MustangForums.com

MustangForums.com (http://mustangforums.com/forum/index.php)
-   2005 - 2014 Mustangs (http://mustangforums.com/forum/2005-2014-mustangs-43/)
-   -   New tires (pics) (http://mustangforums.com/forum/2005-2014-mustangs/699780-new-tires-pics.html)

Andy13186 08-16-2013 07:28 PM

New tires (pics)
 
I ordered some 305 35 20's and 275 40 19's and somehow the 19s are about equal in width...


275's are bridgestone potenza s-04 pole position, the sidewall seems to stick out quite a bit... i am concerned with rubbing with these. I hope they fit on the front with no issues, if not im not sure what im going to do. Potenzas are also massively heavy at 33.6 lbs- not too happy about that.

305's are discontinued goodyear eagle f1 gs d3's , they weigh 32.6 lbs atleast my rims are light

http://i.imgur.com/KizX4We.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/WgrmONP.jpg

kind of thinking the fronts are just massive for 275 width, heavier than other brands too and will probably end up hurting straight line performance more than helping in the corners. will report back though after i have them mounted and drive about 500 miles.


130+ lbs of tire meat

Nuke 08-16-2013 08:29 PM

According to the tire size calculator, the 305's should be 1.2" wider.

What made you choose not only those sizes but such different tread patterns? 275's up front will cause some serious tramlining (I know from experience; see my sig). Plus, those 305's have a larger O.D. than your OE tires. Combine that with the additional weight and thank goodness you have a 5.0 to hopefully reduce the impact of rotational mass and the change to your overall gearing.

I'd be worried how that combination will handle in both dry AND wet weather.

Andy13186 08-16-2013 08:38 PM

The 305's are .7 inch taller than the new fronts, shouldnt be a problem. I chose those rears because I found them for less than half their original price, and also less than half the price of my current rears , and my current rears really arent good for a 470$ tire. I was surprised how bad these PSS were in temps below 75* , i couldnt see these new half price rears being twice as bad as my current rears, and i like the look and extra width in the rear so i bought them. I bought the fronts to come closer to the new rear diameter than my current size while gaining width and possible additional cornering traction.

My accelleration may take a minor hit from a lower rear gear ratio and increased weight , or improve depending on if somehow these rears hook alot better than the PSS. I cant and never could launch above 3k rpm with these rears and have any hint of traction, even in 90+ degree temps. They also only have 3/32nd tread left after about 15k miles (hard miles ill and mabe a couple minor no-brake burnouts ill admit)

so a combination of filling out the wheel-well , having wider looking tires from the rear and front, cheaper price, and possibly better performance (in some ways - where traction is currently not that good : aka launch) is why i bought these tires and sizes.

these rears are supposedly the best wet weather tire of all time, new front tires are a close #2 rated behind my current tires on tirerack.

Nuke 08-17-2013 07:49 AM

Pics when they're on!

Andy13186 08-21-2013 08:34 AM

They are on, Ill post pics later tonight.

First impressions :

I can hear and feel the road alot more with the new tires, significantly louder than the PSS. Great wet weather traction from the rear on some surface types- better than pss on some surfaces.

Old used PSS fronts weighed 24.2 lbs front, 26.5 for the rears

new fronts are 33.4, rears are 32.4

Cant say ive noticed too much of a loss in accelleration so far though despite the increased rotating mass.

The used PSS were much more squishy, i mean if i sat on them they would give way alot more and bend more than either of the new tires. Sidewalls on the new ones are significantly thicker and more stiff.

So the main difference I noticed so far is the increased feel of vibrations and noise from the road. This is somewhat surprising since the sidewalls are larger, but they are more stiff.

These tire sizes also fit on with no issues at all so far, as far as i can tell.

05 Mustang 08-21-2013 08:48 AM

Glad to hear everything has worked out, look forward to seeing some pictures.

Andy13186 08-21-2013 04:56 PM

Pics :

http://i.imgur.com/UG4wKxl.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/ZGPQ1VN.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/LpXT8RP.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/MMVVL2Y.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/anCQGOi.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/gwIwniK.jpg

The roush mufflers are looking pretty bad after about 1.5 years on.. bit of surface rust, i sprayed the welds with rustoleum early on

http://i.imgur.com/PpBCKIV.jpg

spun the tires only a little so far, you can see some scrapes, they broke loose in 1st and 2nd on this one road that isnt great ^

should have gotten a car wash before taking pics, oh well

EDIT* i think my rears are probably over inflated

Jas5 08-21-2013 05:12 PM

Wow, love the rims.. but holy rotational mass! Looks excellent
I dont think you mentioned your wheel widths?

I have 18x9 and 18x10 and run 255 and 285 width, yet my 285's look just as wide as your 305's ? I know it's not much difference but I can definitely notice the difference between my 255 and 285's which is 30 difference just like mine and yours.

http://i.imgur.com/GcYLQlg.jpg <- rear shot. Maybe it's cause you don't have a farther back rear shot.

If/when I get new wheels, i'd definitely want 305's out back and 255 or 265 up front so that it won't rub. I could do that or just get me some drag radials out back right now, but would be scared as hell in the rain. I just looked up 2013 corvette Z06 and no wonder they look wide in person, they are 325 width


edit: after looking at your front and rear tires side by side, the 305's definitely look fat.

edit 2: the laying down comparison, they look the same. what gives

Andy13186 08-21-2013 05:39 PM

Thanks^

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jas5 (Post 8269798)

edit 2: the laying down comparison, they look the same. what gives

the fronts were very wide, but most of it was the thicker sidewall in the front, the rear sidewall was very flat without a rim on it. They really were almost the same width though. The tread surface was wider on the 305s, but i thought they would be a bit wider also

Jas5 08-21-2013 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andy13186 (Post 8269816)
the fronts were very wide, but most of it was the thicker sidewall in the front, the rear sidewall was very flat without a rim on it. They really were almost the same width though. The tread surface was wider on the 305s, but i thought they would be a bit wider also


yeah looks like it basically comes down to tire design.. my 285's might touch as much pavement as your 305's, who knows

Looking at your standing angled shot of your rear, i think mine might stick out a tiny bit more, but that's probably due to wheel offset. And since you'rs is lowered with negative camber, the tops of the wheels are angled inward.


Nitpicking, but stance matters.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:53 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.