We recently purchased a new minivan. The tires are fairly new, but cheap and rather noisy. Our existing van has fairly new Michelin tires that we are happy with.
We would like to replace the tires on the new minivan with those from the old. The new van uses 215-70-R15 tires, and the set we want to replace them with are 215-65-R15.
I think it will work, but would like to get some feedback about what the downside of doing this might be.
as long as the wheels have the same lug pattern you should be ok. I dont see a problem with it, but some of these pros might have more to say, cause I dont know everything by a long shot.
Firmer ride, increased susceptability to pothole damage, odd aesthetics, and an inaccurate odometer and speedometer. Long term, your odometer will register mileage slightly faster, which may affect trade in value a wee bit.
There’s no adverse mechanical aspects, unless your new van has run-flat tires (no spare) and you get a flat. You may be stuck.
That’s really helpful - thank you. I understand that the “65” tires will be slightly shorter in height. Do you imagine the seemingly small difference going from the “70” to the “65” would be significant in terms of ride firmness? Would the better quality tires make up for that in anyway? Thanks again.
In truth, much of that depends on the individual tires as well as the vehicle’s suspension. Two different brands of the same size tires with all the same ratings will even ride differently. The difference here is very small.
Perhaps the most important factor to check is whether or not the new van has run-flat tires. If so, replacing them with tires that are not run-flats could leave you stranded.
Thanks again. The new van does not have run-flat tires, so that won’t be a problem. I appreciate your help!
What everyone failed to mention so far is the load rating of the tires, and that is an extremely important detail.
Even though the size of the two sets of tires is only slightly different, it is possible that the “substitute” tires do not have the proper load rating. Your minivan needs a tire with at least a 101 load rating, and putting any tires with a lower load rating on it will put you in danger of blowouts at high speed.
Do yourself a favor and check the “substitute” tires.
They should be 215-65-R15 101T or 215-65-R15 102T. If they are not of this specification, then you are taking a big chance by using those tires.
Thanks for pointing that out. I can’t seem to locate anything that indicates what the manufacturer recommends for the load rating on the 2005 Kia Sedona. There are no specifications listed in the manual or on the door plate.
The current cheap tires on the Sedona (we bought it used) have a 97 - the Michelin tires are a 95.
Given the uncertainty, we are probably just going to be safe and pop for new tires.
Thanks!
Your OEM tires were rated at serv desc/load rating of 98H, so any number higher than that should be OK.
Nebraska Tire’s subsitution chart says this substitution is OK, size-wise. I would go ahead and try it.
You can also take the exact brand and size information and do a more thorough calculation using the tirerack.com tire guide calculation and see how it comes out. I merely used the Nebraska Tire one since it is convenient.
That would be going down in load carrying capacity, which increases the risk of a load related tire failure, which sometimes has tragic results.
I recommend against this move.
The tires you propose are nearly and inch less diameter with not necessarily better handling. They may be lower profile which potentially helps, but decreases cushioning, affects abs, traction control settings and lowers load capacity. YOU BOUGHT A MINIVAN to use as a hauler, not a sports car. For the potential loss of some safety load caring and performance, why would you do something counter productive to the design intent of a new car…to save a few dollars on something worth $25K. Unless they are recommended in the owners manual, and you plan on never carrying kids, get into an accident and be held accountable…don’t do it. The is a nearly 1 inch difference in diameter and 3.3% difference in overall performance. You can live with that in a PU truck…not a car load of kids who depend upon your safe driving choices
Practically, some performance difference, realistically, don’t be a FOOL !
If you’re going to mess around and take a chance…go bigger, not smaller with tires on discretionary cars; But don’t mess with the safety of a minivan…the LAST vehicle you want to be cheap about.
If you don’t like the tires you have on your car, get BETTER ones the same size, not “dumb” ones.
So your “new” Kia Sedona is actually a 5 year old one.
As the old saying tells us, The Devil is in the details, so your failure to provide accurate information up front about this vehicle led me to provide inaccurate load rating info for its tires.
Jayhawkroy is likely correct that your “new” 2005 Sedona calls for 98H-rated tires.
If your Sedona was actually the 2010 model that you originally implied that it was, then my statement that you need tires rated at least for a 101 load rating was correct.
In any event, a 95 or 97 load rating is not sufficient for this vehicle. Unless you want to put your family in a vehicle that will be very prone to blow-outs at high speed, do not cheap-out on your tires. As Michelin says in their ads, “There’s a lot riding on your tires”, and this is much more than just a cute slogan.
And, for everyone’s benefit, the next time that you post a question in this forum, could you kindly provide accurate information about your vehicle in the first post, rather than waiting until many people have responded before revealing the real facts?