Has anyone run 195/60-15 on 4000Q?
Ti Kan
ti at amb.org
Tue Apr 8 13:04:43 EDT 2003
195/60-15 has too large a rolling circumference for the 4Kq and would
cause your speedometer to read low and the effective final drive ratio
to be made higher, hurting acceleration. In fact your current 195/55-15
is also somewhat larger than what it should be. If there a reason why
you want to go with these tall tires?
Specification Sidewall Radius Diameter Circumference Revs/Mile Difference
195/60-14 4.6in 11.6in 23.2in 72.9in 869 0.0%
195/55-15 4.2in 11.7in 23.4in 73.7in 860 1.0%
205/55-15 4.4in 11.9in 23.9in 75.0in 845 2.9%
195/60-15 4.6in 12.1in 24.2in 76.1in 833 4.3%
195/50-15 3.8in 11.3in 22.7in 71.2in 889 -2.3%
205/50-15 4.0in 11.5in 23.1in 72.5in 874 -0.6%
-Ti
2003 A4 1.8T multitronic
2001 S4 biturbo 6-sp
1984 5000S turbo
1980 4000 2.0 5-sp
--
/// Ti Kan Vorsprung durch Technik
/// AMB Laboratories, Sunnyvale, CA. USA
/// ti at amb.org
////// http://www.amb.org/ti/
///
VFChris at aol.com writes:
> I have an 86 4000Q fitted with '90 100 wheels (15x6ET45). I currently run =
> 195/55-15 tires, and was wondering whether I could run 195/60-15 without an=
> y trouble.
>
> The car is not lowered, in fact, it is even a litle bit raised; I installed=
> stock 90Q spring in the rear to fix (a little over-fixed) the sagging cond=
> ition that seems to happen to a lot of 4000Q's. I'm quite happy with how i=
> t sits, though.
>
> So, back to my quesiton, has anyone run the size tire I am considering, and=
> have you found any problems with it? I think the potential interference p=
> oints are the rear of the rocker panel trim (as it terminates at the begini=
> ng of the rear wheel-opening), and the outer tie-rod-ends (looks kinda clos=
> e right now!).
>
> FYI, I had run 205/55-15 before, which did fit without interference, but I =
> felt the car didn't handle right. I stepped down to the 195/55-15, and fou=
> nd a noticable improvement.
More information about the quattro
mailing list