Why you should get 255/40-17 tires for your OEM rims !!!
04-21-2006, 09:59 PM
#1
Safety Car
Thread Starter
Why you should get 255/40-17 tires for your OEM rims !!!
Inaccurate's "Top Ten List"
As to Why You Should Get 255/40-17 Tires
for your OEM rims.
(please note this is 255/40 not 245/45.)
10) Lower effective gear ratio
9) Increased braking force per given pressure on brake pedal
8) Slightly lower stance (estimating 1/4 inch)
7) Great rim protection without being excessive
6) With the 255 tires, TL now looks even more like a BMW
5) You will be less envious of others having A-Spec
4) Having wider tires than a G35
3) Car feels lighter (accelerates easier, brakes easier, more responsive steering)
2) Don't need to stay 10-feet away from the nearest curb anymore
1) TL now looks plain 'ol "mean" as heck
I got the Goodyear Eagle F1 (D3) tires. Up to this time, I was running the OEM Bridgestone Turanza EL42. I really LOVE the way the TL now looks with these wide tires. And, BTW my age is the middle 40's. I include this to give some insight into my taste. I have always loved the way BMW's looked with their OEM wide tires. So, now I have that BMW'ish look with my TL.
At first, I was aiming to upgrade to just the 245/45 tires. No one here on the forum had ever mentioned using the 255 tires, so I thought the 255 would be too much and "out of the question".
However, when I was searching the forum, I did find one thread in which a single person did install the 255's. He even included pictures. His TL in the photo LOOKED GREAT with the 255's on the OEM rim.
That was it for me. I then planned to get the 255's after seeing this one person's pictures. I was scared to make this $1200 decision without anyone else to "back up" this one person that had installed 255's on the OEM rims. But, on the bright, there was no one on the forum saying that they tried the 255's and had problems.
So, let me be the second person on the forum to say "GET THE 255/40 !!!!". Skip the 245/45. Go with the 255/40.
There is absolutely no rubbing issues. It is NOT even close to rubbing. I turned the wheel and viewed the clearance in the wheelwell --> Huge clearance.
Because the 255/40 is a half inch shorter in diameter than the OEM 235/45, the tire fills-up less of the wheel opening. To me, there is not excessive open space with the 255/40, and I somewhat prefer the slight increase open space. But, actually, this is very minor and (to me at least) not even really noticeable.
But, the increase in tire width is VERY NOTICEABLE !!!!!!! If you like the way BMW's look with their OEM wide tires, you will LOVE this upgrade.
I weighted the OEM wheel (oem rim with oem tire mounted). The OEM wheel is 51.0 lbs (bathroom scale = +/- 0.5 lb.). The oem rim with Eagle F1 255/40-17 tires weigh 53.0. So, the wider tire is 2.0 pounds heavier. This is a 4% increase.
For performance, look at it this way. The mass increase from the wider tires is probably offset by the smaller diameter of the wider tires. In physics, there is a thing called "angular momentum" - I think that is the term for it. This means that if you have two wheels that weigh the same, but with different diameters, the smaller diameter wheel will gain/lose RPM easier than the larger diameter wheel.
Changing topics now to the tire brand selection. A nice feature of the Eagle F1 is what Goodyear calls it's "Rim Protector". This feature just means that the bead area on the tire where the rim seals against the tire is VERY GREATLY recessed more than usual. So, this helps to make the wide 255 tire to fit on the our TL OEM rim because the tire width across the beading area is less than normal for other brands. DISCLAIMER - This is only speculation as I have not actually compared other brands by measuring the width across the beads.
So, you ask me what I think of the 255 upgrade. Just check the ten items listed above. I really do mean those ten items. I really do notice that my brakes seem more powerful during normal everyday usage. I do notice the engine picking-up RPM slightly quicker than before from the lower effective gear ratio.
You ask where are the pics ? I will try to get some pictures posted sometime this weekend.
Did the wider tires make my steering wheel feel heavier ? NO. The steering actually feels a bit lighter. Why ? I don't know why the steering is lighter than it was with the OEM tires. Stiffer sidewalls (from lower sectional profile) perhaps.
How does the car handle ? I can't answer this because I am not the type that corners aggressively. I will say that I feel a slightly improve steering response. Stiffer sidewalls (from lower sectional profile) perhaps.
Is there more road noise ? Not that I can hear or feel. I have driven the 255's on concrete freeway at 70 mph, and I could not hear any difference than with the OEM Bridgestone Turanza EL42. However, in general, the Eagle F1 does have a different sound (not noisier, just different). Driving around town (stop-n-go, 35 mph stuff), the tire has a "ting" sound similar to a ball that has excessive pressure (the tires had 35 psi) when driving over raised irregularities in the road (uneven joints in the road). I like the way the Eagle F1 sounds.
Does the 255/40 stickout too much (in a figurative and literal sense) ? NO. Although the wide tires are a very noticeable difference, a person that never seen a TL before would think that it was a factory design. The 255/40 on the oem rim has a very clean appearance and fits perfectly.
How much is the speedometer affected ? Too soon to say. I have had the 255's for only two days now. But, so far, the speedometer error has not caused me to notice the small difference in mph. But, on the bright side, remember the error will be having a higher indicated mph than the actual mph. So, you are going slower than the speedometer indicates. So, no speeding tickets that you can blame on the error.
Is the mpg affected ? Too soon to say. I have had the 255's for only two days now.
Does the 255 width increase hydroplaning tendencies ? I am unable to make a blanket statement because I am using the Eagle F1, which has PHENOMENAL wet performance according to the research that I did. On my morning commute this morning, there was heavy to medium thunderstorms. I did appox 10 miles at 60 mph thru moderate puddling (long stretch of standing water) while still raining moderately. Also, I went thru average puddling while still raining moderately along city streets at 40 mph. So, I am trying to say that my commute is half city streets (35 mph rated and doing 40 to 50 mph) and half concrete freeway doing 60 mph. The Eagle F1's were noticeable different than any other tire I ever used. When going thru puddling, even on the freeway at 60 mph, there was no splash sounds as normal tires make when pushing the water out of the way. The Eagle F1 made no sounds thru the puddles. Plus, there was no tugging at the steering wheel when encountering puddles; other tires usualy cause a tug on the wheel whening hitting puddles hard. The thing that I noticed the most was that I could not hear the wet roads. The Eagle F1 made the same sound and had the same feel in the rain that it does in the dry. To me, this indicates that these tires are really different. Other tires make splashing sounds, and you can feel the tire pushing water out of the way. With the Eagle F1, the tires seems to cut thru the water like a knife. (Sorry, I got off topic of the 255 width and I turned into a advertisement for Eagle F1's.)
Why did I get the 255's ? Because I did not like the way the OEM wheels looked and to gain curb protection. What were the engineers thinking ??? Those 235's are way too narrow for that 8 inch rim. Perhaps, they intended for us to upgrade to 255's so the car would look more like a BMW. With all the other styling that they "borrowed" from the BMW body style, I think they wanted to include the wide tires too but the marketing department made them use 235's to keep cost down. I say this jokingly, but who knows --- might be some truth in it.
Back to Why did I get the 255's ? The 255/40 DEFINITELY achieved both of my goals. My TL now looks much better (VERY NOTICEABLE !!!) with the wide tires, and I LOVE THE BMW'ish LOOK that it now has. The second goal was to gain some curb protection. With the 255/40, this goal too has DEFINITELY been achieved. I am very happy that I got the 255's instead of the 245's.
As to Why You Should Get 255/40-17 Tires
for your OEM rims.
(please note this is 255/40 not 245/45.)
10) Lower effective gear ratio
9) Increased braking force per given pressure on brake pedal
8) Slightly lower stance (estimating 1/4 inch)
7) Great rim protection without being excessive
6) With the 255 tires, TL now looks even more like a BMW
5) You will be less envious of others having A-Spec
4) Having wider tires than a G35
3) Car feels lighter (accelerates easier, brakes easier, more responsive steering)
2) Don't need to stay 10-feet away from the nearest curb anymore
1) TL now looks plain 'ol "mean" as heck
I got the Goodyear Eagle F1 (D3) tires. Up to this time, I was running the OEM Bridgestone Turanza EL42. I really LOVE the way the TL now looks with these wide tires. And, BTW my age is the middle 40's. I include this to give some insight into my taste. I have always loved the way BMW's looked with their OEM wide tires. So, now I have that BMW'ish look with my TL.
At first, I was aiming to upgrade to just the 245/45 tires. No one here on the forum had ever mentioned using the 255 tires, so I thought the 255 would be too much and "out of the question".
However, when I was searching the forum, I did find one thread in which a single person did install the 255's. He even included pictures. His TL in the photo LOOKED GREAT with the 255's on the OEM rim.
That was it for me. I then planned to get the 255's after seeing this one person's pictures. I was scared to make this $1200 decision without anyone else to "back up" this one person that had installed 255's on the OEM rims. But, on the bright, there was no one on the forum saying that they tried the 255's and had problems.
So, let me be the second person on the forum to say "GET THE 255/40 !!!!". Skip the 245/45. Go with the 255/40.
There is absolutely no rubbing issues. It is NOT even close to rubbing. I turned the wheel and viewed the clearance in the wheelwell --> Huge clearance.
Because the 255/40 is a half inch shorter in diameter than the OEM 235/45, the tire fills-up less of the wheel opening. To me, there is not excessive open space with the 255/40, and I somewhat prefer the slight increase open space. But, actually, this is very minor and (to me at least) not even really noticeable.
But, the increase in tire width is VERY NOTICEABLE !!!!!!! If you like the way BMW's look with their OEM wide tires, you will LOVE this upgrade.
I weighted the OEM wheel (oem rim with oem tire mounted). The OEM wheel is 51.0 lbs (bathroom scale = +/- 0.5 lb.). The oem rim with Eagle F1 255/40-17 tires weigh 53.0. So, the wider tire is 2.0 pounds heavier. This is a 4% increase.
For performance, look at it this way. The mass increase from the wider tires is probably offset by the smaller diameter of the wider tires. In physics, there is a thing called "angular momentum" - I think that is the term for it. This means that if you have two wheels that weigh the same, but with different diameters, the smaller diameter wheel will gain/lose RPM easier than the larger diameter wheel.
Changing topics now to the tire brand selection. A nice feature of the Eagle F1 is what Goodyear calls it's "Rim Protector". This feature just means that the bead area on the tire where the rim seals against the tire is VERY GREATLY recessed more than usual. So, this helps to make the wide 255 tire to fit on the our TL OEM rim because the tire width across the beading area is less than normal for other brands. DISCLAIMER - This is only speculation as I have not actually compared other brands by measuring the width across the beads.
So, you ask me what I think of the 255 upgrade. Just check the ten items listed above. I really do mean those ten items. I really do notice that my brakes seem more powerful during normal everyday usage. I do notice the engine picking-up RPM slightly quicker than before from the lower effective gear ratio.
You ask where are the pics ? I will try to get some pictures posted sometime this weekend.
Did the wider tires make my steering wheel feel heavier ? NO. The steering actually feels a bit lighter. Why ? I don't know why the steering is lighter than it was with the OEM tires. Stiffer sidewalls (from lower sectional profile) perhaps.
How does the car handle ? I can't answer this because I am not the type that corners aggressively. I will say that I feel a slightly improve steering response. Stiffer sidewalls (from lower sectional profile) perhaps.
Is there more road noise ? Not that I can hear or feel. I have driven the 255's on concrete freeway at 70 mph, and I could not hear any difference than with the OEM Bridgestone Turanza EL42. However, in general, the Eagle F1 does have a different sound (not noisier, just different). Driving around town (stop-n-go, 35 mph stuff), the tire has a "ting" sound similar to a ball that has excessive pressure (the tires had 35 psi) when driving over raised irregularities in the road (uneven joints in the road). I like the way the Eagle F1 sounds.
Does the 255/40 stickout too much (in a figurative and literal sense) ? NO. Although the wide tires are a very noticeable difference, a person that never seen a TL before would think that it was a factory design. The 255/40 on the oem rim has a very clean appearance and fits perfectly.
How much is the speedometer affected ? Too soon to say. I have had the 255's for only two days now. But, so far, the speedometer error has not caused me to notice the small difference in mph. But, on the bright side, remember the error will be having a higher indicated mph than the actual mph. So, you are going slower than the speedometer indicates. So, no speeding tickets that you can blame on the error.
Is the mpg affected ? Too soon to say. I have had the 255's for only two days now.
Does the 255 width increase hydroplaning tendencies ? I am unable to make a blanket statement because I am using the Eagle F1, which has PHENOMENAL wet performance according to the research that I did. On my morning commute this morning, there was heavy to medium thunderstorms. I did appox 10 miles at 60 mph thru moderate puddling (long stretch of standing water) while still raining moderately. Also, I went thru average puddling while still raining moderately along city streets at 40 mph. So, I am trying to say that my commute is half city streets (35 mph rated and doing 40 to 50 mph) and half concrete freeway doing 60 mph. The Eagle F1's were noticeable different than any other tire I ever used. When going thru puddling, even on the freeway at 60 mph, there was no splash sounds as normal tires make when pushing the water out of the way. The Eagle F1 made no sounds thru the puddles. Plus, there was no tugging at the steering wheel when encountering puddles; other tires usualy cause a tug on the wheel whening hitting puddles hard. The thing that I noticed the most was that I could not hear the wet roads. The Eagle F1 made the same sound and had the same feel in the rain that it does in the dry. To me, this indicates that these tires are really different. Other tires make splashing sounds, and you can feel the tire pushing water out of the way. With the Eagle F1, the tires seems to cut thru the water like a knife. (Sorry, I got off topic of the 255 width and I turned into a advertisement for Eagle F1's.)
Why did I get the 255's ? Because I did not like the way the OEM wheels looked and to gain curb protection. What were the engineers thinking ??? Those 235's are way too narrow for that 8 inch rim. Perhaps, they intended for us to upgrade to 255's so the car would look more like a BMW. With all the other styling that they "borrowed" from the BMW body style, I think they wanted to include the wide tires too but the marketing department made them use 235's to keep cost down. I say this jokingly, but who knows --- might be some truth in it.
Back to Why did I get the 255's ? The 255/40 DEFINITELY achieved both of my goals. My TL now looks much better (VERY NOTICEABLE !!!) with the wide tires, and I LOVE THE BMW'ish LOOK that it now has. The second goal was to gain some curb protection. With the 255/40, this goal too has DEFINITELY been achieved. I am very happy that I got the 255's instead of the 245's.
04-21-2006, 11:08 PM
#3
Safety Car
Thread Starter
Ok, here are some pics. Please remember that the car is dirty. As I mentioned in my post, my daily drive this morning was thunderstorms. Also, I just now took the pics tonight. So, the pics are dark because it is dark outside. I hope to get some good pics this weekend.
The following users liked this post:
t5C7 (10-04-2013)
The following users liked this post:
2Morrow (03-10-2013)
Trending Topics
04-22-2006, 09:30 AM
#8
10th Gear
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Toledo, Ohio
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That looks great, and that was a very informative thread.
Based on my calcs, I think your final drive ratio (transmission + tires) will be slightly higher. The circumference of this tire should be slightly less than the stock 235/45/R17 Tire. This would mean you would have to rev a little higher to go the same speed.
My guess is that your gas mileage will be slightly lower for two reasons. Rolling resistance and your final transmission to tire ratio.
The one thing you might want to keep an eye on is whether this has a strange effect on your VSA-I think that's right, and your ABS. I don't know precisely how the TL's system works, but normally traction control systems measure the position of the tire based on a trigger in the axles. It might confuse your traction control system, and it may kick on prematurely.
Nice job...WayneWarrior
Based on my calcs, I think your final drive ratio (transmission + tires) will be slightly higher. The circumference of this tire should be slightly less than the stock 235/45/R17 Tire. This would mean you would have to rev a little higher to go the same speed.
My guess is that your gas mileage will be slightly lower for two reasons. Rolling resistance and your final transmission to tire ratio.
The one thing you might want to keep an eye on is whether this has a strange effect on your VSA-I think that's right, and your ABS. I don't know precisely how the TL's system works, but normally traction control systems measure the position of the tire based on a trigger in the axles. It might confuse your traction control system, and it may kick on prematurely.
Nice job...WayneWarrior
04-23-2006, 12:34 AM
#10
Safety Car
Thread Starter
Let's address the issue of the smaller diameter tire causing problems.
According to www.tirerack.com, the Bridgestone Turanza EL42 235/45-17 has 817 Revs Per Mile. The Goodyear Eagle F1 255/40-17 has 835 Revs Per Mile. So, let's get our factor -
817 RPM /835 RPM = 0.978443 Factor
SPEEDOMETER ERROR EXAMPLES
------------------------------------------
40 MPH Indicated x 0.978443 Factor = 39.1 MPH Actual (0.9 MPH Error)
60 MPH Indicated x 0.978443 Factor = 58.7 MPH Actual (1.3 MPH Error)
80 MPH Indicated x 0.978443 Factor = 78.3 MPH Actual (1.7 MPH Error)
MID MPG ERROR EXAMPLES
----------------------------------
20 MPG Indicated x 0.978443 Factor = 19.6 MPG Actual (0.4 MPG Error)
25 MPG Indicated x 0.978443 Factor = 24.5 MPG Actual (0.5 MPG Error)
30 MPG Indicated x 0.978443 Factor = 29.4 MPG Actual (0.6 MPG Error)
So, we see that the smaller diameter tire does not cause too much error. However, it was surprising to me that I could feel the small difference in performance.
I highly doubt that the smaller diameter tire would cause any problems with the computer. However, NOT having the SAME diameter (whatever that diameter might be) on all four tires would for SURE cause the VSA to kick-in.
According to www.tirerack.com, the Bridgestone Turanza EL42 235/45-17 has 817 Revs Per Mile. The Goodyear Eagle F1 255/40-17 has 835 Revs Per Mile. So, let's get our factor -
817 RPM /835 RPM = 0.978443 Factor
SPEEDOMETER ERROR EXAMPLES
------------------------------------------
40 MPH Indicated x 0.978443 Factor = 39.1 MPH Actual (0.9 MPH Error)
60 MPH Indicated x 0.978443 Factor = 58.7 MPH Actual (1.3 MPH Error)
80 MPH Indicated x 0.978443 Factor = 78.3 MPH Actual (1.7 MPH Error)
MID MPG ERROR EXAMPLES
----------------------------------
20 MPG Indicated x 0.978443 Factor = 19.6 MPG Actual (0.4 MPG Error)
25 MPG Indicated x 0.978443 Factor = 24.5 MPG Actual (0.5 MPG Error)
30 MPG Indicated x 0.978443 Factor = 29.4 MPG Actual (0.6 MPG Error)
So, we see that the smaller diameter tire does not cause too much error. However, it was surprising to me that I could feel the small difference in performance.
I highly doubt that the smaller diameter tire would cause any problems with the computer. However, NOT having the SAME diameter (whatever that diameter might be) on all four tires would for SURE cause the VSA to kick-in.
04-23-2006, 06:08 AM
#11
Advanced
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Age: 65
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 235/45-17's are listed with a diameter of 25.3 inches.
The 255/40-17's are listed with a diameter of 25 inches.
In other words, when the 235's have lost 15 hundredth's of a inch of tread, it will be the same diameter as a new 255.
The 255/40-17's are listed with a diameter of 25 inches.
In other words, when the 235's have lost 15 hundredth's of a inch of tread, it will be the same diameter as a new 255.
04-23-2006, 08:42 AM
#12
The DVD-A Script Guy
Nice.
From the pictures I can see just a bit more rim protection. Is there really more than the pictures show ? I realize nothing will protect against serious bashing but I won't even pull up to my mailbox with the OE tires. Crap, just looking at the OE setup makes me cringe.
From the pictures I can see just a bit more rim protection. Is there really more than the pictures show ? I realize nothing will protect against serious bashing but I won't even pull up to my mailbox with the OE tires. Crap, just looking at the OE setup makes me cringe.
04-23-2006, 08:51 AM
#13
Pro
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Delaware/Philly
Age: 47
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
I wouldnt worry about the VSM/ABS system. The system compares the revolutions from each wheel. If all the tires/wheels are the SAME SIZE then the system will work properly.
Your tires look very nice. The only thing I notice is that they are directional. You need to watch for irregular wear (ie cupping on the edges) This occurs when tires are not rotated all around the car. Also with the extra width you may notice that the car will eat up the inside edges of the tires prematurely.
Your tires look very nice. The only thing I notice is that they are directional. You need to watch for irregular wear (ie cupping on the edges) This occurs when tires are not rotated all around the car. Also with the extra width you may notice that the car will eat up the inside edges of the tires prematurely.
04-23-2006, 10:09 AM
#15
Cruisin'
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
planning on gettin 255/40's
since they fit OEM rims... but now that I saw the pics, I'm thinking about getting 1" to 1.3" lowering springs at the same time to remove the slightly increased gap.
Anyone thinks this may be a problem? I've seen TL's w/ 20" wheels, so my first guess is no.
Anyone w/ 255/40's and lowering springs?
Anyone thinks this may be a problem? I've seen TL's w/ 20" wheels, so my first guess is no.
Anyone w/ 255/40's and lowering springs?
04-23-2006, 10:41 AM
#17
Team Nighthawk Mambo King
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Westfield, MA
Age: 64
Posts: 1,089
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Not that I don't believe you or anything along those lines but could you get a picture of the size stamped on the tires. I was going to buy 255's but every site I asked said that the rim would only hold these (which I ended up buying 245-45/17 PZeros M+S) and to tell you the truth these look exactly as wide as your 255's....
I have 30 days to return them but I need proof that someone actually got the 255's installed on the OEM rims.....thanks
I have 30 days to return them but I need proof that someone actually got the 255's installed on the OEM rims.....thanks
04-23-2006, 04:39 PM
#18
Those do look like 255/40/17 because I've seen 245 and 235 and they are much much narrower.....those 255 look fat...but i cant get over the fact that when my odometer shows 60k my car actually only been driven 55K or something along that line 
04-23-2006, 06:55 PM
#19
Safety Car
Thread Starter
For Adobeman ,
Here is a pic for you. Laying a yardstick across the entire tire, then measuring the "offset", we see that we have between a 1/4 to 3/8 inch of tire protruding beyond the rim lip. I am no "curb kissing expert", but I do think that the rim would now never get scrapped.
------------------------------------------------------
For HEK,
LOL... No problem. Here is your pic too.
-----------------------------------------------------
For xedap1998,
oops.... Your right. That would be another disadvantage. But for me, I rather drive "in style" for a indicated 60k miles, and have it really be just 58700 miles (a 1300 penality), than to drive the entire time with 235 wide tires.
MATH STUFF
----------------
60,000 miles Indicated x 0.978443 Factor = 58,706 miles Actual (1293 milage error)
Here is a pic for you. Laying a yardstick across the entire tire, then measuring the "offset", we see that we have between a 1/4 to 3/8 inch of tire protruding beyond the rim lip. I am no "curb kissing expert", but I do think that the rim would now never get scrapped.
------------------------------------------------------
For HEK,
LOL... No problem. Here is your pic too.
-----------------------------------------------------
For xedap1998,
oops.... Your right. That would be another disadvantage. But for me, I rather drive "in style" for a indicated 60k miles, and have it really be just 58700 miles (a 1300 penality), than to drive the entire time with 235 wide tires.
MATH STUFF
----------------
60,000 miles Indicated x 0.978443 Factor = 58,706 miles Actual (1293 milage error)
04-23-2006, 07:18 PM
#20
Team Nighthawk Mambo King
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Westfield, MA
Age: 64
Posts: 1,089
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
For HEK,
LOL... No problem. Here is your pic too.
WOW...I'm so just not happy with the ppl at DiscountTireDirect, Tirerack, TownFair Tire and Sears who steered me wrong and made it seem that if I bought the 255 I was going to make a terrible mistake, damn I knew I should have waited and seen this post since it's only been a week that I got my PZeros and only have driven 60 miles on them....grrr, I know the hassle of getting these sent back prorated and having the stock ones re-installed until the 255's arrive...
Thanks Inaccurate for not taking offense to my asking and again GREAT looking width.....
One additional question here about the miles on the warranty, could Acura void it since your actual milage varies compared to the stock tires and the warranty is based on miles on the car??...I see some math going around, I'm pretty sure the service Dpt would too...just curious...thanks
LOL... No problem. Here is your pic too.
WOW...I'm so just not happy with the ppl at DiscountTireDirect, Tirerack, TownFair Tire and Sears who steered me wrong and made it seem that if I bought the 255 I was going to make a terrible mistake, damn I knew I should have waited and seen this post since it's only been a week that I got my PZeros and only have driven 60 miles on them....grrr, I know the hassle of getting these sent back prorated and having the stock ones re-installed until the 255's arrive...
Thanks Inaccurate for not taking offense to my asking and again GREAT looking width.....
One additional question here about the miles on the warranty, could Acura void it since your actual milage varies compared to the stock tires and the warranty is based on miles on the car??...I see some math going around, I'm pretty sure the service Dpt would too...just curious...thanks
The following users liked this post:
Duraniel (09-30-2012)
04-23-2006, 07:54 PM
#21
Safety Car
Thread Starter
HEK,
Sorry to hear about your purchase situation. I know how you feel. I took a gamble on these 255, but thank goodness it worked out good.
Good question concerning the car warranty. I don't know what the answer is, and I hope that I don't have a reason to find out the answer the hard way. But for me, I am willing to risk having warranty issues in favor of having the wide tires.
Sorry to hear about your purchase situation. I know how you feel. I took a gamble on these 255, but thank goodness it worked out good.
Good question concerning the car warranty. I don't know what the answer is, and I hope that I don't have a reason to find out the answer the hard way. But for me, I am willing to risk having warranty issues in favor of having the wide tires.
04-23-2006, 11:13 PM
#22
Advanced
Join Date: Sep 2005
Age: 64
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Correction to correction factor. Since the tire is a smaller diameter it will turn more time for a given distance in this case 102% of original. Plugging these values results in a speedometer reading slight lower than compared the original. In addition at 60,000 you would really have driven 61,321 miles.
BTW the tires look great on your car! Congrats!
BTW the tires look great on your car! Congrats!
Originally Posted by Inaccurate
Let's address the issue of the smaller diameter tire causing problems.
According to www.tirerack.com, the Bridgestone Turanza EL42 235/45-17 has 817 Revs Per Mile. The Goodyear Eagle F1 255/40-17 has 835 Revs Per Mile. So, let's get our factor -
817 RPM /835 RPM = 1.0220 Factor
SPEEDOMETER ERROR EXAMPLES
------------------------------------------
40 MPH Indicated x 1.0220 Factor = 40.88 MPH Actual (0.9 MPH Error)
60 MPH Indicated x 1.0220 Factor = 61.32 MPH Actual (1.3 MPH Error)
80 MPH Indicated x 1.0220 Factor = 81.76 MPH Actual (1.7 MPH Error)
MID MPG ERROR EXAMPLES
----------------------------------
20 MPG Indicated x 1.0220 Factor = 20.44 MPG Actual (0.4 MPG Error)
25 MPG Indicated x 1.0220 Factor = 25.55 MPG Actual (0.5 MPG Error)
30 MPG Indicated x 1.0220 Factor = 30.66 MPG Actual (0.6 MPG Error)
According to www.tirerack.com, the Bridgestone Turanza EL42 235/45-17 has 817 Revs Per Mile. The Goodyear Eagle F1 255/40-17 has 835 Revs Per Mile. So, let's get our factor -
817 RPM /835 RPM = 1.0220 Factor
SPEEDOMETER ERROR EXAMPLES
------------------------------------------
40 MPH Indicated x 1.0220 Factor = 40.88 MPH Actual (0.9 MPH Error)
60 MPH Indicated x 1.0220 Factor = 61.32 MPH Actual (1.3 MPH Error)
80 MPH Indicated x 1.0220 Factor = 81.76 MPH Actual (1.7 MPH Error)
MID MPG ERROR EXAMPLES
----------------------------------
20 MPG Indicated x 1.0220 Factor = 20.44 MPG Actual (0.4 MPG Error)
25 MPG Indicated x 1.0220 Factor = 25.55 MPG Actual (0.5 MPG Error)
30 MPG Indicated x 1.0220 Factor = 30.66 MPG Actual (0.6 MPG Error)
04-23-2006, 11:30 PM
#23
Safety Car
Thread Starter
Does the word "reciprocal" mean anything to you ? Look it up before you confuse other viewers of this thread please.
Or perhaps you are not accustomed to the term "INDICATED" versus" ACTUAL". "Indicated" means the value registered by the speedometer. "Actual" means the speed that would be displayed on a police radar.
Or perhaps you are not accustomed to the term "INDICATED" versus" ACTUAL". "Indicated" means the value registered by the speedometer. "Actual" means the speed that would be displayed on a police radar.
04-23-2006, 11:30 PM
#24
I love cars!
Originally Posted by Inaccurate
For xedap1998,
oops.... Your right. That would be another disadvantage. But for me, I rather drive "in style" for a indicated 60k miles, and have it really be just 58700 miles (a 1300 penality), than to drive the entire time with 235 wide tires.
MATH STUFF
----------------
60,000 miles Indicated x 0.978443 Factor = 58,706 miles Actual (1293 milage error)
oops.... Your right. That would be another disadvantage. But for me, I rather drive "in style" for a indicated 60k miles, and have it really be just 58700 miles (a 1300 penality), than to drive the entire time with 235 wide tires.
MATH STUFF
----------------
60,000 miles Indicated x 0.978443 Factor = 58,706 miles Actual (1293 milage error)
, 
.
04-27-2006, 09:40 PM
#28
Safety Car
Thread Starter
What do you mean "fix this issue" ? It is those nay-sayers....
To me, "these issues" are what makes this size GREAT !!!!
Let's compare the 255/45 to the 255/40 -
10) HIGHER effective gear ratio (sluggish)
9) REDUCED braking force per given pressure on brake pedal (brakes feel less powerful).
8) Slightly HIGHER stance (estimating 1/4 inch)
7) Great rim protection without being excessive (this remains the same).
6) With the 255/45 tires, TL now looks less sexy (bulky profile)
5) You will be less envious of others having A-Spec (debatable)
4) Having wider tires than a G35 (this remains the same).
3) Car feels HEAVIER (accelerates sluggish, brakes sluggish, less responsive steering)
2) Don't need to stay 10-feet away from the nearest curb anymore (this remains the same).
1) TL now looks plain 'ol "mean" as heck, but with a bulky profile.
To me, "these issues" are what makes this size GREAT !!!!
Let's compare the 255/45 to the 255/40 -
10) HIGHER effective gear ratio (sluggish)
9) REDUCED braking force per given pressure on brake pedal (brakes feel less powerful).
8) Slightly HIGHER stance (estimating 1/4 inch)
7) Great rim protection without being excessive (this remains the same).
6) With the 255/45 tires, TL now looks less sexy (bulky profile)
5) You will be less envious of others having A-Spec (debatable)
4) Having wider tires than a G35 (this remains the same).
3) Car feels HEAVIER (accelerates sluggish, brakes sluggish, less responsive steering)
2) Don't need to stay 10-feet away from the nearest curb anymore (this remains the same).
1) TL now looks plain 'ol "mean" as heck, but with a bulky profile.
04-27-2006, 11:24 PM
#31
Safety Car
Thread Starter
Since some folks are considering to follow my example, I do want to point out another disadvantage to the wider 255/40 tires. SNOW 
For me, I am in Texas. So, this is not a problem. But, I think that the wide tire would be bad for snow (speculation on my part - heck, I'm in south Texas).
Another disadvantage that I want to make clear is possible hydroplaning. It would seem that the 255 wide tire would be more prone to hydroplaning than the 235 width. But, again, for me this balanced-out by me getting the Goodyear Eagle F1, which has PHENOMENAL wet performance according to everything that I researched and from my firsthand experience thru one heavy thunderstorm so far.
For me, I am in Texas. So, this is not a problem. But, I think that the wide tire would be bad for snow (speculation on my part - heck, I'm in south Texas).
Another disadvantage that I want to make clear is possible hydroplaning. It would seem that the 255 wide tire would be more prone to hydroplaning than the 235 width. But, again, for me this balanced-out by me getting the Goodyear Eagle F1, which has PHENOMENAL wet performance according to everything that I researched and from my firsthand experience thru one heavy thunderstorm so far.
04-27-2006, 11:47 PM
#32
Safety Car
Thread Starter
If you want to follow my example, also be aware that you need to purchase FOUR of the tires at one time. You will not be able to "upgrade" the two fronts OR the two rears, and wait until later to upgrade the other two.
This would must likely cause the VSA to activate. The VSA detects speed differences between the all four tires. So, if you installed the 255/40 on some tires, and still had anything else on the other corners, this would trick the VSA into thinking that there is a stability problem. But, again, this is speculation on my part. But, I did follow my own advise and got all four tires installed at one time because I was afraid that I would have VSA problem if I tried to do only a pair at a time.
As long as you get all four 255/40's installed at the same time, there is NO CHANCE of having any VSA issues in my opinion.
This is my daily driver. I commute 50 miles per day. I have not had any problems with VSA or anything else since installing the 255/40's. So, I do not mean to scare anyone away from doing this excellant upgrade.
This would must likely cause the VSA to activate. The VSA detects speed differences between the all four tires. So, if you installed the 255/40 on some tires, and still had anything else on the other corners, this would trick the VSA into thinking that there is a stability problem. But, again, this is speculation on my part. But, I did follow my own advise and got all four tires installed at one time because I was afraid that I would have VSA problem if I tried to do only a pair at a time.
As long as you get all four 255/40's installed at the same time, there is NO CHANCE of having any VSA issues in my opinion.
This is my daily driver. I commute 50 miles per day. I have not had any problems with VSA or anything else since installing the 255/40's. So, I do not mean to scare anyone away from doing this excellant upgrade.
04-28-2006, 12:05 AM
#33
Safety Car
Thread Starter
An update on MPG. I see NO DIFFERENCE in my MPG.
It has been almost one week (Monday thru Thursday). I fill-up on weekends. I use approx 3/4 tank during the week. So, I was waiting thru this week to get a good average of MPG during my daily commute.
With the oem tires (235/45), I was getting 23 MPG during "heavy traffic" days, and 24 MPG during "normal traffic" days. BTW, these are MID values.
Now, with the 255/40's, I am getting between 24 and 25 MPG (the MID number fluctuates). These past four days have been "normal traffic" days. So, with the oem tires I would had gotten 24 MPG. And after will take into consideration the milage error caused by the smaller diameter tires, this same 24 MPG would be the same as 24.5 MPG. And, I do appear to be getting this.
So, in conclusion, my MPG has NOT DECREASED from the wider tires.
It has been almost one week (Monday thru Thursday). I fill-up on weekends. I use approx 3/4 tank during the week. So, I was waiting thru this week to get a good average of MPG during my daily commute.
With the oem tires (235/45), I was getting 23 MPG during "heavy traffic" days, and 24 MPG during "normal traffic" days. BTW, these are MID values.
Now, with the 255/40's, I am getting between 24 and 25 MPG (the MID number fluctuates). These past four days have been "normal traffic" days. So, with the oem tires I would had gotten 24 MPG. And after will take into consideration the milage error caused by the smaller diameter tires, this same 24 MPG would be the same as 24.5 MPG. And, I do appear to be getting this.
So, in conclusion, my MPG has NOT DECREASED from the wider tires.
04-28-2006, 02:57 PM
#34
the only problem i am afraid is the NAV will become inacurate...right now i am running on 235 45 17 and towards the end of the life...the nav system always show about 10 feet too slow( behind ) when i am at an intersection..there is a setting change to compensate for that but i didnt notice much improvment...with 255 40 17 it might be even bigger error
04-28-2006, 03:37 PM
#35
Intermediate
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Lincoln, NE
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tires have no effect on the NAV except perhaps when the GPS antenna is obstructed (such as when in a tunnel) and the car is using its own sensors to compensate. I'm on stock 235/45/17s and it seems to me like the arrow is about 20 feet behind when I'm going through an intersection too.
:rippedoff
04-28-2006, 08:34 PM
#37
Safety Car
Thread Starter
But, perhaps those members with the 245/45's can give some feedback regarding the affects on the NAV. The 245/45 WILL throw-off everything too (MID readout for mpg, speedometer error, odometer, VSA, ABS, etc). The only difference is that the error is in the other direction because the 245/45 tires are also different size than oem (larger diameter).
Here is the math
235 x 45 = 106
245 x 45 = 110
255 x 40 = 102
The 245/45's differ from oem by 4 mm (110 - 106 = 4)
The 255/40's differ from oem by 4 mm (106 - 102 = 4)
So, there is the same amount of error caused by both tires !!!!!
For me, I will take the perks that come with the 255/40's
Here is the math
235 x 45 = 106
245 x 45 = 110
255 x 40 = 102
The 245/45's differ from oem by 4 mm (110 - 106 = 4)
The 255/40's differ from oem by 4 mm (106 - 102 = 4)
So, there is the same amount of error caused by both tires !!!!!
For me, I will take the perks that come with the 255/40's
04-28-2006, 11:23 PM
#38
Safety Car
Thread Starter
Here is a link to Car and Driver Magazine article: http://www.tirerack.com/images/tires...y_f1_gs_ds.pdf
"The Goodyear Eagle F1 picked as best overall performance tire" (Car and Driver, December 2005)
"The Goodyear Eagle F1 picked as best overall performance tire" (Car and Driver, December 2005)
The following users liked this post:
zen470 (10-27-2014)
04-30-2006, 09:28 PM
#39
Safety Car
Thread Starter
I am finding a possible bug with the 255's.
As CAHobbs worded so well in another thread :
<<<BTW, the 8.0 rim won't cause any problems unless you run tires larger that 245s then the narrower rims may cause the tires faces to bow out ... causing a similar wear condition as over inflated tires.>>>
I am finding this to be the case on the rear tires. I can see from dirt on the tires that the full width of the tire is not contacting the road. The contact patch seems to stop one-inch short along each side of the tire. If you look closely in some of the photos of the rear tires, you can see that the dirt does not run all the way across the rear tire.
I tried lowering the rear pressure to 30 psi, but this did not help. Even with 30 psi in the rear tires, the thread was not lying flat across the whole width. So, I now run 35 psi in all four corners.
Because the front of the car is much heavier than the rear, the front tires do make road contact across the full width. I run 35 psi cold in the fronts, and the front tires lay flat across the full width.
So, time will tell the tale. If the tires wear badly, I will probably replace these 255/40-17's with 245/40-17's. Then, with more shorter profile of the 245/40's, I can get more of the "features" that I have come to love from the 255/40's (such as lower effective gearing, better braking leverage, and more snappy steering response).
As CAHobbs worded so well in another thread :
<<<BTW, the 8.0 rim won't cause any problems unless you run tires larger that 245s then the narrower rims may cause the tires faces to bow out ... causing a similar wear condition as over inflated tires.>>>
I am finding this to be the case on the rear tires. I can see from dirt on the tires that the full width of the tire is not contacting the road. The contact patch seems to stop one-inch short along each side of the tire. If you look closely in some of the photos of the rear tires, you can see that the dirt does not run all the way across the rear tire.
I tried lowering the rear pressure to 30 psi, but this did not help. Even with 30 psi in the rear tires, the thread was not lying flat across the whole width. So, I now run 35 psi in all four corners.
Because the front of the car is much heavier than the rear, the front tires do make road contact across the full width. I run 35 psi cold in the fronts, and the front tires lay flat across the full width.
So, time will tell the tale. If the tires wear badly, I will probably replace these 255/40-17's with 245/40-17's. Then, with more shorter profile of the 245/40's, I can get more of the "features" that I have come to love from the 255/40's (such as lower effective gearing, better braking leverage, and more snappy steering response).