295s On All 4's anyone?

[Powered by Ford]

Wow..what an awesome resource. Thanks for posting!

No problem Norm has an even better one he is working on. He emailed it to me yesterday. He will post it up soon.

 

[Norm Peterson]

Sneak Peak

Norm

 

[Powered by Ford]

Sneak Peak

Norm

That's looking very good Norm. How are you simulating the ground force and bulge?

Matt

 

[908ssp]

n......

Sounds much easier to just use the manufacturer's recommended widths, and play it safe. Find a company that designs a width you want for the rim width you have so you're covered.

Why do suppose this is not obvious? Amazing that people think they know better than the manufacturer. Maybe the manufacturer just doesn't want you to buy their tire.

 

[19COBRA93]

Sneak Peak

Norm

What's that, 10psi?

A real world example looks nothing like that.

 

[tjm73]

That's looking very good Norm. How are you simulating the ground force and bulge?

Matt

Also how are you controlling the shape of the bulge? I am quite certain that the makeup of the tire sidewall helps control the side wall shape of the tire. Also what about the thickness of the rubber at the sidewall tread connection area? How is that represented in your diagrams?

I like the diagrams. They help you visualize. But something doesn't look 100% accurate.

 

[Norm Peterson]

It's only supposed to give a somewhat better picture than the ones you see on the online pages that never move the sidewalls out of being vertical/parallel to each other or widen the section width as wheel width is increased.

The loaded vs unloaded page is only intended to indicate something about sidewall flexing for a given tire:wheel combination. On another page in the same workbook, comparisons between two different (unloaded) tire:wheel packages overlaid on the same chart are plotted.

I have not attempted to model any curvature up near the wheel flange or at the shoulder areas. Doesn't seem worth the trouble, or the questions that might arise should adjacent curves show a sharp discontinuity. The sidewall is already a composite of two curves, which is adequate for the intended purposes.

The loaded shape in that plot uses a specified displacement approach with the (approximate) length along the unloaded-case sidewall being essentially maintained rather than a flexibility analysis based on forces and element stiffnesses. The assumption being that the fabric-reinforced and pressurized tire is not particularly compressible within the shape of its membrane.

It's not intended to be the shape under only the static corner weight, more like 75% or so higher as you'd see going over a smallish bump, front tires under severe braking, or outside tires under a pretty good cornering load, minus the lateral deflection (I've got autocross pictures that show considerably greater vertical compression of the tire section height). [Edit]Maybe even if the inflation pressure really was 10 psi or so. I'm not all that concerned with the reason at this point.

I'm still tinkering with it a little, but in checking against some actual static situations the amounts that the max section widths bulge out beyond the face of the wheel seem to be within 1/8" or so.


Norm

 

[HellsBells]

Anyone know if I'll run into issues with a 295/35/19 with a 19x10 +38 wheel on the rear?

Same 19x10 +38 wheel on the front but with a 275/35/19

Thanks!

 

[Norm Peterson]

Imagine a 2008 GT500.

Your clearance on the inside would be about the same (front and rear), but the outside of the wheel and the tire would be something like 9/16" further out on the fronts and about half an inch further out on the rears. A bit closer than I'd care to call from here without making measurements to the fenders, particularly the fronts.


Norm

 

[Kobie]

The 295 weighs 5lbs more than the 275. Sounds like a lot of extra mass, but it does look bitchin!

 

[mustangflanagan]

i was gonna use some gt4 wheels 10 in, i dont know the offset on them but how wide can i get them i was gonna use nittos nto5rs

 

[mynameismike65]

When I ran those Falkens staggered 255/40 & 295/40 18's it tramline pretty badly. When I switched to 275's (20's) all around it is much better.

Go figure

I have the same setup, and yes they tramline horribly.

 

[Kbreeze]

I'm planning on 18x10 Forgestar f14's (Silver, NOT BLACK) with 295/35/18 Vredestein Ultrac Sessanta's (Not too popular with the mustang crowd but awesome tires, especially for the price) on all four corners.

 

[Kbreeze]

I've got 295 on a 10" wheel right now and it feels really well. I think it should be just fine on a 9.5" like you said.

My next set-up will be 19x9.5 sve's all around in 295/35/19s. I just hope i dont rub being dropped on sportlines.

Is your car currently on 18's? (pic in your signature). Are those 18x10's out back with 295/35/18's? What tire are you running?

 

[Digital_Synapse]

Is your car currently on 18's? (pic in your signature). Are those 18x10's out back with 295/35/18's? What tire are you running?

That car is dead as of last week I believe.

 

[Kbreeze]

That car is dead as of last week I believe.

Huh? What happened?

 

[flyfaster1]

Poor fella lost control getting into it and nailed a wall and brick or concrete pillar pretty freakin hard... car didnt fair too well from his pics but glad the dude made it out alright.

 

[Ampire]

Huh? What happened?

It was wrecked unfortunately, heres the link http://www.s197forum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=77777

 

[Makdaddy]

I'm running 295-40-18 Falken Azenis on all four corners. They're mounted on 18x10 Roush's.

Do you know what offset the wheels are?

 

[19COBRA93]

Do you know what offset the wheels are?

They are a 45mm (and they're for sale in the classifieds).