Oh, you mean TRX. That was a Michelin “innovation”.
And they appeared on more than just Ford. Ferrari, BMW, and more!
There was no advantage - except maybe to Michelin.
So that entire size is expressed in mm: “460” = 18.1 inches. A decent rim diameter for a minivan.
I have no idea what the middle figure “710” represents. Definitely not aspect or sidewall height.
710 is the Overall tire diameter in mm.
2 Likes
Thanks. I knew you would know! lol
So that size designation format omits any mention of aspect ratio.
Not exactly. From the overall diameter, you can calculate the aspect ratio.
710mm = Overall tire diameter
460 = Wheel diameter
235 = Tire overall width.
710 - 460 = 250mm sidewall height.
235/250 = 0.94 which is impossible! Even I would not advocate for a 90-series tire (except maybe a bicycle lol).
Dividing 460/710 I get 0.647, or a reasonable 65-class tire.
Seems more intuitive to calculate it the former way (tire width by sidwall height), but the answer I got was ridiculous!
Just sayin the last thing I ever look at on a car is the tire size. When I need tires I just get what was on there. I don’t race because I don’t want to break anything.
The Cruze is a 2018 RS with the stick rims, very short sidewall. The malibu I do not know.
710 - 460 = 250
250 / 2 = 125
Aspect ratio: 125 / 235 = 0.5319
1 Like
And your not going to tell me that low profile tires do not use less rubber to make. These tire companies LOVE low profile tires, half the rubber, same cost. All because people want to look slick or sporty.
Thats the problem with America, everyone wants to look hip or sporty without the means to truly afford being cool.
Being hip costs ALOT of money, blowing out tores and rims like its 1918 in a model T all while paying extra for the privilege to have fragile tires and rims.
It should be the first thing.
I treat any vehicle I operate like an appliance:
I look at the documentation first. That documentation is on the drivers door pillar, on one or more placards, and on the tire sidewall (gross load info.) Under the hood, any placards there describing fluids or engine specs.
Then I make any necessary adjusts: Add oil or air where needed, then go on my way.
My mom’s Civic EX-L has stock 215/45R17
She has yet to ruin a rim or tire due to potholes
Gimme a break, Rick
She’s 83 years old and was NOT interested in looking cool, hip, etc.
That particular car was optioned the way she wanted
1 Like
I bet she would love the car more if it had 185/75 r14s on it. Better ride.
Do you have potholes in California? The roads here are TERRIBLE! Absolutely terrible.
1 Like
There are four good reasons to run that size on a grocery-getter/ church-goer:
Appearances.
Appearances.
Appearances, and
Appearances!
1 Like
I have a new tack to take on this tire aspect debate:
Let’s look at wide/narrow tire preference as a correlation of age.
Just provide your decade, and preference for high or low aspect tires.
Me: In my thirties, for drivability reasons, I was hawking the lowest profile tires of the day.
Now, in my fifties, I’m all for higher profile, up to 70-series.
Next!
Enough already!
Of course the wheels had to be replaced when it was time to replace the tires… The same Honda Odyssey w/different trim level also could run a 235/65R16 and it was the closest to the PAX overall tire size…
I couldn’t agree more, it was fun informing customers that their worn out tires was about to cost them a lot more money than they had budgeted for due to the fact that they also had to buy new wheels… 
Actually, Nevada (post 368) might have a point, and Capri can weigh in:
He divides the difference between tire height and sidewall by half,
resulting in an aspect ratio of 50-55.
So who’s correct?
Read my post again, I said it was the closest to the overall size..
That means that a 235/70R16 would have been to tall and thrown the speedo off, and a 235/60R16 would have been to short and would have thrown the speedo off… We could have gone with a 235/55R18 and that would have been the closest tire size as well as overall size, but the 235/65R16 was the most common OEM size for the Odyssey at the time… BTW, a 235/60R17 would have been a good match for the overall size also…
Overall might not be the best word here, maybe it needed a 2nd word like Overall Diameter or Overall Circumference…
For that model year, base model had 195/65R15, EX had 205/55R16 and EX-L had 215/45R17
The EX-L had the options she wanted
So there you go
I live in Los Angeles
So the answer is YES
We have potholes
The roads are bad
But as I said earlier, she hasn’t ruined any rims or tires driving over potholes
1 Like