235/45/17s on Stock SE Rims . . .
05-08-2001, 01:11 PM
#41
Supporting Maxima.org Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: City of the Fallen Angel, CA
Posts: 4,728
Originally posted by Turbo95Max
i see what your saying, its true there arent really any choices in the 225/50/17 size. on the Nitto website, 225/40/17 with width measuring 9.02 says min of 7.5" rim while a 245/45/17 width measuring 9.61 says min of 7" rim?? something sounds hokie pokie to me. Or maybe my training in this field was all wrong, i belive the first. Have you tried the NT555? what did you think of them? ive used them before and they suck in my opinion, wet traction espically, they are good for the money but if money was a concern id juss opt to get the Kumho Ecsta. I know you can ask Skimax his opinion of the NT555 or other enthusists that push their tires to the limits can give you some good opinions. The RE730's are a very good tire, im sure you can see some of their ratings at Tirerack. Im not good at explaining things in words espically over the net, i know i didnt give you any good evidence for the ABS, you dont have to belive me, but id juss want to warn you about it if any probs do arise. You prolly wont tho.
i see what your saying, its true there arent really any choices in the 225/50/17 size. on the Nitto website, 225/40/17 with width measuring 9.02 says min of 7.5" rim while a 245/45/17 width measuring 9.61 says min of 7" rim?? something sounds hokie pokie to me. Or maybe my training in this field was all wrong, i belive the first. Have you tried the NT555? what did you think of them? ive used them before and they suck in my opinion, wet traction espically, they are good for the money but if money was a concern id juss opt to get the Kumho Ecsta. I know you can ask Skimax his opinion of the NT555 or other enthusists that push their tires to the limits can give you some good opinions. The RE730's are a very good tire, im sure you can see some of their ratings at Tirerack. Im not good at explaining things in words espically over the net, i know i didnt give you any good evidence for the ABS, you dont have to belive me, but id juss want to warn you about it if any probs do arise. You prolly wont tho.
As far as the Nitto 555s are concerned, could they be any worse than the RE92s? Practically everyone who's reviewed the Nittos at Car Review.com raves about them. And I've yet to hear anyone on this forum say anything positive about the RE92's. So the Nittos are my top choice for replacement tires . . . at least for now.
I'd also like to hear more about the abs issue. Please give us some hard info.
05-08-2001, 01:17 PM
#42
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 755
The load rating becomes a more important factor when cornering, because of the weight transfer. The load on the outside, front tire goes up significantly going around a turn. I would rather have an slightly undersized rime than an under-rated tire.
05-08-2001, 01:19 PM
#43
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 117
y2kse
I didn't know that information (OE Toyo tires) was available online. I couldn't find it on Toyo's US site and never thought to look at the Canadian site. Is that 89 load rating correct? The reason I ask is because the tire size is listed as 205/55/16 and Maximas have come in 215/55/16.
A tire with a tire load rating of 89 should be ok on a maxima. (it is cutting it close though) Here's why:
Think about this...Lets say a Maxima weighs about 3400 lbs (including driver) and has a 60/40 front/rear weigth distribution and that the side to side wight distribution is 50/50 for simplicity. Unloaded, a front tire would carry 0.6x3400/2=1020lbs
(recall 89 -->1279) So far so good.
Now if we load the car up (say to go to the airport with driver 4 passengers and a heavy/full trunk). Lets say each passenger weighs 150 lbs and that the trunk's contents weigh 200 lbs. This brings the total weight to 3400+4x150+200=4200 lbs. This is just about the maximum load that most people would put on their Maxima. With this extra weight, the weight distribution will shift some. 55/45 front rear sounds like a reasonable guess. Now the front tires are loaded with 4200x0.55/2=1155 lbs. This equates to 90.3% of the maximum load. Conversely a tire with a 93 load rating is only at 80.6% of its maximum allowable load under these conditions.
If the tires are not inflated properly, the max load goes down. Now there could be a problem. Under hard braking more weight will shift forward to the front and further load the tires. With the narrow rims, there might be a problem.
What does this mean?
Well...89 should be ok. Just don't load up the car and definitely do not pull a trailor. If you do load up the car, drive like an old lady.
That is to say slowly and cautiously. Since manufactures generally rate their products on the conservative side, I wouldn't worry about using the Nitto 555 in this size unless you really load up your car which probably won't be that often if ever. 
I didn't know that information (OE Toyo tires) was available online. I couldn't find it on Toyo's US site and never thought to look at the Canadian site. Is that 89 load rating correct? The reason I ask is because the tire size is listed as 205/55/16 and Maximas have come in 215/55/16.
A tire with a tire load rating of 89 should be ok on a maxima. (it is cutting it close though) Here's why:
Think about this...Lets say a Maxima weighs about 3400 lbs (including driver) and has a 60/40 front/rear weigth distribution and that the side to side wight distribution is 50/50 for simplicity. Unloaded, a front tire would carry 0.6x3400/2=1020lbs
(recall 89 -->1279) So far so good.
Now if we load the car up (say to go to the airport with driver 4 passengers and a heavy/full trunk). Lets say each passenger weighs 150 lbs and that the trunk's contents weigh 200 lbs. This brings the total weight to 3400+4x150+200=4200 lbs. This is just about the maximum load that most people would put on their Maxima. With this extra weight, the weight distribution will shift some. 55/45 front rear sounds like a reasonable guess. Now the front tires are loaded with 4200x0.55/2=1155 lbs. This equates to 90.3% of the maximum load. Conversely a tire with a 93 load rating is only at 80.6% of its maximum allowable load under these conditions.
If the tires are not inflated properly, the max load goes down. Now there could be a problem. Under hard braking more weight will shift forward to the front and further load the tires. With the narrow rims, there might be a problem.
What does this mean?
Well...89 should be ok. Just don't load up the car and definitely do not pull a trailor. If you do load up the car, drive like an old lady.
That is to say slowly and cautiously. Since manufactures generally rate their products on the conservative side, I wouldn't worry about using the Nitto 555 in this size unless you really load up your car which probably won't be that often if ever.
05-08-2001, 01:25 PM
#44
Supporting Maxima.org Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: City of the Fallen Angel, CA
Posts: 4,728
Originally posted by beaglemax
y2kse
I didn't know that information (OE Toyo tires) was available online. I couldn't find it on Toyo's US site and never thought to look at the Canadian site. Is that 89 load rating correct? The reason I ask is because the tire size is listed as 205/55/16 and Maximas have come in 215/55/16.
A tire with a tire load rating of 89 should be ok on a maxima. (it is cutting it close though) Here's why:
Think about this...Lets say a Maxima weighs about 3400 lbs (including driver) and has a 60/40 front/rear weigth distribution and that the side to side wight distribution is 50/50 for simplicity. Unloaded, a front tire would carry 0.6x3400/2=1020lbs
(recall 89 -->1279) So far so good.
Now if we load the car up (say to go to the airport with driver 4 passengers and a heavy/full trunk). Lets say each passenger weighs 150 lbs and that the trunk's contents weigh 200 lbs. This brings the total weight to 3400+4x150+200=4200 lbs. This is just about the maximum load that most people would put on their Maxima. With this extra weight, the weight distribution will shift some. 55/45 front rear sounds like a reasonable guess. Now the front tires are loaded with 4200x0.55/2=1155 lbs. This equates to 90.3% of the maximum load. Conversely a tire with a 93 load rating is only at 80.6% of its maximum allowable load under these conditions.
If the tires are not inflated properly, the max load goes down. Now there could be a problem. Under hard braking more weight will shift forward to the front and further load the tires. With the narrow rims, there might be a problem.
What does this mean?
Well...89 should be ok. Just don't load up the car and definitely do not pull a trailor. If you do load up the car, drive like an old lady. That is to say slowly and cautiously. Since manufactures generally rate their products on the conservative side, I wouldn't worry about using the Nitto 555 in this size unless you really load up your car which probably won't be that often if ever.
y2kse
I didn't know that information (OE Toyo tires) was available online. I couldn't find it on Toyo's US site and never thought to look at the Canadian site. Is that 89 load rating correct? The reason I ask is because the tire size is listed as 205/55/16 and Maximas have come in 215/55/16.
A tire with a tire load rating of 89 should be ok on a maxima. (it is cutting it close though) Here's why:
Think about this...Lets say a Maxima weighs about 3400 lbs (including driver) and has a 60/40 front/rear weigth distribution and that the side to side wight distribution is 50/50 for simplicity. Unloaded, a front tire would carry 0.6x3400/2=1020lbs
(recall 89 -->1279) So far so good.
Now if we load the car up (say to go to the airport with driver 4 passengers and a heavy/full trunk). Lets say each passenger weighs 150 lbs and that the trunk's contents weigh 200 lbs. This brings the total weight to 3400+4x150+200=4200 lbs. This is just about the maximum load that most people would put on their Maxima. With this extra weight, the weight distribution will shift some. 55/45 front rear sounds like a reasonable guess. Now the front tires are loaded with 4200x0.55/2=1155 lbs. This equates to 90.3% of the maximum load. Conversely a tire with a 93 load rating is only at 80.6% of its maximum allowable load under these conditions.
If the tires are not inflated properly, the max load goes down. Now there could be a problem. Under hard braking more weight will shift forward to the front and further load the tires. With the narrow rims, there might be a problem.
What does this mean?
Well...89 should be ok. Just don't load up the car and definitely do not pull a trailor. If you do load up the car, drive like an old lady.
That is to say slowly and cautiously. Since manufactures generally rate their products on the conservative side, I wouldn't worry about using the Nitto 555 in this size unless you really load up your car which probably won't be that often if ever.
I agree with your assesment of load conditions on the Maxima and the effect of those conditions on a tire with a load rating of 89. I'll certainly take your advice to heart after I install my Nitto 555s. Also, load rating is defined as the maximum load a tire is rated to carry for a given inflation pressure. Don't most tire manufacturers recommend increasing the tire pressure by 10% or so if the vehicle will be heavily weighed down? And wouldn't inflating the tires by 10% increase their load rating? Just curious.
Thanks again for covering this essential factor in selecting tires.
05-08-2001, 02:14 PM
#45
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 117
Originally posted by y2kse
I assume the 89 rating is correct unless it's a misprint.
I agree with your assesment of load conditions on the Maxima and the effect of those conditions on a tire with a load rating of 89. I'll certainly take your advice to heart after I install my Nitto 555s. Also, load rating is defined as the maximum load a tire is rated to carry for a given inflation pressure. Don't most tire manufacturers recommend increasing the tire pressure by 10% or so if the vehicle will be heavily loaded down? And wouldn't inflating the tires by 10% increase their load rating? Just curious.
Thanks again for covering this essential factor in selecting tires.
I assume the 89 rating is correct unless it's a misprint.
I agree with your assesment of load conditions on the Maxima and the effect of those conditions on a tire with a load rating of 89. I'll certainly take your advice to heart after I install my Nitto 555s. Also, load rating is defined as the maximum load a tire is rated to carry for a given inflation pressure. Don't most tire manufacturers recommend increasing the tire pressure by 10% or so if the vehicle will be heavily loaded down? And wouldn't inflating the tires by 10% increase their load rating? Just curious.
Thanks again for covering this essential factor in selecting tires.
Tire manufacturers give load rating at a given psi. They also give a maximum psi. You cannot keep inflating the tire indefinitely. I don't have a direct answer for your question. Just be extra careful to maintain the propper inflation pressure in these tires. I think that the maximum load is at the maximum pressure. (this makes sense to me but I am not sure) You don't have as much margin to play with compared to the OE tires. If you are going to load the car up or do some spirited driving, it should help to give your tires a few extra psi.
05-08-2001, 03:00 PM
#47
y2kse...
Originally posted by y2kse
I also insist on following manufacturer guidelines, both Nissan's and the tire maker's. So I won't consider a tire that has too small a diameter and isn't spec'd for 7" wide rims. That rules out every 225/45/17 and 235/45/17 made.
I also insist on following manufacturer guidelines, both Nissan's and the tire maker's. So I won't consider a tire that has too small a diameter and isn't spec'd for 7" wide rims. That rules out every 225/45/17 and 235/45/17 made.
05-08-2001, 03:19 PM
#48
Supporting Maxima.org Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: City of the Fallen Angel, CA
Posts: 4,728
Re: y2kse...
Originally posted by 2K2DEMAX
235/45/17 actually has a slightly larger diameter than the 215/55/16 OEM configuration (which is the config I got with my car) so using the 235/45/17 set up is still within Nissan's acceptable tire/wheel diameter limits (215/55/16 < 235/45/17 < 225/50/17). I currently have the Nitto 555 235/45/17 configuration on 7" rims and I love it. Performance is great both wet and dry.
235/45/17 actually has a slightly larger diameter than the 215/55/16 OEM configuration (which is the config I got with my car) so using the 235/45/17 set up is still within Nissan's acceptable tire/wheel diameter limits (215/55/16 < 235/45/17 < 225/50/17). I currently have the Nitto 555 235/45/17 configuration on 7" rims and I love it. Performance is great both wet and dry.
The best upsize fit for the 225/50/17 is 245/45/17. The difference in diameter between these configurations is only 0.68%.
Thanks for your review of the Nitto 555s.
05-09-2001, 12:07 AM
#50
Turtle turtle... Moderator
iTrader: (25)
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: San Bruno, Petaluma, SF Bay area
Posts: 4,857
id say the NT555 is DEFINETELY better then the RE92's. When i say they suck is compared to other tires in its class. If i didnt have anything to compare it to, i would say the NT555 is the best tire. i dont doubt a 245/45/17 will fit on a 7" rim, until you actually mount up a 245 on a 7" rim i guess you wont understand what im trying to say. After mounting a 245 on, try a 225, then tell me if you noticed any difference.
ABS uses information gathered from various sensors. If anything is different from what designed to see, you can run into probs. In this case we are changing the tire diameter. I hope this makes sense, as for hard proof, i dunno where you can look for info. How bout that one site Howstuffworks?
ABS uses information gathered from various sensors. If anything is different from what designed to see, you can run into probs. In this case we are changing the tire diameter. I hope this makes sense, as for hard proof, i dunno where you can look for info. How bout that one site Howstuffworks?
05-09-2001, 05:39 AM
#51
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 755
The maximum load rating is at the maximum tire pressure that the tire is designed for. These are the numbers on the side of every tire. If the tire has figures like 1400 lbs and 45psi, and you inflate to 33psi the load rating is much lower. Probably not a factor if you only drive in straight lines.
05-09-2001, 07:00 AM
#52
Supporting Maxima.org Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: City of the Fallen Angel, CA
Posts: 4,728
Originally posted by Turbo95Max
i dont doubt a 245/45/17 will fit on a 7" rim, until you actually mount up a 245 on a 7" rim i guess you wont understand what im trying to say.
i dont doubt a 245/45/17 will fit on a 7" rim, until you actually mount up a 245 on a 7" rim i guess you wont understand what im trying to say.
Weigh in here agin, MaxToolin. You actually have Nitto 555s in 245/45/17s mounted on your stock SE rims. You indicated in an earlier post that the tires bulge out about 0.5" on the sides. Does that amount of bulge seem excessive to you? Have you noticed any sidewall cracking, abnormal wear patterns or other signs of stress on the tires? Anything else you'd care to report?
As far as the ABS is concerned, has anyone with oversized tires on their stock rims ever experienced a braking problem? If you have, please report back here.
05-09-2001, 07:07 AM
#54
Supporting Maxima.org Member
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,038
Originally posted by y2kse
I assume what you're saying is that the 245/45/17s don't look right on 7" rims. By look right I mean that the tires bulge out too much on the sides. Is that correct?
Weigh in here agin, MaxToolin. You actually have Nitto 555s in 245/45/17s mounted on your stock SE rims. You indicated in an earlier post that the tires bulge out about 0.5" on the sides. Does that amount of bulge seem excessive to you? Have you noticed any sidewall cracking, abnormal wear patterns or other signs of stress on the tires? Anything else you'd care to report?
I assume what you're saying is that the 245/45/17s don't look right on 7" rims. By look right I mean that the tires bulge out too much on the sides. Is that correct?
Weigh in here agin, MaxToolin. You actually have Nitto 555s in 245/45/17s mounted on your stock SE rims. You indicated in an earlier post that the tires bulge out about 0.5" on the sides. Does that amount of bulge seem excessive to you? Have you noticed any sidewall cracking, abnormal wear patterns or other signs of stress on the tires? Anything else you'd care to report?
By the way, this thread ought to be a sticky or put in the FAQ section.
05-09-2001, 09:39 AM
#55
Re: Re: y2kse...
Originally posted by y2kse
Again, I could be wrong. But I suspect that the speedometer is calibrated differently between GXE/GLEs with 215/55/16 tires and SEs with 225/50/17 tires. There is a 2.16% difference in diameter between the two. So I wouldn't necessarily assume that your speedometer will provide an accurate reading just because 235/45/17s have about the same diameter as 215/55/16s UNLESS you actually upsized from 215/55/16s to 235/45/17s. If you did that, the difference in diameter is only 0.06%. On the other hand, if you upsized from 225/50/17s to 235/45/17s, you're dealing with a 2.05% difference in diameter.
The best upsize fit for the 225/50/17 is 245/45/17. The difference in diameter between these configurations is only 0.68%.
Thanks for your review of the Nitto 555s.
Again, I could be wrong. But I suspect that the speedometer is calibrated differently between GXE/GLEs with 215/55/16 tires and SEs with 225/50/17 tires. There is a 2.16% difference in diameter between the two. So I wouldn't necessarily assume that your speedometer will provide an accurate reading just because 235/45/17s have about the same diameter as 215/55/16s UNLESS you actually upsized from 215/55/16s to 235/45/17s. If you did that, the difference in diameter is only 0.06%. On the other hand, if you upsized from 225/50/17s to 235/45/17s, you're dealing with a 2.05% difference in diameter.
The best upsize fit for the 225/50/17 is 245/45/17. The difference in diameter between these configurations is only 0.68%.
Thanks for your review of the Nitto 555s.
05-09-2001, 12:36 PM
#57
Supporting Maxima.org Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: City of the Fallen Angel, CA
Posts: 4,728
Speedo Calibration
Originally posted by 2K2DEMAX
Just a little clarification here. I don't think that the SE's speedos are re-calibrated for the wheel options. My car is an SE and I got it with 215/55/16's. I almost got the 17" wheel option and I don't recall Nissan offering to re-calibrate my speedo to compensate. So, I think that any diameter between the 215/55/16 and 225/50/17 is acceptable on the SE. I could be wrong.
Just a little clarification here. I don't think that the SE's speedos are re-calibrated for the wheel options. My car is an SE and I got it with 215/55/16's. I almost got the 17" wheel option and I don't recall Nissan offering to re-calibrate my speedo to compensate. So, I think that any diameter between the 215/55/16 and 225/50/17 is acceptable on the SE. I could be wrong.
05-09-2001, 12:45 PM
#58
Supporting Maxima.org Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: City of the Fallen Angel, CA
Posts: 4,728
Originally posted by nizmomx
seems like everyone is looking for new tires. Let me ask u all this. How many mile have everyone gone on the stock tires on the 17s? I'm ran almost 33,000 miles on mine.
seems like everyone is looking for new tires. Let me ask u all this. How many mile have everyone gone on the stock tires on the 17s? I'm ran almost 33,000 miles on mine.
05-09-2001, 07:23 PM
#59
I put Nitto 555 235/45-17 on the Nissan 17" wheels. I think they look fine. Some people say the dont look right because they bulge out from the wheel lip towards the tread. I think the opposite looks awkward. I bought some snow tires mounted on alloys that were too wide, I think. There was actually a lip on the tire sticking out from the wheel rim, and the sidewall sloped inward toward the tread. Looks pretty stupid if you ask me.
05-09-2001, 07:28 PM
#60
Supporting Maxima.org Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: City of the Fallen Angel, CA
Posts: 4,728
Originally posted by JimmyH
I put Nitto 555 235/45-17 on the Nissan 17" wheels. I think they look fine. Some people say the dont look right because they bulge out from the wheel lip towards the tread. I think the opposite looks awkward. I bought some snow tires mounted on alloys that were too wide, I think. There was actually a lip on the tire sticking out from the wheel rim, and the sidewall sloped inward toward the tread. Looks pretty stupid if you ask me.
I put Nitto 555 235/45-17 on the Nissan 17" wheels. I think they look fine. Some people say the dont look right because they bulge out from the wheel lip towards the tread. I think the opposite looks awkward. I bought some snow tires mounted on alloys that were too wide, I think. There was actually a lip on the tire sticking out from the wheel rim, and the sidewall sloped inward toward the tread. Looks pretty stupid if you ask me.
05-09-2001, 09:04 PM
#61
Originally posted by y2kse
How does the bulge compare with the stock 225/50 Potenza RE92s? Is it much greater or about the same?
How does the bulge compare with the stock 225/50 Potenza RE92s? Is it much greater or about the same?
05-09-2001, 11:42 PM
#62
Turtle turtle... Moderator
iTrader: (25)
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: San Bruno, Petaluma, SF Bay area
Posts: 4,857
sometimes juss cause the sidewall bulges doesnt mean its too alrge for the tire, as i said already, alot of manufactuers put an extra bead as a sidewall protector. Mount some S0-2's to a rim and a RE950 to the same rim and the S0-2 will look wider.
05-10-2001, 07:21 AM
#63
Supporting Maxima.org Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: City of the Fallen Angel, CA
Posts: 4,728
Originally posted by Turbo95Max
sometimes juss cause the sidewall bulges doesnt mean its too alrge for the tire, as i said already, alot of manufactuers put an extra bead as a sidewall protector. Mount some S0-2's to a rim and a RE950 to the same rim and the S0-2 will look wider.
sometimes juss cause the sidewall bulges doesnt mean its too alrge for the tire, as i said already, alot of manufactuers put an extra bead as a sidewall protector. Mount some S0-2's to a rim and a RE950 to the same rim and the S0-2 will look wider.
05-10-2001, 12:06 PM
#64
Supporting Maxima.org Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: City of the Fallen Angel, CA
Posts: 4,728
We're sticky . . .
Just a quick note to let everyone know that a link to this thread has been added to the Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ-U) sticky thread. Thanks to Max_Gator for suggesting it and Y2KevSE for incorporating it.
05-11-2001, 05:15 AM
#65
Originally posted by Turbo95Max
sometimes juss cause the sidewall bulges doesnt mean its too alrge for the tire, as i said already, alot of manufactuers put an extra bead as a sidewall protector. Mount some S0-2's to a rim and a RE950 to the same rim and the S0-2 will look wider.
sometimes juss cause the sidewall bulges doesnt mean its too alrge for the tire, as i said already, alot of manufactuers put an extra bead as a sidewall protector. Mount some S0-2's to a rim and a RE950 to the same rim and the S0-2 will look wider.
Cheers
Double A
05-11-2001, 08:54 AM
#66
Supporting Maxima.org Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: City of the Fallen Angel, CA
Posts: 4,728
The State of the Thread . . .
OK, here's what we've got so far.
I believe we're in general agreement that it's OK to mount an oversized tire on our 7" wide rims provided it falls within the manufacturer's guidelines for recommended rim widths. I also think we agree that a tire with a minimum load rating of 89 is acceptable. That appears to leave two open issues:
1) Is it OK to mount a tire on our rims that does NOT fall within the manufacturer's guidelines for recommended rim widths? In other words, can we safely mount tires on our rims that are designed for a minimum rim width of 7.5"?
2) Does a change in overall tire diameter have any effect on the Antilock Brake System (ABS)?
What I'd like is some feedback on these issues based on your PERSONAL EXPERIENCES or CASE STUDIES rather than conjecture or hearsay.
Thanks in advance.
I believe we're in general agreement that it's OK to mount an oversized tire on our 7" wide rims provided it falls within the manufacturer's guidelines for recommended rim widths. I also think we agree that a tire with a minimum load rating of 89 is acceptable. That appears to leave two open issues:
1) Is it OK to mount a tire on our rims that does NOT fall within the manufacturer's guidelines for recommended rim widths? In other words, can we safely mount tires on our rims that are designed for a minimum rim width of 7.5"?
2) Does a change in overall tire diameter have any effect on the Antilock Brake System (ABS)?
What I'd like is some feedback on these issues based on your PERSONAL EXPERIENCES or CASE STUDIES rather than conjecture or hearsay.
Thanks in advance.
05-12-2001, 04:25 PM
#67
Member
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 37
Nitto 555 Pictures
Originally posted by Max_Gator
Better yet - can you take a picture. I'd like to see what the 235s and the 245s look like.
By the way, this thread ought to be a sticky or put in the FAQ section.
Better yet - can you take a picture. I'd like to see what the 235s and the 245s look like.
By the way, this thread ought to be a sticky or put in the FAQ section.
Been away from the forum for a couple of days. Here's picture #1 of the Nitto 555 245/45-17 on the stock SE rims.
Toolin....
05-12-2001, 04:31 PM
#68
Member
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 37
Nitto 555 Pictures
Originally posted by Max_Gator
Better yet - can you take a picture. I'd like to see what the 235s and the 245s look like.
By the way, this thread ought to be a sticky or put in the FAQ section.
Better yet - can you take a picture. I'd like to see what the 235s and the 245s look like.
By the way, this thread ought to be a sticky or put in the FAQ section.
Here's picture #2 of the Nitto 555 245/45-17 on the stock SE rim. Just got back from a long road trip - both dry and wet and am extremely happy with the performance, ride and handling. Noise is MUCH lower than the RE-92 and in the rain the Nitto's are really good - a far cry from the skate blades the RE-92's become... They look really good on the car also!
-Toolin....
05-12-2001, 05:36 PM
#69
Supporting Maxima.org Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: City of the Fallen Angel, CA
Posts: 4,728
Re: Nitto 555 Pictures
If your pictures are any indication, MaxToolin, the Nittos sure as heck don't look like they're bulging that badly to me. Once again, I'm no expert. And it may be hard to get a really clear indication of how much bulge there is from the pictures. But from what I can see, they seem to fit just fine on our stock SE rims.
Thanks for the pics.
Thanks for the pics.
05-12-2001, 05:43 PM
#70
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 1,335
i was talking to brian catts today and he looked at my rims...according to him, the reason they don't bulge too much is because we have a very large lip on the rims which is why the stock tires go inwards instead of ending at the rim (i'm sure some of you know what i'm talking about)...so bulging shouldn't be your main concern because our rims won't show it too much
05-12-2001, 06:11 PM
#71
Member
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 37
Re: Re: Nitto 555 Pictures
Originally posted by y2kse
If your pictures are any indication, MaxToolin, the Nittos sure as heck don't look like they're bulging that badly to me. Once again, I'm no expert. And it may be hard to get a really clear indication of how much bulge there is from the pictures. But from what I can see, they seem to fit just fine on our stock SE rims.
Thanks for the pics.
If your pictures are any indication, MaxToolin, the Nittos sure as heck don't look like they're bulging that badly to me. Once again, I'm no expert. And it may be hard to get a really clear indication of how much bulge there is from the pictures. But from what I can see, they seem to fit just fine on our stock SE rims.
Thanks for the pics.
The tires don't bulge, rather they're out beyond the
rim a bit more that the RE-92's are on the stock rim. If I led you to believe that they actually round up beyond the rim, I apologize. I think they fit just fine. I also read the posts regarding the load rating and since I'm alone in the car for the most part and don't carry a lot of gear, I think I'm well within the tolerances of the tire. If you're concerned the 235/45-17 has a 93W load rating.
-Toolin....
05-13-2001, 12:34 PM
#72
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 28
Ok a dumb question
Since the 245s are higher in number than the stock 225s, wouldn't this mean that the Nitto 245/45/17 would be a tire that is a bit higher. In the pics, the seem a bit shorter to me than the stock 225s.
Also, do any of you guys know if Toyo makes a tire that can compete with the Nitto in this size? Price?
I've also heard some info from a guy who raves about SO2s. Who manufactures them? Why are they so special? Price? Thanks so much. Laters.
Also, do any of you guys know if Toyo makes a tire that can compete with the Nitto in this size? Price?
I've also heard some info from a guy who raves about SO2s. Who manufactures them? Why are they so special? Price? Thanks so much. Laters.
05-13-2001, 02:13 PM
#73
Member
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 37
Re: Ok a dumb question
Originally posted by Don2000g
Since the 245s are higher in number than the stock 225s, wouldn't this mean that the Nitto 245/45/17 would be a tire that is a bit higher. In the pics, the seem a bit shorter to me than the stock 225s.
Also, do any of you guys know if Toyo makes a tire that can compete with the Nitto in this size? Price?
I've also heard some info from a guy who raves about SO2s. Who manufactures them? Why are they so special? Price? Thanks so much. Laters.
Since the 245s are higher in number than the stock 225s, wouldn't this mean that the Nitto 245/45/17 would be a tire that is a bit higher. In the pics, the seem a bit shorter to me than the stock 225s.
Also, do any of you guys know if Toyo makes a tire that can compete with the Nitto in this size? Price?
I've also heard some info from a guy who raves about SO2s. Who manufactures them? Why are they so special? Price? Thanks so much. Laters.
Actually 245 is the width in millimeters. What you're concerned with is the overall diameter of tire and wheel combinations. The formula for calculating the overall diameter is as follows:
(width * Aspect Ratio) * 2 + (WheelDiam * 25.4 (inchs2mm))
SO for the stock 225/50-17:
(225*.50)*2 + (17 *25.4) = 656.8 mm
For the 245/45-17:
(245*.45) + (17 *25.4) = 652.3 mm
So the difference between the OEM 225/50-17 and the 245/45-17:
.68% smaller.
FYI the poular 235/45-17 size calculation:
(235*.45) + (17 *25.4) = 643.3mm
So the difference between the OEM 225/50-17 and the 235/45-17:
2.1% smaller (on the edge of the industry recommended overall diameter tolerance range of +2/-3%)
For the winter I run Bridgestone Blizzak WS-50 mounted on 15" steel wheels in size 205/65-15:
(205*.65) + (15 *25.4) = 647.5 mm
-Pretty close to the OEM 225/50-17 overall diameter.
Also, another key point is the width of the tire is measured mounted on the measuring rim width, so for the Nitto 555's that I have are 245mm wide on an 8.0" rim. Mounting them on a narrower rim results in a narrower tire by 5mm for every .5" less than the measuring rim width so for the Nitto 555's mounted on a 7" rim the actual width =
245mm - 10mm = 235mm.
Hope that helps,
-Toolin....
05-13-2001, 04:14 PM
#74
Supporting Maxima.org Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: City of the Fallen Angel, CA
Posts: 4,728
Re: Ok a dumb question
Originally posted by Don2000g
Since the 245s are higher in number than the stock 225s, wouldn't this mean that the Nitto 245/45/17 would be a tire that is a bit higher. In the pics, the seem a bit shorter to me than the stock 225s.
Also, do any of you guys know if Toyo makes a tire that can compete with the Nitto in this size? Price?
I've also heard some info from a guy who raves about SO2s. Who manufactures them? Why are they so special? Price? Thanks so much. Laters.
Since the 245s are higher in number than the stock 225s, wouldn't this mean that the Nitto 245/45/17 would be a tire that is a bit higher. In the pics, the seem a bit shorter to me than the stock 225s.
Also, do any of you guys know if Toyo makes a tire that can compete with the Nitto in this size? Price?
I've also heard some info from a guy who raves about SO2s. Who manufactures them? Why are they so special? Price? Thanks so much. Laters.
So far, only three tires in sizes 235/45R17 or 245/45R17 have been identified that conform to the manufacturer specifications when mounted on 7" wide rims. None of these tires is manufactured by Toyo or Bridgestone.
05-13-2001, 05:09 PM
#75
Member
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 37
Re: Re: Ok a dumb question
Originally posted by y2kse
For a visual representation of MaxToolin's analysis, check out http://www.miata.net/garage/tirecalc.html.
So far, only three tires in sizes 235/45R17 or 245/45R17 have been identified that conform to the manufacturer specifications when mounted on 7" wide rims. None of these tires is manufactured by Toyo or Bridgestone.
For a visual representation of MaxToolin's analysis, check out http://www.miata.net/garage/tirecalc.html.
So far, only three tires in sizes 235/45R17 or 245/45R17 have been identified that conform to the manufacturer specifications when mounted on 7" wide rims. None of these tires is manufactured by Toyo or Bridgestone.
Where was this site when I was shopping for comparable tire sizes?? No more flying fingers on the calculator.
Great link....Thanks.
Toolin....
05-14-2001, 08:01 AM
#76
Supporting Maxima.org Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: City of the Fallen Angel, CA
Posts: 4,728
Re: Re: Re: Ok a dumb question
Originally posted by MaxToolin
y2kse,
Where was this site when I was shopping for comparable tire sizes?? No more flying fingers on the calculator.
Great link....Thanks.
Toolin....
y2kse,
Where was this site when I was shopping for comparable tire sizes?? No more flying fingers on the calculator.
Great link....Thanks.
Toolin....
05-14-2001, 09:04 AM
#77
Supporting Maxima.org Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: City of the Fallen Angel, CA
Posts: 4,728
Hey MaxToolin . . .
I'd suggest you post your pics in this thread as well:
http://forums.maxima.org/showthread.php?threadid=38740
http://forums.maxima.org/showthread.php?threadid=38740
05-16-2001, 03:10 AM
#78
Member
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 68
Re: Speedo Calibration
Originally posted by y2kse
It turns out that you're partially right and partially wrong, 2K2DEMAX. The speedometer gear is the same for both 16" rims and 17" rims. What's different is how the ECM interprets the output voltage. There are, in fact, different programs for 16" wheels and 17" wheels that are downloadable to the ECM. So had you purchased 17" wheels rather than 16" wheels, your dealer would have needed to reprogram your ECM to compensate.
It turns out that you're partially right and partially wrong, 2K2DEMAX. The speedometer gear is the same for both 16" rims and 17" rims. What's different is how the ECM interprets the output voltage. There are, in fact, different programs for 16" wheels and 17" wheels that are downloadable to the ECM. So had you purchased 17" wheels rather than 16" wheels, your dealer would have needed to reprogram your ECM to compensate.
05-16-2001, 07:57 AM
#79
Supporting Maxima.org Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: City of the Fallen Angel, CA
Posts: 4,728
Re: Re: Speedo Calibration
Originally posted by javamax
I'm curious as to why the ECM needs to be reprogrammed? Given that the diameters are very close, how does the ECM know anything has changed? I'm concerned that I may have problems when I switch from the stock 17" tires to 15" snows this winter. Has anyone had a problem doing this?
I'm curious as to why the ECM needs to be reprogrammed? Given that the diameters are very close, how does the ECM know anything has changed? I'm concerned that I may have problems when I switch from the stock 17" tires to 15" snows this winter. Has anyone had a problem doing this?
You shouldn't have a problem switching from your 17" tires to 15" snows PROVIDED you maintain the same or nearly the same overall diameter. Use the tire size calculator at http://www.miata.net/garage/tirecalc.html to help you accomplish that.
05-16-2001, 06:06 PM
#80
Supporting Maxima.org Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: City of the Fallen Angel, CA
Posts: 4,728
Load Rating Update . . .
A have confirmation that a tire with a load rating of 89 is acceptable for use on 5th Generation Maximas. The heaviest 5th Gen Maxima manufactured is the GLE Auto. The maximum permissible load for this vehicle is 4,393 pounds. (That number includes the vehicle itself, of course.) This breaks down to 1,098 pounds per tire when the GLE is fully loaded. A tire with a load rating of 89 can support a maximum of 1,279 pounds per tire. That provides a cushion of 181 pounds per tire when the vehicle is fully loaded.
Hope that helps.
Hope that helps.