|
|
|
What is the correct tire size to use with Virgo wheel on my 86 240 wagon? TIA.
Tom240
|
|
-
|
|
|
Either 195/60-15 or 205/60-15. I use the latter on my 245 with Dracos. Higher load rating than the 195 (1323 vs 1201 lb), almost a half inch wider section width, and smaller speedo error than 195 (2.7% vs, 4.5%).
--
Thank goodness we don't get all the government we pay for. -- Will Rogers
|
|
-
|
|
|
Well, The tires on the car now are 185/70/14. I don't know if that is the correct or original one, since I don't have the sticker to tell me the factory tires size any more.So when I plug this number into the tire size calculator, I get this 195/60/15 with not much changing in the car's speed. BTW, will the bigger and /or wider tires hurts the fuel economy?
Tom240
|
|
-
|
|
Tom, my point is, you need to check the door edge label to see what was originally specified for your car. It may have 185/R-14's now but I think that is a very wrong size for a wagon. That is not what you should be comparing against. If you found mud in the gas tank would you hunt for equal mud for the next fillup?
For a wagon, so the size should be 185/R-14. Check your door sticker to be sure. My '86 wagon was 185/R-14 (r.i.p.).
If a sedan then 185/70-14.
The overall diameter of the 185/R-14 is considerably larger than the sedan size tires that you now have.
The suggestions I saw in this thread for 195/65-15 and 205/60-15 are closer to 185/R-14's diameter but still less, and enough to cause an error of a few miles per hour at highway speeds. Also less load capacity, though quite serviceable.
205/65-15 will be a near perfect match.
I did make a typo in my first post where I mentioned the wickedbodies tire size calculator. It does calculate "R" as 82. I've settled on "R" = 80 for my own purposes.
I decided on "R" = 80 after finding the 185/R-14 tires listed at tirerack.com. I looked up their dimensions under "specs" and back-calculated the value of "R" from those dimensions. It came out to 80.
--
Sven: '89 245 NA, 951 ECU, open-front airbox, E-fan, 205/65-15's, IPD sways, E-Codes, amber front corner reflectors, quad horns, tach, small clock. Wifemobile '89 245 NA stock. 90 244 NA spare, runs.
|
|
-
|
|
|
I'll quibble a little with you on a couple of trivial things. The OEM Michelins on my '92 245 were 185R14 and had a load rating of 1360 pounds at 36 psi (my ancient notes are a little smudged), which by industry standards is a LR of 91. Most 205/60-15s currently on the market have a LR of 90, which is 2.5% lower. The Bridgestone Potenza RE960's which my 245 wears actually have a LR of 91.
In an earlier post you made a comment about the "R" in the size designation 185R14. The R simply signifies a radial tire, and the absence of a specific aspect ratio implies that the aspect ratio is 80, as you correctly back-calculated. The R is a holdover from the days before radial ply tires were nearly universal. The aspect ratio of *about* 80 was the de facto standard in the industry before "wide oval" tires gained popularity in the mid-to-late 1960's. However, some 185R14 tires actually had an aspect ratio of 78.
Before conservative Mercedes-Benz adopted lower-profile tires for their cars, the 185R14 was the standard size for their sedans, BUT Mercedes specified a reinforced tire of the same size but with a higher load rating, and also a raised ridge on the sidewall to guard against damage from curbs. I believe only Continental and Michelin made the reinforced 185R14, and back then they were occasionally listed as "185-14r" to distinguish them from the standard tires of that size. The load rating for these tires was in the 1500-1600 lb range, or in the 95-98 range by today's industry standards. I was a little disappointed that my Brick didn't come with the "Mercedes" tires! (No matter - the stock Michelins had a hard tread that had awful traction in the wet and I couldn't wait to wear them down and replace them.)
Lastly, the 2.5% speedo/odo error between the 185R14 and 205/60-15 is nothing to write home about - less than 2 miles per hour (in the "safe" direction) at 60 mph. The variation in tire diameter among different tire models even from the same manufacturer can be nearly as much.
The net result of all this for our fellow Brickboarder Tom is that if he has a need for an increased load rating, the 205/65-15 is a good choice. Otherwise, the 205/60-15 is just dandy. FWIW, I believe the Turbo wagons were only shod with 195/60-15s on their Virgos... with the same load range as the 185/70-14s on the sedans.
--
Thank goodness we don't get all the government we pay for. -- Will Rogers
|
|
-
|
|
|
This all makes sense and I really can't disagree.
It's good to get confirmation re. the usual aspect ratio being 80.
I truly appreciate that.
Yes, the speedo error with 205/60-15 is about 2.5 mph. in the "safe" direction.
Whether that's acceptable is a judgment call.
I have to admit my beast is slower off a dead stop than I'd wish - however my aim is maximum possible mpg so I prefer the slightly larger diameter 205/65-15. With those the speedometer overstates speed by only about .4 mph at 65 mph.
I believe the VW microbus also used 185/R-14's that were specified for an increased load capacity, probably similar to the Mercedes tires. Maybe the same ones.
--
Sven: '89 245 NA, 951 ECU, open-front airbox, E-fan, 205/65-15's, IPD sways, E-Codes, amber front corner reflectors, quad horns, tach, small clock. Wifemobile '89 245 NA stock. 90 244 NA spare, runs.
|
|
-
|
|
|
Uh! ...! I don't have the door edge label that you talk about any more. I bought this wagon used, so I have to go with what on the car, but I'm listening to everyone here before buying next set of tires.
|
|
-
|
|
|
I'm using 205-65-15 on steelies.
For a tire size calculator see
www.wickedbodies.net/Tire-Size-Calculator.htm
Check your passenger door edge label for the original tire size.
Wagons are usually 185/R-14.
The wickedbodies.net calculator calculates "R" as = 82.
After some research which was not fully conclusive I finally settled on R=82 for my own purposes.
Plenty tire retailers will tell you "R" = 70 or 75 because they're clueless.
--
Sven: '89 245 NA, 951 ECU, open-front airbox, E-fan, 205/65-15's, IPD sways, E-Codes, amber front corner reflectors, quad horns, tach, small clock. Wifemobile '89 245 NA stock. 90 244 NA spare, runs.
|
|
-
|
|
|
15 inch, somewhere between 185-70 and 215-50.
I personally use 205-60s.
|
|
-
|
|
|
Thanks! I think I go with 195/60/15. And I hope this set up goes well with BFGoodrich Traction T/A H.
|
|
-
|
|
|
Say, Tom - consider going with 195/65-15, as these will be closer to the diameter of the original tires and result in less speedo error. You'll read about 3% high. With 195/60, >6%.
Their load rating is also higher, and closer to the originals, than the 195/60. Typically, 195/60 has an 87 load rating, 195/65 is 91.
From the standpoint of optics, we have 195/60-15 on two cars (the 81 and my 940), and they look a little small in the wheel wells. Just a matter of personal opinion, of course, but I like the look of the 195/65 (my snow tires) better.
--
Bob (son's 81-244GL B21F/M46, dtr's 83-244DL B23F/M46, my 94-944 B230FD and 89 745 (LT-1 V8); hobbycar 77 MGB, and a few old motorcycles)
|
|
-
|
|
|
My Continental 195/60/15 summer tires are simply too small. So when I later bought a set of winter tires (Michelin) I went for 195/65/15. They look more correct on the car and give more accurate speedo readings.
Erling.
--
My 240 Page
|
|
-
|
|
|
Erling,
What's happening amigo? I thought you'd be out on a bike somewhere globe-trekking.
Glad to hear from you.
On a non-thread-hijacking note, in your pics, Erling, of the 240 gallery, are those the 195/65 tires in the pics with the Virgos?
I'm in the same boat here. My 1985 245 has 14" wheels, exactly like your originals. I want 15" or 16" and Virgos seem to be what I am leaning to.
Thanks,
Jamie B
Commerce, TX
|
|
-
|
|
|
Hi Jamie!
When I got my '87 sedan, it came with a set of 175/80/14 tires - which were standard for the GL for the Norwegian market. When I found a set of Virgos, I had a set of 195/60/15 (Continental) put on them, as I read that this is a compatible 15" alternative. But with the new wheels on the car, I thought they looked a bit smaller - subjectively, they didn't seem to fill out the wheel openings like the old wheels did.
Also, the speedometer was a bit more off the mark now. When passing these digital signs along the road telling the drivers the correct speed, I used to see 78 kmh with the 175/80/14 tires when my speedo read 80. Fair enough. But with the 195/60/15 tires, the speedo reads 80 kmh when my actual speed is 76.
I finally measured the three sets of wheels I had at the time (all of them with ca 5-8,000 km useage), and there was a 2-2.5% difference:
Firestone 175/80/14: 1975 mm circumference
Dunlop 185/70/14: 1935 mm circ. (snow tires)
Continental 195/60/15: 1926 mm circ.
So when I needed a set of snow tires for Virgos, I got 195/65/15 (Michelin) and their circumference is 2018 mm. They look better on the car, and my speedo is correct.
I know that the tire calculators are not absolutely accurate, there are differences between makes even for the same size etc. It could be that my Contis are on the small side, and other makes are larger (for the same claimed size).
The gallery pics with the Virgos are all with the smallish Contis; 195/60/15.
[As for my globe-trekking, because of a badly timed change of jobs I had to stay home working. *Sigh* My friends biked as planned from the Chinese border all through Vietnam and far into Cambodia though.]
Cheers,
Erling.
--
My 240 Page
|
|
-
|
|
|
Hi Erling,
Saw your post about tires not looking quite right in the wheelwells of your 240. I also had this effect on my 745t. A few years back i bought Yokohama (forget model name but very common) in a 195/60 15 size. They were good tires, they lasted a long time, handled well but there was something I didn't like about them that I couldn't put my finger on and knew I wouldn't buy them again. One day while visiting a clients shop one of the guys asked me why my car had such little tires/wheels on a car of that size. I guess then it hit me(light shines on dark harbor?). I bought new tires (not for the look but because it was time) and went with Fuzion 205/60/15. Yes they are a bit wider which I also wanted but they really fill up the wheelwell and look normal on the 745t. I have had the Fuzion(a Bridgestone product) for about 3 months and they handle very well and they were reasonably priced from Tirerack($46.00/ea)
Dan
|
|
|
|
|
