18 or 20" wheels?
02-28-2014, 02:57 PM
#41
Gentleman's Relish
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: AZ
Posts: 13,090
02-28-2014, 03:41 PM
#43
02-28-2014, 06:02 PM
#44
4th Gear Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: California
Posts: 1,471
Radial tires
Norm!
I was there! The original Michelin X radial was a huge improvement in grip back its day for a street tire but the Xas was the true break through in Michelin radial street tire performance. Much better grip and handling under more conditions with much better limit behaviour but they did get loose and were a little harder to catch once you lost it. Of course you are comparing the Michelin radials to crappy bias ply tires which at the time could generate maybe about 0.4g so I would say the trade off was well worth the cost and the price.
Ride? Who cared about ride back then? You are talking about a time when a 70 series tire was a radical tire! Back in the late '60's early '70's we used to put the Xas on BMW 1600/2002s with re-valved Koni dampers and Apina springs and bars. I also had aluminum, later Delrin bushings machined for the control arms. Amazing setup at the time, the Xas were kind of pricey but MAN did they work on lighter low powered cars! On heavier cars with more power as the '60's rolled past and into the early '70's the hot street tire was Pirelli CN36. Those were amazing tires if you had the rim width to support them.
Chip
I was there! The original Michelin X radial was a huge improvement in grip back its day for a street tire but the Xas was the true break through in Michelin radial street tire performance. Much better grip and handling under more conditions with much better limit behaviour but they did get loose and were a little harder to catch once you lost it. Of course you are comparing the Michelin radials to crappy bias ply tires which at the time could generate maybe about 0.4g so I would say the trade off was well worth the cost and the price.
Ride? Who cared about ride back then? You are talking about a time when a 70 series tire was a radical tire! Back in the late '60's early '70's we used to put the Xas on BMW 1600/2002s with re-valved Koni dampers and Apina springs and bars. I also had aluminum, later Delrin bushings machined for the control arms. Amazing setup at the time, the Xas were kind of pricey but MAN did they work on lighter low powered cars! On heavier cars with more power as the '60's rolled past and into the early '70's the hot street tire was Pirelli CN36. Those were amazing tires if you had the rim width to support them.
Chip
02-28-2014, 06:18 PM
#45
4th Gear Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: California
Posts: 1,471
Which do you prefer?
Seems like a year ago everyone was like 18 or gtfo (unless you promise not to tell anyone :/)
but in the past week or two on several mustang communities I found a handful of people getting 20's...is 20 the new 18?
What happened to "18's provide a better ride quality" (why is that btw?) and "20s look too big"?
I'm looking to get some 18s this week, hopefully no one says "you should have gotten 20's bro"
Seems like a year ago everyone was like 18 or gtfo (unless you promise not to tell anyone :/)
but in the past week or two on several mustang communities I found a handful of people getting 20's...is 20 the new 18?
What happened to "18's provide a better ride quality" (why is that btw?) and "20s look too big"?
I'm looking to get some 18s this week, hopefully no one says "you should have gotten 20's bro"
OP,
I think the right 20's can look great but unless you spend big bucks on forged 20" wheels you will be slow. Performance wise 18"'s are absolutely the best way to go if you can find a tire with the right height for the rim width you buy. IMO 19" wheels are a good compromise because there are some light 19"s out there for almost a reasonable price and the tire selection is pretty good. The real trick is to find light 18x 10" wide wheels with the offset to keep the tires inside the arches front and rear. This may mean using a front and rear specific wheels to get the right fit on the street without race levels of camber. Out back unless you have a Watt's link even with an adjustable Panhard bar it is hard to go wider than about a 10" wide hoop if the car is lowered much at all. But this is pretty much what everyone else said already.
HTH!
02-28-2014, 06:45 PM
#46
6th Gear Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: state of confusion
Posts: 7,635
No it would be testing to determine the exact window for failure, how it fails, progression of failure and then determine with those results the range and set expectations based upon these findings. Which provides a better picture of a possible outcome. You would be validating a curve of performance degradation and plotting that progression. Essentially providing a picture graphically of what that window of failure looks like.
It popped up to define putting on larger wheels and tires that have a wider and lower cross section and stance relative to a targeted performance for each application. As everything that becomes commonplace typically needs a definitive term.
As reference for where we've been it would be useful. As a template for where we're heading...not so useful.
They are mentioned as an example of extremes which would not only be just cosmetic but also useless from a performance perspective. Not a scare tactic. There are vehicle teams that test these configuration on our modern performance cars to best equip cars with wheels to accommodate the required braking without sacrificing the purpose of the wheel/tire combo.
I didn't go into the Speed ratings you just did...that's another whole topic. I we were discussing the benefits of a well engineered performance tire.
Tire design is driven by the faster performance vehicles... and clearly driving faster means
<snip>
They don't put tall tires on a Bugatti or a Hennessy or a SSC Aero or a Pagani... Or any Vehicle capable of sustaining these speeds WELL beyond a quarter mile simply because they can explode at sustained high speeds. Its an engineering thing.... I know.
<snip>
They don't put tall tires on a Bugatti or a Hennessy or a SSC Aero or a Pagani... Or any Vehicle capable of sustaining these speeds WELL beyond a quarter mile simply because they can explode at sustained high speeds. Its an engineering thing.... I know.
I used it the same way here. and note did mention as the tech is applied internally. Semantics in nomenclature? Really?
So you're now saying that tires which are designed for a straight line drag strip performance are the same characteristics as a high performance road tire. Ummmm... not.
Just added this...Sure I do.... it initially was about the cost of manufacture vs what the bean counters believed the consumers would pay for. And American manufacturers were not about to re engineer their suspensions back in the 50's and 60's to accommodate the harsher ride qualities of these tires. In fact steel belted radials really didn't take off in America until the fuel crisis hit and imports were coming in equipped with these radials and the appropriate supporting suspensions to accommodate the given ride characteristics of the tires. And we Americans saw how more fuel efficient a tire could make a car.... etc etc etc.. BTW it was Goodyear that introduced the Steel belted radial tires first.... they quickly sold off that endeaver when sales were just horrible due to the market perceptions at the time....Then Michelin took advantage of things when the fuel crisis opened our eyes to a better way. In a nutshell... yes this is what basically happened. BTW I was in HS school in the 80's. ;-)
Your guess at radial tire history is factually inconsistent with the known time line. The fuel crisis was a 1970's thing and the Michelin X radial tire goes all the way back to 1946 (even I knew about radial tires in general and Michelin radials in particular somewhat before 1970). FWIW, the original radial tire patent was by an American, but Arthur Savage had no known association with Goodyear.
Together...We would have figured out a better way. Or argued about it. ;-)
---
---
We'll just have to see what the next 20, or maybe 40 years brings when the time comes. But that won't help solve today's tire decisions, and the matter of limit behavior and predictability vs us humans being more comfortable with gradual changes in vehicle behavior near the limit rather than sudden ones isn't going to go away.
Norm
Last edited by Norm Peterson; 02-28-2014 at 06:58 PM.
02-28-2014, 11:35 PM
#47
I put 20s on my 2011 because I like how they look.
Incidentally, today I took one of my favorite corners (a sharp corner I take every single day, multiple times a day) 5mph faster on the 20s than I ever did on the 18s or 19s. Food for thought.
Incidentally, today I took one of my favorite corners (a sharp corner I take every single day, multiple times a day) 5mph faster on the 20s than I ever did on the 18s or 19s. Food for thought.
03-01-2014, 07:19 AM
#48
6th Gear Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: state of confusion
Posts: 7,635
Norm!
I was there! The original Michelin X radial was a huge improvement in grip back its day for a street tire but the Xas was the true break through in Michelin radial street tire performance. Much better grip and handling under more conditions with much better limit behaviour but they did get loose and were a little harder to catch once you lost it. Of course you are comparing the Michelin radials to crappy bias ply tires which at the time could generate maybe about 0.4g so I would say the trade off was well worth the cost and the price.
Ride? Who cared about ride back then? You are talking about a time when a 70 series tire was a radical tire! Back in the late '60's early '70's we used to put the Xas on BMW 1600/2002s with re-valved Koni dampers and Apina springs and bars. I also had aluminum, later Delrin bushings machined for the control arms. Amazing setup at the time, the Xas were kind of pricey but MAN did they work on lighter low powered cars! On heavier cars with more power as the '60's rolled past and into the early '70's the hot street tire was Pirelli CN36. Those were amazing tires if you had the rim width to support them.
Chip
I was there! The original Michelin X radial was a huge improvement in grip back its day for a street tire but the Xas was the true break through in Michelin radial street tire performance. Much better grip and handling under more conditions with much better limit behaviour but they did get loose and were a little harder to catch once you lost it. Of course you are comparing the Michelin radials to crappy bias ply tires which at the time could generate maybe about 0.4g so I would say the trade off was well worth the cost and the price.
Ride? Who cared about ride back then? You are talking about a time when a 70 series tire was a radical tire! Back in the late '60's early '70's we used to put the Xas on BMW 1600/2002s with re-valved Koni dampers and Apina springs and bars. I also had aluminum, later Delrin bushings machined for the control arms. Amazing setup at the time, the Xas were kind of pricey but MAN did they work on lighter low powered cars! On heavier cars with more power as the '60's rolled past and into the early '70's the hot street tire was Pirelli CN36. Those were amazing tires if you had the rim width to support them.
Chip
My boss at my first job out of school had a Fiat 124 that was running the Xas tires, and the Xas was a popular choice among the members of the several sports car clubs that then existed in the greater Hampton Roads area of VA.
I had a set of CN36's, 185/70-13's, on 13 x 7's (yeah, I knew even then what I was doing), on a Pinto that I'd done quite a bit else to. Never got raw-timed at autocross by any street-tired 240/260/280Z. Aside from their performance, I don't think I've run on any tires either before or since that were more immune to wander over open metal grate bridge decking. Even my wife remembers this.
Norm
03-01-2014, 01:39 PM
#49
2nd Gear Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Florida
Posts: 300
What rims are shown in your sig? They look nasty on that sterling Grey and I've been looking for some rims!
03-02-2014, 03:40 PM
#50
3rd Gear Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 748
I think 19s seem to be the sweet spot for the S197.
That said, I personally have a set of 2011 SVTPP GT500 wheels on my 2010 GT.
They're 19s in the front and 20s in the back. I think 19s all the way around would look great.
YMMV
That said, I personally have a set of 2011 SVTPP GT500 wheels on my 2010 GT.
They're 19s in the front and 20s in the back. I think 19s all the way around would look great.
YMMV