View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
aaron_sK Member
Joined: 23 Jan 2006 Posts: 8834 Location: Back in beautiful Tacompton
1987 Chevrolet Camaro IROC-Z
|
Posted: Fri Jan 15, 2016 8:00 pm Post subject: Wheel weight on not a racecar |
|
|
So wheel weight on a high performance car is bad, and everyone on the internet will gladly type seventeen pages all about that, but I come to the crew for an answer to a more practical question: how much does the weight of the wheel and tire assembly affect a daily driver?
If I run heavy-ass tires and wheels will I increase or decrease ride harshness in the post-apocalyptic pothole wasteland that is Tacoma? How about vibration on the freeway? How much weight would I need to add or remove before I saw any difference? How much (if at all) does it affect fuel economy?
I suspect it will hurt braking, but my brakes are overkill for my vehicle weight anyway so I'm not super worried about that.
If it helps the current wheel/tire weight is 40~ lbs. per. Scale weight is 2800~ with me in it. |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
QwkTrip 11sec Club
![](images/avatars/5331510654664d0c0e14ee.jpg)
Joined: 17 Feb 2004 Posts: 3942 Location: Peoria, IL
1989 Pontiac Firebird
|
Posted: Fri Jan 15, 2016 8:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It is both unsprung weight, and inertia in the rotating assembly. Holding everything else constant, I suspect it hurts anything that requires motion. Ride quality, mileage, braking, you name it. But we're not holding everything constant. You get to play with tire diameter and sidewall which will effect ride quality. I suppose the only reason to increase wheel weight (steelies) is to improve strength if needed.
Was that brief enough for you? |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
aaron_sK Member
Joined: 23 Jan 2006 Posts: 8834 Location: Back in beautiful Tacompton
1987 Chevrolet Camaro IROC-Z
|
Posted: Fri Jan 15, 2016 9:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
QwkTrip wrote: | Was that brief enough for you? |
Brevity is also, apparently, the soul of engineering.
Here's another one that I've wondered about for awhile: does a taller sidewall always equal a softer/smoother/"better"/ect. ride?
Does a wider tire give a better ride than a pizza cutter?
How does vehicle weight factor into this? My last two cars have been well under 3K lbs. Does less weight on the tires change the ride?
My previous tire changes have all been on performance or rather "performance" vehicles. This old-man nonsense about owning something that doesn't repeatedly punch you in the kidneys is all new to me. |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
QwkTrip 11sec Club
![](images/avatars/5331510654664d0c0e14ee.jpg)
Joined: 17 Feb 2004 Posts: 3942 Location: Peoria, IL
1989 Pontiac Firebird
|
Posted: Fri Jan 15, 2016 9:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
No, sidewall construction also matters. Taller isn't automatically smoother.
Trailers carry wide range of weight so by definition it will be over sprung and over damped for most situations. I have nearly zero experience with trailers, but I'll bet having a tire that isn't squirmy under load is far more important than ride quality. Real trailer tires tend to have really tough sidewalls and ride rough. Sidewalls are made extra tough because so many people clip the right rear on curbs. |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
chevymad Master B
Joined: 11 Jan 2004 Posts: 5474
1987 Pontiac Formula
|
Posted: Fri Jan 15, 2016 9:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
From Jeep experience weight kills power, braking and mileage. Sidewall and air pressure matter most to ride quality. Heavy sidewall or lighter vehicle means run much less air pressure. Jeep actually drives fairly decent at speed with only 10psi in the E rated tires.
My original 31" tire/wheel combo was around 65lbs, my toyo combo weighs in at 100lbs each. Width and height both changed so its hard to be accurate but mileage dropped 5mpg just by going to the bigger heavier tire.
Not saying to run 10psi.. Just that I had to drive 15miles after airing down once and it was surprisingly ok.
Last edited by chevymad on Fri Jan 15, 2016 9:45 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
QwkTrip 11sec Club
![](images/avatars/5331510654664d0c0e14ee.jpg)
Joined: 17 Feb 2004 Posts: 3942 Location: Peoria, IL
1989 Pontiac Firebird
|
Posted: Fri Jan 15, 2016 9:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
aaron_sK wrote: | My previous tire changes have all been on performance or rather "performance" vehicles. This old-man nonsense about owning something that doesn't repeatedly punch you in the kidneys is all new to me. |
You're getting old like me. I really really really like how quiet and smooth my truck is.
I don't know how to optimize tires for any given situation. I just know a few general concepts. But one thing I have learned through the years is you get what you pay for. I remember having Firestones on my '99 Aurora and switching to Michelins. OH MY GOSH WHAT A DIFFERENCE!!! Same tire size, same shocks, same car.... whole different ride. The Michelins made for a really smooth and quiet ride. |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
QwkTrip 11sec Club
![](images/avatars/5331510654664d0c0e14ee.jpg)
Joined: 17 Feb 2004 Posts: 3942 Location: Peoria, IL
1989 Pontiac Firebird
|
Posted: Fri Jan 15, 2016 9:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
chevymad wrote: | My original 31" tire/wheel combo was around 65lbs, my toyo combo weighs in at 100lbs each. Width and height both changed so its hard to be accurate but mileage dropped 5mpg just by going to the bigger heavier tire. |
The new tires on my truck are exact same size as original, but 6 pounds heavier per tire. Took a 1.5 mpg hit and I could feel that the truck accelerated slower.
I do like a taller tire when hitting potholes. I'd rather span the hole then drop in the hole. Seems like a 31" tire is enough to smooth out most pot holes. |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
chevymad Master B
Joined: 11 Jan 2004 Posts: 5474
1987 Pontiac Formula
|
Posted: Fri Jan 15, 2016 10:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It's hard to pick tires even by price. I once had a set of Coopers on the formula that were just awesome. Lasted 45k miles, were smooth, quiet and very sticky. Loved them so much I bought another set of coopers to replace them, but stepped up to their next "better" tire. These were lousy. Noisy, slippery and only lasted 20k miles. I can understand not lasting long if they actually stuck to the road better, but these were much worse. And I paid $200 per tire vs the usual $150 I had paid for the others. |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
Alphius Peanut
![](images/avatars/17565934854c4f4e4ab6f09.gif)
Joined: 05 Sep 2006 Posts: 2429 Location: Grand Mound
1984 Chevrolet Camaro Z/28
|
Posted: Sat Jan 16, 2016 11:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
Increased unsprung weight will make ride quality worse, if all else is equal.
Taller sidewall height is less important than sidewall strength and rubber compound for ride quality. Soft sidewalls improve ride quality at the expense of handling.
Wide vs. narrow has no meaningful impact on ride quality, but will affect mileage and road noise a little. If you're talking a 10mm difference, that won't be too noticeable.
For an example: You remember the awesome barely-streetable Nittos I had on the Camaro. When I changed to my current all-seasons, I noticed a much softer ride over expansion joints and road imperfections due to sidewall stiffness. I also saw increased mileage and far less road noise. Exact same tire size, so sidewall height and width were unchanged.
Overall, you have to choose the right tire to maximize ride quality. You can't make a bad tire good or a good tire bad by minimally changing tire height, width, etc. _________________ 84 Camaro Z28 - LS1/T56
85 Silverado - Low and Slow |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
Twilightoptics Hardcore (12sec Club)
![](images/avatars/13045505804a4997fd085c3.jpg)
Joined: 13 Jan 2004 Posts: 9191 Location: Auburn , WA
1987 Chevrolet Camaro IROC-Z
|
Posted: Sat Jan 16, 2016 12:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
When I went from 31" BFG All Terrain to 33" Goodyear MTR with the durable side wall: ride quality diminished considerably - almost road like leaf springs, and mileage went from ~18 to 15.5. Part of that likely was from needing more gear to utilize 5th gear properly. You could definitely tell the rolling resistance was more .
Like B said though, we're talking 30-40lbs per wheel end added. Buying lighter wheels? Only if you're full racecar. _________________ A redline a day keeps the carbon away! |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
aaron_sK Member
Joined: 23 Jan 2006 Posts: 8834 Location: Back in beautiful Tacompton
1987 Chevrolet Camaro IROC-Z
|
Posted: Sat Jan 16, 2016 1:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
QwkTrip wrote: | You're getting old like me. |
I figured a man who has just admitted to owning a front wheel drive Oldsmobile would appreciate it.
This is all very good information. I never really bothered with tires other than buying the widest and cheapest I could get my hands on, so this is interesting new stuff for me.
The bottom line is that the ride in the Toyota is driving me nuts. I was debating selling the truck for awhile, but I feel I shouldn't do that what with it's whole never breaking down or needing any money put into it, but if I am going to keep it I need to give it some love and the tires are at the top of the list.
Currently I have the stock-as-a-rock 14x5 steelies on it (20~lbs.) and a set of horrible old high-treadwear hard-as-a-rock Michelin 195/75s which are the stock size but seem on the wide side for a 5" rim. They are all kinds of bad and ugly and dangerous in the rain and they need to go.
I was thinking of going with a set of 16x7 Starquest fronts (16~lbs.) because I really dig the look, but those are getting hard to find and when you do they're beat up or overpriced or both.
A much cheaper option would be some 15x7 Soft 8's or D-windows. I had that exact color scheme and rims on my first '95 F-150 and I really liked it, but they are 26 lbs. per, which led me down the path of how much and extra 40+lbs. of unsprung weight is going to hurt the truck, or more specifically, hurt my ass.
Toyota ran a stupid +35mm offset and some huge wheel flares so I have a lot of room to play around. I want to maintain (close to) the same overall diameter (25.5") so I would be looking at a 215/65-15 or 215/55-16 to maintain a nice square sidewall and add some width. |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
Twilightoptics Hardcore (12sec Club)
![](images/avatars/13045505804a4997fd085c3.jpg)
Joined: 13 Jan 2004 Posts: 9191 Location: Auburn , WA
1987 Chevrolet Camaro IROC-Z
|
Posted: Sat Jan 16, 2016 2:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
in the RX7, I noticed no considerable change to ride/mileage when I ditched the stock skinny 13" wheels, for some 16x7 with the same diameter tire. _________________ A redline a day keeps the carbon away! |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
aaron_sK Member
Joined: 23 Jan 2006 Posts: 8834 Location: Back in beautiful Tacompton
1987 Chevrolet Camaro IROC-Z
|
Posted: Sat Jun 18, 2016 4:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
So right after this topic concluded I found a set of five BBS meshies for dirt cheap, bought 'em, and then stacked them in a corner of the shop and ignored them for half a year. Then Jon posted about how much he hates them and is hatred ironically motivated me to both troll him and improve my truck at the same time like so...
Rims are 15"x6.5" with a +14 offset. Tires are Sumitomo HTR PO2's, 215/65R15.
It's more unique than I thought it would be, and I am kinda digging the late-80's/early-90's sport look.
The overall weight was within a couple pounds despite going up two inches in width, an inch in diameter, and an inch in tire cross section.
The Sumitomos so far seem like a really good cheap performance all-season. Better than the old fallback Kumho ASX's I think.
Mileage report incoming.
One of these days I might even wash it... ![Rolling Eyes](images/smiles/icon_rolleyes.gif) |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
QwkTrip 11sec Club
![](images/avatars/5331510654664d0c0e14ee.jpg)
Joined: 17 Feb 2004 Posts: 3942 Location: Peoria, IL
1989 Pontiac Firebird
|
Posted: Sat Aug 06, 2016 10:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
Somehow it works on that truck. Pulls together the look. |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
Alphius Peanut
![](images/avatars/17565934854c4f4e4ab6f09.gif)
Joined: 05 Sep 2006 Posts: 2429 Location: Grand Mound
1984 Chevrolet Camaro Z/28
|
Posted: Sun Aug 07, 2016 8:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I wan't 100% sold from the pictures, but in person it really works. _________________ 84 Camaro Z28 - LS1/T56
85 Silverado - Low and Slow |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
|