Well Davey, I know the difference trust me..... I guess my 1970 Superbee, 1967 GTX, 68 Roadrunner all bigblock cars with 15X3.5 welds may have weighed more too and that didn't stop me from driving them on the street daily or 1 of my 2 73 Challengers or one of my 6 mustangs and my list goes on and on. I have logged atleast 60,000 + miles on skinnys over the years and a good friend of mine has well over that on his car daily driven rain snow the works, hell he is in need of another set of 165/15's as I type for that same car. I have owned more cars and trucks than probally most just over 200 and everyone with skinnys that I have owned I NEVER have had a problem with them. I maybe no expert to you but I call them as I see them and I have enough knowledge to be dangerous. Did you know that back in the day Chrysler put 15X4 steel wheels on the front of there factory Super Stock cars from the 60's, with a 550/15 tire they came with wedge motors and or Hemi's. You would be suprised to know how many car companys that only had or have a 4 or 5in. wheel from the factory. To say they are QUOTE: Skinnies are horrible on the street. Ask me how I know... They will negate any gain in braking just by being so narrow. All of your braking is up front. When you have such a small patch of rubber on the road, they will lock up easy. They also tend to understeer tremendously. Many times I wanted to turn and kept going straight because there wasn't enough rubber to turn the car. I still have to say BS. The section width on a 165 R 15 is 6.3in. and the tread width is 5.2in. now if i'm correct my parents 73 Comet had 195/75/14 with a section width of 7.3in. and a tread width of 5.6in. I may be wrong here but thats only 1in. in the section 1/2in. a side and .4in. in width, .2in. per side so where is the big difference in handling and braking coming from? I know what i'm talking about I am a Mickey Thompson tire dealer, I must have forgot to let you know that in my other post. Billy boy...
Stockton Wheel will make you a skinny steel wheel for the front and a wider wheel for the back of your car that you can use your dog dish type caps on. They are not cheap but you can have that cool sleeper look if you want. If you are wanting to get better than average performance from your car, which it sounds like you do then the weld type wheels should be your choice. In all honesty the less the rotating mass the better off you will be. Now saying that, will it make a huge difference probally not like John said but if you want 10.90's why not take 20 or so pounds off each end and let it all hang out. I personally have welds and know a ton of people with aluminum racing type wheels such as Weld, Centerline and Bogart that have driven there cars many miles and have never had an issue. Just be safe and level headed and you will be fine. I am sure you already know that your car is not a road racer so the 50mph corners are of no context to you, again just be level headed and you will be fine.... By the way the MT drag radials are much stickier than the BFG's, you might want to consider them as your tire of choice. Bill
Well gee, how much does a VW weigh and how much does a Maverick weigh? Big difference. There's a thousand pounds of difference between the two, and much of it is over the front wheels on a maverick. Skinny tires do not handle or brake as well as wider ones, and that's a proven fact. They're fine for normal cruising around, but during any kind of spirited driving, they are downright dangerous...not to mention ugly as hell...
OK time for my input on tires and cornering. i so often hear how poorly our cars handle, then read about people running tires as narrow as stock and yet taller in front and wide and taller in back, being the ones complaining. running through the hills where i live, and have lived i use the stock height suspension on 225 60 14 with just mild shocks. as a rule i can double the average turn sign for the trucks and campers and not even be leaning the car or pushing near my envelope, just cruisin easily along. ive said before i scared a person in his 944 turbo trying to follow me through the santa cruz hills and ive left ricers in the dust on the hills out here without even trying. the car will handle according to how you set it up, if you make it for going straight, expect to lose a little corner traction. F1 cars dont run skinny fronts and dragsters dont run F1 tires all around, theres a reason.
curious since we have a lot of knowledgable people here. years ago I had a 68 chevelle, I put cragar SST's, 10" rims w/ 255-15 on rear and 4" -14's on front. car drove just fine. I sold the car without the rims and later put them on a 77 grand prix. I couldn't turn a corner without skidding the front end. terrible breaking too.. It has always bugged me why there was so much difference?????
T.L. Did you miss a post? If you didn't get it i'll type it out again. I'll try and make it brief. I was using a VW as an EXAMPLE how they came with that same tire size from the factory, key word EXAMPLE. Okay now my other post was like a book well sort of, again I was giving an EXAMPLE of what I have personally owned with skinnies, the vehicle types with big blocks and had no problems. I also gave an EXAMPLE of one of my personal friends that has the same tires on his car now for years that has experienced no problems. Now I tried wrapping it up with an EXAMPLE of the stock factory tire size off my parents 73 Comet and the size of the 165 R 15's in question and there is really no difference in section width let alone tread width, what can't you read out of this? Please tell me.... I am not trying to be a smart a@@ here but come on, it is really a personal opinion here, am I correct just one's taste over the other. Quote: Skinny tires do not handle or brake as well as wider ones, and that's a proven fact. They're fine for normal cruising around, but during any kind of spirited driving, they are downright dangerous...not to mention ugly as hell... That fact maybe true in the summer or on dry days but when it rains or snows actually a skinnier tire is better, FACT! What type of spirited driving are you talking about? I hope your not taking the corners like its a Ferrari or something now that is just plain crazy and downright dangerous. Well here we go the truth comes out, opinions are like a@@holes everyone has one. I personally like skinnys but I too like the odd the different, the rarer the better but thats me. This thread started out by having "Stockhatch" ask about the weight difference of two types of wheels and John answered him correctly and it took off from there with opinion after opinion. Personally I don't care what wheels or tires he runs I just wanted to help with the knowledge I have with the subject. I hope everyone can understand where i'm coming from... Bill
DING, DING, DING, DING, DING..... We have a Winner..... Sierra Grabber are you a carpenter, cause you hit the nail on the head..... Bill
Probally a typo but Cragar didn't make a 14X4 front rim but they did make a 15X4 for a short period of time. Wow thats crazy but unfortunately you will probally never really know if there was a tire problem to low of pressure for the weight of the car or if there was a chassis problem somewhere. The GP was a tad heavier than the Chevelle that too may have had adverse affects in your situation too. Sorry I wish I could give you a straight answer but without seeing the car and going over the senerio it is a guessing game from here out... Heck I take it you sold the car, so just say it was the damn Pontiac was junk and now you have a good car.... Bill
GP junk well, the Grand Prix I has was a lemon. ( reson for getting rid of it ) owned it for a year and it was a money pit. I kinda thought it had been wrecked and maybe the frame was bent. thus the crappy handling. I have never seen a car that wanted to go straight so badly. in town turning corners at a slow speed....have to come to a stop almost just to make the turn... those cars had a very long snout on them, maybe thats it.. My Mav does OK, thats all thats important
It sounded like it may have been a crash survivor that wasn't fixed correctly. When you have a push like that there is definatlely something wrong. Oh so true on the nose of those cars they were long and had a 200lb bumper hanging off the front that probally wasn't doing any good either.... Good luck with your Mav.... Bill
I feel better about your next post. You got your point across. I still don't agree, but at least you dropped the VW reference. You gotta admit that using that as your only example on a board like this is asking for flames. Still, I found them terrible for street driving, but maybe I don't have your patience. When I drive on the street regularly, I don't want to have to baby a car just so I can run skinny rims on it. I also feel your reference to stock rims from the 60s or even 70s was a little off base. Sure they put stupid skinny rims on cars... they also used bias ply tires, but not too many folks think it's cool to run those on the street today. Not too many folks think it's cool to keep their Mavs underpowered or underbraked so they can keep the skinny stock rims/tires either. Also, I don't know anything about Mopar, but Ford put 5" wide rims and bias plys on the 64 Thunderbolt! There was a disclaimer in the glove box for the customer stating that Ford could not be responsible if they drove the car with the stock rims in place. They were there only to get the car from Detroit to the dealer and then to your shop. After that you were expected to upgrade. Dave
Exactly what does "had no problems" mean anyway? That you never had a flat or blow-out? That you never lost control of your car and had an accident? If so, then good for you. That still doesn't change the fact that a wider tire has better grip (which affects braking and steering), and greater load-carrying capacity. Maybe I did miss something in your previous post. Maybe I missed the main point you were trying to make. If so, I apologize. It "sounded" like you were saying that it was B.S. that wide tires perform better (or are safer) than skinnys. If that is what you were saying, then you would be dead wrong. I know what the original topic of this thread is about, but I felt like commenting on your post, so i did...
lol... Sometimes I do encite those.... Heck I have no patients when i'm driving i'm lucky I haven't landed up in jail. I am not easy on my stuff I usually act like i'm at the strip, green means go just I am a little faster across the intersection than most.... I used the early cars as a reference point and I know that most guys don't call up Coker Tire and order a set of OE type tires for there cars because there just to damn expensive for most. The majority of guys run radial tires close to the stock sizes on the front, thats where I was going with that example. My example was to note that the factory did put those tire and wheel sizes on there cars knowing full well there were going to be those few that were still going to drive them with the front rubber being the same. There was alot more street racing back in the day.... I have a friend who actually owns a factory T-Bolt his car has like 160 some original miles on it and it has 15X4in. factory steel wheels on it up front, they never sold it and it is still in his family dealerships name, so technically its still new.... Its an awesome survivor. Yep any factory type race car came with the "Notice" attached.... A little bit about me. One of the reasons I know so much about Mopars is I have been a Senior Division Judge for many years at the Mopar Nationals and I have had the opportunity to see these rare factor type race cars and have been able to judge them for correctness. I also am in the process of building my own 90 Mustang DR car for NMRA and FFW competion. I also crew for one of the top stars in the NMRA DR class and have judged so many car shows I can't even count. I consider myself very lucky for what I have gotten to do in this hobby or sickness we all have. Bill
No problems means just that, I have had no problems with braking skidding or steering with the use of 165 R 15's on any of my cars that I have had that tire size on. Let me say this, its truely all about RESPECT. Now that being said, if you don't RESPECT your vehicle your asking for some serious trouble, the knowledge of having a skinnier tire up front makes you want to be a little safer and the knowledge of a bigger tire up front gives you the feeling of more stability and security, but both are very dangerous in there own rights if you don't RESPECT what you are driving. To much confidence in having a bigger tire up front could put you in the mind set that you could take that corner a little faster and you could put yourself in a very dangerous situation, on the other hand having a skinny tire/wheel up front is not going to be as forgiving as the larger tire in a corner because of course there intension was for more of a straight line use and someone who is over confident can too get themselves into that same situation as the larger tire with being to over confident in a corner with such a skinny tire, there are many other scenarios too but they both have there positives and negatives and to each there own, but again it really comes down to RESPECT of what type of vehicle you have your self strapped into. I hope i'm clarifying things alittle better so you guys understand where i'm coming from.... Bill
Yes, one must be very familiar with the handling characteristics of their vehicle, and aware of what its limitations are. I can't drive my Maverick like a late model Corvette or Ferarri, but I can certainly drive it more agressively (without losing control) with the tires and suspension I have on it now, than I could with stock skinny tires and flimsy suspension...
