Classic Mustangs (Tech) Technical discussions about the Mustangs of yester-year.

Another Newbie! Hopefully my first post will work

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jan 15, 2010 | 09:02 AM
  #11  
oldrock's Avatar
oldrock
2nd Gear Member
 
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 190
From: texas
Default

I think that is a real beauty! Didn't even notice the cobras till I read that other post. Don't know what you could replace that with but I wouldn't worry about it if it were me.
Old Jan 15, 2010 | 09:11 AM
  #12  
FoMoJoe's Avatar
FoMoJoe
Thread Starter
2nd Gear Member
 
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 222
From: Georgia
Default

I appreciate that tire feedback. The tires were on there when I purchased the car and I am all for safety if a switch is necessary. I just did all the mechanical work. Not being a tire size expert here, would others agree? How much taller of a tire is a 225/45 R17 vs a 215/40 R17. I know it's in the numbers. Inch maybe? Is there even a bigger size over 225 but under 245? And would would the overall height be on that too?
Old Jan 15, 2010 | 09:19 AM
  #13  
noroof66's Avatar
noroof66
3rd Gear Member
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 629
From: CA
Default

Nice car, I like the color and rims as well.
Old Jan 15, 2010 | 10:11 AM
  #14  
Norm Peterson's Avatar
Norm Peterson
6th Gear Member
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,635
From: state of confusion
Default

Originally Posted by FoMoJoe
I appreciate that tire feedback. The tires were on there when I purchased the car and I am all for safety if a switch is necessary. I just did all the mechanical work. Not being a tire size expert here, would others agree? How much taller of a tire is a 225/45 R17 vs a 215/40 R17. I know it's in the numbers. Inch maybe? Is there even a bigger size over 225 but under 245? And would would the overall height be on that too?
From a quick look at TireRack.com ( Direzza Sport Z1 Star Spec is what came up at the top of their list on a 215/40-17 size search - but the dimensions and load capacities will be pretty much the same no matter whose they actually are).

~ Size ~~~~~ Width ~~~ Dia ~~ Max Load
195/70-14 ~~~ 7.9" ~~~ 24.8" ~~~ 1312#

215/40-17 ~~~ 8.7" ~~~ 23.8" ~~~ 1074#
215/45-17 ~~~ 8.4" ~~~ 24.6" ~~~ 1201#
225/45-17 ~~~ 8.9" ~~~ 25.0" ~~~ 1323#
235/40-17 ~~~ 9.6" ~~~ 24.5" ~~~ 1323#
235/45-17 ~~~ 9.4" ~~~ 25.4" ~~~ 1433#
245/45-17 ~~~ 9.7" ~~~ 25.7" ~~~ 1521#

Note that the tire diameters listed are unloaded diameters. IOW, the tops of the tires won't be at "Dia" above the ground once the car is sitting on the ground and the tires are loaded (1/2", maybe 3/4" less). However, the tire tops will be close to half that diameter above the axle center, which is something that you can use to determine things like tire to fender gap and possible lowering. 235 and wider may not fit without a bit of work

The member "Dodgestang" has a number of tables for tires and wheels for various years of these cars - what works, what other modifications, what needs a little clearance work, etc. I still can't remember the links off the top of my head and my work computer won't let me go to "personal storage" sites to grab the addresses.


Norm

Last edited by Norm Peterson; Jan 15, 2010 at 10:13 AM. Reason: fussing with ASCII table construction
Old Jan 15, 2010 | 01:13 PM
  #15  
FoMoJoe's Avatar
FoMoJoe
Thread Starter
2nd Gear Member
 
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 222
From: Georgia
Default

I've been checking the tire specs on Tirerack. For the front, my tires are rated at 1201 lbs. from the Kumho manufacturer. 125 lbs. more than the previous chart that was posted which was for another manufacturer (Direzza). If I go up to the 225/45R17 with my Kumho brand to keep consistent tires on the car, it will go from 1201 to 1477. I guess my question is, I see there's a difference in the max load, but is it necessary seeing that the tire is 1201 and not 1074 as originally thought?
My rears are already rated at 1521 lbs.
Old Jan 15, 2010 | 01:40 PM
  #16  
kalli's Avatar
kalli
6th Gear Member
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 6,417
From: Cork, Ireland
Default

there's no need to look it up, it's a simple calculation

the tyre diameter is made up out of twice the sidewall and the rim

the first number is the tyre width in mm, the second the aspect ratio in percent, the wheel is in inch
example:
215/40 R15

one sidewall would be
215/100*40=86mm=3.385inch
twice that plus the 17 is 23.77", which matches the manufacturers
215/40-17 ~~~ 8.7" ~~~ 23.8" ~~~ 1074#

the short formula I use for that is:

Width*Ratio/1270+Wheel
215*40/1270 + 17=23.77
Old Jan 15, 2010 | 02:12 PM
  #17  
Norm Peterson's Avatar
Norm Peterson
6th Gear Member
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,635
From: state of confusion
Default

Originally Posted by FoMoJoe
I've been checking the tire specs on Tirerack. For the front, my tires are rated at 1201 lbs. from the Kumho manufacturer. 125 lbs. more than the previous chart that was posted which was for another manufacturer (Direzza). If I go up to the 225/45R17 with my Kumho brand to keep consistent tires on the car, it will go from 1201 to 1477. I guess my question is, I see there's a difference in the max load, but is it necessary seeing that the tire is 1201 and not 1074 as originally thought?
My rears are already rated at 1521 lbs.
Still a bit "iffy" up front, but probably do-able for most normal to moderate driving. Hard acceleration won't be the problem; it's whatever hard cornering you do that'll beat up front tires and make them run a bit warm.

Near as I can tell, the OE size was either 6.95-14 or maybe 7.00-14, and those are good for either 1270 or 1310 lbs depending on which line in some old tire load vs inflation pressure table I'm looking at (it's not on TireRack, any other site or even in electronic form other than my scan copy that I know of).

In order to make up the load capacity difference from 1200 to 1310 or so would require about 5 psi more inflation pressure. I don't know what the mfr-recommended pressure was for the OE tires, but whatever it was you'd want your starting point for tire pressure tuning (to suit ride comfort and handling preferences) to be 5 added to it. At least 3, if you're comfortable working with 1270 being the OE tire capacity. Don't go less.


Norm

Last edited by Norm Peterson; Jan 15, 2010 at 02:16 PM.
Old Jan 15, 2010 | 02:24 PM
  #18  
FoMoJoe's Avatar
FoMoJoe
Thread Starter
2nd Gear Member
 
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 222
From: Georgia
Default

Goodstuff! Very informative!
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
djbigskrilla
2005-2014 Mustangs
24
Sep 20, 2022 01:04 AM
drfister
2005-2014 Mustangs
11
May 3, 2018 10:38 PM
movielover40
New Member Area
5
Aug 27, 2015 10:13 PM
Stilz
New Member Area
3
Aug 19, 2015 06:17 AM
ccwebb
GT S197 General Discussion
2
Aug 11, 2015 06:47 PM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:28 PM.