225 55 ZR16's ??
Discussion
smb said:
depands on the age of the car, the fronts on early cars are 205/60 and rears, 225/55, on later cars, 205/55 and 225/50 respectively
Not according to the Bible. Fronts went from 205/60 to 205/55 at some point (1994/5), but the accompanying rears were always 225/50/16s... Mine had 205/60/15 front and 225/50/16 at the rear when I bought it, which I understand to be how it came originally back in 1993.
zippee said:
biggiles said:
zippee said:
V8 Devil said:
Mine is a 1998, could I use the 225 55 16's on the rear?
Mines a 97 and uses 50's on the rear.
Mine's a 97 500 and I have 245/45 R16s on the rear... and I thought it was normal!
I thought the 500s came with the Griff alloys?
Get outta here! The Griff's came with Chimaera alloys
900T-R said:
smb said:
Depends on the age of the car, the fronts on early cars are 205/60 and rears, 225/55, on later cars, 205/55 and 225/50 respectively.
Not according to the Bible.
It's not a bible though is it? Just one man's recollection. smb is correct.
V8 Devil said:
Mine is a 1998, could I use the 225 55 16's on the rear?
Yes.
JR said:
900T-R said:
smb said:
Depends on the age of the car, the fronts on early cars are 205/60 and rears, 225/55, on later cars, 205/55 and 225/50 respectively.
Not according to the Bible.
It's not a bible though is it? Just one man's recollection. smb is correct.
Strangely, AFAIK all contemporaty road tests mention 205/60/15 (front) and 225/50/16 (rear), too...
The plot thickens...
900T-R said:
Strangely, AFAIK all contemporaty road tests mention 205/60/15 (front) and 225/50/16 (rear), too...
The plot thickens...
The plot thickens...
TVR were nothing if not inconsistant. The Chim was launched as the softer version of the Griff and had 5% higher profile tyres front and rear. Over it's life it became a Griff rival and then the cheaper option when the 500 was dropped. Various tyres were fitted inc 235s and 245s at the rear. TVR just seemed to fall back on the legal requirement for tyres: "suitable for the car and the use to which the car is being put." With this in mind I the 225/55s at the rear are an option depending on how the car is used. More relevant is why the Griff/Chim never got the 8.5" rear rim that it needs.
Changing the profile of a tyre, but not the width on the rears, will alter the speedometer reading. The Chimaera's were fitted with a wider tyre's and different profiles when they were modified with power assisted steering.
All the info is in the bible with the sizes, profiles & circumferences.
Bible not to hand at the moment which is why I have not quoted any sizes.
Paul.
All the info is in the bible with the sizes, profiles & circumferences.
Bible not to hand at the moment which is why I have not quoted any sizes.
Paul.
900T-R said:
smb said:
depands on the age of the car, the fronts on early cars are 205/60 and rears, 225/55, on later cars, 205/55 and 225/50 respectively
Not according to the Bible. Fronts went from 205/60 to 205/55 at some point (1994/5), but the accompanying rears were always 225/50/16s... Mine had 205/60/15 front and 225/50/16 at the rear when I bought it, which I understand to be how it came originally back in 1993.
re check the bible, cars to 95/96 ( not exact had 225/55 rears ) mine came that way from the factory
JR said:
900T-R said:
Strangely, AFAIK all contemporaty road tests mention 205/60/15 (front) and 225/50/16 (rear), too...
The plot thickens...
The plot thickens...
TVR were nothing if not inconsistant. The Chim was launched as the softer version of the Griff and had 5% higher profile tyres front and rear. Over it's life it became a Griff rival and then the cheaper option when the 500 was dropped. Various tyres were fitted inc 235s and 245s at the rear. TVR just seemed to fall back on the legal requirement for tyres: "suitable for the car and the use to which the car is being put." With this in mind I the 225/55s at the rear are an option depending on how the car is used. More relevant is why the Griff/Chim never got the 8.5" rear rim that it needs.
As I understand it, the width of the front tyres - 205 or 225 - was determined by whether the car had power steering originally specified, at least for vehicles of a similar age to my own (1998). This would seem to tally with the "suitable for the car" quote above - obviously slightly narrower tyres make life marginally easier for low-speed manoevering of non-PAS cars. Can anyone verify this?
Edited by Yiliterate on Sunday 1st April 18:40
Gassing Station | Chimaera | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff