[s-cars] RE: 255/40 17 Snow Tires

[Bill Clancy]

Come on man...  Paul already told us that snows have to be skinny.  
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: djdawson2 at aol.com 
  To: clancybill at yahoo.com ; pkrasusky at ups.com ; S-CAR-List at audifans.com ; Strangconst at rogers.com 
  Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 1:13 PM
  Subject: Re: [s-cars] RE: 255/40 17 Snow Tires


   I tend to disagree with the feeling that a wide snow tire can't work well.  I think those feelings are based on the older technology that required lugs of the tire to "bite" into the snow... therefore it was better to have less surface area, allowing the tire to better penetrate the surface of the snow.

  Newer tire technology is based on a more microscopic level... using siping and rubber compounds that grip without penetration.  Many of these tires work really well on sheer ice... unheard of with the older "snow" tires.

  My experience... ask around to some Colorado listers that have been to my house.  Very steep climb that routinely sees major snow.  I have had 205s on my urq, and 225s and 235s on my S4.  I have seen no appreciable difference in performance based on the width with the modern tires.  I've used blizzaks, Dunlop Graspics, and several flavors of Pirellis.  All have pulled me up my road when there was a parking lot of SUVs at the bottom of the mountain.

  Dave
   
  -----Original Message-----
  From: Bill Clancy <clancybill at yahoo.com>
  To: pkrasusky at ups.com; S-CAR-List at audifans.com; Strangconst at rogers.com
  Sent: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 12:41:25 -0800
  Subject: Re: [s-cars] RE: 255/40 17 Snow Tires


  Has anyone ever tried a set of 255's in the snow and found that they got stuck or that it was just horrible to drive? A lot of SUVs come stock with 255's and larger. Ever see what comes stock on the back of an X5? 285 35/19. A 255 is not crazy wide. We're only talking 10% wider than stock. BFD.