-
There were many reasons for the change of the site software, the biggest was security. The age of the old software also meant no server updates for certain programs. There are many benefits to the new software, one of the biggest is the mobile functionality. Ill fix up some stuff in the coming days, we'll also try to get some of the old addons back or the data imported back into the site like the garage. To create a thread or to reply with a post is basically the same as it was in the prior software. The default style of the site is light colored, but i temporarily added a darker colored style, to change you can find a link at the bottom of the site.
175/55 or 165/60
- Thread starter MrBones
- Start date
Poseidon
New member
I always joke around saying the tape measures at different manufacturers are different sizes. It’s true tho. I think it is similar to how some manufacturers have tighter tolerances on their parts than other manufacturers.
As for tire sizes being different, a good example is a dunlop E3 250 rear tire sometimes used on the M109R is wider than a Metzeler 260 on the same wheel. There are also tires of the same width where the shorter aspect ratio is actually a taller tire then the one with the taller ratio.
How can the size differences come to be?? Well..... apart from what Posiedon suggested (which I feel is a distinct possibility!! :lecturef_smilie: ) the size printed on the sidewall is only a NOMINAL size, so there can be some differences either way due to that just being the closest nominal size the manufacturer thought was suitable, and they might have all sorts of reasons for going up or down to pick THAT particular size!! :shocked:
But then there are also often REAL differences in the way some manufacturers arrive at the closest size in the first place!! :banghead: Some manufacturers assemble the tire to the carcass level & then use whichever nominal size is closest to that as the basis for the size, THEN they add the tread layer, & the tread plies can easily add 18mm or 3/4 of an inch to the rolling RADIUS, which can mean a 36mm or 1.4" difference OR MORE in the rolling diameter - and that can vary significantly depending on what type of tread plies/pattern is being applied!! Other manufacturers might assemble the tire the whole way, & use the carcass PLUS the tread plies to form the basis of their sizing. The largest variation I personnally have encountered was an extreme Mud tire that was a little over 50mm/2" LARGER in diameter than the nominal size printed on the sidewall, but some of the other tire testers/drivers I've worked with have told me of tires with even greater variances - and these variances aren't always LARGER than the nominal sizes; I have seen quite a few tires that were somewhat smaller than their nominal sidewall size!! :yikes:
So while the nominal sizes might be a good start for initial comparison purposes, before you commit/spend your hard earned $$, you are best to look at/compare physical dimensions &/or measurements like the actual tire rolling diameter or maybe even something like the number of revs per mile - any PHYSICAL measurement from the tire's specs is going to be far more reliable than just comparing or going by the Nominal sizing printed on the sidewall. Or you could only choose from those tires and sizes that others have already tried successfully on their Spyders... but you need to match brands, nominal sizes, tire types, tread patterns, everything, or there might just be too much difference!! :gaah:
But then there are also often REAL differences in the way some manufacturers arrive at the closest size in the first place!! :banghead: Some manufacturers assemble the tire to the carcass level & then use whichever nominal size is closest to that as the basis for the size, THEN they add the tread layer, & the tread plies can easily add 18mm or 3/4 of an inch to the rolling RADIUS, which can mean a 36mm or 1.4" difference OR MORE in the rolling diameter - and that can vary significantly depending on what type of tread plies/pattern is being applied!! Other manufacturers might assemble the tire the whole way, & use the carcass PLUS the tread plies to form the basis of their sizing. The largest variation I personnally have encountered was an extreme Mud tire that was a little over 50mm/2" LARGER in diameter than the nominal size printed on the sidewall, but some of the other tire testers/drivers I've worked with have told me of tires with even greater variances - and these variances aren't always LARGER than the nominal sizes; I have seen quite a few tires that were somewhat smaller than their nominal sidewall size!! :yikes:
So while the nominal sizes might be a good start for initial comparison purposes, before you commit/spend your hard earned $$, you are best to look at/compare physical dimensions &/or measurements like the actual tire rolling diameter or maybe even something like the number of revs per mile - any PHYSICAL measurement from the tire's specs is going to be far more reliable than just comparing or going by the Nominal sizing printed on the sidewall. Or you could only choose from those tires and sizes that others have already tried successfully on their Spyders... but you need to match brands, nominal sizes, tire types, tread patterns, everything, or there might just be too much difference!! :gaah:
Last edited:
jcthorne
Well-known member
For the same reason a 2x4 is not 2" by 4". The size numbers are nominal. Not actual dimensions. For actual dimensions of specific tires, the manufactures publish that data but its different between brands and between lines within brands.
Rattlebars
New member
Those have a inside and outside tread pattern. Stupid question #1 - is that a problem as it would have one mounted "backward" and one mounted forward?
PW2013STL
Active member
Rattlebars
New member
Similar threads
