What Brand Of Tire Would YOU Run?

[dvkim]

Can any one recommend a set of tires for my 94 with stock 16's, 17's. I'm aware of stock sizing and currently running SP 8000's that are about 30% worn with Alternate Sizing at:
225-40-16F
245-40-17R

Are these tires O.K. for my stock wheels?

This is only my second set of tires. I'm at about 43K Miles so I guess I'm doing well as far as wear.

Which Tire would you run on 16's and 17's stock wheels? I've heard the SO3's are a good choice. Do they come in the Stock sizes?

 

[AaronR]

Dvkim, I would definitly get a set of S-03's. I am one of the lucky souls here at the Tirerack that get to do street and track testing. After driving every other available option (literally!) I bought the S-03's for my NSX. Pilot Sports are also a good choice, but I liked the S-03's better when we wet tested at our track. If you walked around our parking lot, you would see without question that more people have S-03's than any other tire on our personal cars. As far as sizing is concerned on your stock 94 wheels you would want to run 225/45/16 up front and 255/40/17 in the rear in my opinion.
Aaron


Aaron

 

[Hrant]

Aaron, I had a similar post re SO3 question in the Tech forum a while back. I just checked the sizes you recommeded, TCS will be fine but will this not give more oversteer than the oem sizes of 215/45/16 on the fronts? The 255/40/17 on the rear is just over 5% so TCS will be activated especially with some treadwear.

What is your pricing for a set for NSXPrime forum members or NSXCA?

Edit: Does the 225/45/16 rub if it is lowered with Bilstein (lower perch) and stock springs? what about Eibachs added?
http://www.nsxprime.com/ubb/Forum10/HTML/000602.html

[This message has been edited by Hrant (edited 02 August 2002).]

 

[AaronR]

Hrant, we have used 225/45/16-255/40/17 with no tcs problems at all. The od's are approx 3 to 4 10ths of an inch taller and the widths are approx half an inch wider than stock so the change is minimal. I do not see you rubbing with a lowered car unless it is drastically lowered (most likely with coil-overs). I would prefer to use oe sizing whenever possible, but the S-03's do not come in the 215's hence the change. Many people will give you many opinions on sizing here, and that's the great part about our cars. Many cars (take a newer Vette for example) are almost dead locked into oe sizing.....which is often no fun due to limiting tire choice. I think you will find this sizing combo to look and feel very nice on the car, I do. Unforunatly, Tirerack does not partake in any group buys, board discounts or the like. Our management is very strict on pricing. In fact our sales force is not allowed to change pricing for anyone other than those who qualify for our wholesale automotive dealer program, but even then those people are only allowed to buy for resale purposes only.

Our pricing on the fronts are $152.00 and the rears are $192.00. Both are currently in stock.

As far as NSXPrime is concerned, I am here to be a friend and fellow owner but I am not in the position to sell anything. I am always more than happy to help, as I have many questions that I need answered about our cars too. I can suggest a few really good guys (dan @ 800.428.8355 ext 294 and noah @ 88.428.8355 ext 272) that will service you with the best of them!
Hope that helps,
Aaron
94 Green/Tan #268

 

[Hrant]

Well said Aaron re your position at Tire Rack, did not know the details or policy.

I still have a question re the sizing though.

Why opt/recommend 225/40/16 and 245/40/17 instead of 255/40/17 for the rears? Is there a particular advantage? Since the front is not oem size, should the back be oem jsut because ....? Wouldn't the 255 offer more balance rather than bias to oversteer with 225/245?

 

[AaronR]

I like to use the 255's in the rear so that the stagger stays as close as possible with the original ratio. Being that the stock overall diameters are diffrent (as opposed to a stagger on an M3 for example where only the width is staggered) I like to raise or lower the fronts and rears together. I feel that Honda wanted a difference in od's from front to rear so I try to keep it there.


ps- even the new 02 NSX 17/17 sizing keeps the od's staggered.

Aaron

 

[nsxtasy]

Originally posted by Hrant:
I just checked the sizes you recommeded, TCS will be fine but will this not give more oversteer than the oem sizes of 215/45/16 on the fronts? The 255/40/17 on the rear is just over 5% so TCS will be activated especially with some treadwear.

I'm not sure how you calculated that, Hrant. Here are my calculations for the outer diameters for dvkim's '94:

Front
215/45ZR16 stock
225/45ZR16 +1.5 percent

Rear
245/40ZR17 stock
255/40ZR17 +1.3 percent

Thus the front-to-rear ratio would hardly change using these sizes - only by 0.2 percent, which is nowhere near the 5 percent that will throw off the TCS.

Regarding tire choices, dvkim (and aaronr), if you've never tried the OEM tires (Yokohama A022H and Bridgestone RE010), I would strongly recommend that you do so. While there are many excellent street tires on the market, including the S03, only the OEM tires are designed specifically for the NSX, with each tire designed for a specific corner of the car. There are differences in compounds and biasing front-to-rear, and the biasing is designed to work together with the NSX alignment to maximize sharpness in handling. You can read more about the OEM tires in the FAQ here.

 

[Hrant]

Originally posted by nsxtasy:
I'm not sure how you calculated that, Hrant. Here are my calculations for the outer diameters for dvkim's '94:

Front
215/45ZR16 stock
225/45ZR16 +1.5 percent

Rear
245/40ZR17 stock
255/40ZR17 +1.3 percent

Thus the front-to-rear ratio would hardly change using these sizes - only by 0.2 percent, which is nowhere near the 5 percent that will throw off the TCS.

..........
.

Ken, I thought you have to measure the difference between the fronts and the rears and not just between different sizes in fronts and rears. The total difference is at issue no?

I used the spreadsheet given to me by Andrie. The overall diameter for the 225/45/16 is 23.9" and the 255/40/17 is 25.1" thus the difference is -1.2" and divided by 23.9" for the fronts that is 5.02% ..... am I missing something or doing the math wrong

The S03 in 245/40/17 measures 24.8" in diameter very close to the oem.

Based on the table I have, the RE010 measures 23.5" for the front 215/40/16 and 24.6" for the rear 245/40/17.

Regarding oem tires, it is interesting that Tire Rack rates the RE010 higher that the AOH22 ........ and these are 10 year old technology in design and presumably rubber compound ........

 

[nsxtasy]

Originally posted by Hrant:
I used the spreadsheet given to me by Andrie. The overall diameter for the 225/45/16 is 23.9" and the 255/40/17 is 25.1" thus the difference is -1.2" and divided by 23.9" for the fronts that is 5.02% ..... am I missing something or doing the math wrong

Yes.

Let's use the '94-01 sizes as an example. (Those with '91-93 or '02 cars can do similar math.)

Keep in mind that what matters for the TCS to operate properly is the ratio of the outer diameter of the rear tire to the outer diameter of the front tire.

In the stock sizes, the outer diameter of the rear tire (24.71 inches) is 4.65 percent greater than that of the front tire (23.62 inches). For the TCS to operate properly, you have to keep that ratio within 5 percent of that figure. Actually, I would probably want to keep it within 3 percent or so, just to take account of things like tire wear - but, for calculation's sake, let's assume exactly 5 percent. That means that if the rear diameter is larger than the front by 9.65 percent or more, the TCS won't work. Or, if the rear diameter is more than 0.35 percent SMALLER than the front diameter, TCS won't work.

METHOD 1 - Calculating the actual ratio of diameters

One way of determining the ratio is to calculate it using the actual diameters, and compare it to the stock 4.65 percent difference.

If you wanted to calculate the actual ratio for the sizes Aaron mentioned by using the actual diameters, you would find that the outer diameter of the rear 255/40/17 is 25.03 inches and the front 225/45/16 is 23.97 inches. The rear is 4.42 percent larger than the front, which is only 0.23 percent different from the stock ratio of 4.65 percent. Since 0.23 percent is less than the 5.0 percent threshold for TCS to operate properly, you're fine.

METHOD 2 - Subtracting the changes in diameter in front vs in rear

The tire calculators make it easy to determine a percent increase or decrease in tire size, and I find it easier to use that than to calculate the actual ratio. That's why I prefer this second method.

Now, how does the ratio of the rear diameter to the front diameter change? It changes when you change the size on the front, the rear, or both. If you increase the diameter of the front tire by 3.0 percent, and you increase the diameter of the rear tire by 3.0 percent, that ratio doesn't change at all, and TCS will work. If you increase the diameter of the front tire by 1.0 percent, and you increase the diameter of the rear tire by 3.0 percent, you will increase the ratio of rear to front by approximately 2 percent. And, since you're changing the ratio by 2 percent, TCS will work.

However, if, let's say, you make the rear diameter 5 percent bigger, and the front tire 1 percent smaller, you are changing the ratio by 6 percent, and TCS will NOT work.

Hope that makes sense.

Incidentally, I am using a "generic" tire size calculator for my calculations. Yes, it is slightly more accurate to use a spec chart for a particular tire, and to use a "rolling diameter" (which takes into account the deflection at the bottom of the tire). But effects such as the particular tire and the deflection happen at both front and rear, and furthermore, this is not an exact science (where 4.9 percent will definitely always work and 5.1 percent will definitely never work). Using general calculations from tire size calculators such as this one should yield results which are close enough to tell you whether a given set of tire sizes will or won't work.

Originally posted by Hrant:
these are 10 year old technology in design and presumably rubber compound ........

A ten year old tire isn't AUTOMATICALLY worse than a new tire. The age of the technology doesn't make up for the fact that the tires were designed specifically for the NSX and its four corners, and the primary design objective was precision handling (obviously, not tire wear

). On an NSX, the OEM tires will still handle better and more precisely than any other street tire manufactured today, IMO and most other owners I've talked with. Granted, there are other tires that last longer, or cost less; also, the OEM tires unfortunately aren't available in sizes for larger wheels. But if you give a high priority to handling, and you're using OEM size wheels, you really ought to give the OEM tires a try to see for yourself what they're like.

[This message has been edited by nsxtasy (edited 02 August 2002).]

 

[Hrant]

I think I finally get it ........

I was using the "actual" starting percentage difference between the front and rear as the measure that would trigger the TCS; in your example the 4.65% for the stock should not exceed the upper limit of 5%, rather than adding a 5% margin over the "already existing" base difference .......... which means now the upper limit between the front and the rear is 9.65% ..........

Having said this, note that the 9,65% is "one" target based on measuring it from the AOH22; presumably there is slight difference if one uses the RE010 or the Dunlop 8050 (no more in production) ..........

By the way, I have been running on Yoko AOH22 since 1998 it came with the car as oem .... if nothing else, different tires may test and sharpen one's drvining skils ......

 

[ncdogdoc]

I have been using the SO3's for about 4 months now and I am very happy with them. I bought them instead of returning to OEM fitments so that I could swap L to R as the inside edges wore out. I do get rubbing with the fronts, but not bad and only at full lock. I am using the 245's in the rear to not lose any gearing.

I will admit that they are not as fun at the RE010's, but are wearing better and still very nice on the track. Will probably start using R compounds on the track in the near future on 15/16 wheels.

------------------
Gary Yates
1995 Red/Tan

 

[Andrie Hartanto]

Hrant,

Ken's answer is so long it is confusing. I'm an engineer, and it took me a while to understand what is he trying to say

your method of calculation is correct, only you two uses different data to calculate the percentage.

You use: (25.1-23.9)/23.9 = .0502 = 5.02%
Ken use: (24.71-23.62)/23.62 = .0461 = 4.61%

If you are using my spreadsheet, I can guarantee it accuracy. But it is also depend on the user, on using the input data. Keep in mind that the formula of calculating the overall diameter is:

((tire width X profile ratio) X 2/25.4) + diameter of the wheels

That being said, each tire will vary quite significantly between brands and/or models. thus making the calculation almost useless.

In my experience using Dunlop SP9000, the 225/45/16 front and 255/40/17 will indeed induce traction control upon hard acceleration. Lot's of other people with Michelin report the same problem. I have no idea about S03, as I have no experience with them.

The best bet in comparing the ratio is to go to each manufacturer site, or even tire rack site and look up the tire spec sheet. There you can find the actual (measured not calculated) overall diameter size. Find that size, and compare it to O.E, and you get the most accurate as it can be. Of course, rim width will make a s light variation as well, but it is insignificant, unless it is very different in width.

 

[nsxtasy]

Andrie,

Originally posted by Andrie Hartanto:
That being said, each tire will vary quite significantly between brands and/or models. thus making the calculation almost useless.

Hardly! Tires don't vary that much from one brand to another. I really doubt that any ratio calculated for a specific brand and model will vary by more than 1 percent from a ratio based on the raw calculation from a tire spec sheet. Hrant's is a very good example; his calculation was only off by 0.4 percent. Such variations are much more likely to occur due to rounding in the spec sheet (usually to tenths of inches) than any other reason.

Even Andrie is rounding in coming up with his numbers; I take them from a spreadsheet which keeps the full precision of the original input numbers (which is why mine showed 4.65 percent, while Andrie's method using numbers rounded to hundredths of inches shows 4.61 percent).

Originally posted by Andrie Hartanto:
In my experience using Dunlop SP9000, the 225/45/16 front and 255/40/17 will indeed induce traction control upon hard acceleration. Lot's of other people with Michelin report the same problem.

Yes, but that's because of the hard acceleration, not because of the tire sizes or the front-to-rear ratio being different from stock! Hard acceleration will induce traction control if the tires slip. You can do that with the stock tires, too!

When the front-to-rear ratio is off more than 5 percent from stock, it will kick in the TCS in situations other than strictly hard acceleration.

[This message has been edited by nsxtasy (edited 02 August 2002).]

 

[Hrant]

Originally posted by Andrie Hartanto:
Hrant,

........

your method of calculation is correct, only you two uses different data to calculate the percentage.

You use: (25.1-23.9)/23.9 = .0502 = 5.02%
Ken use: (24.71-23.62)/23.62 = .0461 = 4.61%

..........

Now I am

totally

Ken's point is that the 5% variance is on top of the 4.61% differecne that the tires come with (using his example). That is to say you could have as much as 9.61% difference between the front and the rear and TCS would not be activated.

Whereas I previously was under the impression that the SO3s noted above with 5.02% difference "between" the front and rear itself would activiate TCS

Help with simple English please .........

 

[ScienceofSpeed]

Originally posted by nsxtasy:
Hardly! Tires don't vary that much from one brand to another.
When the front-to-rear ratio is off more than 5 percent from stock, it will kick in the TCS in situations other than strictly hard acceleration.

I'd disagree. A set of Michelins I am running now on the S2000 vary by at least 10 if not 20 mm compared to the "same size" Bridgestone tires. Tires from brand to brand vary quite a bit in my experience.

Regards,
-- Chris



------------------
Revolutionize your NSX with ScienceofSpeed
www.ScienceofSpeed.com | [email protected] | 877-863-4520

 

[nsxtasy]

Originally posted by ScienceofSpeed:
I'd disagree. A set of Michelins I am running now on the S2000 vary by at least 10 if not 20 mm compared to the "same size" Bridgestone tires. Tires from brand to brand vary quite a bit in my experience.

Yes, different brands and models of tires DO vary in size while labeled as the same size. (Falken Azenis are notorious for being wider than other brands, for example.) However, if they vary in the front, the same model tires will usually vary in the rear by the same amount - thus having no significant effect on the front-to-rear ratio. And most people use (or should use, anyway) the same kinds of tires on the front and the rear. Otherwise, yes, if you mix tires, that could introduce another source of variation to kick off the TCS - which is why I would keep the tolerance tighter than 5 percent.

 

[nsxtasy]

Originally posted by Hrant:
Ken's point is that the 5% variance is on top of the 4.61% differecne that the tires come with (using his example). That is to say you could have as much as 9.61% difference between the front and the rear and TCS would not be activated.

That's correct (except the precise number is 4.65 percent, not the rounded 4.61 percent).

Originally posted by Hrant:
Whereas I previously was under the impression that the SO3s noted above with 5.02% difference "between" the front and rear itself would activiate TCS

Those sizes of the S03 aren't responsible for activating the TCS. If TCS kicks on using those sizes, it's because the driver is hard on the gas. Tires can slip when you accelerate too fast, you know - and THAT causes the TCS to kick in, not the size tires.

 

[AaronR]

For the calculators out there here are the S-03's exact specs:

225/45/16
Od- 23.9
Section width- 9.0
Tread width- 8.4

255/40/17
Od- 25.1
section width- 10.4
Tread width- 9.4

Aaron

 

[Hrant]

I just talked Dan at Tire Rack. Very helpful.

His point is this:

The stagger in the original stock tires is about 1.1" or so and he recommends to maintain the "same" stagger to avoid the ABS light from coming. The proposed 225/45/16 and 255/40/17 in the SO3 keeps this same stagger.

TCS may not be activated if the stagger is increased per Ken's understanding by another 5% from the oem, but according to Dan, the ABS light will [or perhaps given this debate "might" ]come on.

Hope this clarifies it.

By the way the price is $152 for the fronts and $192 for the rears to all.

 

[nsxtasy]

Maintaining the "stagger" is nothing more than maintaining approximately the same ratio of the front to rear outer diameters. The 5 percent tolerance for the TCS came direct from our friends at American Honda.

ABS and TCS both operate using the same principle (wheel spin) detected from the same sensors.

What Dan told you is correct, but it's nothing new.

 

[ChopsJazz]

I want to answer dvkim's original question and recommend the OEM Yoks. In my experience, nothing makes the car drive more like an NSX than Yoks do.

 

[Andrie Hartanto]

Originally posted by nsxtasy:
Those sizes of the S03 aren't responsible for activating the TCS. If TCS kicks on using those sizes, it's because the driver is hard on the gas. Tires can slip when you accelerate too fast, you know - and THAT causes the TCS to kick in, not the size tires.

Ken, please give me more credit than that. Of course the TCS will kicks in if the tire slip regardless of size. I assume everybody in this forum are at least that smart. In my case, the tire didn't break loose. I can turn off the traction control and slam on the gas pedal without TCS,a nd the tire don't break loose.

 

[nsxtasy]

Then how do you account for TCS activating, when the ratio of the front to rear outer diameters of the S03 is virtually identical with the stock tires? It CAN'T be because of the tire sizes.

BTW, just because the tires don't "break loose" (burnout) doesn't mean there isn't enough wheel spin to activate the TCS.

[This message has been edited by nsxtasy (edited 02 August 2002).]

 

[Andrie Hartanto]

Originally posted by nsxtasy:
Yes, different brands and models of tires DO vary in size while labeled as the same size. (Falken Azenis are notorious for being wider than other brands, for example.) However, if they vary in the front, the same model tires will usually vary in the rear by the same amount - thus having no significant effect on the front-to-rear ratio. And most people use (or should use, anyway) the same kinds of tires on the front and the rear. Otherwise, yes, if you mix tires, that could introduce another source of variation to kick off the TCS - which is why I would keep the tolerance tighter than 5 percent.

Actually, just for example. A Michelin Pilot Sport Cup in 225/50/15 is skinnier than kumho ecsta V700 in similar size SIGNIFICANTLY.

A Michelin Sport cup in 255/40/17 is wider than kumho ecsta V700 in similar size quite a bit that it causes rubbing on a 911.

Interesting, eh? I didn't actually measure the O.D. So I can't comment on that.

 

[Andrie Hartanto]

Originally posted by nsxtasy:
Then how do you account for TCS activating, when the ratio of the front to rear outer diameters of the S03 is virtually identical with the stock tires? It CAN'T be because of the tire sizes.

BTW, just because the tires don't "break loose" (burnout) doesn't mean there isn't enough wheel spin to activate the TCS.

[This message has been edited by nsxtasy (edited 02 August 2002).]

Firstly, I never tried S03, so I can't comment. My comment is strcitly for SP9000 in similar size.

Again, Ken, give me more credit than that!

I've been in motorsports for a while. I think I can tell when the tire is breaking loose, even though it is not smoking (burn out)