See Pictures. Which tire is WIDER?
12-20-2007, 10:15 PM
#24
Launching!
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Tucson
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
12-20-2007, 10:17 PM
#25
Launching!
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Tucson
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The first number is the width of the tire in mms. the second number is the height of the sidewall in a percentage of the width of the tire, the last number is the diameter of the wheel its made for.
For example (just an example not a real tire) 100/30/15
Its 100 mm wide
30% of 100mm is 30mm so the sidewall is 30mm tiall and it goes on a 15" wheel
But like stated earlier different brands will vary.
The BFG KD 315/35/17 is much wider than the Sumitomo HTR Z 315/35/17
For example (just an example not a real tire) 100/30/15
Its 100 mm wide
30% of 100mm is 30mm so the sidewall is 30mm tiall and it goes on a 15" wheel
But like stated earlier different brands will vary.
The BFG KD 315/35/17 is much wider than the Sumitomo HTR Z 315/35/17
12-21-2007, 12:26 AM
#30
given the same brand and same size wheel diameter, a 275 is a 275 is a 275 is a 275 is a 275 is a 275 is a 275 is a 275 is a 275 is a 275, regardless of the height of the sidewall. the tire width stays the same, while the sidewall is what changes, not the other way around......
the 40 vs. 50 in your example only affects the height of the sidewall, it has absolutely nothing at all to do with how wide the tire is. TAEnvy is right in what he said. don't believe me? fine....read this
so a 275/40-17 is 275mm wide, with a sidewall height of 110mm
and a 275/35-17 is STILL 275mm wide, but the sidewall height is now 96.25mm
like i said, this only counts when the tires are the same brand.....different manufacturers measure them differently, so yes, it is true that a 275-width tire from BF Goodrich may be wider than a 275-width tire from Michelin, and skinnier than a 275-width tire from Cooper, but then we're starting to compare apples to oranges to grapefruits.
12-21-2007, 12:44 AM
#31
sorry, i'm afraid not
given the same brand and same size wheel diameter, a 275 is a 275 is a 275 is a 275 is a 275 is a 275 is a 275 is a 275 is a 275 is a 275, regardless of the height of the sidewall. the tire width stays the same, while the sidewall is what changes, not the other way around......
the 40 vs. 50 in your example only affects the height of the sidewall, it has absolutely nothing at all to do with how wide the tire is. TAEnvy is right in what he said. don't believe me? fine....read this
so a 275/40-17 is 275mm wide, with a sidewall height of 110mm
and a 275/35-17 is STILL 275mm wide, but the sidewall height is now 96.25mm
like i said, this only counts when the tires are the same brand.....different manufacturers measure them differently, so yes, it is true that a 275-width tire from BF Goodrich may be wider than a 275-width tire from Michelin, and skinnier than a 275-width tire from Cooper, but then we're starting to compare apples to oranges to grapefruits.
given the same brand and same size wheel diameter, a 275 is a 275 is a 275 is a 275 is a 275 is a 275 is a 275 is a 275 is a 275 is a 275, regardless of the height of the sidewall. the tire width stays the same, while the sidewall is what changes, not the other way around......
the 40 vs. 50 in your example only affects the height of the sidewall, it has absolutely nothing at all to do with how wide the tire is. TAEnvy is right in what he said. don't believe me? fine....read this
so a 275/40-17 is 275mm wide, with a sidewall height of 110mm
and a 275/35-17 is STILL 275mm wide, but the sidewall height is now 96.25mm
like i said, this only counts when the tires are the same brand.....different manufacturers measure them differently, so yes, it is true that a 275-width tire from BF Goodrich may be wider than a 275-width tire from Michelin, and skinnier than a 275-width tire from Cooper, but then we're starting to compare apples to oranges to grapefruits.
^^ this guy is right.
12-21-2007, 01:06 AM
#32
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tire_code
When referring to the purely geometrical data, a shortened form of the full notation is used. To take a common example, 195/55R16 would mean that the width of the tire is 195 mm at the widest point, the height of the side-wall of the tire is 55% of the width (107 mm in this example) and that the tire fits 16 inch diameter wheels. The code gives a direct calculation of diameter.
Less commonly used in the USA and Europe (but often in Japan for example) is a notation that indicates the full tire diameter instead of the side-wall height. To take the same example, a 16 inch wheel would have a diameter of 406 mm. Adding twice the tire height (2x107 mm) makes a total 620 mm tire diameter. Hence, a 195/55R16 tire might alternatively be labelled 195/620R16.
Whilst this is theoretically ambiguous, in practice these two notations may easily be distinguished because the height of the side-wall of an automotive tire is typically much less than the width. Hence when the height is expressed a percentage of the width, it is almost always less than 100% (and certainly less than 200%). Conversely, vehicle tire diameters are always larger than 200 mm. Therefore, if the second number is more than 200, then it is almost certain the Japanese notation is being used - if it's less than 200 then the US/European notation is being used.
do some research and don't give out bad info. this is from Wikipedia (not all internet info is correct but here it is and also on multiple sites.)
When referring to the purely geometrical data, a shortened form of the full notation is used. To take a common example, 195/55R16 would mean that the width of the tire is 195 mm at the widest point, the height of the side-wall of the tire is 55% of the width (107 mm in this example) and that the tire fits 16 inch diameter wheels. The code gives a direct calculation of diameter.
Less commonly used in the USA and Europe (but often in Japan for example) is a notation that indicates the full tire diameter instead of the side-wall height. To take the same example, a 16 inch wheel would have a diameter of 406 mm. Adding twice the tire height (2x107 mm) makes a total 620 mm tire diameter. Hence, a 195/55R16 tire might alternatively be labelled 195/620R16.
Whilst this is theoretically ambiguous, in practice these two notations may easily be distinguished because the height of the side-wall of an automotive tire is typically much less than the width. Hence when the height is expressed a percentage of the width, it is almost always less than 100% (and certainly less than 200%). Conversely, vehicle tire diameters are always larger than 200 mm. Therefore, if the second number is more than 200, then it is almost certain the Japanese notation is being used - if it's less than 200 then the US/European notation is being used.
do some research and don't give out bad info. this is from Wikipedia (not all internet info is correct but here it is and also on multiple sites.)
12-21-2007, 03:51 AM
#33
TECH Fanatic
Last 3 post x4.
35,40,50 refers to the aspect ratio of the tires. The sidewall height is 35%, 40%, 50% of the tread width.
None of these ratios(%) make the tires wider.
The tread width makes them wider. 295s should be wider than 285s regardless of aspect ratio.
However, some brands do "run" a little wider than others.
35,40,50 refers to the aspect ratio of the tires. The sidewall height is 35%, 40%, 50% of the tread width.
None of these ratios(%) make the tires wider.
The tread width makes them wider. 295s should be wider than 285s regardless of aspect ratio.
However, some brands do "run" a little wider than others.
12-21-2007, 06:57 AM
#34
Launching!
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Tucson
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
go to tire rack and look at the spec for either tire.
now look at a 285 40 then 295 30 the 285 is wider than a 275 and the 295 wider than 285, make sure you compare the same brand of tires.
do some research- then post.
12-21-2007, 06:58 AM
#35
Launching!
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Tucson
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tire_code
When referring to the purely geometrical data, a shortened form of the full notation is used. To take a common example, 195/55R16 would mean that the width of the tire is 195 mm at the widest point, the height of the side-wall of the tire is 55% of the width (107 mm in this example) and that the tire fits 16 inch diameter wheels. The code gives a direct calculation of diameter.
Less commonly used in the USA and Europe (but often in Japan for example) is a notation that indicates the full tire diameter instead of the side-wall height. To take the same example, a 16 inch wheel would have a diameter of 406 mm. Adding twice the tire height (2x107 mm) makes a total 620 mm tire diameter. Hence, a 195/55R16 tire might alternatively be labelled 195/620R16.
Whilst this is theoretically ambiguous, in practice these two notations may easily be distinguished because the height of the side-wall of an automotive tire is typically much less than the width. Hence when the height is expressed a percentage of the width, it is almost always less than 100% (and certainly less than 200%). Conversely, vehicle tire diameters are always larger than 200 mm. Therefore, if the second number is more than 200, then it is almost certain the Japanese notation is being used - if it's less than 200 then the US/European notation is being used.
do some research and don't give out bad info. this is from Wikipedia (not all internet info is correct but here it is and also on multiple sites.)
When referring to the purely geometrical data, a shortened form of the full notation is used. To take a common example, 195/55R16 would mean that the width of the tire is 195 mm at the widest point, the height of the side-wall of the tire is 55% of the width (107 mm in this example) and that the tire fits 16 inch diameter wheels. The code gives a direct calculation of diameter.
Less commonly used in the USA and Europe (but often in Japan for example) is a notation that indicates the full tire diameter instead of the side-wall height. To take the same example, a 16 inch wheel would have a diameter of 406 mm. Adding twice the tire height (2x107 mm) makes a total 620 mm tire diameter. Hence, a 195/55R16 tire might alternatively be labelled 195/620R16.
Whilst this is theoretically ambiguous, in practice these two notations may easily be distinguished because the height of the side-wall of an automotive tire is typically much less than the width. Hence when the height is expressed a percentage of the width, it is almost always less than 100% (and certainly less than 200%). Conversely, vehicle tire diameters are always larger than 200 mm. Therefore, if the second number is more than 200, then it is almost certain the Japanese notation is being used - if it's less than 200 then the US/European notation is being used.
do some research and don't give out bad info. this is from Wikipedia (not all internet info is correct but here it is and also on multiple sites.)
Thanks for this post, I cant belive people THINK the sidewall makes a tire wider.
12-21-2007, 09:05 AM
#36
Staging Lane
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I dont know about better education but its certainly the same in respect to some people knowing what their talking about and others talking out their ***.
now
12-21-2007, 02:55 PM
#40
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: MI
Posts: 1,005
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the sidewall will have an affect on size, its like an aspect ratio. i have two tires in the exact same sizes, sidewall included- and even still one is bigger than the other. different brands come up with different measurements it seems. my goodyear gs-d3's look half an inch to an inch (off the top of my head) wider than the kuhmos.