Tire downsize

Wtf lol

 

Safe tires are wide, soft tires that add traction\control. Narrow, hard tires steer you uncontrollably into traffic if your foot slips on the pedal.

 

More sidewall usually leads to more traction/better conformity of the contact patch with the road. It's one reason the F1 team bosses didn't want to change from 13" to 18" wheel sizes.

I wish there were Y- or (Y)-rated tires that were taller in the sidewalls for the same overall height, to yield a better contact patch, and better ride, to some extent. The "ultra low profile is cool" thing that is going on, other than for truly gargantuan brakes, is not one that racing teams adopt willingly, evidently.

Porsche tried 19" rims on their 935 race cars to match the 19" units on the back, for the purpose of putting in larger brakes, but, alas, they found that under hard cornering on the test track, the tires kept slipping off of the rims. I am curious just how low in profile they WERE. They went back to the 16" rims. I'm not sure why they couldn't have tried 18" or 17". They were trying to fit the wheels under the sloped nose of a 935 race car, too, so that would have limited their sidewall height.

 

The stiffer and shorter sidewalls are exactly why the F1 teams didn't want lower-profile tires, as they would slow the cars down due to lack of traction. How was your experience in Formula One?

Higher sidewalls also aid traction in drag racing. As an example, a 2500hp Hellcat with only 8" wide slicks on small 15" wheels had to fight to keep from going into a wheelie for the first sixty feet or so. See following video. Note his elapsed time in his 4200 pound car.



Note, that has never occurred with anyone using 20" wheels and low-profile tires. In fact, TRY to find someone making seven-second passes on 20" wheels. Try to find someone pulling EIGHTS on 20" wheels.

The low-profile tires do not have a larger contact patch for the same tire height and width, so that is just a patently false statement.

Tires with a taller sidewall put MORE of their tread on the ground than do same-width tires with lower sidewalls. Look at the start of a race with a Fuel dragster for an example in drag racing. Look at the Formula One tires in action on seasons before this one, with 13" wheels. F1 cars are THE sharpest-responding, best-handling cars on Earth. They didn't want 18" wheels. Evidently the teams that engineer F1 cars didn't get the same memo you did.

The more rigid sidewalls are a problem when it comes to traction. On a tire, the most consistent thing you want is the contact patch on the ground. The more your tire sidewalls approach infinitely rigid, the less contact patch you get for a tire of the same diameter and width.

This problem is exacerbated the rougher the surface is. The more uneven the surface, the more accurately the tire with taller sidewalls will allow the tread to contact the surface.

Taller sidewalls allow more of the tread to be in contact with the road. Rigid sidewalls were what radials were designed to move away from. When they first came out, people would think you had flat tires because the sidewalls bulged more than with bias-play tires.

Taller sidewalls means more ability of the tread to conform to road surface, not be conformed to some imaginary cylindrical shape. With INFINITELY rigid sidewalls, you get very, very, little traction or contact patch at all.

 

I agree with SRT-Tom. Apples and Oranges.
Taller sidewalls make sense for certain applications like F1 and drag cars with low ET's. It's different for street cars, again depending on application.
I run my wider 245/45R20 tires on my Challenger except for winter. In the winter I use 235/55R18 which give the height but a narrower width. The narrower footprint helps push the tire through the snow for good winter traction. (They also provide a softer ride.)
Also, I don't see pro-touring cars, current performance cars (Challengers, Camaros, Mustangs, Vettes, etc...) or cars running autocross running 225/78R14's.
Tire construction adds another variable too. Just IMO.

 

Not all cornering in F1 is at 68mph and higher. They are also taking 30-40mph ultra-low-speed hairpins.

You are like a salmon flinging itself up a waterfall in January that froze last October, hoping somehow this time it will be liquid.

How many miles per hour is a car traveling at the start of a drag race? 100? 200? 68? Oh, right, ZERO miles per hour. Speed is irrelevant.

No, what is good at high speed has also been proven to be effective at low speed.

I quote one of them:
"and since the car is so stiff and rigid, there's extra movement on an F1"
Another fantasy that all your wishing will not make come true. NO, there is not extra movement. An F1 car is only around 700kg/1500 pounds. That is not a lot of weight on the car. Fantasy argument destroyed.

Further, I remind you of the fact that the Hellcat that was doing 7's on 15" wheels and tall sidewalls, again annihilating your little crusade to win an argument against all facts, reason or logic, this Hellcat weighed 4200 pounds and was more flexible than an F1 car.

What I am talking about is demonstrated superiority in actual performance, not what you may see people do with their cars in some poser showoff category like Pro "Rich Boy Who Got a 1969 Mustang" Touring.

No matter how much you buddies may try to turn this into a victory for your narrow-minded aggressive ignoring of facts, reason, and proven results, the fact is that under ALL conditions, with ALL cars, racing or on the street, taller sidewalls on the same-height tire of the same width allow more tread conformity to the pavement, and stiffer sidewalls do NOT help traction, but limit it, instead, by refusing to allow the tread patch size and shape to be maximized for maximum traction.

Note that I said tires of the same width and overall height, not tires that are narrower and of the same height. You "not seeing" cars with 225-section tires that are 78 percent as wide as tall is irrelevant and childish. Do such tires even exist? Are you dreaming of old bias-ply tractor tires?

Me having to explain this is like dealing with children.

The FACTS are that on the street or the track, on cars with stiff or not so stiff chassis, same-width tires with the same height gain more traction with higher sidewalls than with lower sidewalls due to physics, not whether some fluffy rich boy runs it in Pro Pouf or whatever class Hot Rod, The Magazine For Rich Guys Who Know Nothing About Cars But Can Just Buy Whatever They Want says they prefer.

Taller sidewalls on same-width tread and same-height tire give more traction due to the sidewalls allowing the tread patch touching the ground to be larger and to retain its contact with the ground with more conformity than a same-width-tread, same-exact-height tire that is lower in profile.

You not agreeing with me or agreeing with your buddy doesn't make any difference whatsoever to the facts at hand. The FACT is that shorter sidewalls are more limiting to tread contact conformity than are taller sidewalls. Obviously, too-tall sidewalls are not desirable, either, but how tall IS too tall? I think it's more relative to width than to absolute height.

Shouldn't Don Garlits be using these?

If you like the low sidewalls so much, get some 20 or 15-series tires and wheels and demonstrate their superiority. Show us the traction. While you're at it, find some racing teams using them.

And dismissing any facts due to it being in racing is a demonstration of peak stupidity. Do the motors not count, either, because it's in a race? Do aerodynamics all get cancelled because of racing?

No, your "cancel culture" "gang up on anyone you don't agree with" isn't working, and it will not work. Here, the facts and truth are louder than your ability to gather allies, real or made up.

The real world cancels your cancel culture.

https://simpletire.com/brands/nexen...urce=top-pick-top-picks&pick=sponsored-brands

Here are some tires for you. You can demonstrate the incredible improvement in roadholding, ride, and traction you get with them. You will need some 24" wheels for them, but they match the width and are close to the same height as the standard SRT tires.


In fact, look around your Pro Touring reference book for people who are winning contests in handling and traction with them on the drag strip, on the street, and on the road course and on the mountain switchbacks.

There should be HUNDREDS of people demonstrating the superiority of the tiny sidewalls that you claim are so vastly superior. Everyone should be using them. Especially in Pro Touring, which is evidently your yardstick.

In fact to give infinite traction, have you considered getting 275/05-24 tires for the Challenger made? Think of the amazing and infinite grip of a tire that had about half-inch overall height off of the rim. You'd be able to drive on the ceiling in tunnels, right?

Facts are right, you are wrong. You continuing to fling yourselves at me in spite of all evidence, fact, reason, logic, and results just proves that you are in an emotionally-based stalking session, and proving me wrong, even if you have to say black is white and white is black and up is down and down is up because someone in Pro Touring said so.

Low sidewalls have been depicted for DECADES in tire and wheel advertisements. Something about that look seems to thrill people. I always wondered why a 70-series tire was depicted as more of a 40-series in artists' renditions in tire ads in magazines. 50-series tires were depicted as 20-series. The tires depicted in the following picture never once existed, in history. I know. I used to search the tire stores for them, and voila! they were not to be found!



I noticed that custom car designers would ALWAYS use ridiculously low sidewalls on their renditions, but they could never bring those to life in the real world. For some reason, people find low-profile tires to be glamorous and kewl.




https://www.autoblog.com/2008/11/05...ith-worlds-first-15-series-tire/?guccounter=1


They are declared to be "sharper handling." To use your own argument, on the street, that doesn't matter, RIGHT? Because it's on the street, not the racetrack. Funny how the sharpest-handling cars on planet Earth, F1 cars, have used tall sidewalls for DECADES. Someone forgot to tell them, evidently, what you internet experts already "knew" because someone in Pro Touring liked them.

They are more responsive than skinny 165mm-wide 80-series tires from 1968, maybe. What they are not better than is same-width, same-height tires with smaller rims and taller sidewalls.

As I stated before, Porsche tried super-low-profile tires back in the 1970's, and they just got pulled off of the rims due to their low sidewalls being too low. Their quest was due to the low overall height available on the 935 coupled with 19" wheels for massive brake rotor clearance.

What provides "sharper handling" is "more traction" and you get "more traction" with "taller sidewalls not yanking the tread edges off of the pavement as much as short sidewalls."

You can have maximum fuel mileage or you can have maximum traction. You cannot have both. A tire that allows more of the tread to be deformed/flattened to touch the pavement is going to take more energy to drive, generally, by sheer adhesion if nothing else.

Low profile tires make ride height more predictable, so the car can be a bit lower without risking contact of the underbody with road. What they are, also, is cheaper to make, and thus, more profitable for the same tire makers who push them.

Zero sidewalls are not useful, neither are too-tall sidewalls. Present sidewall heights are somewhat overdone in how short they make them, as it is actually reducing their traction and performance for profit and being able to bray about low fuel consumption.

Notice how hard it is to even FIND a tire that is an 18" wheel or 17" wheel that is 275 in width, a high-performance tire, AND 29 inches tall? When the STREET car, the Dodge Demon, needed more traction, it went with 18" wheels, not 20" wheels. Why would that be?

Larger wheels also allow bigger brake rotors, but how big do they even need to be, when racing cars only use 18" tall wheels? How much brake rotor size do we actually need, compared to how much better it would be to have better traction?

If gigantic brake rotors were so desirable, why aren't race cars using 24" wheels? Why not 30 inch Lexanis?

Bring back taller sidewalls. 50-and 55-series tires will grip better than do 40 and 30-series tires.

 

And we have tons of potholes here. I would prefer to have a less bumpy ride on these roads and a tire that offers the best protection to wheels. More importantly that extra rubber provides more cushioning for a comfortable ride to protect your own body so you don't get all beat up from the shock of the bumps and every little imperfection in the road. I do not need to feel every little bump in the road.