exunaja

ok people here is the link...
please give your comment.
thank you for all your patient

Pilot A/S 235/50

Erwin

lcf

iTrader: (6)

nice tires! the 235s look good on the max. i cant believe i was considering upgrading to 255s once upon a time!

2k2Merlot

Those look awesome! They are already my plan for tire replacement. Good to see how they look!

stockmax

Just took my name off of the list waiting for the stock 225 Pilots. Going to get 235/50's. Thanks!

jjames

Those look great. Is it OK to put the 235/50/17 on the stock 7" rrims?

y2kse

iTrader: (1)

Yes.

Those tires REALLY look sweet, Erwin. In fact, they're SO sweet that I no longer have to consider lowering my Maxima to get rid of unsightly fender gap. That's what I was hoping for, of course. Regardless of what anyone says, lowering a car stiffens the ride. And the ride on my SE is already stiff enough for my liking.

Congratulations for starting a new trend! When it's time for me to purchase new tires, they will DEFINITELY be 235/50R17s.



Imitation is the highest form of flattery.

exunaja

You all welcome.
enjoy your new tires and remember the breaking period.

Immitation hmmm.... damn.. I need a new nickname?
any ideas?


Erwin

y2kse

iTrader: (1)

Go up a couple of posts, my friend.

max2001se

Yes - check the link.

http://forums.maxima.org/showthread....5&pagenumber=5

maxse01

Only problem now is that your spedo is going to slow. When it says you are doing 60, you will really be going 61. Looks good though.

exunaja

welcome to the Pilot A/S 's family!

Welcome to the Pilot A/S 's family!

shall we start a new club?
Erwin

y2kse

iTrader: (1)

That's still well within the 3.0% maximum recommended speedometer error. And it's less of an error than that generated by running 235/45R17s.

All things considered, I'd say that the 235/50R17 Michelin Pilot Sport A/S is hands-down the best tire money can buy for the 5th Gen Nissan Maxima with OEM rims and a stock ride height.

exunaja

yep and it still unnoticeable.. esspecially when you all driving above the speed limit!


Erwin

slickrick

iTrader: (12)

but how do these tires handle in the rain?

yongjun

Erwin where did you get them mounted?

exunaja

my mistake
Erwin

exunaja

heard all the good stuff and I believ is improvement over RE92
still waiting for rain to come
I'll update once we have rain in Dallas

Erwin

exunaja

Hi YJ!
Was up?
I got it mounted at a local shops at Denton Hwy, North Richland Hill.
not recommended but it's cheap.

Omegasrk

iTrader: (1)

Would that size work on a lower Maxima? I have Eibach pro-kit on my car. I'm wondering would there be enough clearance to fit those tire on stock rims on my car. I'm also tired of waiting for the 225/50-17 from TireRack. Maybe I'll try the 235/50-17 Pilot A/S instead. Thx.

y2kse

iTrader: (1)

I'd think twice about that if I were you, Omegarsk. I seem to remember someone trying 235/50s on a lowered Max and they rubbed. So be careful.

yongjun

Oh you could have always gone to Oak cliff and got them mounted for 2 dollars a tire.

hehe just curious cause the pictures reminded me of the back of intercrew.

ABS

Y2KSE, I'm curious why you think this size tire is better than a 225/50/17? I would think you would recommend the Michelin tire in the stock size. After all, we really have enough side wall height with the stock size to begin with unless, that is unless you feel that the extra height of the 235/50 is compensated for by the extra width gained on it? Just curious to know your rationale. Thanks!

y2kse

iTrader: (1)

Your questions are valid, ABS. I support the 235/50 for several reasons. The first is in response to those who insist on running a 235mm wide tire on their OEM 17" x 7.0" rims. In order to remain in spec, a 235mm wide tire MUST have an aspect ratio of 50 or more.

The second is as an answer to those who hate the amount of fender gap the 225/50R17 produces with a stock ride height but find the idea of lowering their car daunting. For them, the only available alternative is to run tires with a wider diameter.

Third, there are actually some people who don't think that the 225/50R17 is compliant enough. I happen to be among them. The 235/50R17 will produce a more compliant ride than the 225/50R17. And the traction produced by a Michelin Pilot Sport A/S should more than make up for the increased sidewall height.

Hope that answers your questions.

ABS

YSKSE,

That does answer my question. Thanks for the quick response. Are there any other decent tires worth considering in the 235/50 size besides the Michelin? I might be interested in something less expensive . . .

jjs

Definitely agree with this one! That is why I am running 225 55/17's and am perfectly happy with them. Look good, fill the fender nicely, handle crappy Houston roads well enough, and since I don't autocross, are plenty responsive for handling considerations.

y2kse

iTrader: (1)

The only other tires I'm familiar with in the 235/50 size are the Pirelli PZero System Asimmetrico and the Pirelli P6000. You can get specs on those at Tirerack.com.

exunaja

$2 per tire??? woaaa that's a steal

exunaja

for 20-30 more per tire you can get a pilot A/S.

y2kse

iTrader: (1)

Roger that!

exunaja

rain just started here in Ft. worth.
I will try the pilot capability in the wet weather soon..
I'll report my finding tommorow..
hmmm

Erwin

CHAZMAX

Though this is correct...

One thing that has not been mentioned is:
Since the 235/50/17 tire will be approx. 1.5% slower than OEM, then the odometer will read 1.5% less miles than it accurately should. Thus for every 1000 miles, you will have shaved 15 miles of the odometer!

Not much, but yet another reason for the Pilots.

Galo

Y2KseV...I dunno that I agree with you that a 235 will be more compliant than the 225 because the 235 is a 96 load rated tire versus a 94 load rating for the 225. If that is due to some additional internal structure within the tire that could negate the added flexibility from 4mm additional sidewall.

Also for all to keep in mind, the diameter change between this tire and the stock Potenza is not 1.5%, it's 2.2%: 26.6 inches versus 25.9 inches and while that does fill the wheel well better, it also effectively 'lengthens' the gear ratios; it essentially makes every gear 2.2% longer. Will help mileage but will definitely be detrimental to acceleration, particularly in the top gears.

Me? I'm staying with the softer-riding, more compliant, less aggressive -and stock diameter MXM4s....dying for them to get here

lcj2002se

Hey Guys, Has anybody tried the Goodyear F1 GS D2's ?? It has a neat lookin tread design. What do you guys think???

2K1HoMax

just a question, since now there is more rotational mass, is there that big of a diff on loss of power, or its the same? peace

Don2000g

Those 235/50/17 Michelin Pilot Sport AS look awesome. These are the EXACT TIRES that I've purchased. They should reach my local Tire Corral on Friday. Can't wait! Thanks so much for the pics. You did an excellent job of posting pics with different angles and comparing them to the crappy RE 92s.

MaxedOut2g

hod up...235/50/17 will rub if my car is dropped? im on progress springs...i was actually ready...
atw

y2kse

iTrader: (1)

Interesting post, Galo. I'm not sure what the relationship is between load rating and compliance. I know that both are related to the amount of air the tire can hold. Obviously a 235/50R17 can hold more air than a 225/50R17. Given that they both have the same aspect ratio, it seems reasonable to assume that the 235/50 would be more compliant than the 225/50. But I don't know that for a fact.

Your point about lengthening the gear ratios is valid. I wonder just how detrimental to acceleration running the wider diameter tire will be. I suspect it won't be too noticeable. Perhaps Erwin could give us a report on that.

Keep us posted on those MXM4s.

2K1HoMax

its not the width that does anything, all that does is increase the contact patch giving u better handeling, braking, and accleration. but its the overall diamter of the wheel increasing whats goin to add to the rotaional mass and make it harder to turn the wheel, its also goin to slighty give u and error in the speedometer, which is quite normal as well. im just gonna try to get a larger rim, thinner tires
(which in terms is plus sizing) but im gonna try to get as close as a match to the stock overall diamter of the wheel and tire combined. the closest one o stock that ive found for the 225/50/17 that matches within 0.XXX % is the 245/35/19 almost exactly the same overall. its just slightly larger. what site was it on..... http://www.5thgenmaximas.com/
go to the tire and wheel calculator. mybad if i listed any wrong info. just throwin in my .02 peace

y2kse

iTrader: (1)

What is the basis for your contention, 2K1HoMax? A wider tire with the same aspect ratio should have a taller sidewall height, hence more air capacity and greater compliance.

Quote:

its the overall diamter of the wheel increasing whats goin to add to the rotaional mass

And a 19" tire/rim combo with precisely the same overall diameter as a 17" tire/rim combo isn't going to increase the rotational mass?

Galo

..this rotational mass thing.
If I faintly remember my Dynamics class (more years ao than I wanna admit to) the rotational mass would change if a) the overall weight of the unit was greater and b) the weight's distribution within the wheel/tire assembly moves outwards from the center of the wheel.

Given that tires are usually heavier than wheels (good wheels, et least) it's intuitive that yes a 19" wheel could have more rotational inertia than a 17" diameter assembly of equal weight because both the wheel's rim as well as the tire are farther away from the hub -but it would be a ***** to calculate the overall impact would be..maybe a much yourger (fresher) en-ga-neer could figure it out