Contour Enthusiasts Group Archives Forums Modifications Wheels & Tires 215/40-16 ?

I'm concerned with price and options, that has a lot to do with it. OEM BFG KDW tires were 89 or so about four months ago, now that it's spring they're 139! Had I know this I might have bought them then! I would love to keep the price below 100, and infact I simply won't buy if they are above, I bought 192 dollar tires and I won't be doing it again! I just don't see that the improvement is worth the much larger sum of money! There aren't many options in 215/50-16 at all, and only one true summer time at eitehr tires.com or tirerack.com, so I have to switch the size a bit to get more options.

Chris

I was using that http://www.miata.net/garage/tirecalc.html tirecalc thing (which rocks, let me just say) and the different between the 215/45-16 nad the 225/45-16 as far as sidewall goes is 2/10 of an inch. That's like this ""' (at least on my screen) all the way around. It seems like that would be difficult to detect. I don't know. Wishful thinking, perhaps? I guess I'm liking those Falken Azenis tires, and they only come in 215/45 in the 16" anyway. I'm worried that the Ecstas won't be up to par compared to the KDW, whereas these Falkens are 108 (I know I said, not above, but at tires.com shipping is free, so that makes up for it) and I'm a reasonable believe in you get what you pay for, so it'd make sense that they would be close to as good as the KDW. If I have to, I'll just replace the KDW, but I'll have to wait until fall when they drop the price back down to 89 bucks. I'm none to happy about that little game, let me tell you!

Chris

Man I just can't shut my mouth... Here's another one... If I were to go with Ecstas... 225/45-16 or 205/50-16? That's a 2cm difference in width, but the 205 would probably fit more evenly on the rim... I just don't know. If the stock rim were 7" I'd feel much more comfortable about the 225 thing.

Chris

225/50R16 is what most people are going to if they didn't pick up the BFG @ 90ea back then. Don't worry about the 225 width. I ran 225.50 on a 16x6 rim without problems. IMO, the stock tires/wheels already look a little bit small in thw eheel wells on a non-lowered SVT. No need to make it worse.

In that size, the Kumho W rated wtire is only $80. Cheap, good performance, and it won't throw your speedo off much.

I tend to think if I were running STS that 215/40-16 is exactly the size I would want. First, my car would be lowered and I would want it to be even lower for autocross. I might even pursue 15" wheels if they fit. Less rotational inertia, less rollover. No huge bumps to worry about when autocrossing.

With another set of wheels, who cares about aesthetics. I would worry about putting 7% more miles on the car if I drove it everyday that way. In my case with 50,000 miles already and no plans to sell, an extra 3,500 miles on the odometer at 100K might be OK.

I am seriously considered just that size for my next set of tires. I wonder if the 6.5 inch wheel is wide enough, it certainly is not optimal. But my biggest concern would be clearance issues on a 98 SVT with stock wheels. Wheel spacers could take care of that.

Well, when I first got my 215/40-16 tires, I had them mounted on my stock 16x6.5 rims. Although, the rims were definitely too narrow, they looked like they fit fine, better than the 225/50-16 tires I had on them before. Then I switched to some 16x7 rims and my handling improved dramatically, but the ride got noticably rougher.

This is how they looked on a Cougar lowered with Eibach's. As you can see, even with the shorter springs, there is still some unsightly fender gap, but it's not as bad as you might expect.

Actually I was thinking that the fenders looked just as I'd like them, but it is lowered, so there you go. Oh well, guess I'm waiting for the off season with the BFGs, I just really don't think the 225/50-16 is the way to go, something doesn't look right for cornerning. Guess it's just a thing in my head.

Chris

My car didn't handle that well with 225/50-16 tires on the stock 16x6.5 rims. There was a decent amount of grip, but steering was very unresponsive, even in everyday driving.

I'm thinking of getting a set of 17" rims with larger tires for street driving and reserving the 215/40-16's for track use. There's not much of a point to looking funny and having an inaccurate speedometer and odometer for extra performance on the street.

you MUST keep in mind that when you put a different size tire on the car, the overal diameter must be very close to the overal diameter of the original tire. 214/40/16 WILL NOT FIT an svt. You will screw up your car if your tires is larger or smaller than the stock size to a certain degree. LArger is worse than smaller, but i still wouldn't go that small. Your overal diameter should be somewhere in between 23.7 and 24.8 on a 99 svt, given that the computer is calibrated for bf goodrich's 24.3. I know a good bit about tires and have worked with many tire dealers. I've faced the same problem you have, and the only true solution is to switch to 17" rims which is probably what i'm gonna do, even though i really like the stock 99 rims. Just my .03 cents

Maybe I'm showing my ignorance, but what does the computer have to do with tire size? I have noted faster acceleration just going to slightly smaller diameter 215/50 vs. stock 205/55. i would expect 215/40 to offer even better acceleration while lowering the car. i realize it would screw up the speedometer and odometer reading but who cares if i get better performance at 51,000 miles with no plans to trade. I also realize that a 6.5 inch rim is not big enough for 215/40, but when constrained by stock autocross rules, I'm willing to give it a shot.