[alpharomeo]

Originally Posted by Nikhilb2008

165/60-14 is non-existent. There is no tyre available in that size in India. Your best bet in 14" is 175/60-14 but that will affect your ride comfort.

There is a dedicated i10 tyre thread. Search for it and post there.

Hi Nikhil,

Could then suggest the best size for an i10?
Also, on a slightly different note, I reached out to Tyre Professionals @ Kanakpura road for my i10 tyre upsize few hours ago.
I am looking to upgrade my shoes to 185/60R14 and was looking between Bridgestone ER300 and Yokohama C Drive.

I had planned to come and visit tomorrow morning.
But both were told were out of stock currently.

Seeking your help on this.
On the right size and make.

Regards,
Alpha.

[alpharomeo]

Hi,

I upgraded my shoes today @ Sai Iyengar Tyres (Indira Nagar).
I got the Yokohama Earth 175/65R14 on to my i10 magna.
It feels really good and handling has improved a lot and steering is responsive.

On my way return, it was raining and went through quite a bit of bad roads / weekend traffic. Ride back was good.

Here is the what i paid:

4 x Yokahama Earth 1 - 175/65R14 - 4300/- per tyre
4 x Neo Astrix 14" 6J - 4200/-

Traded in my 22K run Bridgestone B250 155/80R13 tyres for 1500.
Split up was:
4 x Steel Rims - 100/- per rim
2 x Tyres - 500/- each
2 x Worn out - None

Net amount paid - 34000 - 1400 = 32600/-

I did get a Black&Decker Auto Dustbuster worth 2195/- free (I plan to sell this on eBay as is).

Overall experience was good. Ashwin Balaji was good and helped me a lot. I was worried of this size as keralshobit had experienced some issues with this size. So I checked with Ashwin. He said he had put 175/65R14 Michelin XM1+ on his friends i10. And he had no issues. He in fact called his friend again and enquired if he had any issues regard side wall scrapping. And he had none for past 2 years it seems.

My original plan was for 185/60R14 Yokahama C Drive, but only 3212 stock was available. And Bridgestone Turanza ER300 too was not available. Thus i had to go with either Yokahama A drive or this one.

The tyres i got were of 3213 stock (32nd week) and on Neo Wheels i got a 6month Warranty too.

I did not pay anything for Wheel Balancing / Alignment / Nitrogen or Labour.

There was quite a queue for alignments and balancing. Two i20s do were present then.

After returning home i put my hand around the tyre and saw that the gap between the tyre and the wheel well had closed down. This i can relate to the increase in the total diameter by about 6 mm. Tried different steering angles and saw the minimum distance now to be about 10mm between wheel well and the tyre. Rear is fine and i dont think there should be any issue.

I shall post the pics soon and keep you all posted.

Regards,
Alpha.

[sonic_boom]

Originally Posted by RSR

The answer you are looking for is: It is not recommended, though they will fit.

Originally Posted by autotranny

The width of Hyundai stock RIMs are 4.5, whereas the recommended minimum width for the 175 tyre is 5. BUT the tyres can be easily mounted. No doubt about that.

Thanks autotranny and RSR. I did extensive research around this and the evidence was inconclusive. Some people said 175/70 R13s mount well on i10s stock rims and some said it's not meant to be. But since some users have been using these tyres on their i10s for a couple of years and Hyundai themselves recommend this upgrade, I took the plunge and upgraded to 4 all new Bridgestone Turanzas on stock rims yesterday. Took one Pune-Mumbai e-way trip and all seems good so far and the car is definitely more planted.
Will post FE figures soon.

[misquitas]

I have two queries on replacing tyres on my i10 (1.2 kappa2, Magna 2010), whiich completed 50,000 kms yesterday.

It has run on factory-fiitted stock MRF ZEC tyres (155/80/R13) till no with no problem whatsoever. These 4 tyres are now worn out and need to be replaced quickly.

Going by the debates on this thread, I am not inclined to put 175/70/R13 on my existing rims as they are not recommended due to various issues.

At the same time, I don't want to upgrade to alloys at this juncture and I am, surprisingly, content with the stock 155/80/R13 tyres on my rims. I have been getting great FE so far (worst 15 kmpl, best 21 kmpl), hence, I don't want to experiment with larger tyres and alloys.

Now the two queries:

1. I checked with different mechanics, tyre dealers and Hyundai service personnel and I got conflicting views on the best stock tyres for my i10.

The different suggestions...
1. MRF ZEC/ZVTS (Rs 2800)
2. Apollo Amazer (Rs 2900)
3. Yokohama (Rs 3250)
4. Bridgestone (Rs 3650)

Most of the Hyundai people strongly recommended Bridgestone, but it is the most expensive of the lot.

So, which stock size tyre would be recommended for the next 40k kms, considering our rough Indian roads?

2. My spare MRF tyre has only done about 1000 kms for about a month in the last 3 years. Could I use that as the spare and buy only 4 new tyres? Would it make any difference and would the MRF tyre become too hard (over time) to use it as a spare tyre?

Please let me know urgently as I have to change the tyres within the next 1-2 days.
Thanks.

[RSR]

Originally Posted by misquitas

I have two queries on replacing tyres on my i10 (1.2 kappa2, Magna 2010), whiich completed 50,000 kms yesterday.

It has run on factory-fiitted stock MRF ZEC tyres (155/80/R13) till no with no problem whatsoever. These 4 tyres are now worn out and need to be replaced quickly.

50,000 km is very good life for the tyres on the i10 - MRFs are known to last long even on the worst of roads.

Originally Posted by misquitas

Going by the debates on this thread, I am not inclined to put 175/70/R13 on my existing rims as they are not recommended due to various issues.

Yes, fitting 175/70R13 tyres on the stock 4B x 13" rims is not recommended, thought they will fit.

Originally Posted by misquitas

Now the two queries:

1. I checked with different mechanics, tyre dealers and Hyundai service personnel and I got conflicting views on the best stock tyres for my i10.

The different suggestions...
1. MRF ZEC/ZVTS (Rs 2800)
2. Apollo Amazer (Rs 2900)
3. Yokohama (Rs 3250)
4. Bridgestone (Rs 3650)

Most of the Hyundai people strongly recommended Bridgestone, but it is the most expensive of the lot.

So, which stock size tyre would be recommended for the next 40k kms, considering our rough Indian roads?

Each one has its advantages and disadvantages. The MRFs (and maybe the Apollo Amazers too) are very tough tyres, last long and can take abuse very well, but fall a bit short on performance and ride quality. The Yokohamas (A-Drives, I guess) are softer compound tyres - very silent with excellent grip and ride quality, but aren't as tough as the MRFs. The Bridgestones (B250 or B290?) offer the best of both. They are quite tough, yet offer good grip and decent ride quality.

My pick would depend on the kind of roads you mostly drive on. If they are very good and smooth roads, then go for the Yokos. The Yokos would also help you get the best grip and handling to complement the excellent Kappa2 engine. If you have to drive through pathetic excuses for roads, MRFs are the best bet. If you have to tackle both kinds of roads, then the Bridgestones would be the ones to go for.

Originally Posted by misquitas

2. My spare MRF tyre has only done about 1000 kms for about a month in the last 3 years. Could I use that as the spare and buy only 4 new tyres? Would it make any difference and would the MRF tyre become too hard (over time) to use it as a spare tyre?

It can certainly be used as a spare. Tyres do harden over time even if unused, but 3 year old tyre still has some life left in it. Since it has hardly been used, you can indeed use it as a spare for a couple of more years. As you'll probably go for a different pattern and also considering the tyre is not new, it's best to use the spare as just that - use it to replace a flat tyre, and then put it back in the boot on getting the flat one fixed.

[misquitas]

Originally Posted by RSR

50,000 km is very good life for the tyres on the i10 - MRFs are known to last long even on the worst of roads.

Many thanks, RSR, for your detailed reply. Going by the average condition of roads, I am more inclined to pick up MRF or Apollo tyres for my i10. Given the fact that I had absolutely no problem with MRF ZEC tyres for 50k kms, I may just consider replacing my stock tyres with the same tyres. Heck, they are the cheapest among them as well.

[sparsh]

You can also look at the Uk spec which comes shod with 175/65 R14. This would improve ground clearance and improve the ride quality as well. There may be an impact on fuel efficiency though.

[misquitas]

Originally Posted by sparsh

You can also look at the Uk spec which comes shod with 175/65 R14. This would improve ground clearance and improve the ride quality as well. There may be an impact on fuel efficiency though.

True, but it is apparently not recommended on the India model. Posts on this thread seem to suggest so. Besides, would it not foul with the calliberation settings on the odometer?

[rohan_iitr]

Originally Posted by misquitas

Most of the Hyundai people strongly recommended Bridgestone, but it is the most expensive of the lot.

So, which stock size tyre would be recommended for the next 40k kms, considering our rough Indian roads?

2. My spare MRF tyre has only done about 1000 kms for about a month in the last 3 years. Could I use that as the spare and buy only 4 new tyres? Would it make any difference and would the MRF tyre become too hard (over time) to use it as a spare tyre?

I would recommend Bridgestone over MRF from my personal experience.

My i10 came with Bridgestone tyres, whereas my colleague's i10 came with MRF tyres. There is a noticeable difference in the ride quality. Even the road grip and steering feel are much better with Bridgestone tyres - my car feels planted at 90 kmph, whereas my colleague's car with MRF tyres feels like a boat at the same speed (on the exact same road).

Also, I would suggest that you sell the old spare and buy a one.

Do you not use the spare during tyre rotation ?

Rohan

[misquitas]

Originally Posted by rohan_iitr

I would recommend Bridgestone over MRF from my personal experience. My i10 came with Bridgestone tyres, whereas my colleague's i10 came with MRF tyres. There is a noticeable difference in the ride quality. Even the road grip and steering feel are much better with Bridgestone tyres - my car feels planted at 90 kmph, whereas my colleague's car with MRF tyres feels like a boat at the same speed (on the exact same road).

I too have been getting strong recommendations regarding the advantages of Bridgestone over other tyres. Some have even advised me to opt for the newer Bridgestone B290 in comparison with the older B250. The best rate I'm getting for the Bridgestone B290 is Rs 3650 per tyre. Is this rate OK?

Also, I would suggest that you sell the old spare and buy a one. Do you not use the spare during tyre rotation?

My spare MRF tyre is a little over 3 years old and has done about 1000 kms. I doubt any tyre dealer would want to buy my spare tyre, which probably would also be harder by now. Also, when I used to do tyre rotations at the MRF dealer, they erroneously undertook only 4-tyre rotation. By the time I realised the advantages about 5-tyre rotation, it was too late and the 4 tyres had already covered a significant number of kms.

[misquitas]

Originally Posted by RSR

The Bridgestones (B250 or B290?) offer the best of both. They are quite tough, yet offer good grip and decent ride quality.

If you have to tackle both kinds of roads, then the Bridgestones would be the ones to go for.

Originally Posted by sparsh

You can also look at the Uk spec which comes shod with 175/65 R14.

Originally Posted by rohan_iitr

I would recommend Bridgestone over MRF from my personal experience.

My i10 came with Bridgestone tyres, whereas my colleague's i10 came with MRF tyres. There is a noticeable difference in the ride quality. Even the road grip and steering feel are much better with Bridgestone tyres - my car feels planted at 90 kmph, whereas my colleague's car with MRF tyres feels like a boat at the same speed (on the exact same road).

Many thanks, rohan_iitr, RSR, sparsh, for all your advice. I just returned from the tyre dealer after replacing my old MRF ZEC 155/80R13 with new Bridgestone B290 155/80R13 tyres. They were Rs 3650 apiece and I had to pay an additional Rs 130 for the weights as the balancing and allignment for the tyres. Total cost: Rs 14730. I insisted on the same tyre specifications (155/80R13) to avoid any issues with the rim and with the calibration of the odometer.

I read about the difference between the newer Bridgestone B290 tyres and the older B250 tyres on the internet and found this information from the company's website and other press releases:

Benefits of B290 tyres:

* The tyre is specially made for the Indian market.

* The B290 has a square tyre profile to the traditional rounded outer sidewall. The company says that this provides a better contact area where the tread touches the road.

* Other benefits of this profile are minimized shoulder wear and fewer tyre deformations.

* The company promises increased tyre life of 10 per cent over its predecessor.

* The wide grooves and sipes help in providing better handling and braking in wet conditions.

* The bigger and stiffer blocks also enable good braking in dry conditions.

* Closed shoulders produce less noise thus improving the ride quality.

* Its deep tread and wear resistance compound account for better fuel efficiency and superior tyre life.

Now, both the B290 and the B250 tyres were available with the Bridgestone dealer and were priced the same. Hence, it did not make sense to me to opt for the earlier B250 tyres, given the purported improvements on the B290 tyres.

The dealer did the balancing and allignment of my four new tyres and within an hour, I was driving home with new Bridgestone B290 tyres. The drive certainly felt good and in all honesty, I dont know iff it was due to the fact that my earlier tyes were MRF ZEC or simply the fact that these MRF ZEC were worn out and needed an urgent replacement.

I have retained the old spare MRF ZEC tyre as it has hardly been used for about 100 kms and has a lot of thread left. The four tyres will now be given/sold to a scrapyard.

[RSR]

Originally Posted by misquitas

Now, both the B290 and the B250 tyres were available with the Bridgestone dealer and were priced the same. Hence, it did not make sense to me to opt for the earlier B250 tyres, given the purported improvements on the B290 tyres.

The B290s are certainly the better choice of the two. It's a newer pattern, more optimised for Indian conditions (B250s aren't bad on this aspect as they are pretty tough) and will eventually replace the B250s in the near future. So they are future proof when compared to the B250s - if you want to replace only two tyres some years in the future, finding B250s may be an issue, not so with the newer B290s.

Besides, the i10 is undertyred on the stock size of 155/80R13s, certainly while driving on highways. So the extra road contact patch of the B290s due to its "squarer" pattern should make a marginal difference for the better.

Originally Posted by misquitas

The drive certainly felt good and in all honesty, I dont know iff it was due to the fact that my earlier tyes were MRF ZEC or simply the fact that these MRF ZEC were worn out and needed an urgent replacement.

Newer tyres generally feel better than old, worn out ones. Still, the Bridgestones B290s should be appreciably better than the MRF ZECs in terms of grip, braking, ride quality and road noise as the ZEC is an old pattern, hard compound tyre.

Originally Posted by misquitas

I have retained the old spare MRF ZEC tyre as it has hardly been used for about 100 kms and has a lot of thread left.

A wise decision. It should still have some life left in it, and should do decently as a spare tyre for a couple of more years.

However, please use it only as a spare tyre as it is a different pattern and older than the other four tyres. You can utilise it in the same manner as the space-saver spare tyres found on some cars. Replace a flat tyre with the spare, use it only till you get the flat tyre fixed (as soon as possible), and then put it back in the boot.

[nick17s]

Some images of my i10 with 185/60/14

[blackasta]

With 39K+ on the Yoko ES100s, the time is coming up fast that I change the shoes. Now 185/60R14 tires have a -0.1 circumference difference from the 155/80R13 stock size, but fewer tires are available in that size.
I was looking up 175/65R14 size, which has a circumference difference of +0.85% (well within the tolerance limit), and is available with Yoko Earth 1 that seems to have good reviews.

I checked the thread to find a few members have upsized to 175/65R14 size - what's the verdict?

[dar3dev|l]

Originally Posted by blackasta

With 39K+ on the Yoko ES100s, the time is coming up fast that I change the shoes. Now 185/60R14 tires have a -0.1 circumference difference from the 155/80R13 stock size, but fewer tires are available in that size.
I was looking up 175/65R14 size, which has a circumference difference of +0.85% (well within the tolerance limit), and is available with Yoko Earth 1 that seems to have good reviews.

I checked the thread to find a few members have upsized to 175/65R14 size - what's the verdict?

Recently got Earth's with same specs for my friends Beat. He is really happy with the performance

I am running my i10 on Michellins and got just over 25K kms, so a long time to go to replace them. But if I were to change at this moment i would have definitely moved to Yoko's !