Bigpun1

I have a 04 TL with 8" oem wheels. I'm having a hell of a time finding 235/45/17 winter tires that aren't gonna cost me a arm and a leg. Will a 225/50/17 be ok for winter tires. Sorry in advance if this has been asked numerous times before

Jackass

Pretty sure the fit will be fine. Define "arm and a leg" in cost? I did find it challenging to find much in that size locally, so I gave up and ordered from TireRack and took them to a local shop for mount/balance.

Bigpun1

so far in Canada for anything decent I'm looking at over $1000 + tax + install

VisualEchos

iTrader: (1)

Not only will they fit, they will be inherently better because of the thinner tread (side to side), and taller (softer) sidewall. 225/50 FTW when it comes to Winter tires.

Bigpun1

Awesome to hear. Thanks for the info guys

Turbonut

iTrader: (1)

I'm one of the few, but never agreed with this theory.

Jackass

I'm with you on this. I can easily argue both sides depending on the scenario. I "agree" the skinny tire is better when driving in snow. But...I do not think the same "perk" applies when driving on ice or dry/wet roads. On snow, the skinny tire theory is that the tire will more easily cut through the snow instead of just staying on top of it. But when you take snow out and go to ice or pavement, I would theorize that wider is better since you can get more rubber to make contact. Since where I live, we rarely have major snow events that leave snow on the roads for more than 24 hours, I wanted wider tires to provide more stability on the more common dry/wet roads we have most of the winter. Who knows....I think the best thing here is that people are considering proper dedicated winter tires in areas that for sure should.

VisualEchos

iTrader: (1)

Sorry, but you guys need to do more research.

For forward acceleration you need a contact patch that is long front to back. For sideways grip you need a contact patch that is wide side to side.

Have a look at the snow tires on a Rally car.

Have a look at the slicks on a Dragster when the throttle is hit.

You guys are arguing with physics, and it simply can't be done. If you fit a 205 on the TL wheel it'd get better grip than the 225 in the snow.

Remember, the contact patch itself is only changed by the weight of the vehicle, and the amount of air in the tire, so the surface area itself is exactly the same between a 195/225/265/335, it's just a different SHAPE. And again, you can't fight physics...

Jackass

Which is exactly what I said from a snow perspective.
This I don't quite understand? Width of the tire tread will impact the size of the contact patch as will the overall diameter of the tire. Both the width and the length will be greatly impacted by inflation and weight. Now if you take a 195 and 335 tire that have the same overall diameter, the size of the contact patch will be drastically different.

VisualEchos

iTrader: (1)

No, they won't. Your tire is a balloon. If you have 2 balloons that have an equal amount of weight applied to them, and have equal amounts of air...but are simply different shapes, then your contact patch will be equal, it'll just be a different shape.

A 205/50/18 has the EXACT same contact-patch area as a 345/30/18 if they have equal amounts of air, and are fitted to the exact same car, the only difference is the SHAPE. The 205 will be longer front-to-back, and narrower side-to side. The 345 will be shorter front-to-back, and wider side-to-side. This is physics and simply can't be fought.

The one thing you can say is that the 345 will be a heavier tire, and therefore impose a minutely larger contact patch, but it's so slight compared to the weight of the car that it's not even worth mentioning. 10 lbs is nothing to 3500 lbs.

Jackass

I want to argue with you...but I can't....since I have a feeling your theory may be correct, but it just is not registering in my head quite yet. Need to sit here and think about it a bit more.

Jackass

So after a quick and dirty lesson via the all so truthful Internet, I concede that the contact patches are the same, just shaped differently. Each shape brings pros and cons depending on the use case. So overall.....I think for the topic the OP brought up...as long as we are running proper tires for the use case, we will all be good.

If anything, this was a good refresher course for me on many of these theories/topics I haven't touched on in 20+ years. My head hurts now and I am going back to reading and watching random things on the Internet now for the rest of the day. So much for productivity.

VisualEchos

iTrader: (1)

Yes, each shape has pro's and con's, and a big pro of skinny tires is snow traction (hence the rally car bicycle studded tires, which bite the best). I tried to get 225 Winter tires for my stock TL wheels, but none were available when I went to purchase, so I had to get 235's. But for Summer tires, it's 265's all the way, which are terrible for rain, but feel fantastic just driving around town.

Turbonut

iTrader: (1)

Rally cars use studded tires and want the tire to"sink" into the snow so as the studs dig in, and yes, contact patch area remains relatively the same, but I'd certainly rather have a wide tire that supports stability and be the same on dry roads, rather than the skinny tire with less load capacity with ill handling characteristics.
Contact area will remain about the same at rest, the shape it takes under load is better distributed by the wider tire.
Not really certain as to your mention of a dragster, but the traction is because of the soft compound used, which is similar to wider low profile ties, softer tires better traction, so if a hard tire, guess the dragster wouldn't move.
My feelings are the same with snow tires, a wider patch is still better than a skinny long patch that sinks into the snow and creates resistance in front of the tire, and as far as having better traction with 205, I'd refute that, but that's you opinion. There are a lot of physics involved, however, even the scholars offer a difference of opinion.

I stated my opinions and whether people agree or not, I'm not entering into a lengthy debate.

VisualEchos

iTrader: (1)

I'm not sure I understand. These cars came from the factory with 235/45, so changing to a 225/50 will be nearly as stable, and will certainly have the same load capacity. I suppose you could argue that the increased sidewall would create more movement during evasive maneuvers, but I certainly wouldn't call that "ill handling characteristics". Remember, we're talking about Winter tires here, and Winter driving.

Better distributed for corners, yes, but not bite through snow, better bite though snow would be as skinny as possible. Think about it like this. Right now you could have a Viper owner reverse over you and probably escape without injury, and it's because the 355 wide tire distributes the load over a wide area. Now change that tire to a bicycle tire and have him reverse over you, and you would be cut in half. Same load, smaller surface area.

Traction with a drag tire comes down to the compound, yes, but also the 7psi, the tire deformity, etc. The point I was making was that to get the best grip, they make the tire much thinner (side-to-side) than you would think once the car gets going, and it's because that a longer (front-to-back) contact patch offers more forward resistance (grip) than a shorter one. Again, physics. They could make the tire retain its super wide stance under load, but they don't want that because it doesn't offer as much grip. Have a look at this video. Pay close attention at 2:54, it shows the tire literally laying out in front of itself, offering as much forward grip as possible.


The additional grip is precisely because it sinks deeper! Not sure I know of any scholars that have a difference of opinion on this, but if you can show me some videos I'm happy to listen.

I have quite a bit of respect for you, and would not say anything that I think would be disrespectful, so I see nothing wrong with a friendly debate. But if you don't want to participate, I understand. No harm, no foul, we are still friends.

Morrissey25

iTrader: (4)

I have learned so much from this thread... Once again, thank you to the great information provided by Acurazine and all of its wisdom!

Personally, I love my winter 235's. I definitely wouldn't go any wider for the snow and I never thought about going with a more narrow tire on the stock rims.

Jackass

I greatly enjoy the educational back and forth. I have seen enough threads with the participants in here that many of the statements and opinions shouldn't just be dismissed if I don't agree....quite often there is plenty of truth in there. There are always lots of various opinions that are all over the place....and there is a place for those. There is also a place for fact. My "opinion" is to stick with my 235 winter tires since 95% of my winter driving will be driving on dry or wet pavement and therefore I am willing to sacrifice some snow perks a bit. If I lived further North or in the mountains where the roads are covered a lot, I am sure my opinion would be different based upon the conversation within this thread so far.

The truth here is probably that moving around +/- 10-20 on the winter tire size probably won't have that much impact overall in the first place other than peace of mind. I feared a narrow winter tire on my TL since I had narrow winter tires on a previous car which made that car f'ing scary as hell to drive on wet/dry pavement. It was a complete and total badass in the ice storm we had that winter. But....man, it scared the heck out of me the rest of the winter since the car was just so darn sloppy. My experience...different tires...different car...but it feeds my opinions.

Turbonut

iTrader: (1)

Here I go after the no debate statement, but I did forget to add that some 225/50 tires are actually wider
than some 235/45 tires. Guess you'll need to look at tread width when purchasing the tires.

Load capacity within the same tire 225/50 (1477) 235/45 (1609), at least the one that I checked.

Am familiar with the dragster tire as I drove one, but with a soft compound and 17" wide there is a great
amount of traction, but never really gave much thought to use a narrow tire for better traction. There's got to be a happy medium.

The scholar debate I was speaking was directed towards traction/friction on dry surfaces, not snow.

Did come across the following though:
Generally, narrower tires are better in snow and on ice because they are more stable and get better linear traction by penetrating the snow. This is not always true though; on hard-pack snow, wider tires with more sipes are better. In deep snow, wider tires might be able to float over the top, but that’s a very specific situation. Narrower wheel widths are normally better because it rounds the profile of the tire and helps both penetration and flotation.

Guess I'll let it go at that, but in my book, the wider will stay on, winter/summer as they have over the last many decades.

VisualEchos

iTrader: (1)

Agreed.

Load capacity, IMHO, is a bunch of nonsense these days, no one even gets near the LC. If you look at the Sottozero 3 you'll find 4 different load capacities, 2 of which are the same aspect ratio.

It goes against some conventional *wisdom*, but can certainly be the case. Remember what Keith Black did with small-blocks when everyone thought that big-blocks were the fastest? Same idea.

I agree that there can be certain instances where the wider tire will be better, but they would be rare IMO, and very specific.

Turbonut

iTrader: (1)

We're cutting down the differences.

Just remember that the '04TL max load is 850lbs. as per the owner's manual, so any tire with a lesser index will drop the load limit. Not stating that in this specific situation a problem exits, but one does need to recognize the consequences of a lower load range index.


A little off subject, but I believe that small block was a lot of cubic inches. My cousin ran a modified alcohol small block Chevy with some success, but was more competitive after changing over to the big block. There was just so much one could do to a small CI engine.