Is it true that low profile tires are ass shit?
Yes. They handle like shit and ride like shit which is why all high end performance cars and luxury cars all use them exclusively.
>>28059101depends on the application. generally, most of /o/ sounds like they live in the middle of nowhere, some shithole seasian country, or siberia. you think low pros will get you far in any of those environments? us civilized anons can get away with them. they’re alright for daily driving. not sure about track use.
>>28059101Son, that's a fucking monster truck.
They only exists so you can fit bigger rims
>>28059121>ebonics
>>28059101they're worse for comfort. in theory they can have some advantages for handling because of less sidewall flex, but if you go really thin it just ruins everything.
>>28059101Every experience I've had with low profile tyres, except for a Tesla Model 3 Performance, has been terrible from a comfort perspective. My E46 M3 on 19"s was crashy and uncomfortable, and my brother's E30, which had alpina reps (pic rel), would end up tram lining and wandering from left to right on smooth roads. The Model 3 I drove, however, was unbelievably comfortable. One of the best riding cars I've ever experienced, except for maybe a Vanden Plas 1300.
>>28059130bruhs b out here flexin dey sidewall ong fr fr lmaooo
>>28059108they be looking on fleek doe, sheesh
>>28059101Try for yourself.I like meaty tires with big fat sidewalls since potholes and speedbumps and shit. Low profiles are faster in turns but fat ones slide more predictable for me and never violently snap out.
>>28059157Tesla 3 has really nice suspension or maybe it's just because it's so heavy. Reminds me of french cars like citroen & peugeot how nice it rides over uneven surfaces.
>>28059157surely you must be capping in jest
>>28059108race kers dont
>>28059157What do you expect with that monster truck suspension? Lose the damn weeblet pikachu bullshit already and get an E30 325i with a huge turbo, and an E92 335i already.
>>28059124how is that ebonics
>>28059167Yeah, I was genuinely shocked at how nice it was. I reckon weight is a key factor, but I think the real heros are the engineers.>>28059169I assure you, my candid experiences are nothing if not fr fr, no cap.
>>28059167My ITfag brother owns a Model 3, I find it crashy and uncomfortable.Also he once couldn't get in because the stupid aerodynamic door handles froze solid and I had to drive over and repeatedly slap them until the ice broke. Very silly cars
>>28059101yes. if youre not tracking your car theyre a meme. sidewall does affect your cars ride quality. also wheels with extra short sidewalls look incredibly gay and retarded.
>>28059101Dspends on the suspension.
>>28059101low profile tires>prosless sidewall flexbigger brake rotorsappearance (subjective)>consstiff rideno protection for wheelsheavy wheelshigh profile tires are basically the reverse
>>28059157The Tesla Y Performance is awful with 255/40/20And even worse with its 21 counterpart.
>>28059101how has almost everyone in this thread missed the fact that the only point of bigger wheels is to fit bigger brake rotorslow profile tires are a consequence of bigger wheels, that's why they're typically only on performance cars. ride quality suffers but that's not what you buy fast cars for, they have stiff af suspensions anyways.
There's less tire squirm when you start a turn, but because of the hard sidewalls companies have invested heavily in NVH to compensate which has made cars heavier just so people can flex that their car has 19s or 20s.
>>28060173Even in a Rolls Royce there's a noticeable difference in ride quality between the tall sidewall and the rubber band option. Sidewalls matter. It's partly why an old land yacht or a modern pickup truck rides better than a lot of modern Euro luxury sedans.
>>28060391Big brakes don't mean much at all and is mostly there for show. The pressure differential in the master cylinder is more important. If you can get the brake to the lock with ABS disabled, then the brakes are working hard enough.
yesmore road noise, more rim damage from potholesit sucks that all "better" trims of all manufacturers *force* you into large wheels without any option to choose a lower trimon my bmw order I couldn't pick any """sports""" option without going at least one inch upI don't understand why going down isn't even an option, clearly the wheels are the easiest to swap out
>>28060421big brakes are for heat dissipation, not braking force
>>28060409>Even in a Rolls Royce there's a noticeable difference in ride quality between the tall sidewall and the rubber band optionNo it doesn't. You've never even been in one. >It's partly why an old land yacht or a modern pickup truck rides better than a lot of modern Euro luxury sedans.No they don't. Trucks ride like shit no matter what tires they have. Ride quality is 95% suspension. Wheel size and weight make the minisculest of differences. In a blind test you wouldn't be able to tell the difference.
>>28060404I see you continue the tradition of namefags in posting on stuff you have no fucking idea about.
>>28061093cont>>28060421and in two successive posts.Go on, try for the hat-trick. Give us another of you pieces of incorrect knowledge
>>28059226Retards find out the scientific name for rims is wheels and now they try to correct everyone because they think they're smart
>>28061103>the scientific nameHoly god lord of the faggots>think they're smartI had a conversation with a 60 year old who had ZERO knowledge that a wheel is the entire round metal part and the rim is just the outer piece flange that the tire is held to.Only fucking retards call it a rim and I know this because it started with nogs in their nog culture.You're dumb and inexcusable, go fuck yourself.
>>28060188Can you explain why F1 cars, LeMans cars, NASCAR, and other major motorsports have significant tire walls? >inb4 dumb rules or some suchEven if it were a rule your wheel cannot be bigger than xx" and the tire must be yyy dimensions, they're clearly making shit work for performance. Theres no fuckin reason on passenger cars to have a 1" sidewall other than appearance.
>>28059101I have PS4S on 21s and it rides like shit but I do think it handles nice. Anyway the same roads on 19s is way way better. But if you have big brakes you don’t have a choice
>>28061098He's right tho. Big breaks are just for heat dissipation and on some cars manufacturer get bigger rotors because they can then use cheaper single piston calipers.
>>28061220Blame video games.
>>28061250Firstly, it's "brakes"Secondly, ponder this. If he was correct, why can't you lock up your wheels at 120 mph?Think you can? Go try it (or as close as you can get) next time you're driving.Wait...you do drive, don't you?
>>28061243sidewall flex doesn't actually slow you down, provided your suspension is set up correctly, it just makes the steering response feel more vaguerace cars want the benefits of lighter wheels, more sidewall (so they can make the suspension even stiffer) and don't need huge brakes since they can work around heat with brake ducts and high temp brake compoundsfor street cars, manufacturers and buyers have decided that the sbjective appearance and handling benefits of big wheels outweigh the objective downsides in ride quality and unsprung mass (at least up to a certain point)
>tfw 205/40/R18
>>28061258clutch disengage then spin into a barrier, sounds like fun
>>28061258>why can't you lock up your wheels at 120 mph?NTA, but what shitbox do you drive that can't lock at those speeds? I have single piston calipers w/ no booster, and I locked at around 105.
>>28060391And bigger wheels are a consequence of a few factors, but I argue that ultimately government regulation is to blame. Safety and fuel economy regs have steadily caused cars to become larger, more slab-sided in appearance with higher belt lines, smaller windows. Since cars are so bloated the only way to achieve visual balance is with fucking huge wheels.
>>28059101Knew someone that bought a BMW that came with wide rims/skinny tyres straight from the factory. The first time he struck a pothole the tyre blew and the dealership didn't want to pay for the repairs.Unless you're going to race the hell out of the car or you live in a magical place with perfectly smooth streets they're not worth it.
>>28061247I have PS4S on 20"s on KW V3s and it rides pretty nice. Better than stock, which was apparently better than a standard 5 Series already.
>>28061331See also: additional body styles
>>28061283You're missing the point. Let me explain it as though you're dim.It's easier to lock up at 30 than at 130. At 130 (or 250, if you prefer) you can stand on the brake pedal with a force that would lock your wheels at lower speeds, yet the wheels keep turning
>>28059171and there is a good reason since they can level and/or damp.and they also delay power to street which is also good.high profil is more comfort btw.low profile tires like in OPs pic are only pseudo-race design for faggots.tbf there are rare moments they might have a little advantage over bigger sized tires that is only exceptions.best is to look at what f1 does when its about performance of tires.
>>28061258you're just wrong
>>28061348>yet the wheels keep turningNah bro, your car is just shit, you need that looked at
45R tire sidewall size is the lowest I'll go. It's a decent balance of looks and comfort. Any lower and it's gonna ride harsh.
>>28061261>it just makes the steering response feel more vagueHow vague do you think F1 steering is?
>>28061381Probably pretty vague because its a nepobaby shitter "sport" that uses power steering lmao
>>28061365>you're just wrongOK, consider the attached picture. We have a tyre of rolling radius R exerting a deceleration force on the tarmac surface of F. We have a disc brake inside the wheel and tyre (shown orange) with an effective radius of r that is exerting a braking force on the wheel of BWe know that for a steady state the torque exerted on the wheel by the braking force is FR, which will be the same as the torque exerted by the brake disc, Brso FR = BrB = F (R/r)So as the wheel diameter reduces, the brake force reduces; as the disc diameter increases then the brake force reduces; F, is obviously constant.So smaller wheels and bigger brakes reduce the braking force required by the disc. So bigger brakes require lower forces for the same tyre force at the road, and therefore lower pressures
>>28061381>Posts rear wheelIt's almost like power gets sent there or something. What, you gonna post top fuel dragsters next?
>>28061411I hate math, but kudos for shutting up the tripfag.
>>28061381who cares? F1 isn't an unrestricted race series, the rules tell them what wheels, tires, and brakes they can run
>>28061342>>28061331I get reposting the shitboxJust admit its either a tax incentive to get it classed as a Light Truck, or admit customers have terrible priority and will buy a worse vehicle if its a SUV.Or option C: Manufacture is really bad at making cars, which is why the Tesla 3 and Y is outselling most horrid SUV that isn't RAV4 or Honda CHR.
>>28061425Silly me, I forgot about sidewalls wrinkling because of the 12,000 horsepower F1 cars have and known for only ever going in a straight line.
>>28061430You can't really understand cars without math
>>28061411>So bigger brakes require lower forces for the same tyre force at the road, and therefore lower pressuresExplain to me how that translates to anything as a driver. The caliper needs less force to brake the same amount, but smaller brakes can brake the same amount by adjusting the brake cylinder pressure and it would feel the same to the driver.What I'm saying is that if you can lock up the wheels that means your brakes are applying enough force.As some anon above said there is a factor of heat dissipation and if you're spending an hour+ on a track that can matter, but for most people big brake upgrades are the equivalent of buying a $5k watch just to show that you can.
>>28059108anon... they only do it because morons find them pretty... sorry
>>280613312 door SUV?BASED
>>28061497i think there are miniscule gains you can get at speed in a straight line bc it reduces drivetrain losses, but you could also tape over panel gaps for the same gains
I've hit enough curbs to know that if I had low profile tires my wheels would be fucked lol
>>28061348Try unplugging your ABS and ESC fuses and test your theory.
Some of my local roads are tearing apart and the stock 225x50 tire size does not feel good for my wheels.A previous owner/the previous owners spent way too much money putting charger 18x7.5s to replace this car's stock 17x7s (my car looks bad but was an absolute gem of a find, mechanically well taken care of plus upgrades), and they are already in rough enough shape.I might go back to 60 profile because I do not want to shell out the $1200 for new wheels even though one leaks 5PSI a week.
>>28059101>go from low profile 30w tires to 45w>mfw it doesn't feel like ass over the shitty pothole filled roads as much
>>28061489>Explain to me how that translates to anything as a driver.Look, I get that, as a tripfag, you're invested in the "hurr durr, large brakes are just for show" line you're promulgating.. I've just used a little basic physics to show that there are more considerations than you may think.If you take the line you mention of changing the mechanical ratio in the master cylinder (whether through piston diameter, servo assist or pedal leverage ratio) your braking system will still need to apply the same pressure to the pads. I've shown that larger brakes require a lower force on the disc for the same force at the tyre. So what could that offer you? Well, setting aside the lower hydraulic pressures (because you've already said you can achieve that other ways), it can offer you a wider range of pad material. If you get the same retardation for less clamp force you don't need such high coefficient of friction between pad and disc. With lower clamp forces you will (material dependent) wear the rotor and pad more slowly.Now I'm not denying the heat dissipation argument, but it isn't a given. It's easy to envisage a larger, unvented disc that has worse dissipation than a smaller, ventilated one. But in this case the mechanical advantage and lower clamp pressure (for same materials) of the larger rotor still applies.You're saying that>but for most people big brake upgrades are the equivalent of buying a $5k watch just to show that you can.and I'm just saying that there are advantages to larger diameter rotors that you didn't understand. But now you do..This is the point where you go "Hurr durr, no real difference in the real world" and I'll just laugh when I see it. You can also mention Reddit spacing if you think it helps your argument
>>28059157>>28059167I suppose you are talking about the updated Model 3, not the OG model?Because I have a Y and agree with >>28060358Ride is harsh even in the 19 inch wheels.
>>28063350The one I drove was a... 2019, Maybe? Think the performance model came out in 2018, so it can't be any older than that.
>>2806177310w40 tires are my favorite, not too thick, not too thin
>>28063432I've tried them but I found the grip was slightly poor - they were a bit slippery
>>28059171A lot of racing classes still have an 18" limit for frankly fuck knows what reason at this point considering those rules are literally 25 or 30 years old in many cases at this point. There was some super low profile tires on some touring and GT cars in the mid-90s.In general there's a few factors that don't remotely reflect any road car use between obviously bigger disks needing bigger wheels, rotating weight, either aerodynamics or literally what size tire will fit under the fenders, and so on.>>28061363No looking at F1 is fucking retarded because they just have to use whatever wheel size fits the tires the single supplier feels like making and they're tiny open wheel cars.
>>28062824Can you even prove to me the marginal increase you get in leverage makes any more difference than the extra mass you have to stop spinning?Consider generally there's a reason rear brake rotors are smaller and rear brake pressures aren't just super low because having excess brake leverage is overall not a great compromise given it hinders every other area of car performance. You WANT the smallest brakes you can get away with, that's why a 2009 GSX-R has thinner rotors than a 2006.
>>28061381it's not vague at all, but not because of the balloon slicks they use, it's because all the bushings are spherical metal type, the body is a carbon fiber monocoque and the suspension is extremely stiff with advanced dampenersyou will find none of those things on the average road car
>>28061381i'm hoping this somehow catches on as a meme so that normies start clamoring for fat tyres again and we can get the top tier shit like michelin primacy 4 sts or whatever for 15,14 inch wheels etc.
>>28064439>f1 cars>tinydoes he know?
>>28064482do you
>>28064487you realise the car on the right is over two feet shorter than the f1 car at the bottom of the pic i posted, right?
>>28064459You're missing the point, and trying to score points (double points for you).Physics doesn't lie. And the reason rear rotors are smaller is brake balance and where the work is done - something I'm well aware of. I'm also aware that unsprung mass is a thing. The entire point of my little picture and lecture was to puncture an ego.Yes, I'm an asshole, if you like. But I'm one that understands a bit more than some others. Incidentally, the whole, ironic, counter-intuitive "best brakes = small wheels + large rotors" was something one of my earliest mech eng lecturers pointed out, and commenting that "Now you know more than many auto engineers". Looks like he was right, even after all these years.I shall now fade into anonymity
>>28064459>>28064494(cont)but if you'd really wanted to score points you'd have pointed out (so many points) that, in my simplistic diagram, B cannot equal F as the wheel is (should be) rotating, and braking is a problem in dynamics rather than statics
>>28064489You realize length is not the solitary defining dimension of a 3 dimensional object, particularly when a significant amount of that is just the silly v-shaped front wing and angled endplates that add a ton of length (literally half a meter) but not a lot of actual area let alone volume.
>>28064502if a car was 10 miles long but was 1 inch tall, would you still consider it tiny?
>>28064439>No looking at F1 is fucking retarded because they just have to use whatever wheel size fits the tires the single supplier feels like makingIt's what the rules mandate, not what the tyre manufacturer makes. Which is why there was an increase in wheel size a few years ago.
>>28064507Officially Pirelli's position was that they didn't care between 13" and 18" but nobody else was going to bid on 13s and they told F1 to go fuck itself on wanting to switch to 16s in 2026. You can't write rules requiring equipment that no one will make.>>28064506In terms of what kind of brakes it would use, yeah it would be wouldn't it? 18" wheels were a clear performance loss in F1 because the tire had to be taller and that adds drag and weight. That isn't going to be the same for a truck going from 17" to 19".
>>28064519>Officially Pirelli's position was that they didn't care between 13" and 18"Pirelli actively supported the change because it made the tyres more like the rubber they fitted to road cars
>>28064496(cont^2)But, before I go, and as we're completely off-topic, I'll leave you with another non-intuitive bit of physics to ponder: a car going round a curve at a constant speed requires more power than the same car going straight at the same speed. True or false? Show your workings.
My old car had 55 profile tires and the front sidewalls flexed a lot when driving through the canyon, resulting in a very unsettling feeling on the steering wheel. Furthemore, while accelerating out of the corrner, the tires tended to hop resulting in loss of tractionMy new shitbox rides on 40 profile tires and they feel completely different. The car is more stable when the tires are stressed and steering is direct. Furthermore, loss of traction is more gradual under acceleration resulting in less slip. Another benefit not immediately apparent is that by leaving springing and damping on the coilovers instead of the tire's flex results in less undesirable body motion when encountering bumps or undulations during a turn.
>>28061220I like saying rims and calling magazine clips just to trigger fags like you
>>28059157>crashy>tram liningYup. That's been the biggest adjustment I had to deal with going from a Toyota with 17"s to an Audi with 19"s. The numb EPS doesn't help either. It's a shame because everything else about the ride is so much better. I'm actually looking forward to putting on my 18" winter wheels and seeing how much of an improvement that makes.
>>28060391>the only point of bigger wheels is to fit bigger brake rotorsStop being wrong. Less sidewall flex positively contributes to lateral handling.As usual with cars, form follows function. Low profile tires, loud exhaust/decel pops/2 step, lowered suspension, wings/spoilers/splitters and other aerodynamic features, positive camber, bucket seats, disc brakes, all of these were born in motorsport. And because things that win will always be cool, they became the aesthetic direction for street cars. It's that simple.
>>28064948>Less sidewall flex positively contributes to lateral handling.and to poorer ride. The large wheels/skinny tyres are usually specified by the Design department, because they look cool, even though, for most people (obviously not you, because you're a l33t track benchracer) a taller sidewall/higher profile tyre would be a better choice
>>28064948Not a single race series uses 22" wheels though
>>28061699>i think there are miniscule gains you can get at speed in a straight line bc it reduces drivetrain losses,Those """"gains"""" are only valid if you are using superlight wheels to reduce unsprung weight (i.e. the wheel's mass increase has to be less than the mass of the rubber you're replacing). All the other gains are practically non-existent and only cope by retards justifying an aesthetic choice for a supposed performance vehicle.
>>28065031They do in the drug dealer vs police cruiser sprint series. It's an unusual event in that instead of a starting pistol, the gunfire is at the end of the race
>>28059101They look good. The smaller your sidewall the worse the riding experience will be. You trade performance and comfort for style. Same reason people lower their cars even though 9 times out of 10 it's a worse driving experience.
>>28064543That's not exactly obscure information.
>>28065139I didn't see the word "obscure" in the post you linked to. Do you know the answer?
>>28059101Good for the track but asking for rim damage and a rough ride anywhere elseMy corvette has 17 inch, this was damn big for the 90's, now regular ass corollas get 18 inch it's ridiculous
>>28059101Nitto 420s master race. Only experienced drivers can ride lows curb checking woman need not apply
30 series side walls seem to ride find.
>>28059101yes i took the balloon pill 235 55 front 225 65 rear r17slove my tyres and rims how i love my women thicck wide and bulboushad 245 45 r19s lasted all of 2 weeks on rural roads lol
>>28061220They're also known as rims. I don't know why you have to be autistic about this.
>>28064948> Less sidewall flex positively contributes to lateral handling.Completely incorrect. Sorry. Learn actual tire physics, I suggest Race Car Vehicle Dynamics by Milliken and Tune to Win by Carrol Smith
>>28061220I call all wheels mags just to make people like you angry.
>>28066007I unironically tell people to "throw some Ds on that bitch." They are convinced that I'm a massive wigger. I simply enjoy the 2006 hit track by Rich Boy.
>>28059101Real driver here. Lowpros are better for street driving, less sidewall makes for cleaner exits on drifting/ powerslides, more controllable. And that's all that matters.
>>28061348IDK, the static CoF for both my brake pads and my tires seems to be the same at any speed. Are you using giant steamroller wheels with 100+lbs of rotating mass?FYI, I've locked the fronts on my old M3 at 130+ due to a mid-corner whoop, and it was not fun. Locking all 4 would have been a bunch worse. Of course, it had 225/45R18s on the front and 255/40R18s on the rear. A balanced tire package (like a lot of people like to install) would maybe have prevented the lock, or maybe would have created a 4 wheel lock that killed me, hard to say, but I had a tire over the fog line before I got off the brake enough to regain traction.
>>28064948embarrassingly wrong, never post again
Yes they suck. Street cars don’t need such huge wheels with thin profile tires. You don’t need all that brake and you don’t want to crack and weld your wheels after driving on public roads
>>28066103Nobody said you can't lock at any speed. The statement was it's easier to lock up at lower speeds (less pedal pressure) than at high speeds
>>28066230(cont)And objectively that has to be true, if only due to the energy contained in the rotating wheels and tyres (and drive train) being so much higher at higher speeds. What I don't know (and can't be bothered to try to calculate) is how significant this is compared with the energy in the forward velocity of the car. I'd suspect not very.
>>2805910119” is ideal for performance and looks.
>>28066315Unless your wheel and tire package is spectacularly heavy, and your brake cooling is amazing, the difference isn't significant. Using my M3 as an example, the rotating mass in gear was under 300 lbs, but the car itself is over 3600 lbs wet with driver. In a purely hypothetical example of seeing livestock on the road while driving double the speed limit on a Wyoming county highway, you would have to increase pedal pressure as you slowed down because of heat, instead of having to decrease pedal pressure as you slow down due to the rotating mass's diminishing effect on required brake pressure. The effect you're predicting was more noticeable in low speed situations where the brakes are able to stay (relatively) cold, as you finish a threshold stop at low speed with cold brakes, you need to ease the brakes if you don't want to get a touch of ABS at the end.
>>28059101James May's elderly mother even said that she hates the cars that have low profile tires
>>28066543Not trying to be pedantic or sarcastic, but in this context your rotating mass in gear = 300 lbs is meaningless. If you're trying to give me the rotational moment of inertia then the units would be something like lbs ft^2. Is that what you're saying? The rotational moment of inertial for the driveline is 300 lbs.ft^2? And was this with the clutch in?
>>28066381If you have 19'' rims you sure as fuck better have at least 15'' brake rotors.
>>28061497Also to fit brakes. You arent fitting 17s on a porsche without reducing brake size.
I definitely prefer the feel of meatier tires but it's not too noticeable until you're really pulling a turn
>>28066666fucking quint 6 get
>>28060421>retarded tripfag doesn't understand that heat soak and dissipation scales with rotor surface areaUnsurprising
>>28065938His mother never hugged him
>>28064494Based, BTFOd that fag
>>28064506would you call a 12 inch dick with the thickness of a pencil huge?
>>28061103>scientific name
My car is factory xxx30R20. Would have definitely gone for 35R19s if I had the option. Cheaper tires, better selection, and probably better comfort over bad pavement.
Yes. They only exist to give niggerlicious feels to the driver.
