![]() | |
![]() |
| | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
| |||
| |||
|
#2
| |||
| |||
|
|
So why are all the auto makers putting bigger and bigger P-metrics on their trucks now (P265/70R17 seems to be typical) instead of narrow load range D tires? |
#3
| |||
| |||
|
|
On Thu, 06 Aug 2009 11:43:35 -0500, zxcvbob <zxcvbob (AT) charter (DOT) net wrote: So why are all the auto makers putting bigger and bigger P-metrics on their trucks now (P265/70R17 seems to be typical) instead of narrow load range D tires? Don't know if this is naive or not, but I would imagine that the wider tire would give you a bigger contact patch and especially at a lower pressure, more traction - all other things being equal. |
#4
| |||
| |||
|
|
My 2001 Silverado C1500 has never gotten over 19 MPG, and 19 was only once on a long highway trip when I wasn't in a hurry. Usually it gets about 15 or 16 in the summer and 11 in the winter. (I think part of the problem is the oxygenated gas they sell up here doesn't have as much energy as straight gasoline) The original equipment tires were General P255/70R16's and the door placard says to keep 35 pounds of air in them. These tire always had good traction on dry pavement, mediocre in rain, and were terrible in the winter. I put four LT215/85R16 all-season radials on a couple of weeks ago. Been experimenting with different tire pressures to get it to handle right -- ended up with 55 pounds in the fronts and 50 in the rears. And the ride is not noticeably rougher than it was with the old tires. With 55 in the rear tires, it gets scary going around a curve on a rough road if there's no weight in the back. I can increase them to 60 or 65 when I'm hauling. I just checked the gas mileage for the first time yesterday and I got 18.4 mpg! That doesn't sound like much, but it's at least a 15% improvement and it didn't cost me anything because I needed new tires anyway. This was about half highway driving and half stop-n-go city driving. It might actually break 20 now on the highway (and they should give me better winter traction too because they are narrower.) So why are all the auto makers putting bigger and bigger P-metrics on their trucks now (P265/70R17 seems to be typical) instead of narrow load range D tires? Bob |
#5
| |||
| |||
|
|
zxcvbob wrote: My 2001 Silverado C1500 has never gotten over 19 MPG, and 19 was only once on a long highway trip when I wasn't in a hurry. Usually it gets about 15 or 16 in the summer and 11 in the winter. (I think part of the problem is the oxygenated gas they sell up here doesn't have as much energy as straight gasoline) The original equipment tires were General P255/70R16's and the door placard says to keep 35 pounds of air in them. These tire always had good traction on dry pavement, mediocre in rain, and were terrible in the winter. I put four LT215/85R16 all-season radials on a couple of weeks ago. Been experimenting with different tire pressures to get it to handle right -- ended up with 55 pounds in the fronts and 50 in the rears. And the ride is not noticeably rougher than it was with the old tires. With 55 in the rear tires, it gets scary going around a curve on a rough road if there's no weight in the back. I can increase them to 60 or 65 when I'm hauling. I just checked the gas mileage for the first time yesterday and I got 18.4 mpg! That doesn't sound like much, but it's at least a 15% improvement and it didn't cost me anything because I needed new tires anyway. This was about half highway driving and half stop-n-go city driving. It might actually break 20 now on the highway (and they should give me better winter traction too because they are narrower.) So why are all the auto makers putting bigger and bigger P-metrics on their trucks now (P265/70R17 seems to be typical) instead of narrow load range D tires? Bob Did you lookup the rolling radius of the two tires in question? If your new tires have a larger rolling radius you simply changed your overall drivetrain gearing to a lower effective ratio which will improve MPG at the expense of some towing / hauling capacity. It will also affect your speedometer and odometer accuracy so it should be recalibrated. You could actually do this deliberately if you wanted and had a programmer handy to correct the calibration, have a truck with a relatively high axle ratio for towing capacity, and have a second set of tires/wheels with a notably larger radius to swap on when not towing for better MPG. Similar effect could be achieved with an add-on overdrive gearbox, but that's a lot more complex a task. |
#6
| |||
| |||
|
|
Pete C. wrote: zxcvbob wrote: My 2001 Silverado C1500 has never gotten over 19 MPG, and 19 was only once on a long highway trip when I wasn't in a hurry. Usually it gets about 15 or 16 in the summer and 11 in the winter. (I think part of the problem is the oxygenated gas they sell up here doesn't have as much energy as straight gasoline) The original equipment tires were General P255/70R16's and the door placard says to keep 35 pounds of air in them. These tire always had good traction on dry pavement, mediocre in rain, and were terrible in the winter. I put four LT215/85R16 all-season radials on a couple of weeks ago. Been experimenting with different tire pressures to get it to handle right -- ended up with 55 pounds in the fronts and 50 in the rears. And the ride is not noticeably rougher than it was with the old tires. With 55 in the rear tires, it gets scary going around a curve on a rough road if there's no weight in the back. I can increase them to 60 or 65 when I'm hauling. I just checked the gas mileage for the first time yesterday and I got 18.4 mpg! That doesn't sound like much, but it's at least a 15% improvement and it didn't cost me anything because I needed new tires anyway. This was about half highway driving and half stop-n-go city driving. It might actually break 20 now on the highway (and they should give me better winter traction too because they are narrower.) So why are all the auto makers putting bigger and bigger P-metrics on their trucks now (P265/70R17 seems to be typical) instead of narrow load range D tires? Bob Did you lookup the rolling radius of the two tires in question? If your new tires have a larger rolling radius you simply changed your overall drivetrain gearing to a lower effective ratio which will improve MPG at the expense of some towing / hauling capacity. It will also affect your speedometer and odometer accuracy so it should be recalibrated. You could actually do this deliberately if you wanted and had a programmer handy to correct the calibration, have a truck with a relatively high axle ratio for towing capacity, and have a second set of tires/wheels with a notably larger radius to swap on when not towing for better MPG. Similar effect could be achieved with an add-on overdrive gearbox, but that's a lot more complex a task. Yes I did. (I thought about putting 7.50R16 or 235/85R16 tires on for just that reason) The LT215/85's have exactly the same rolling radius as the original P255/70's. I checked my speedometer yesterday with a GPS and it's dead-on. :-) Bob |
#7
| |||
| |||
|
|
My 2001 Silverado C1500 has never gotten over 19 MPG, and 19 was only once on a long highway trip when I wasn't in a hurry. Usually it gets about 15 or 16 in the summer and 11 in the winter. (I think part of the problem is the oxygenated gas they sell up here doesn't have as much energy as straight gasoline) The original equipment tires were General P255/70R16's and the door placard says to keep 35 pounds of air in them. These tire always had good traction on dry pavement, mediocre in rain, and were terrible in the winter. I put four LT215/85R16 all-season radials on a couple of weeks ago. Been experimenting with different tire pressures to get it to handle right -- ended up with 55 pounds in the fronts and 50 in the rears. And the ride is not noticeably rougher than it was with the old tires. With 55 in the rear tires, it gets scary going around a curve on a rough road if there's no weight in the back. I can increase them to 60 or 65 when I'm hauling. I just checked the gas mileage for the first time yesterday and I got 18.4 mpg! That doesn't sound like much, but it's at least a 15% improvement and it didn't cost me anything because I needed new tires anyway. This was about half highway driving and half stop-n-go city driving. It might actually break 20 now on the highway (and they should give me better winter traction too because they are narrower.) So why are all the auto makers putting bigger and bigger P-metrics on their trucks now (P265/70R17 seems to be typical) instead of narrow load range D tires? |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |