Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Are Larger Wheels and Tires a Waste of Money?

2»

Comments

  • oldfarmer50oldfarmer50 Member Posts: 22,666
    "...how is icy road traction affected by low profile tires..."

    My "sporty coupe" came with 235/45R18 all season tires. Since it's a new car I haven't taken it out on our salty roads yet. Others who have the same car say it handles very well in the snow. Of course mine is a FWD which may mean nothing if you drive a RWD.

    2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible

  • warhubwarhub Member Posts: 13
    I'm purchasing a 2008 VW GLI. The car comes with 17" all-season 225/45R17 inch tires. There is an option to put 225/40R18 wheels and tires on the car for about $11 more per month on a 36-month lease. I'm not concerned about the $11 a month, but rather the possibility of significantly more tires bubbling, blowing up or wheels getting destroyed. I live in NY and travel mostly in the 'burbs, making the occasional (once a month) trip into NYC. There are still some potholes around to be sure, but nothing like the Bronx! If I went with the 18" it's solely because I like how they look. I'm sure the ride of the 18's is only negligibly "sportier," and I've been told that the snow traction should be about the same as the 17's given that the tires are the same manufacturer and are identical in tread type. Would I be a fool to buy the 18's? Am I destined to go through a significantly greater number of tires and possibly scuffed wheels or is the difference only going to be marginal. Again, I really like how the 18" wheels look, but I'm not going to do it if it's truly stupid in the wallet. :confuse:
  • texasestexases Member Posts: 10,708
    If you weren't liking the looks of the 18s so much, I'd say go with the 17s, because you could get good performance rubber in the 17's size, but if you really like the 18s look, go for it. Only thing to check is friends/acquaintences with low profile tires, see what they say.

    edit - only other concern is if you expect to loan the car out. No one will be as careful as you, and they will find every pot hole and curb in town!
  • 210delray210delray Member Posts: 4,721
    Ah, New York. Love the city, but it's tough on cars. I'd get the 17s.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    A real leveler would be cost per mile driven.

    For your standard tires example it is $750/35,000 miles=

    $ .0214285 cents.

    sport tires $1,400/15,000=

    $.0933333 cents

    $ .09333 - $ .0214285= $ .07190/ $ .09333=

    77% more per mile driven. If you are used to spending $ .0214285 why would you want to spend 4.355 TIMES MORE?

    So using 185/70/14 tires with most of the mileage in a plain jane everyday commute, I got 74,300 miles from oem tires. Replacement costs are a@ $ 49. per tire and $ 60. for removal, disposal, new valves, mount, balance or $ 256/ 74,300 miles =.0034454. The math indicates an almost obscene difference. I LOVE the MB E350, but the math is far too overwhelming to ignore, especially for commuting.

    What do you think will happen when you curb a (probably forged, AKA even BIGGER BUX) exotic rim vs say the steel one used with the 185/70/14 tires? I can probably say that tops, the steel one will cost $50 and that is Fed Ex'd to the front door.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    While I do not haunt car magazines, I very rarely see before and after testing with the performance parameters neatly laid out. (for the purposes of this discussion before and after larger wheels and tires etc,) . The closest I have seen are www.tire rack.com 's testing the variables they are usually testing for: SAME SIZED in the SAME category tire brands.

    The sense I have is larger sizes in addition to the discussed higher acquisition costs, hit performance: ie.,LOWER mpg, stopping distance, hp at the wheels, ride compliance/comfort etc. So it would seem defining the purposes and then seeing if the engineering adaptation makes sense is the first order of business in the "upgrade" Indeed given the original example of oem engineered upgrades, there is STILL no definitive testing/comparison.
  • karsickkarsick Member Posts: 312
    GREAT TOPIC!

    (too bad I didn't catch it earlier)

    Somebody REALLY needs to tell those retarded McLaren & Ferrari Formula One engineers that they need to replace their silly, ineffective balloon-like tires & wheels with some Stylin' Fo-shizzle Chromey DubDeuces (spinnazzzz preferably) and micro-sidewall 20-series lo-pros.

    Seriously, for anyone with a logical bone in their head, there is a diminishing return with ever-increasing wheel size, and most carmakers have crossed that line.

    For the same $$$ you would have spent on frequent mega-dollar re-tires, I'm convinced you could get the world's strongest & lightest forged alloys in a modest 15"-16" size, a set of dedicated track & ice tires, along with a WRC-worthy Ohlins or DMS suspension setup.

    With a proper set-up of lightweight, reasonable-size running stock, you could run RINGS around the guy with the cheeeeezy dubs, and even laugh at bad pavement along the way.
  • berriberri Member Posts: 10,165
    These huge tires are a total waste of money unless you're in it for styling. They cost a fortune, wear out more quickly, ride harsher and tend to do worse in wet or snow conditions. Interestingly though, Toyota seems to be getting big into these big wheels as in Highlander and Venza.
This discussion has been closed.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles