RE: wheels/tyres

["Brian and Mea Jowett" <syncroboy@hotmail.com>]

>you also should differentiate what car manufacturers will sell you, and 
>what car/chassis designers intended.  just because audi for example, will 
>sell you some wheels and tyres isn't enough for this punter.  at least 
>buying the factory-fitted wheel *and* suspension kit will give you 
>something that the factory boys have thought about a little (although you 
>certainly pay for the priviledge).

That's a given. Everything NEEDS to work smoothly and in conjunction.

>what i struggle with is the continual question "how wide a tyre can i fit 
>in my audi?"  seeming to assume that this will inevitably result in better 
>handling, better steering, better braking and better wet/dry performance. 
>no-one ever seems to think that it might decrease handling, deteriorate 
>steering, and munt the ride.  no-one ever asks "what is the best wheel/tyre 
>combination for my audi?"

This is a very good point...I agree. So far this is what I found out in my 
Corrado in both FWD and Syncro forms. 225/40/16 works the best... it still 
rides well and the light weight BBS wheels make the steering delightful. 
225/35/17 cause a bit of torque steer w/ FWD, did not notice torque steer 
with Syncro.. however the wheels are a good 7 lbs more each... so the quick 
turn in went right out the window also. Could the weight be the cause of the 
steering feedback? I'll never know as there are no plans to return the car 
to FWD.

>fwiw, you mention the rs2.  the rs2 (on 245/40 17's) turns in more slowly 
>and is significantly less nimble than the ur-quattro 20v which makes do 
>with 215/50 15's.  the rr will walk all over the rs2 in the wet, and in the 
>dry if the road is twisty enough.

I do mention the RS2... but not the Ur-Q. Are the chassis dynamics of both 
these vehicles close enough to warrant a comparison?
Is this a fair comparison? What are the weight differences between the two? 
Place the RS2 wheels on the Ur-Q and see how it feels upon turn in.

>  in fact, afaik, we have one rs2 lister
>presently thinking about a *decrease* in the size of the tyres on his
>wagon...

He should try a weight reduction first.

>i accept that bigger brakes are a possible benefit, but there are a range 
>of perfectly good options within the wheel size if you look around.  
>anyway, that thread is dead already...
>
>i also agree about the requirement of weight minimisation.


Great! less weight = less spring and dampener = better ride and handling.

>i'd be interested in knowing some other of those in-favour variables you're 
>thinking about....

I was speaking of the variables in chassis tuning and design that can effect 
tire/wheel size requirements.... from control arm bushing stiffness to 
alignment... spring rates, compression/rebound dampening rates, swaybars... 
struts or dual a-arms. There are also many economic factors behind it all.

Here's a few lines -
Let's face it... every car has an ideal wheel size for a given task. What 
that size is can only be found through much testing. What car manufacturers 
choose to give us can often be a compromise even on the high end crap. 90% 
of aftermarket wheels are good for boat anchors and maybe 10% of that 90 are 
nice to look at. I'm sleepy... anyone else care to help make this more 
interesting than I posibly can?

Brian
93 VR6 Corrado Syncro


_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com