Needs the pic of the rear spoiler thread for that right?

 

Reading? Learning? Or both? I may be on the wrong SITE for both... Just ONCE I try to be serious, and look where it gets me. haha!

 

I wasn’t trying to discourage you… there are a bunch of old (very informative) threads on the topic… and lots of good sites that give the ratio – I’m not on my home computer, but when I have a chance I will post for Jeff the recommended percentage… for some reason I’m thinking typically its 3% or less variance (but it might be 2% or less)… I have always tried to stay as close to OEM diameter as possible…

Anyway – my reason for the comment is that there are lots of very good info on this and other sites – it just seems this isn’t the thread to be learning from necessarily.

 

Tire Size Comparison http://www.miata.net/garage/tirecalc.html
Mitata tire calc. Been using it for years and years. I didn't know it was necessary to include the % differences as I arleady posted them. Click quote to see the chart correctly.

I guess specific sedan applied questions are not allowed in this section.

Specification Sidewall Radius Diameter Circumference Revs/Mile Difference
215/55-17 4.7in 13.2in 26.3in 82.7in 767 0.0%
245/40-19 3.9in 13.4in 26.7in 83.9in 755 1.5%
255/35-19 3.5in 13.0in 26.0in 81.8in 775 -1.1%
245/35-19 3.4in 12.9in 25.8in 80.9in 783 -2.1%

 

you were asking if 2.1% was too much...

Anyway - I dont know why I posted in here... learn on.

 

Mostly just seeing what Jeff ends up doing.

 

jeff imo, you're not even dropped that low. If you go down in tire size you will only increase your fender gap and it'll look retarded.

245-40-19
265-35-19

Now we talkin

 

haha. Naw. I don't want to run a wide one like a 265.

 

Are you still going to rotate a nonstaggered wheel set with the same sized tire? So you run wider wheels in the front?????

 

No. I'd do a TNT thing and go front/back as they seem so cost effective.

If I run something like a Vrenstein and a stagger, the literature shows you can run them in either direction so I'd go left right.

 

From my experience, rotation front to back is way less important than rotation side to side to even out camber wear on the inside edges, so nonstaggered isn't that beneficial. On a sedan it makes more sense to run nonstaggered heights since the rear fenderwell is cut so much smaller than the front.

 

I do have some camber wear but that didnt' really show up until after about 20k on these used RE050s. I got a decent amount of miles out of these despite their 140 UTOG rating.
What asymmetrical tires do you run that don't cost a ton?

 

directional FTW! the vanes look seek foo!

 

Do you mean symmetrical? I run Falken 451's currently, and will be going to 452's in the spring. They are symmetrical and can be flipped from side to side. I get a fair bit of camber wear on the front where I don't have a camber kit, the rears wear evenly for the most part.

 

Ugh. Alot of the literature doesn't say symmetrical or aysmmetrical. It will say directional sometimes.

I must be confused. The Falken 452s look like a directional tire. So you don't turn them around but just move them over to the other side maintaining the same direction arrow?




I take it the RE050 can be rotated side to side the same way? But the literature says asymmetrical tread. Or does that mean you can't?



Tire rotation information from Tire Rack: