, i'm doing 305/30 up front and 325/30 in the rear
How much negative camber you planning to run with the 325's?
 
OP
OP
Prokiller

Prokiller

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2018
Threads
3
Messages
293
Reaction score
291
Location
Eastern PA
Vehicle(s)
1994 Mustang GT & 2018 Mustang GT PP2

Mhjr74

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 17, 2018
Threads
3
Messages
109
Reaction score
62
Location
Maryland
Vehicle(s)
Lincoln MKS, Ford Explorer
Do you think a negative camber will be required with 325's on the rear? I am thinking about going with 325's for the rear as well.
 

Silver Bullitt

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2018
Threads
17
Messages
2,359
Reaction score
2,170
Location
Parkville, MO
Vehicle(s)
2018 GT Coupe PP2
Do you think a negative camber will be required with 325's on the rear? I am thinking about going with 325's for the rear as well.
Forum member ashpian is running 325/30/19 PS4's with -1.8 w/o rubbing last I heard, but I also believe he was dropped a little (maybe 1/2"). I don't plan to daily 325's, but I'd love to have some ET Streets in 325's for the 1/4. Anxious to hear back if you have any rubbing on stock specs. Might have to play a little with offsets on some aftermarket 19x11's just to be safe, just not sure yet. Aren't the stock rears 48 offset?
 
OP
OP
Prokiller

Prokiller

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2018
Threads
3
Messages
293
Reaction score
291
Location
Eastern PA
Vehicle(s)
1994 Mustang GT & 2018 Mustang GT PP2
i'm doing the same tires as [MENTION=14484]Ashpian[/MENTION] because of his pictures. loves me some rear tire bulge. but yes, he did lower his which i will not be doing. i don't forsee any rubbing issues
 

JD_GTPP2

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 9, 2018
Threads
15
Messages
116
Reaction score
31
Location
Maryland
Vehicle(s)
2018 Camaro, 2SS/1LE
i have michelin pilot sport 4s on order so i can drive this thing in the rain. and despite the two pages of conversation on tire widths, i'm doing 305/30 up front and 325/30 in the rear
My PS4s are being installed as I type this. Hate that I have over 500 miles on the SC2s, but took a while for my preferred shop to get the tires delivered.

I went with the same squared up layout as stock for autocross purposes
 

gbgreen

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2018
Threads
3
Messages
146
Reaction score
63
Location
Central NJ
First Name
Gerry
Vehicle(s)
2016 Ruby Red Manual V6 Mustang Coupe
I have had the Bridgestones for nearly 2k miles, 305/30 size, love the tires, they stick well, handle well, do great in pouring down rain, and grab really well. They do not sling rocks like the SC2. I wanted to go skinnier on the front to at least get the tire flush to the fender, but I've really liked the square set up and have not regretted keeping it that way.
Thanks. Appreciate it. I seem to remember you preferred some rocker panel extension over mud flaps/stone guards. Is that correct? Do you have any pictures that show these reasonably close up?
 

gbgreen

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2018
Threads
3
Messages
146
Reaction score
63
Location
Central NJ
First Name
Gerry
Vehicle(s)
2016 Ruby Red Manual V6 Mustang Coupe
285/35's on 11" wide wheels is not nearly the problem that running all the way out to "max recommended" might sound. In fact, my "track set" is specifically that (in 18" rather than your 19", which is irrelevant). Being stretched to the recommended max tends to stiffen the tire laterally and vertically, which tends to compensate for the additional sidewall height. Personally, I'd much rather fit tires to wheels wider than "measuring" than "measuring" even for street-only driving.

<picture removed>

I'm sure this has to do with load index, and this can get more complicated than the dealer is willing to get into as far as guaranteeing that the new load index and its new inflation pressure requirement at least match the OE load rating.

My "track set" has 5000 or so street miles and quite a few track days on them. You'll be fine, just be careful about getting very close to curbs because the 285 tires offer even less scuff protection.

FWIW, I'd suggest at least considering Michelins in either PSS or PS4S, based on the breakaway characteristics probably being more similar to the PSC2's than the Contis are likely to be.

Norm
OK then, we have a vote for the stretched (within approved limits) setup.

Yeah, I actually thought about going for the Michelins. The Tire Rack Test described the road feel as the most refined, while the Continentals had a lighter feel. But it's hard to beat the value of the Conti or Bridgestone for a quality tire.

Re: Load Index
The Conti and Bridgestone both have a Load Index/Service Description higher than the OEM Michelins. But I think you have it right that some dealers don't want to get into details on it, while others (like Silver Bullit's dealer) are willing to work with you. Luckily, it looks like a couple of dealers (at least on first impression) may be willing to work with me on this.

More to think about. Thanks again.
 

gbgreen

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2018
Threads
3
Messages
146
Reaction score
63
Location
Central NJ
First Name
Gerry
Vehicle(s)
2016 Ruby Red Manual V6 Mustang Coupe
At least part of that is coming from the "stretched" tire fitment.

Norm
I thought Prokiller was doing 305/30 up front and 325/30 in the rear. So each of them is mounted on the minimum width rim, which would make them "pinched", not "stretched", right? Or am I missing something?
 

Norm Peterson

corner barstool sitter
Joined
Jul 22, 2013
Threads
11
Messages
9,011
Reaction score
4,721
Location
On a corner barstool not too far from I-95
First Name
Norm
Vehicle(s)
'08 GT #85, '19 WRX
Re: Load Index
The Conti and Bridgestone both have a Load Index/Service Description higher than the OEM Michelins. But I think you have it right that some dealers don't want to get into details on it, while others (like Silver Bullit's dealer) are willing to work with you. Luckily, it looks like a couple of dealers (at least on first impression) may be willing to work with me on this.
Be careful with Load Index comparisons, because there's more than one Load Index table, and they don't "line up" with each other.

IOW, a Load Index 97 in SL (Standard Load) compares to Load Index 101 in XL for rated load at the same inflation psi up to 36 psi. Not 97 SL ==> 97 XL like you might first think. It's only for inflation pressures beyond 36 that the 101 XL picks up any more rated load.

Working with the tables, you can adjust inflation pressures over a small range to at least match your car's rated load at the placard psi number(s). I do have the SL and XL tables (and a spreadsheet that takes the grunt-work out the lookups).

That's for rated load purposes, which you can take as a starting point for any psi tuning for handling, same as you would with the OE tires and OE inflation pressures.


Norm
 

Norm Peterson

corner barstool sitter
Joined
Jul 22, 2013
Threads
11
Messages
9,011
Reaction score
4,721
Location
On a corner barstool not too far from I-95
First Name
Norm
Vehicle(s)
'08 GT #85, '19 WRX
OK then, we have a vote for the stretched (within approved limits) setup.
Yes.

FWIW, I have two sets of MPSS tires, the track set as mentioned (285/35-18 on 18x11) and a "street set" (265/40-18 on 18x9.5). The "stretched" track set feels better (probably lower slip angles at work) at a little beyond 0.9 lateral g's than the street set does in the low 0.8 lateral g range. Those tires are claimed by Michelin to have exactly the same actual tread width. This is only my most recent experience with "stretched", where I actually had datalogging capability. I've been doing stretching tires out to (and in a couple of cases with 60 and 70 profiles 1/2" beyond) max recommended.


Norm
 

Mhjr74

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 17, 2018
Threads
3
Messages
109
Reaction score
62
Location
Maryland
Vehicle(s)
Lincoln MKS, Ford Explorer
Has anybody noticed that the build site for the 2019 Mustang shows that PP2 comes with 265/40r19 (F) and 275/40r19 (R)? This has to be a mistake because those tires would not fit on the standard PP2 rim.
 

Attachments

TomcatDriver

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2017
Threads
9
Messages
1,159
Reaction score
469
Location
Mojave Desert
Vehicle(s)
2017 GT350 Magnetic w/black stripes
Has anybody noticed that the build site for the 2019 Mustang shows that PP2 comes with 265/40r19 (F) and 275/40r19 (R)? This has to be a mistake because those tires would not fit on the standard PP2 rim.
That's wrong. Ford did the same thing with the 2018 configurator. If you look at the detailed description under PP2 (click on the little blue i in the upper right) it will correctly list 305/30/R19 even though under the "Tire Type" section it lists 265/275s.
 

gbgreen

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2018
Threads
3
Messages
146
Reaction score
63
Location
Central NJ
First Name
Gerry
Vehicle(s)
2016 Ruby Red Manual V6 Mustang Coupe
Has anybody noticed that the build site for the 2019 Mustang shows that PP2 comes with 265/40r19 (F) and 275/40r19 (R)? This has to be a mistake because those tires would not fit on the standard PP2 rim.
Yep. Happens for me too. But if you click on the info button for the PPL2 package (see attached), it has the correct tires. Software error...
If you feel so inclined, I'm sure Ford would appreciate it if you reported the error.
 

Attachments

 
Top