[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
As I recall, the typical tire has a tread depth of about 12/32 inch. At
2/32 they are considered "bald". Taking away 10/32 of the rolling
diameter from a 15 inch 215/60 reduces the rolling distance from ~2007mm
to ~1982mm or about 1.25%. This would be about .75 mph difference at
60mph. So the difference in a new tire and an old one is only about
3/4ths the difference of going from a 205/55 to a 215/50.
>From: Peter Henriksen
>Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 1996 9:44 AM
>To: 'email@example.com'; 'firstname.lastname@example.org'
>Subject: RE: Tires
>From my calculations (read: YMMV :-):
>Tire size Total diameter Rollout Change from stock
>205/55 631.9mm 1985.1mm N/A
>215/50 621.4mm 1952.1mm 1.7%
>225/45 608.9mm 1912.9mm 3.6%
>Formula being: ((2*((<profile>/100)*<width>))+(<wheel size>*25.4)) to
>get a result in milimeters for the diameter and then 2*pi*r to get the
>rollout (pi somewhat equal to 3.1415).
>Did I just do something stupid or is that right? It's still pretty
>early, I haven't had nearly enough coffee and I haven't done anything
>like this since college...
>On that note, how much of a difference is generally acceptable in
>rollout before the speedometer and odometer start getting way off? Where
>do you go to get the instruments recalibrated?
>- peter henriksen, email@example.com, issaquah, wa
> 91 200qw
> 94 acura legend gs
> 80 mazda 626
>> >>One question. Has anyone put new tires on yet? I am planning on
>> >>putting 225/50 R16 Dunlop D40M2's this week. They have the same
>> >>circumference as the 205/55's and supposedly enough clearance. Has
>> >>anyone heard differently?
>> My understanding of tires is that a 215/50 or 225/45 would have the
>> same circumference as a 205/55.