Why do we have to have low profile tyres to look "sporty"?

[sh07vp1985]

Ive got 165/80/R14 on my dialy driver.... it floats ahead like a boat=) Super nice on snowy winter roads though.

[Lester H]

It’s because marketing has again triumphed over common sense; showroom appeal has triumphed over daily use.Car makers have become so addicted to the sporty look ( and at the top end of their ranges, massive power) so that we have a situation where the uncomfortable cars under discussion are hardy ever driven close to the limit.

[ddom]

Better handling innit.

[Exige77]

Lester H said:

It’s because marketing has again triumphed over common sense; showroom appeal has triumphed over daily use.Car makers have become so addicted to the sporty look ( and at the top end of their ranges, massive power) so that we have a situation where the uncomfortable cars under discussion are hardy ever driven close to the limit.

Money comes from selling cars. Showroom appeal is everything.

If customers didn’t want the sporty look, the car manufacturers wouldn’t make it.

How many S line, AMG or M sport 2 litre diesels do you see? People pay a lot for this purely cosmetic upgrade.

[MC Bodge]

strain said:

Surprised that nobody has mentioned the mondeo (from what I can see)

Saw quite a few with wheels that look tiny, every time I see one all I can think is 'god that must be comfortable'

I have a Mondeo similar to the one above, albeit a Titanium Estate, with 18" wheels. I wouldn't have chosen such large rims, but they came with the car. The ride is actually very good and it steers well for a big car -Ford have done a good job with it, although I prefer the chassis and (hydro-mechanical)steering of my old Mk4 on its 16" wheels and cheaper tyres with more resistance to potholes and back road driving.

Edited by MC Bodge on Monday 4th January 09:57

[nickfrog]

ddom said:

Better handling innit.

In fairness, the lower the profile the more instant the response so there are some benefits from a handling point of view, particularly on track. Having said that, this can be also be achieved with a stiffer sidewall but that in itself has its own limitations and also massively reduces (road) tyre choice of course.

The other benefit is the added resistance to shoulder roll and therefore shoulder damage at the front, again a massive benefit for those of us who track their road cars.

Personally for say a 1.5t road car, a 18' 40 profile tyre with a stiff sidewall would be great but my car came with 19' on 35 and probably has slightly better response while the overall air volume is actually quite good given the significant width so the ride is surprisingly compliant.

[NGRhodes]

nickfrog said:

ddom said:

Better handling innit.

In fairness, the lower the profile the more instant the response so there are some benefits from a handling point of view, particularly on track. Having said that, this can be also be achieved with a stiffer sidewall but that in itself has its own limitations and also massively reduces (road) tyre choice of course.

The other benefit is the added resistance to shoulder roll and therefore shoulder damage at the front, again a massive benefit for those of us who track their road cars.

Personally for say a 1.5t road car, a 18' 40 profile tyre with a stiff sidewall would be great but my car came with 19' on 35 and probably has slightly better response while the overall air volume is actually quite good given the significant width so the ride is surprisingly compliant.

https://www.tyrereviews.com/Article/The-differences-between-17-18-and-19-inch-tyres.htm

Tyre reviews a few years ago did a good test, same car (Golf GTi I think), same brand tyres, same brand wheels in 17 (45 profile), 18 (40 profile) and 19 (35 profile) inches, all same width, tested on a track. Lap times between 18 and 19in was only a tenthish of a second different in dry (probably less than error difference of repeated laps), 17s were best in the wet, subjectively the 18s had the best feel for the track.
I suspect for typical UK fast road use the 17 and 18 will be close, with the 19 been slower (dry or wet).

[dundarach]

Because people are stupid and advertisers know this...

[anonymous-user]

I’ve just installed these on my rav4. It’s refreshing to not have to worry about potholes and kerbs too much

[AW111]

NGRhodes said:

https://www.tyrereviews.com/Article/The-difference...

Tyre reviews a few years ago did a good test, same car (Golf GTi I think), same brand tyres, same brand wheels in 17 (45 profile), 18 (40 profile) and 19 (35 profile) inches, all same width, tested on a track. Lap times between 18 and 19in was only a tenthish of a second different in dry (probably less than error difference of repeated laps), 17s were best in the wet, subjectively the 18s had the best feel for the track.
I suspect for typical UK fast road use the 17 and 18 will be close, with the 19 been slower (dry or wet).

When I was looking at wheel & tyre (and brake) options for my '87 MR2, I looked at what the US (tarmac) autocross and track guys were running.
It was inevitably narrower and smaller than many fast street cars.

[nickfrog]

NGRhodes said:

https://www.tyrereviews.com/Article/The-difference...

Tyre reviews a few years ago did a good test, same car (Golf GTi I think), same brand tyres, same brand wheels in 17 (45 profile), 18 (40 profile) and 19 (35 profile) inches, all same width, tested on a track. Lap times between 18 and 19in was only a tenthish of a second different in dry (probably less than error difference of repeated laps), 17s were best in the wet, subjectively the 18s had the best feel for the track.
I suspect for typical UK fast road use the 17 and 18 will be close, with the 19 been slower (dry or wet).

Really interesting stuff. I am not surprised by the result. Width tends to increase with size though. For me lap time is far less important than response and handling, particularly for a non-race car on track days where clear laps are rare and timing not allowed.

The subjective aspect seems to confirm that:

"During dry handling, the tyres subjective feel improved with the lap times. The fastest lap time of the 19" wasn't because the largest wheel size offered more grip, it was due to the way the tyre delivered the performance - the turn-in of the tyre was far sharper and the car felt more responsive mid corner. Where the 17" tyre felt soft and vague, the 19" fed you with confidence and stability, allowing you to hit all your apex point, giving you the information you needed to really push the car. The difference between the 18" and 19" sizes was much smaller than the jump from 17" to 18", but there was still a step."

[Exige77]

nickfrog said:

NGRhodes said:

https://www.tyrereviews.com/Article/The-difference...

Tyre reviews a few years ago did a good test, same car (Golf GTi I think), same brand tyres, same brand wheels in 17 (45 profile), 18 (40 profile) and 19 (35 profile) inches, all same width, tested on a track. Lap times between 18 and 19in was only a tenthish of a second different in dry (probably less than error difference of repeated laps), 17s were best in the wet, subjectively the 18s had the best feel for the track.
I suspect for typical UK fast road use the 17 and 18 will be close, with the 19 been slower (dry or wet).

Really interesting stuff. I am not surprised by the result. Width tends to increase with size though. For me lap time is far less important than response and handling, particularly for a non-race car on track days where clear laps are rare and timing not allowed.

The subjective aspect seems to confirm that:

"During dry handling, the tyres subjective feel improved with the lap times. The fastest lap time of the 19" wasn't because the largest wheel size offered more grip, it was due to the way the tyre delivered the performance - the turn-in of the tyre was far sharper and the car felt more responsive mid corner. Where the 17" tyre felt soft and vague, the 19" fed you with confidence and stability, allowing you to hit all your apex point, giving you the information you needed to really push the car. The difference between the 18" and 19" sizes was much smaller than the jump from 17" to 18", but there was still a step."

I think the main reason for bigger wheels is so larger diameter brakes can be fitted. Bigger wheels mean smaller tyre height.

Once it’s been established that performance cars have low profile tyres, many non performance car buying people want them.

Looks cool doesn’t it ?

[nickfrog]

Exige77 said:

I think the main reason for bigger wheels is so larger diameter brakes can be fitted. Bigger wheels mean smaller tyre height.

Once it’s been established that performance cars have low profile tyres, many non performance car buying people want them.

Looks cool doesn’t it ?

Yes that's the perception for some but I am too bothered - I actually love small wheels as I think they give cars a motorsport look. My point is that handling is not necessarily affected by bigger wheels, it can be enhanced by them (at the detriment of other things like wet handling or comfort).

[Jonny TVR]

Higher profile tyres are so much better to live with.

I also think they now look better .. not always though.

Edited by Jonny TVR on Monday 4th January 13:29

[NGRhodes]

nickfrog said:

NGRhodes said:

https://www.tyrereviews.com/Article/The-difference...

Tyre reviews a few years ago did a good test, same car (Golf GTi I think), same brand tyres, same brand wheels in 17 (45 profile), 18 (40 profile) and 19 (35 profile) inches, all same width, tested on a track. Lap times between 18 and 19in was only a tenthish of a second different in dry (probably less than error difference of repeated laps), 17s were best in the wet, subjectively the 18s had the best feel for the track.
I suspect for typical UK fast road use the 17 and 18 will be close, with the 19 been slower (dry or wet).

Really interesting stuff. I am not surprised by the result. Width tends to increase with size though. For me lap time is far less important than response and handling, particularly for a non-race car on track days where clear laps are rare and timing not allowed.

The subjective aspect seems to confirm that:

"During dry handling, the tyres subjective feel improved with the lap times. The fastest lap time of the 19" wasn't because the largest wheel size offered more grip, it was due to the way the tyre delivered the performance - the turn-in of the tyre was far sharper and the car felt more responsive mid corner. Where the 17" tyre felt soft and vague, the 19" fed you with confidence and stability, allowing you to hit all your apex point, giving you the information you needed to really push the car. The difference between the 18" and 19" sizes was much smaller than the jump from 17" to 18", but there was still a step."

I think one of the final comments is important:

"While the 19" wheel size looked the best and felt much better in the dry, the nervousness in the wet and the comfort levels on the road made driving the GTI hard work, having to respect the limits and avoid any sort of surprise on the road."

Jon does say he thinks the 18 is the best overall.

[NGRhodes]

Exige77 said:

I think the main reason for bigger wheels is so larger diameter brakes can be fitted.

Not seen an evidence this is true for road cars (it is for race cars, in an old CCC magazine they featured a BTCC touring car that lapped faster in 17in wheels than 19in, but needed the bigger brakes to last a race that could fit under then 19s).

How big diameter brakes are needed ? My Audi A4 has 320mm discs under 16in wheels.

[Kent Border Kenny]

NGRhodes said:

Not seen an evidence this is true for road cars (it is for race cars, in an old CCC magazine they featured a BTCC touring car that lapped faster in 17in wheels than 19in, but needed the bigger brakes to last a race that could fit under then 19s).

How big diameter brakes are needed ? My Audi A4 has 320mm discs under 16in wheels.

Mine are 394mm inside 19 inch wheels, and are quite a snug fit.

[nickfrog]

NGRhodes said:

I think one of the final comments is important:

"While the 19" wheel size looked the best and felt much better in the dry, the nervousness in the wet and the comfort levels on the road made driving the GTI hard work, having to respect the limits and avoid any sort of surprise on the road."

Jon does say he thinks the 18 is the best overall.

What might be true for a particular chassis/wheel/tyre combo may not be true for another one, particularly in the wet, plenty of other parameters ; the main thing is perhaps to pick the combo that has been chosen for optimum handling, however small/large the wheels. Jon's view is entirely subjective too, that's his preference and I can see why. The next man may have a different view and may favour ultimate response even at the (potential) detriment of wet handling. There is no "best" in that sense. Width tends to increase with size so in that respect, the test is a bit skewed as that also often allows to limit the "loss" of sidewall height compared to conserving width.

Edited by nickfrog on Monday 4th January 14:23

[nickfrog]

NGRhodes said:

Exige77 said:

I think the main reason for bigger wheels is so larger diameter brakes can be fitted.

Not seen an evidence this is true for road cars

The M2 Comp (in the US and elsewhere when fitted with the bigger brakes) can only cope with 19'.

[NGRhodes]

nickfrog said:

NGRhodes said:

I think one of the final comments is important:

"While the 19" wheel size looked the best and felt much better in the dry, the nervousness in the wet and the comfort levels on the road made driving the GTI hard work, having to respect the limits and avoid any sort of surprise on the road."

Jon does say he thinks the 18 is the best overall.

What might be true for a particular chassis/wheel/tyre combo may not be true for another one, particularly in the wet, plenty of other parameters ; the main thing is perhaps to pick the combo that has been chosen for optimum handling, however small/large the wheels. Jon's view is entirely subjective too, that's his preference and I can see why. The next man may have a different view and may favour ultimate response even at the (potential) detriment of wet handling. There is no "best" in that sense. Width tends to increase with size so in that respect, the test is a bit skewed as that also often allows to limit the "loss" of sidewall height compared to conserving width.

Agreed, lots of variables, cant make sweeping statements.
In the article Jon says they are same width tyres (225) and rolling radius differs by just 0.4%, do you mean there is significant enough variance within this width rating to make a difference ?