If you’re talking about things like F1, they don’t use low profile mainly because the rules say they can’t. There’s also something to be said about the extra damping you get from higher sidewalls, which gets important in a car where you don’t have much room for proper dampers.
There was talk something like 3 years ago of going from 13 inch to 18/19 inch wheels in F1 which would have given the tires the low profile look, and Michelin was really pushing for that, but it didn’t happen.
If the tire companies could join in a conspiracy I think it would be to have only 3 or 4 wheel sizes and 3 or 4 tread and wear designs of tires.
I seem to remember Cooper Tire closed a plant that made 15 inch tires because it was to expensive to refit it for the 16 to 18 inch tires that cars were coming with.
I agree, not everything is a vast conspiracy. Manufacturers make the products they make because that’s what the consumers will buy, if they get it wrong, they are stuck with “another Edsel”.
In the late 1980’s, I called on Ford for a major tire manufacturer. At the time, 60 series tires were considered low profile.
It was the car manufacturer who specified the tire size (and, of course, the wheel size!). Tire manufacturers could suggest tire sizing - and they did if they thought it would give them a competitive advantage - but ultimately, it was the car manufacturer’s decision and they opened the development work to pretty much all their tire suppliers. The only leverage the tire manufacturers had was price - that is, a low price could pretty much guarantee getting the business.
But during that time frame, it was rolling resistance that was the key characteristic - and the car manufacturers occasionally specified values that were too low and they got tires that didn’t wear very well. The car manufacturers of course didn’t care because they weren’t providing a warrantee on the tires. It was the tire manufacturers who bore the brunt of the customer complaints. The tire manufacturers learned how to gently push back if things went too far.
I should also tell you that the car manufacturers didn’t like unusual tire sizing - except to say, they did like the idea that the consumer couldn’t buy a replacement tire that wasn’t built to OE specs. Only the shortsighted car managers ignored the fact if there was a large enough demand, ANY tire manufacturer could produce a tire in ANY size and supply it to their dealers.
So if there was a conspiracy, it was due to fuel economy.
“The proliferation of low-profile tires is evidence that form often wins over function. This automotive fashion statement is wholly detached from our current reality of ever heavier vehicles pounding over increasingly derelict roads, and drivers pay the price when forced to replace damaged tires and/or wheels.”
[ intro to the article “Reinventing the Wheel” in Car and Driver July 2018, page 22, describing Michelin’s development of a wheel with flexible flanges that “deform during a pothole strike to protect both the tire sidewalls and the wheel.”]
Wouldn’t it be simpler to “reinvent” the 60 profile tire and the steel rim?
It seems like we are constantly inventing solutions for problems that we invented in the first place.
I like the alloy wheels and don’t want steel rims with wheel covers that fly off into who knows where. I will agree that if the vehicle you want has 45 or 40 you should be able to have 50 or 60 installed at a reasonable price before leaving with your new vehicle.
As they say, ‘to each his own,’ And yes, within reason the trend does offer some improved performance for those who enjoy pushing at the limits. My biggest criticism is that because they are a profitable trendy option they are becoming original equipment on even the lower end of the price market and the vast majority of car buyers would opt for the old steel wheels and 60 series tires and save the cost difference but they are getting scarce at dealerships. .
Yes, I agree, that is the problem. As I said, at some time in the near future (or today) you will be unable to buy a car without very low profile tires. Which adds to the cost and subtracts from safety.
When I bought a new Subaru a few years ago, I found that to get the roof rails, I had to get 16" Al alloy wheels, as opposed to the base 15" steel ones. 16" I can live with, but the trend is to larger and larger as the base model.
The irony is that I have not used the roof rails to date.
My main complaint about low profile tires is that almost every automaker uses them on top trims. So if you want amenities like power seats, a moonroof, the better infotainment system etc, you have to take the low profile tires. I find that in my area of New England the roads are not compatible with very low profile tires (every tire today is considered “low profile” compared to a tire of 20 years ago). Does a 2018 Honda Accord need 40-series rubber to handle its mission? I tested an AWD wagon this past week with 35-series tires and its ride was “ruined” in my opinion. Some performance cars do better with very low profile tires, but it’s a shame most mainstream buyers who want a top trim have no choice but to take them. Here’s a BestRide story along these lines if interested.
Perfect example db4690. I recently tested the new 2019 Corolla Hatchback SE. Its ride was splendid. Really top-notch. But manual cloth seats and limited creature comforts. My fellow testers had the only other trim, the XSE trim with the power seats and other things I would value as a buyer, but with the lower profile tires and they all seemed to report it had an overly firm ride. Shame.