235/65/16 with OEM rim? [Archive] - Honda Element Owners Club Forum

: 235/65/16 with OEM rim?


sevencyclist
12-02-2009, 07:06 PM
Wondering whether anyone has installed 235/65/16 tires with the original rims that came with the car? How has been your experience?

I believe the diameter is just slightly larger. Any problems going over bumps? Thanks.

insane_sc
12-02-2009, 07:18 PM
First: Welcome to the EOC!

Second: IMO, that tire is a little too wide for the stock rim, you will have a ton of buldge and your handling will suffer for sure, 225/65 would be safer, stock is perfect for our stock rims. Choose a tire that kerps you and your passengers safe. The tire would technically fit, but not correctly.

Later,
Steve

sevencyclist
12-02-2009, 07:29 PM
First: Welcome to the EOC!

Second: IMO, that tire is a little too wide for the stock rim, you will have a ton of buldge and your handling will suffer for sure, 225/65 would be safer, stock is perfect for our stock rims. Choose a tire that kerps you and your passengers safe. The tire would technically fit, but not correctly.

Later,
Steve

Thanks. Would 225/70/16 or 225/65/16 be better? I don't know if there's advantage to having slightly smaller or larger wheel? I don't do off road driving, so am not too concerned about clearance.

Also, I assume having larger wheels means the mileage counter rolls a little slower than it should, meaning car is being overworked, whereas having smaller wheels runs out the warranty a little sooner.:-)

insane_sc
12-02-2009, 07:37 PM
225/65 is closer to stock, the 70 would counter the mileage a little, but not that much, I recommend the 65 honestly, but the 70 will work.

paulj
12-02-2009, 09:41 PM
Looking at spec tables for one model in this size, the 'measured rim width' is 7" (this is the rim where the tire is 235mm wide), but the allowable range is 6.5 to 7.5. So according to the specs, this size should fit fine. On the narrower 6.5 rim it will actually be a little narrower (typically by .2" for .5" change in rim).

Over all diameter is 28", not much larger than stock.

Many of us have switched to 225/70/16, which is 2% larger than stock, and a measured rim width of 6.5. 235/70/16 is another common step-up in diameter, 4% larger.

Load range is as good as stock.

JourneymanAcuraMech
12-03-2009, 01:32 AM
235/65-16 is the only Honda approved alternate size for the E. Handling is more precise because the tire height is shorter. And the 235mm contact patch helps you corner like a slot car.
Why anyone would put a taller tire like a 225/70-16 or worse a 235/70-16 on an already high center of gravity vehicle boggles the mind.
When I drove an E with 225/70-16's, they felt more scary that the stock Wranglers.

paulj
12-03-2009, 02:00 AM
For some people a taller tire was purely a matter of looks ('fill the wheel well'). Others wanted to improve ground clearance. There was also the matter of model availability. In 2003 the selection of AT category tires in the stock size was pretty skimpy; now it is much better. Bridgestone Revos were a popular model in the 235/70/16 size in the early E days. Some even went as high as 225/75/16, usually in knobby model like BFG TA/KOs.

When I first switched to 225/70/16 tires I didn't detect much change in handling. Except that I noticed that extra 1/4" the first few times that slid into the seat.

If you want a slightly wider tire, without changing diameter much, 235/65/16 looks like a good choice.

Now I'm included to say that the only good reason for changing the tire size is model availability. If the model you want comes in the stock size, stick with it. If it only comes in one of these alternative sizes, then fine.

Another reason for not changing size, is the spare. The compact spare is already something like 6% smaller than stock. Increasing tire diameter will only increase that difference. I don't worry about that because I carry a full size spare under my camping gear.

sevencyclist
12-03-2009, 01:50 PM
Sounds like 235/65/16, 225/70/16, 225/65/16, and 215/70/16 will all fit on the OEM 2007 EX rims (16x6.5?) that I have.

As I understand it, the wider the tire, the better the handling; and the shorter the tire, the better the handling. Would I lose anything by having shorter tires other than the ground clearance which is not important for me at all? How about the degradation of performance due to "bulge" of wider tires on narrower rims such as 235/65 on the 16x6.5?

I guess the question is would I gain more in handling by having the wider tire, or lose more by having slight give due to the slight bulge as insane_sc mentioned?

I do want a wider tire than the 215, but do not want to get any taller by going to 225/70/16, so I think it's between 225/65/16 vs 235/65/16. Any thoughts?

paulj
12-03-2009, 02:30 PM
Tirerack may have a tech note about tire width and handling.

My understanding is that contact patch area is basically a function of the vehicle weight and tire pressure. Just changing to a wider tire does not change the area. It does change the shape. It makes the patch a bit wider, but also a bit shorter (front to back).

A longer, narrow patch has better tracking (think skis), a shorter, wider patch easier turning. It may be debatable whether changing from 215 to 235 (section width) is enough to make much difference. Note that section width is not the same as treadwidth. The Wranglers have a relatively narrow treadwidth, given the section width. Coopers have a noticeably wider thread (squarer shoulder). AT category tires also are wider.

The businesses about shorter (smaller diameter) tires having better handling has to do with the distance between the rim and the ground. Think of the tire as a flexible square. Push from the side, and it deforms. The longer the sides of the tire, the larger the deformation. So it isn't so much a matter of diameter as it is a matter of profile. Lower profile tires flex less on a turn, and so give crisper handling.

Most EOC people who put larger tires on the stock rims are thinking about 'rough road' driving. They are picking AT category tires, not high performance ones.

If you are mainly interested in handling, I'd suggest reading up on performance categories and tread designs, before worrying about tire size changes. Keep in mind that a tire that is better on dry handling, might not be so good in wet conditions, and even worse on snow or ice.

insane_sc
12-04-2009, 02:52 AM
^^^nice post. From my experience, a 235 wide tire is pushing it on our rim. You end up getting "quench" to early then roll over on the tire, that is hard on the tire. You want the quench to be at its max point of flex, it is then using the sidewall the way it was meant to. Look at any race car that is setup correctly, we can always find pictures of bad examples, the tire is usually flush or within 1mm width per side, there is a reason for that. Yes, a 235 will fit, it has been done, and they may handle better in dry when normal non-spirited driving habits are being performed, but push that same tire to a evasive manuver, and it may not be good. The same goes for streching a tire, the sidewall is allready flexed, the quench is done, that is why some drifters will run rims the width out of the tire spec, this has not been proven to work, but they think it gets them to slide easier. I saw first hand what can happen, tire pulled off rim, car slammed into other car. There are reccomendations for all tires to rim width ratio, but remember, you should stay within 3% diameter, especially on a auto trans, and with 5% width. Do the math, 215*1.05(5%)=225.75(225width) or 215*.95(-5%)=204.05(205width). As stated above, there are tire designs made with the correct section width of 215 or even 225 that has a broad shoulder design to give more contact patch and still be in the correct parrameters and dimensions for saftey and handling. Also, not all dealers are bad about this, but usually if you go outside the parameters of the stock size, they will not perform warranty work on your vehicle, I had to take off my 20's because of the 245 width even though its on a 8.5" rim, my mechanic is a friend and told me to no show up with them on, they will void my warranty on my drivetrain, thank god bob came to the rescue with $50 element steelies with worn badyears, saved me the headaches for sure.
Sorry for any spelling mistakes, I have been up for 18 hours and just worked 13 of it. I am going to bed!!
Later
Steve

insane_sc
12-04-2009, 03:12 AM
Oh yeah, also rim width to tire width, you want between a ratio of 27 to 33, 30 being perfect, how to figure it out, 225(width)/7.5(rim width)=30, that is perfect. 235/6.5=36.15, way too much!! Even at the stock 215/6.5=33.07, its already maxed out at a performance standpoint. My 245/8.5=28.82, a little stretched but within spec. I hope all my calculators packed away in my brain are helping everyone understand what I am trying to explain.
O.k. Now its nighty nite!!

SRLNCLT
12-04-2009, 02:47 PM
I went with 225/70/16 Toyo Open Country AT's 4 years ago for my winter tires. To me, they handle way better then the stock wranglers. If I had to do it over again, I'd probably do the 235/65 just cuz I like the lower/squatier/wider look.