JRH

Looking at new tires, and would like to go wider with stock rims. Considering 245/45/17s or 255/40/17. the 245s are closet to stock height but are about .2 inches taller and in general weigh about 4 pounds more than stock tires.

Just wondering if there is any noticeable performance impact (seat of the pants) in acceleration and cornering with the taller and heavier 245/45 tires?

Would like to go 255/40 on the Yoko W4S, but I am thinking these tires are too wide for stock rims

ifirahse

iTrader: (6)

Go with 245/40/17 instead of 45, that's what I did and I felt the car handle a little better.

Turbonut

iTrader: (1)

IMHO stick with the 245/45-17 W4s as the 255/40-17's are .6" smaller in diameter and are to be installed on a 8.5" minimum wheel-Here we go again!!!!!!!!!

ILLustriousUA6

iTrader: (2)

I have 245/45/17's on my stockies-falken fk-452's.

they grip like hell and handling's very nice.

I hate cars

Very easy answer. 255/40/17 all the way. This is a no-compromise deal. Pretty much the same sidewall height as stock and they make the car look so much better. Plus the added performance is very noticable. Any time you put a taller sidewall, you will have a softer ride but lose some of the steering sharpness and feedback. On top of that it's going to look like you're driving a 4X4 lol.

Don't listen to anyone who says 255s are too wide for the stock rims, they only say this because they haven't experienced it. Search for the old thread that's like 20 pages long and you will see there are plenty of us with 255s and no problems. Some are even running a 265 on the stock rims but that's pushing it a little. I will never go back to the 235s after running the 255s for 30,000 miles now.

BEAR-AvHistory

JRH

Yeah, I don't have a problem going with the 255/40 tires, except for the Yoko W4S. It has a section width of 10.4 inches, making it one of the widest tires out there. If I go with another tire, I will definitely go with the 255s. I am still waiting for reviews of the Goodyear Eagle GT

Turbonut

iTrader: (1)

Take a look at the specs, the GForce 255/40-17 has a section width of 10.2" and a tread width of only 8.2" with a height of 25" which is about 1/2" smaller than the OE tires.
http://www.wheelenhancement.com/tirespecs.php?tireid=2

A 245/45-17 W4s has a section width of 9.7" and a tread width of 9.2" with an overall diameter of 25.7"
Looks to me that the tread on the ground is far more with the 245/45-17 W4s tires along with a more realistic height. No roller skate tires.

Depends on what you want, a 4x4 look or a classy looking sport sedan.

I hate cars

I had to go and measure mine after reading this an I have a solid 10" of rubber on the ground. There is no sidewall bulge and the shoulders arent very rounded so where does this 2" of rubber disappear to?

As far as roller skate tires, they're no smaller in diameter than the stockers with a few miles on them. 1/2" is 1/4" on each side. Not noticable. They look twice as good as the stock hockey pucks.

Timeless

Go with the 255/40-17 if you're looking for an upgrade from stock. I put on 255/40 Nitto 555's and I'll never again run any tire narrower than these. You run a similar total height to the stockies but have a much larger contact patch due to the added width. Its definitely worth the upgrade...and they fit fine on the stock rims.

rksokol

I have Goodyear 255/40/17 Eagle F1 All-Seasons. They grip like mad!

Inaccurate

Why you should get 255/40-17 tires for your OEM rims !!! (click here)

o4Komodo

iTrader: (2)

I swapped over from Toyo Proxes4 [235/45/17] to Falken FK452 [245/40/17]..
Big improvement [minus the fact the Proxes4 had no treadlife left].
Seems to have less road noise, takes corners better than the Proxes4 at higherspeeds, seemed to have reduced some torque-steer[or that might be my imagination] and it seems to grip excellently.
I was going to get PZeros... but the extra $100 per tire made me decide not to.
Highly recommend 245.. or maybe even 255.
Highly recommend some FK452 as well.

carlos9827

iTrader: (2)

+1

Turbonut

iTrader: (1)

Amazing that you find 10" on the ground as the W4s, which has one of the largest treads in the industry, is only 9.6" in 255/40-17. Interesting that BFG doesn't list the tread width, but TR has the GYF1 255/40-17 tread width listed as 9.1" which is again smaller than the Yoko 245/45-17 at 9.2".

Also, I've never said the 255 would not fit on the 8" wheel as you could put wider on there if you wanted. Also RJ has 7.5" wheels and people run wide tires with no problems, so it boils down to taste once again.

If you want a small, and it's smaller than the OE tires, wide tire (section width) that looks like a 4x4 going down the road that's your choice, but it's not the only option available as some are just looking to upgrade the ride, handling and looks of the OE tires. If the latter is what is wanted, go with a 245/45-17, but if the very wide low tires are the look desired, then by all means go for the 255/40-17.

Once again, personal preference.

I hate cars

Specs from websites are nice but I believe my own eyes in this situation. If it makes you feel any better there's about 1/2" less rubber on the ground in the rear.

I can't even follow the rest of your post. Not sure about the contradictory small, wide, and 4x4 looking tire you speak of.

In the end, it is not about taste and personal preference as you like to say. Facts are facts.

With the same brand and model of tire:

A shorter sidewall will have sharper steering response, more stable in corners, and will build less heat.

A wider tire will have better traction in the dry. It will look better to 99% of people too.

A taller tire will build more heat, is less stable in corners (more likely to fold under and lose some of it's contact patch), some turn in sharpness and steering feel will be lost. It will absorb bumps a little better.

A narrower tire will have less traction in the dry and to most people won't look as good. It may have better traction in the wet and snow.

I thought this was basic common knowlege but apparently it has to be explained.

Turbonut

iTrader: (1)

No explanation necessary, but I guess it boils down to just one question-What are we driving here, a luxury sport sedan or a car that's going to be driven at Watkins Glen? Hey, I've said it before, if you want small and wide, that's fine, but I don't. How many TL owners are spinning their tires on start up or when going around corners? Not very many as it's a slow, or at least mediocre performance, FWD transportation vehicle.

JRH

From the pictures that I have seen, the 255/40s don't look much different from the side than stock.The 245/45s don't look much taller from the side than stock either, but they are taller, weigh more, and require slightly more power to start rolling, more braking power to stop etc. And as far as the car being slow, maybe my 6mt its slow compared to a corvette, but I don't think that anything that can get mid 14s in the quarter stock is all that slow. When I thnik slow and basic, I think 4cyl Camry

Turbonut

iTrader: (1)

Actually if you look at the W4s, the 255/40 and 245/45 weigh in at the same 28lbs., while stock 235/45 26lbs. Heavier no matter which size is chosen over stock.

Sorry, didn't mean to step on toes when I said slow or mediocre performance, but in this day and age mid 14's is adequate, but not great, especially when it's trying to yank the steering wheel out of your hands. Too many other vehicles will outperform the TL, but hopefully the new one will do better. I also was directing the comment to the yahoos that need to have oversized, but smaller diameter tires on their cars to keep it from breaking loose during their wind sprints.