TheSamba.com :: View topic

Sun Feb 21, 2010 8:16 pm

Are there any tires that meet the required load standards that fit 16x7 wheels? I am not talking the non-reinforced tires GoWesty sells for their 16x7.5 wheel package. :?:

Sun Feb 21, 2010 9:23 pm

215/65-16 98H Yokohama Geolander ATS
Conti Vanco series (expensive)
Some Dunlops, I think.

Go look at the tire websites.

Sun Feb 21, 2010 10:45 pm

What abut the Michelin Hydro Edge ? I read somewhere they're excellent (quiet !) at highway speeds. Presently I'm driving highways with BFG T/As and I can't hear myself think !

Sun Feb 21, 2010 10:46 pm

Nokian makes a 215 16 102V version of the WRG2 . I've been running them since December and love 'em. Also look at Vredstein, Im pretty sure they make a suitable all season tire too.

EDIT: I was sleepy. I meant 225/60R 16 XL 102V. The diameter is around 26.5" (780 rev/mi), can take 50psi and the V rated sidewall is really stiff.

Marc

Sun Feb 21, 2010 10:48 pm

Quote: What abut the Michelin Hydro Edge ?
Those are the tires that GoWesty sells with their rim/tire package that the OP wanted to avoid.

Sun Feb 21, 2010 11:06 pm

jptech wrote: What abut the Michelin Hydro Edge ? I read somewhere they're excellent (quiet !) at highway speeds. Presently I'm driving highways with BFG T/As and I can't hear myself think !
Those are the underrated tires as stated above.

The GW guy swears up and down they are OK. But, factory specs don't lie. I hope they have good insurance!

You MUST have a correctly rated tire. We have LOTS of posts and debates on this topic. LOTS!

There is a lot more discussed about 15 inch, but 16 inch and above are likely the wave of the future as the smaller sizes get less and less choices. Besides the bigger the wheel, the bigger the brake you can stuff under there. I am liking bigger brakes a LOT, myself.

Mon Feb 22, 2010 5:03 am

I'm considering the same question. I have a set of the CLK wheels awaiting rubber and mounting, so I've been looking at options in the 16 inch size as well.

I know the rule of thumb is a 100 load index or better, but how "bad" (as in risky) is a tire with a 99 load index?

Specifically these are the tires I'm considering. These are a 215 60 16 tire

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vi...MEWAX%3AIT

The Yokohama Geolanders mentioned earlier actually show only a 98 load index. Is the difference here that they are Truck/LT rated?

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/4-215-65-16-Yokoham...2c52a292d1

Which size gets me closest to the correct diameter, the 60 series or the 65 series?

Mon Feb 22, 2010 7:56 am

Yoko Geolander A/T-S

225/70 R16 107H

$119 ea. at Discount Tire

Reviews of these on the DT website typically mentioned very high mileages in use, like 80k in several reviews, and people talked about how quiet they were on pavement. The long wear made them worth the little bit of extra money to me over the alternatives I had picked out from DT (BFG LongTrail T/A Tour in P215/75 R16 101T, or Hankook DynaPro iPike RW07 in 225/70 R16 107S).

Haven't driven on them yet, though, the Syncro is a work in progress.

edit: adding a better pic of the tire:

Mon Feb 22, 2010 9:39 am

tencentlife wrote: Yoko Geolander A/T-S

225/70 R16 107H

$119 ea. at Discount Tire

Reviews of these on the DT website typically mentioned very high mileages in use, like 80k in several reviews, and people talked about how quiet they were on pavement. The long wear made them worth the little bit of extra money to me over the alternatives I had picked out from DT (BFG LongTrail T/A Tour in P215/75 R16 101T, or Hankook DynaPro iPike RW07 in 225/70 R16 107S).

Haven't driven on them yet, though, the Syncro is a work in progress.

Geolanders were also on my list.. And they look to be a very good choice.

I chose the BFG Radial Long Tour TA, Load Range D.. 225/75r16.
At 29" tall they are too much tire for the stock 2.1 WBXer..

BUT if one is inclined to to accept the trade-offs.. (entering the HYW at 60 in 3rd and cruisng at 65-70mph and 3000-3200 rpm vs shifting down earlier on grades) or if one has plans to upgrade the engine then these larger diameter tires are not bad..

They do require serious downshifting on grades.. NO DOUBT!
At higher altitudes the suffering is even more pronounced.

Still.. there's a tradeoff.
Because I can easily pull 60 in 3rd, I can run up grades at a reasonable speed in 3rd and still have some pedal left.

I've driven mine 2k miles now and the handling on road is superb. Quiet, track well (and I have not even had an alignment done yet :lol: ).. They do VERY well in rain and have seen light snow and not even hiccuped in it.

Oh.. and gas mileage suffers a bit too.. Cruising at 65-70 and 3k rpm is wonderful.. but rpm may be lugging a bit with the increased wind resistance at these higher speeds. (I cruised at 60ish with the OE 14s)
Where I saw 20ish mpgs on stock sized C load rated tries.. I am seeing 18-19ish on the 16s.
Where I had 18ish in town I am now seeing 15-17 in town (ouch!). In fairness there may be other issues at play. Like an exhaust leak, I know of. And the van sits nearly 3" higher now (more wind resistance and more air turbulence under the van)

Tall tires = tradeoff.

But getting an adequate sidewall not only impoves peace of mind.. the van handles SO much better as to have me wondering if the new springs, shocks, bushings and sway bar were necessary (they weren't.. but hey sure are nice additions!)

I would recommend anyone interested in a more pavement-oriented tread to look at the BFG Radial Long Trail TAs or for a slightly lower rated tire that is even more pavement-oriented, the Long Trail Tours..

Mon Feb 22, 2010 9:53 am

Wow, lots of good feedback here. What would be the best tire size to run on 16" wheels if you are sitting on Carat springs? Is there any risk of rubbing on Carats? :?:

Mon Feb 22, 2010 10:44 am

Gauche1968 wrote: Wow, lots of good feedback here. What would be the best tire size to run on 16" wheels if you are sitting on Carat springs? Is there any risk of rubbing on Carats? :?:
Send Loogy an email on that question.
Short answer is "yes"

215/70s will likely rub the front wheel well lips on those lower springs.
225/75s are most definitely going to rub regardless the wheel ET or spacers used.

My 225/75s rubbed both front and back of the FRONT wheel well arch on OE Westy GL springs.. they still rub now on deep compression with the VanCafe springs (lifted 1") 10mm spacer on ET37 wheels and some modest fender work.

A lower the sidewall (65 vs 75) in union with the smaller width (215 vs 225) will decrease the degree of rubbing possibly eliminating it..
But if I were you I would be prepared to do some modest fender "adjustments" regardless.

Its gonna be very close.

I am working with a mm or two of clearance now.. even AFTER making those fender adjutsments and installing taller springs.

There is not room on the rear for cable chains without modifying the rear swing arm, (a project I am undertaking sometime next summer).

Mon Feb 22, 2010 11:01 am

> 215/65-16 98H Yokohama Geolander ATS

has 768 rotations per mile, which is 6% taller than stock, and will impact your power uphill, and its for 4wd applications, the OP seems to have a 2wd

>(nokian WRG2) 225/60R 16 XL 102V. The diameter is around 26.5" (780 rev/mi),

which is 5% taller than stock. And these tires are directional, meaning you cant cross rotate, and that also means you need 2 spares (or might have to run the spare backwards.. forget about 5 tire rotations, you cant with directional tires)

> Specifically these are the tires I'm considering. 215/60-16 Falken Ziex ZE-912

thats a 808 rotation per mile tire, just 2% taller than stock. This is the closest size match of any of the suggested tires

to compare tire diameter, you need to know its rotations per mile. Knowing its a 225x65x16 or 215x60x16 does not tell you the rotations per mile, you have to look it up in the specs

once you have rotations per mile here is the math (stock rotations is 820).. 808/820-1= 2%
or 768/820-1= 6%

> The Yokohama Geolanders mentioned earlier actually show only a 98 load index. Is the difference here that they are Truck/LT rated?

Yes, I think the Falken is a passenger tire, so you have to reduce its load rating by 9%. The load rating is 1709, minus 9% is 1555lbs load rating, thats a do not pass (minimum to pass is 1580lbs)

read more about that here:
http://www.van-cafe.com/home/van/page_1223_1404/nokian_tire_2057015_wrg2.html
"VW recommends tires that carry a minimum of 1580 lbs, but since this is not a Load range C tire, the NHTSA in its DOT Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards state that when using a non-load range C tire in a light duty truck application you reduce tire load capacity by 9%."

Of the 3 tires above, the Falken has too low an adjusted load rating
the Yokohama is the tallest, and most offroad tread (the OP has a 2WD)
the Nokian is the best for snow (does OP need directional snow tires?)

fwiw, the Michellin Hydroedge 215x65x16 has a a 98T load range, passenger tire, 1653lbs -9%= 1504lbs. That is out of spec worse than the falken. that hydroedge has 776 rotations, or 5% taller than stock, similar to the Nokian in diameter, just slightly smaller than the Yokohama. But the Hydroedge is directional, meaning you cant cross rotate.

so far I have not seen any tires in this discussion that I would be happy to put on a 2wd Vanagon with a single spare. But the Yokohama is the only one that meets load range and is not directional.

> I chose the BFG Radial Long Tour TA, Load Range D.. 225/75r16.
that tire has 704 rotations per mile, which is 14% taller than stock. Most people get unhappy above 10% taller..

If I had a 2wd van with a stock motor, and I HAD to run 16" rims, and did NOT need a snow capable tire, I would look at the Vredestein Comtrac 195x65x16, with 805 rotations per mile (2% taller than stock)

Mon Feb 22, 2010 11:03 am

I definately would recommend nothing larger than a 215/65/16. I rubbed with a 215/70/16 on my '89 westy until I changed my springs to moog which are much stiffer. But more importantly is the increased tire diameter. The 215/70/16's really slow my down going up hills compared to my winter tires which are a 215/65/16. This is even with the EJ22 engine. I think a stock 2.1 - 2wd would really be hurting going any larger than stock sizing.

paul

Mon Feb 22, 2010 11:33 am

Franklinstower wrote: I definately would recommend nothing larger than a 215/65/16. I rubbed with a 215/70/16 on my '89 westy until I changed my springs to moog which are much stiffer. But more importantly is the increased tire diameter. The 215/70/16's really slow my down going up hills compared to my winter tires which are a 215/65/16. This is even with the EJ22 engine. I think a stock 2.1 - 2wd would really be hurting going any larger than stock sizing.

paul
I agree with Paul here. The following is Geolander specific but other tires can be similarly considered as above. There are several reasons for normal uses to stick with the 215/65-16, some of which are noted above. The 98 H ( http://www.vanagon.com/info/tires/index.htm ) rating is still going to hold up your 6000 pound or so Westy (1709 X 4 = 6836 ) plus the H rating indicates it should have a somewhat stronger sidewall. (loaded weight fo a van 5279 pounds via http://www.westfalia.org/community/showthread.php?t=197 without passengers ) Not to forget you have 10% wiggle room. The 107 rating gets you about 1000 pounds more. The Geolander need not be derated like a normal passenger tire such as the Hydroedge ( http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires.jsp?tireMake=Michelin&tireModel=HydroEdge ) Plus it is rated to 7.5 inch rims based on spec. The 70 is 7 inches.

At $83 via http://www.onlinertires.com it seems alright in my book.

Mon Feb 22, 2010 11:43 am

Jon_slider wrote:

> I chose the BFG Radial Long Tour TA, Load Range D.. 225/75r16.
that tire has 704 rotations per mile, which is 14% taller than stock. Most people get unhappy above 10% taller..

If I had a 2wd van with a stock motor, and I HAD to run 16" rims, and did NOT need a snow capable tire, I would look at the Vredestein Comtrac 195x65x16, with 805 rotations per mile (2% taller than stock)
We don't drive the same roads.

The mountain roads I drive are not 65-70 mph 4 lane freeways.. but 40-50mph 2 lanes. 3rd gear works fine.

I do want to make one thing abundantly clear.. a 225/75r16 is the upper recahes of what even fits in a Vanagon wheel well.

And if it was not clear from my post, it is outside the zone for the 2.1 WBXer.

A 215/70r16 may come back closer to the zone.. but I'm guessing it would still be a compromise.

On a Carat? I can't even imagine wanting to install a tall sidewall 16.
From the numbers, the much shorter Vredestein appears to be a MUCH better solution for that application..

Mon Feb 22, 2010 12:20 pm

If you are looking for a good quiet road tire. Look at the hankook ventus v4 es.
I have a 225/55/16 load rating of 99. Good highway tire.

Mon Feb 22, 2010 1:34 pm

ohlott wrote: If you are looking for a good quiet road tire. Look at the hankook ventus v4 es.
I have a 225/55/16 load rating of 99. Good highway tire.

those would be subject to the 9% downgrade right? Or are they LT rated?

Are there any 215/60-16 tires that meet specs? This is the size I would like to go with. Closest match to the right revs per mile, and low enough profile to clear with carat springs, which I'm switching to.

Mon Feb 22, 2010 1:42 pm

hiram6 wrote: ohlott wrote: If you are looking for a good quiet road tire. Look at the hankook ventus v4 es.
I have a 225/55/16 load rating of 99. Good highway tire.

those would be subject to the 9% downgrade right? Or are they LT rated
NO. They are XL rated. Do not derate.

I just think they are too wide for many of us. Good for up to an 8 inch rim which is basically too wide. The section width, if I recall, is approaching 9 inches, but that needs to be verified. But they are close to stock diameter.

Mon Feb 22, 2010 2:59 pm

The Falken Ziex tires don't seem to have a very good reputation from what I've read online. I'd considered them for my Subaru a couple months ago when a pair of new ones came up on CL. After doing a few searches it seemed like quite a few people shared the opinion that they deteriorated rather quickly (loss in grip/handling and increased noise). I think these were mostly people running low(er) profile sizes on passenger cars.

Mon Feb 22, 2010 3:38 pm

To the OP, I have 215/60R16 Yokohama Geolander AT-S on my carat. Treadwear: 500, Load: 1521 lbs., max pressure: 51 psi, diameter: 26.1", revs per mile: 796.

They will scrub a tiny bit if the front suspension is fully flexed (like cornering over a curb). Great performance so far on rough roads and highways.