Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2016 18:48:05 GMT
A topic done to death on other fora....but;
I was just wandering a street in Netanya (a town on the Mediterranean cost 25km north of Tel Aviv), and decided to be a nerd and look at the general profile of tyres attached to cars. There is a broad mix of European, Korean and Japanese cars, of varying ages, although given the size of the market (small), there tends to be no more than two engine/trim combinations per model. So for top of the range cars you see a lot of petrol engines, which you don't see here (Audi Q7 4.2 V8 anyone?).
Apart from a very small number of cars like the aforementioned Audi, the majority of cars have steel wheels and the tyres are certainly higher profile by at least 10 points; i.e. 65 instead of 55. This was very noticeable when we rented a Nissan Juke four Christmases ago. The rental car had higher profile tyres and had a far superior ride than the car we eventually acquired at home. I wish you were able to choose the profile of the wheel/tyre combination when you bought a new car rather than being forced into low profile tyres the higher up the trim range you go.
|
|
WDB
Full Member
Posts: 7,352
|
Post by WDB on Aug 8, 2016 14:07:18 GMT
Mixed feelings on this issue. I have a large car with smallish 16-inch wheels and 225/55 tyres, which rides very smoothly but is stodgy to drive on a twisting road - although this may have more to do with its soft suspension and gearing that makes it difficult to feed in power progressively through a bend.
On the other hand, I have a smaller (but still medium-sized) car on 255/35x18 tyres, which can sometimes get fatiguing on a bad road but is delightful on a good one. But that also has firm M-Sport suspension, gearing that lets me flick between third and fourth on country roads, and 120% of the power for 80% of the weight, so I can easily modulate its progress by applying power.
In other words, I don't know how much of one car's stodgy comfort, or of the other's occasionally harsh agility, can really be attributed to its tyres. Conversely, I have occasionally wondered whether 17 inches might actually be the ideal wheel size for both.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2016 18:33:06 GMT
WDB, I am assuming the car with the 16" wheels is your E220 estate. Think my E350 has 17" wheels (must check it later), but when driving twisty roads I found that using the S setting on the central console made a big difference to the ability to be in the right gear and seemed to sharpen up the suspension.
|
|
|
Post by Hofmeister on Aug 8, 2016 21:44:50 GMT
Detest low profile tyres. They are a fashion accessory, which on heavily rutted and potholed UK roads are a literal pain in the ass.
|
|
WDB
Full Member
Posts: 7,352
|
Post by WDB on Aug 8, 2016 22:32:59 GMT
...when driving twisty roads I found that using the S setting on the central console made a big difference to the ability to be in the right gear and seemed to sharpen up the suspension. And yes, I do that too. But I'm guessing your E350 also has seven speeds to my five. The MB 5G transmission is renowned for its robustness but its third and fourth gears are a touch high, so unless I preselect third on the entry to a bend, reapplying the power to level the car through the curve forces it to shift down halfway through, which doesn't make for smooth progress. In contrast, the extra torque from the six-cylinder (and manual) 325d means I can leave it in the slightly lower fourth gear and just scoot through with a well-timed squeeze of the pedal. I think the right ratio is crucial, though. The eight-speed automatic BMWs I've driven can manage the same trick even with the relatively weedy 2.0 petrol engine, presumably because 4 (or 5?) out of 8 can be lower than 4 out of 5. In other words, fine car that it is, the E220 is not a first choice for the back roads - but it's not fault of the tyres.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 9, 2016 9:30:51 GMT
Yes the E350 has seven speeds, which probably helps.
I recall the 1977 Porsche 911 Turbo had only four gears compared to the regular 911 which had five. The marketing speak was 'so much torque you don't need all that 'stick waggling''. But I think the truth was a little different..
Allegedly the torque of the Turbo was just about sufficient to make up for the lack of gears, but in reality the five speed couldn't handle the torque output of the Turbo.
|
|