General Higher profile on 18" wheel ?

[s130]

I just spoke to a guy on facebook. He was in same position. He did not go to 16" because it would have meant swapping over the tpms too - extra expense. I had forgotten about tpms.

On the 500X the TPMS is a passive system. There are no pressure sensors within the tyre chamber. Passive TPMS uses the ABS system to monitor wheel rotational differences where an under inflated tyre will deliver different results to the other normally inflated tyres.

 

[johnbushell]

I think the price quoted looks a bit high for steel wheels. I think you could pick almost any, I can't see why they'd have to be fiat 500x specific.

I think the 16 inch alloys off the pop/ pop star (cant remember) would maybe be your best bet. But then there's other Fiat 16 inch alloys say from the 500. The 500 on 16's has the same problem as the 500x on 18's, people buy them and then find the ride too hard.

Saying that to get a good price you'll probably have to wait a bit and see what pops up.

500 wheels are 4 bolt and will not fit the 500X.

 

[cowabunga]

I just spoke to a guy on facebook. He was in same position. He did not go to 16" because it would have meant swapping over the tpms too - extra expense. I had forgotten about tpms.

But...........he went for 225x55x18 - up to 55 from 45 profile. Fitted fine with no fouling. Gearing was fine with only a small deviation on speedo. He says comfort was noticeably improved.

So, once the fronts wear out - I might try that ( all round obviously ) - wont be long as I am doing 1500 to 2000 miles per month !

I compared the 45's to the 55's and there's a 6.4% variance on the speedo which will run through to the mileometer. I'd be surprised if this was legal.

http://www.willtheyfit.com/index.ph...2=55&wheel_size=18&wheel_width=7-5&offset2=40

 

[NitramA]

Your wheels are what I'd say are the standard cross plus version, most I see have those fitted.

Another option might be to change the dampers, a thread was started here by a frustrated owner but a resolution wasn't found.

https://www.fiatforum.com/500x/442709-500x-ride-quality.html

Yes that frustrated owner was me!!
There's still no sign of alternative dampers, or at least not ones that increase comfort.

I've been watching this thread with interest as I'm still struggling (on & off) with the ride.
I like the idea of the increased profile on the tyre. I think I'd even make allowances for upsetting the speedo.

To be truthful I also struggle with the non linear power delivery so I think I'll suffer for another 6 months until the cars 2 years old and seek out something else.
Its a real shame as other than a loose battery connection when new its really been a very reliable car.(touch wood).

 

[s130]

Yes that frustrated owner was me!!
There's still no sign of alternative dampers, or at least not ones that increase comfort.

I've been watching this thread with interest as I'm still struggling (on & off) with the ride.
I like the idea of the increased profile on the tyre. I think I'd even make allowances for upsetting the speedo.

Just to add a little additional variation to the tyre size discussion then the tyre load rating index can affect the ride. The higher the rating then the tyre will probably have a stiffer and less flexible sidewall structure that can lead to a harder ride.

e.g. For my old Fiat Croma 2005 when I changed tyres the original fitment was:

Bridgestone Turanza215/50 R17 91W (91=615kg)

which I replaced with:

Kumho Ecsta Sport KU31 - 215/50ZR17 95W XL (95=690kg)

and the ride was firmer!

For a 2015 500X the tyre options were:

215 / 60 R16 95H (690kg)
215 / 55 R17 94V (670kg)
225 / 45 R18 91V (615kg)
225 / 45 R18 91Y (615kg)

all with same tyre pressures.

Like with the Bridgestone Turanza and Kumho Sport it is not un-common to find that different make same tyre size and speed rating having different Load Indices.

Maximum Axle Weight for a 500X is 1150kg (front) for 1.4MultiAir and 2.0MultiJet which equates to 575kg per wheel. A load index of 89=580kg. A load index of 90=600kg. So Fiats 91V (615kg) has a safe running margin and should be the minimum chosen for any wheel size.

Any scope for manoeuvring depends on tyre manufacturer offerings within each size/profile/speed rating they produce.

Needless to say when "playing" with wheel sizes and tyres expensive mistakes/dislikes can occur. Some find some makes of tyre to be too soft/compliant and lack cornering stability other find some to be too hard or too noisy.

Also not all tyres have the "Rim Protector Lip" so you could find you have a lovely tyre you are very happy with only to get messed up rims!

Lastly there is no such thing as a perfect ride and handling and low noise etc. :devil:

 

[cowabunga]

Yes that frustrated owner was me!!
There's still no sign of alternative dampers, or at least not ones that increase comfort.

I've been watching this thread with interest as I'm still struggling (on & off) with the ride.
I like the idea of the increased profile on the tyre. I think I'd even make allowances for upsetting the speedo.

To be truthful I also struggle with the non linear power delivery so I think I'll suffer for another 6 months until the cars 2 years old and seek out something else.
Its a real shame as other than a loose battery connection when new its really been a very reliable car.(touch wood).

That's unlucky. I though as you hadn't posted for some time you'd perhaps found a solution, surely somebody must make them but I have looked around in the past and there appears to be none.

Non linear power delivery I think is a sign of the times, the smaller the engines the bigger the turbo needs to be, and then a diesel will always pull better at lower revs. I think in your case a lot of the reason for flagging this up is because you previously had a diesel and will be used to running at say 2/3rd's of the revs you are now.

It's not solely a petrol issue though, we had a 1.3mjd 500 before the 500x which was flat below 1,500 revs and then boosted into life above this, very non linear. If anything I prefered a small lancia hire car I'd driven years ago in Italy, had the same engine but was only boosted to about 75bhp, rather than the 95bhp of ours.

I'm happy with our 2l AT9, which HP wise is about the same as the 1.4 petrol but obviously won't be boosted as much.

 

[NitramA]

That's unlucky. I though as you hadn't posted for some time you'd perhaps found a solution, surely somebody must make them but I have looked around in the past and there appears to be none.

Non linear power delivery I think is a sign of the times, the smaller the engines the bigger the turbo needs to be, and then a diesel will always pull better at lower revs. I think in your case a lot of the reason for flagging this up is because you previously had a diesel and will be used to running at say 2/3rd's of the revs you are now.

It's not solely a petrol issue though, we had a 1.3mjd 500 before the 500x which was flat below 1,500 revs and then boosted into life above this, very non linear. If anything I prefered a small lancia hire car I'd driven years ago in Italy, had the same engine but was only boosted to about 75bhp, rather than the 95bhp of ours.

I'm happy with our 2l AT9, which HP wise is about the same as the 1.4 petrol but obviously won't be boosted as much.

I agree with all you say.
Going from a 2litre 190bhp diesel automatic to a 140bhp petrol manual was always going to be a bit of a shock for me.
I think the old saying that there ain’t no substitute for “cubes” applies.

Interestingly my wife has a Panda TA Trekking and I really enjoy driving it on the open road, although it’s a noisy little beastie in town.

 

[cowabunga]

Not sure if youve seen my other posts recently but i got a 500x about 6 weeks ago. 66 Reg, delivery miles.

Being a 2l AT9 cross I think it's a car that would remedy your 2 problems if your thinking of changing soon.

A big car supermarket had 20 of them, about equal numbers of green/ red/ blue. Now they have just 5, one green and 4 red. Some of them have spare wheel, dynamic safety pack, comfort pack installed which is circa £1,500, its easy to tell which ones have.

The only issue is I hink they are early 2016 models and haven't got nav.

£13k. Great price, I love mine.

 

[theshootist]

Well, I have decided to take the plunge...........

Going with 16" wheels. The cheapest I could find Fiat 16" steel wheels was £43 each. Add another £5 per wheel for decent trims.

So, I looked at alloys and found a very nice set with free shipping from Italy at only a few pounds more !!!!

So, they are ordered and on way.

Now to tyres - Fiat put 215x60 on the 16" wheeled 500x - its pretty much identical to the low profile 18". I also looked at 215x65 on the 16" which adds .5" all round for a very small speedo difference and more than enough clearance ( I checked )

I can get Goodyear All Seasons in 60 profile at £120 each but have found a very special one-off offer of four 65" profile Pirelli All Seasons at the bargain price of £60 each !

So, tyres will be ordered tonight once I decide between the two.

Will come back with an update regarding the comfort improvement I manage to achieve.

 

[cowabunga]

The prices now seem more reasonable, I think it's a good deal.

Will be interesting to see what you think when they are on.

 

[s130]

To add a little confusion here I'm wondering if the 500X (with SAT NAV) self calibrates.

When my tyres hit the minimum tread I'll try to remember to do a 3 way test.

Speedo at 60mph on motorway, Sat Nav speed and to cross check a stop watched timed 1.6km motorway marker timed period.

Without access to detailed manufacturer information, much of which is never disclosed to dealer level master technician level, we will be guessing, and as I have done, trying to understand actually what really happens, etc.

OK today, after 2 weeks of not driving my 500X and lower tyre tread depth (half for as new tread depth) I took a few sample SAT Nav vs Speedo readings at/or around 40mph and there is an up to a 2mph difference in readings (speedo high)

Have not done the maths yet wrt rolling radius/distance with new vs worn tread but it now look like there is no self calibration between the units.

What appears to be the case (as suggested by robotdancer) I have an exceptionally accurate speedo when running on new tyres.

I'm happy to agree/conclude there is no self calibration function.

 

[TrevC]

Yes, I found a 2mph difference at 40 too. Full results posted on the other dedicated thread.

 

[cowabunga]

So that's about 5%, I have read circa 6%-8% elsewhere for other speeds.

On the assumption that motorway speed enforcement occurs at 10%+ 2mph = 79mph, what do you guys think is the highest speed one could set cruise control to without being stopped/ fined? 83mph?

 

[s130]

So that's about 5%, I have read circa 6%-8% elsewhere for other speeds.

On the assumption that motorway speed enforcement occurs at 10%+ 2mph = 79mph, what do you guys think is the highest speed one could set cruise control to without being stopped/ fined? 83mph?

My answer is no for 83. When I got my 1st ever speeding ticket after 43 years of driving I'd just finished running my 500X in and chose to do a cruise at 80mph set on cruise control (on a dual carriage way) on the speedo thinking I was safe. Wrong. Ticket and picture in the post for 80mph!

Since then I've set a speed warning for 75mph which gives that extra couple of mph safeguard for when you accelerate to overtake and might not lift as quickly when the alarm goes off.

Personally I now treat the speed as being dead accurate :yuck:

 

[robotdancer]

So that's about 5%, I have read circa 6%-8% elsewhere for other speeds.

On the assumption that motorway speed enforcement occurs at 10%+ 2mph = 79mph, what do you guys think is the highest speed one could set cruise control to without being stopped/ fined? 83mph?

%age calculations for speeding fines were binned years ago even in patrol cars.

 

[TrevC]

Yep, the 10% thing is an urban myth. 71mph can be a fine/speed awareness course.

 

[Alanw47]

Yep, the 10% thing is an urban myth. 71mph can be a fine/speed awareness course.

I have no idea if this is still current but it certainly WAS the official Police guidelines

 

[cowabunga]

Yeah, I think 79 is about right. I've said before ive used a few bmw's over the last few xmas' in which I travel about 1,000 miles mainly on the motorway. Have set the cruise to 8% over and have never had any issues.

That said if I'm on the M40 after the traffic clears around Thame (J5) on the way to Birmingham there's a lot going far quicker than me.

 

[s130]

The 10% + 2 was in the ACPO Speed Enforcement Policy Guidelines 2011-2015. The criteria was also qualified with respect to matters such as dangerous driving, road conditions, traffic etc.

Technically doing 70.0000001mph in a 70 limit is breaking the law for which you can be fined/prosecuted, however clearly there is some common sense that needs to be applied. The guidelines were designed to address this and produce some form of national uniform approach. Police officers have the ability to make a judgment call hence some people getting warnings for some offences, like 1st time cannabis, bad language/swearing at an officer, stopping on double yellow lines etc.

The full legal details of the April 2017 speeding penalties can be found here:https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/item/speeding-revised-2017/

With the new April 2017 changes to speeding penalties I've not seen or heard of any changes in ACPO Guidelines. Also there have been no mass stories in the papers of people complaining for being done at 1mph over a speed limit although they could fined for doing so.

This article http://www.express.co.uk/life-style/cars/806313/Speeding-fines-2017-UK-10-percent-allowance-rule-explainedsuggests the 10% +2 is still the "Rule of Thumb" being adopted by National Police Chiefs' Council (NPCC). Suggest reading the whole article as it talks about "discretion" and practical issues.

To further confuse/confirm/deny anything the Government Crown Prosecution Service website has this current (not redacted) information/guidance: http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/p_to_r/road_traffic_offences_guidance_on_fixed_penalty_notices/#speed

There is no myth in the "guidance" and there is no "myth" that you can not be prosecuted for doing 1mph (or less) over a speed limit. What is true is that you will playing the lottery for exceeding any speed limit

 

[cowabunga]

Thanks for the official line.

I think on a lot of motorways 70 dead on just feels too slow these days, the lorries seem to drive around 55 and the car's 80 or so.

There may have been changes though, I suppose they need to find official solutions however spurious to plug the gap in excessive state spending.

70 mph seems so archaic as well, wasn't it introduced in the 1950's. I reckon you'd be safer in a new car now crashing at 80mph than you would crashing in a 1950's car at 30mph.