Quick one on tyres

Discussion and technical advice the SW20 MR2. 3S-GTE, 3S-GE, 3S-FE etc
Anything and everything to do with maintenance, modifications and electrical is in here for the Mk2.

Moderators: IMOC Moderators, IMOC Committee Members

Post Reply
Racer7
Posts: 536
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 6:22 pm
Location: SW London

Quick one on tyres

Post by Racer7 »

Hello,

I was about to order some Falken 452s after much reading on here. I.e. they're the tyre of choice alongside AD08s.

However, on the Camskill site (and it appears on Falken site) they don't do a 45 profile in 16s.

What I understand as the optimum size I need is:

Front 205/45/16
Rear 225/45/16

So now I can't do that I'd have 205/50/16 at the front.

Would that look weird and would it affect the handling?

I understand that 45 on the rear is correct. 50 would throw off the rolling radius/speedo reading.

Advice plus any pics would be helpful. Time for me to invest in something useful on the car! :thumleft:
synXero
Posts: 3781
Joined: Fri May 28, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: London, Edinburgh, or the Highlands!

Re: Quick one on tyres

Post by synXero »

In short, yes.

225/50/16 on the rear will throw your speedo out such that when speedo says 62mph, you'll be doing 65mph. How much this matters is up to you really. 225/45 would be 62mph = 62mph.

Visually, your wheelwells will look more full, which could be a good thing.

If your car is lowered you might have problems rubbing on arches/liners, particularly on the front.
Marf
Posts: 6728
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 4:56 pm
Location: West Sussex

Re: Quick one on tyres

Post by Marf »

I had 205/50/16 and 225/45/16 on 16x7/8, was a nice setup IMO

Image

Image

Image

These sizes are available in the 452 and the AD08, which is what's in the above pictures.
Racer7
Posts: 536
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 6:22 pm
Location: SW London

Re: Quick one on tyres

Post by Racer7 »

Did Falken used to do 452s in 205/45/16?

Seems weird that they don't.

What was the reason (other than availability) that made you go with a 50 profile up front? Have you compared it to a 45 profile?
Marf
Posts: 6728
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 4:56 pm
Location: West Sussex

Re: Quick one on tyres

Post by Marf »

I went with a 50 up front to:

1. stay in line with the standard stagger which is both width and profile
2. keep the tyre heights as close to equal as possible front to back

205/100*50=102.5 mm
225/100*45=101.25 mm

No idea if they do a 205/45/16, to me that would look a bit too skinny with a 225/45 on the rear.
Racer7
Posts: 536
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 6:22 pm
Location: SW London

Re: Quick one on tyres

Post by Racer7 »

Hmm, anybody else done this?

I see Marf's logic but also just wondering what others are doing with side wall depths? (balance the discussion so to speak)

I ask as all I only tend to read people running matching wall depths front and back.

As it happens I'm a bit stuck in regards to 45 profile for the Falkens on the front since I can't find them (discontinued)!

Since this little lot is going to set me back just shy of £400 I'd like to get it 'right'.

Cheers!
vishpish
Posts: 565
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 3:57 am
Location: Glasgow

Re: Quick one on tyres

Post by vishpish »

I'm running 225/45/16s fk452s but could never get them in 205/45/16 hence why i run shitey toyos up front.

Think the fk453s are out so I'd try them for more variety in size
Marf
Posts: 6728
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 4:56 pm
Location: West Sussex

Re: Quick one on tyres

Post by Marf »

Racer7 wrote:

I ask as all I only tend to read people running matching wall depths front and back.


I'd wager that's because most people don't really understand the relationship between width and profile, and also those running 17s are limited as to their tyre choice up front, hence end up running equal profiles, usually a 40 profile as a 45 would be too fat up front for a 17.

Go look at the sticker in your drivers door shut. OEM tyres have stagger of both profile and width. that should be enough to convince you that it's normal. :thumleft:

In reality I doubt you'd notice much difference, but as I said a 205/45 up front is gonna look skinny compared to a 225/45 at the rear.

205/100*45 = 92.25mm
225/100*45 = 101.25mm

More sidewall is better also for comfort, and steering feedback when pressing on.
Racer7
Posts: 536
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 6:22 pm
Location: SW London

Re: Quick one on tyres

Post by Racer7 »

Ok Marf, fair play on the logic. Though I wonder if others have tried a higher profile up front only to go back to equal front and back.

But now you can expect another commission cheque from Yokohama. I'm now considering getting the AD08s (do a search and your name is always next to that combination of letters and numbers!)

Part of this is that I do think that running 50 profile and 45 on the back will look a bit weird. I currently have T1Rs (I think) on my wheels and put them next to each other today. Didn't think it looked too off.

Image

Anyhow, back at the IMOC community, at £474 I'm just wondering if these tyres really are the nutz? More importantnly I'm wondering how important it is that I run them all round?

I was thinking I could go AD08s on the back (improving on the 452 option) and something like the KUMHO Ectsa KU39s at £63 or Goodyear F1s at £80 a pop versus £114 for the AD08s at the front. This would really be a price driven decision (i.e being cheap! and I hardly drive the car).

Will better tyres up front will make noticeable difference in comparison to the cheaper ones? If so I may be tempted to cough up the extra £40-60 per wheel.

I currently struggle to do even 1000miles a year at the moment so I'm figuring that the wear may be a moot point due to the number of years I could run them. Though I am worried that I may need to change the tyres if they get old and funny after time...does that happen?

Incidentally for those looking at the AD08 here is some useful info I found:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OC83IbX__Gg
synXero
Posts: 3781
Joined: Fri May 28, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: London, Edinburgh, or the Highlands!

Re: Quick one on tyres

Post by synXero »

Tyres do harden over time, yeah.

I'm a stickler for a good tyre on a sports car, I don't see the point in a great car with crap rubber, so I'd always just say buy the best you can afford.
Johnr32
Posts: 389
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 11:43 pm
Location: Erith, Kent

Re: Quick one on tyres

Post by Johnr32 »

Those ad08s are extremely good all year round and can be used as a normal road tyre without worrying. Surprisingly they wear nicely too (depending on power..)considering the performance.
Marf
Posts: 6728
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 4:56 pm
Location: West Sussex

Re: Quick one on tyres

Post by Marf »

I've run mixed and matched sets of tyres and in my experienced matched is always better.

Despite it being MOT compliant to have different tyres front and rear, on a sports car I think it's silly to mix compounds and sidewall stiffness front to rear.

Any understeer exhibited at the front end is worsened by having a stickier tyre on the rear. Now factor in that the LSD also has a tendency to make the car push on in tighter slow speed corners anyway and I'm convinced that matched is better.


I had T1R up front and Yoko A022 on the rear before my AD08s, and it exhibited exactly those characteristics.

In your example above you're talking about mixing FK452 and AD08.

The A022 was much stickier than the T1R, and if I'm not mistaken the FK452 has a higher treadwear rating than a T1R? i.e less grip and more tendency to understeer,

I don't mean to harp on and yes they're pricey(mine cost 490 I think) but you'd be pleasantly surprised how much better your car would feel on a complete set of AD08s :thumleft:
Post Reply

Return to “MR2 MK2 1990 - 1999 NA & Turbo”