Technical 15/16" tyres ride ?

[suzey]

I quite like the 16" round alloys ...can anyone tell me if the ride varies on the 15/16" tyres? ...thanks x

 

[Chris123]

I've got 16s, having driven a demonstrator on 15s. There's not a whole load of difference - a little bit more grip in theory, but not so much you'd be disappointed with 15s. There seems to be a little more tyre noise with 16s too, but again, its not really that much different. Choose the ones you think are prettiest!

 

[suzey]

Cheers Chris

 

[Bhindi]

I stayed with the 15's, I just thought, if thats what the car has been designed to have then that suits me..I didn't want to disrupt the driving balance if that makes any sense... but I'm sure I am probably just being very naive and cautious.. I think also was the increased expence in replacing a larger tyre, but again, thats probably marginal..

I went very girly over the subject I suppose, but chose to focus on spending the money in different ways!

 

[Mollie]

For me, this car is largely about looks, so I've gone for the 16" multispokes.

 

[pearce_jj]

same for me. I'm not sure the rise suffers particularly anyway.

 

[jnoiles]

I've done 21000 miles on my 16" o-spoke Fiat alloys with factory spec contisport tyres and about 4000 miles with a set of 15" Team Dynamics with toyo R888 tyres on them. Both are wearing 195 tyres, the 15" are 50 profile the 16" are 45 profile.

The 15"s have it for ride quality. You're conscious of far less mass flying around at each corner of the car. It absorbs bumps better. It feels generally more chuckable than the 16" wheels. The whole car is less skittish.

The 16"s look better. The grip isn't as good but obviously the track tyres vs road tyres thing comes into it. The ride is crashier on 16" and the gyroscopic effect is more noticeable.

Bear in mind I had a set of 30mm HK lowering springs fitted to mine.

 

[suzey]

Thanks everyone really useful

 

[Bhindi]

Have you decided then Suzey?

 

[percymon]

Choose 16s and you have 12.7mm less rubber between the road and the rim, so the bump absorption is bound to be worse. 16s will also have stiffer sidewalls so perhaps better initial sterring response but again slightly hard ride characteristics.

Whether 16" rims n tyres are heavier than 15"s i don't know, i suspect they are, which will add to unsprung mass and again poorer ride quality.

I do think 16s look better, but its a pesonal choice.

Tyre brand will also make a difference - Dunlops are genrally very quiet and compliant, Contis and Bridgestones aren't particularly quiet. Michelins are middle ground for noise.

 

[baxwalker]

How's about sticking with 15s and lowering the car.

Need to choose springs carefully to retain best ride quality - plenty of threads on here about lowering springs etc.

Just a thought

 

[jnoiles]

How's about sticking with 15s and lowering the car.

Need to choose springs carefully to retain best ride quality - plenty of threads on here about lowering springs etc.

Just a thought

Yeah. Don't use the HK ones. They're wonderful on a track, pants everywhere else. Crashy and horrible.

 

[pearce_jj]

The 15"s have it for ride quality. You're conscious of far less mass flying around at each corner of the car. It absorbs bumps better. It feels generally more chuckable than the 16" wheels. The whole car is less skittish.

I don't understand this, I thought the whole point of larger wheels was because the increase in weight of the alloy is less than the reduction in weight of rubber. Why would touring cars want to increase their unsprung mass?

 

[sikersh]

Sod that, get the 17's

 

[PlopHole]

Sod that, get the 17's

I was gonna suggest that!

 

[percymon]

I don't understand this, I thought the whole point of larger wheels was because the increase in weight of the alloy is less than the reduction in weight of rubber. Why would touring cars want to increase their unsprung mass?

touring car wheels are about £1k each, fiat pay about £30 for an alloy - apples n pears.

 

[AdamP1991]

I don't understand this, I thought the whole point of larger wheels was because the increase in weight of the alloy is less than the reduction in weight of rubber. Why would touring cars want to increase their unsprung mass?

So they can get sodding huge brakes under them would be why.

Plus touring car wheels are (or were) mostly dymags and contain a lot of magnesium making them light but brittle. Not what you want on a road car.

I run 13" steel wheels on my hillclimb car, weigh about 5kgs each which in wheel terms is nothing.

 

[Chris123]

Don't get carried away with the idea that larger wheels are necessarily better. I have 14 inch wheels with 60 profile tyres on my Lotus 7 replica, and they're perfect for the job. Also, Formula 1 cars run 13 inch wheels with high-sidewall tyres, and they don't exactly hang about - I know there's a million other reasons for this, but the point is that bigger wheels aren't always a good idea.
I notice that the basic Pop model comes with 14 inch steel wheels too, so a 15 inch is still "bling"!

 

[jnoiles]

I don't understand this, I thought the whole point of larger wheels was because the increase in weight of the alloy is less than the reduction in weight of rubber. Why would touring cars want to increase their unsprung mass?

Fiat seems to make the standard alloy wheels out of depleted uranium. They weigh a ton.

My 15"s are much lighter than the standard alloys.

 

[tc500]

I've just picked up my new 1.2L on 16" 5 O-spokes, having driven demos on 15's. Can't say the difference is dramatic, but it's noticeable. I'm happy with my choice - the biggest difference (so far) is the way it tracks - slightly "edgier", I'd say. But then......Ive been driving a Smart Cabrio for the last seven years, and if you want a harsh ride that is definitely the car for you! (good car though.....!) Hope that helps.