How do you know that the ride isn’t more affected by the suspension than the sidewall height?
2 Likes
Doing my part to get to 400!
1 Like
Heading to 400!
My 12 year old 4X4 half ton truck with OEM 65 series tires handles better than nearly any 60s stock American car.
Over the years I have read questionable reviews. Example, in the early 90s I don’t remember which magazine, a full size Ford was tested. The author asked “When will Detroit learn there is no need for a two ton sedan”, or words to that effect. Same issue, a different tester praised a Mercedes, that cost twice as much, weighted more. In almost every measured test, the Ford outperformed the M-B.
When I bought my 2001 Ranger I got the 3.0L, a “consumer” magazine stated the 4.0L did not offer much more performance! Later I drove a 4L, boy was that magazine wrong.
2 Likes
Because the suspension isn’t the part of the car in direct contact with the driving surface.
They are probably leaving that auto parts store you like so much 
3 Likes
I tell ya what, take any given old RWD Caprice (you pick) and drive it with your 70-75 series profile of YOUR choice and drive it, then without changing anything else, now put on a set of 20’s with a set of 40 series tires and go drive it, now put the stock wheels/tires (again, you picked them) back on but now remove all 4 shocks and do the exact same test drive, but make sure it is a real drive with bumps and rough roads and such, then put the shocks back on (still your choice of wheel tire combo) and now cut 3 rounds out of the coil springs and drive it again, again same drive…
Now tell us that the tire sidewall ratio makes a bigger difference than the suspension does… I have driven vehicles with all 4 shocks 100% blown out, as well as strut suspension vehicles with all 4 coil springs removed, as well as with low pro tires, the suspension made a bigger difference in the ride than the tire…
That being said, years ago Acura speced Bridgestone X tires for it’s whatever SUV, they took the R&D vehicle to a trac and drove it around and then pulled it back to the trailer and removed the wheels/tires and moved them straight to the ground and removed the struts and took them behind closed doors (A/C probably) and then put the struts back on, then the tires and drove it again, yes they fine tuned the struts to the tires, not the tires to the suspension… But I don’t care if you put 13" or 36" tires on a vehicle, if the suspension is crap, so will be the ride… Now once the suspension is right, well then tires can/will make a difference..
1 Like
No, but it’s what’s keeping the parts that are in direct contact with the driving surface that way!
1 Like
Back to the Case tractor, with tall, narrow tires, guess where the suspension is located.
Just doing my part to get it to 400.
1 Like
The suspension is in the direct path between the tires and your rear. It has a huge effect on ride. Greater than the tires. The path is tires - suspension - chassis structure - seats - you. A parallel path skipping the seats ends at your hands and feet.
2 Likes
Of course, you are correct, but I’m beginning to think that our tire-talking “friend” is trolling us. Is it really possible that someone believes the suspension’s design to have zero effect on ride quality?
1 Like
Maybe we can add a topic to the discussion.
What ever happened to the metric tires/wheels Ford came out with in the 80’s? I believe Michelin was the only one (I think) that made those metric tires for the Ford wheels.
What was the supposed benefit to that system? Were the tires any better? Did the metric wheels enhance handling in any way?
That only lasted a few years, didn’t it?
No, tires too wide for Chris.
Yes, I remember those rim/tire option for Mustangs, I suspect few owners opted for them.
Yep, both Ford and BMW (and a few others) used them for a few years, more info here:
Michelin’s Infamous TRX Tire Was Way More Clever Than You Realize
1 Like
One of the others was Jaguar–which was owned by Ford from 1989-2008. When the Jaguar XJ40 (slogan: The British car to beat the world! ) was introduced, it featured metric-size tires, despite the fact that every other marque in The UK specified Imperial-size tires.
Only Michelin (and one other mfr, which I don’t recall) made tires to fit that Jag, and this led to smaller tire availability and higher tire prices for the folks who had the misfortune to buy that problem-prone Jag model.
This was the XJ40, which looked very similar to the model that it replaced.
Don’t forget about the Honda Odyssey Michelin PAX tire/wheel combo…
235-710R460A
PAX was a cruel joke, imo
1 Like