[awinriez]

It is weird, couldn't find any mention regarding quicker failure of suspension components. A friend of mine went for 18" aftermarket alloys on a Polo, ended up screwing up the rear suspension setup within 7k-8k kms of use. Yes, the VW ASS managed to put a hole in his wallet. And he went back to the stock rims

As many have already mentioned, it depends a lot on your driving style too. But then, I believe that most people on this community drive in a more saner way than the rest of the world. However, let us look at it this way. You are doing 80kph on a National Highway, which I guess in most parts of the country is still just a single lane for each side. For some reason, maybe you were tailgating too close, or low light conditions or a long blind curve, you missed out to notice that new pothole from the last week rains or donated by the guys from the electricity or water supply departments. You are too late to do a maneuver or slow down. What'd you do? Hold on to dear life, hang on the wheel and let loose those swear words as you feel the impact jolt up your spine. I feel certain there would be a lot of people who can relate to this on a day to day basis. Do this a couple of times a month and in a year will start noticing niggles from the car (again this applies for those petrolheads with an unparalleled level of attention to detail) Small drops make an ocean, someone said.

One more thing I have noticed is the way rattles start to build up way too early than expected, especially in cars with notorious build quality. And yes, another thing to consider maybe the effects these have on your lower back or spine (not an expert to comment on this, but then, just a thought).

All that being said, I still stand there in awe each and everytime I see a car with sexy rims and low profile shoes. Can't help it!

[Artoodeebag]

While I prefer the aesthetics offered by lower profiles (having never driven a profile lower than 60, can't comment on the impact on performance), it makes no sense for Indian manufacturers to offer them. As it is, cars get fitted with a rough road package here (to the best of my knowledge, that is; as far as I know VW and Skoda cars get a 15mm rise in GC). That already spoils the stance a little. If manufacturers are comfortable sacrificing aesthetics for practicality there, why bother with lower profiles?

[venkyhere]

Originally Posted by blackwasp

A thread with perfect timing.

My Abarth came from the factory with 195/55 R16 tyres. Currently running with 205/55 R16 tyres that I'm not very happy with. The ride is not as plush as regular Puntos. Not only do I plan to go back to 195-section tyres, I'm seriously contemplating going back to 15 inchers!

195/60 R15 vs 195/55 R 16. This is what the tyre comparator shows up (9.5% increase in sidewall):

Isn't the factory size of 195/55/16, the wrong refence to compare against, since you anyway dont have it on the car ?
Shouldn't the reference be the actual thing that you currently have :
205/55/16 vs 195/60/15 --> gain 4.5% sidewall, lose 2.8% circumference
205/55/16 vs 195/65/15 --> gain 13.6% sidewall, gain 0.4% circumference

[Aravind_M92]

I do see a lot of varied opinions on this topic. I believe car manufacturers do put up their tire sizes based on the cars capacity and running conditions. I drive a CVT car and I believe going in for a larger rim or even upsizing the tyre would affect the car substantially. CVTs were designed for smooth drives with moderate loads. Unless there’s a better belt technology CVTs would never reach those capacities. Please do correct me if I’m wrong here.

Coming to road conditions in India, we still have a long way to go! I drive around in a rural area with my drive being 70% highways and 30% town limits ( that too for a 7 km daily commute). In this town of ~2 kms, I encounter about 6 speed breaks and numerous potholes! I barely go beyond 20 kmph in these places. Now coming to bigger rims, and the cost involved, yes there look fancy but going over these potholes will be a huge pain both to the back and the wallet!

I’ve voted for stock rim size and upsizing the tyres within the rims capacity rather than changing the rim itself. Well, opinions do differ! I upsized my tyres to 195/60 on stock rims and do feel the engine grunt at low speeds. But coming to the cons and pro, my ride has become more stable and smoother. But don’t know the wear and tear of the CVT belt.

[somspaple]

"Reliable stuffs are boring!" - can't help it :(

Those huge rims and sexy low profile tyres have fascinated me ever since I was in college. But when it comes to choosing stuff for my rides I've always leaned towards reliable set-up.

For that matter I feel the stock rubber on Next Gen Verna 16 inch wheels have a low profile sidewall for our road conditions. I went for 205/55 upgrade straight out of showroom for want of 'better' tyres and for that few mm increase in sidewall height.

[Bibendum90949]

Voted for taller profile tyres.I've always been upgrading my tyres literally on day one of purchasing the car.

On our roads, a taller sidewall not just gives peace of mind but more comfort and cushioning too. Such tyres tend to absorb most potholes( it kind of wrap them around )with ease whereas lower profile gives an annoying thud besides running the risk of damaging the wheels in the event of hitting a pothole or hump at speeds.i've seen some of my cars which I owned ride much better with higher profile tyres on pothole ridden roads than with their stock ones.It was still a good bargain by trading off a bit of handling traits.You don't do high speed cornering every other day anyways.

Few cars which i've observed that comes with taller profile tyres from OEM are Tata Harrier, Audi A4 ( previous gen ),Q3, Q5, Brezza etc.Some manufacturers make cars that handle brilliantly but it comes shod with either puny tyres or inferior quality ones just to save few pounds.

Few upgrades which i've done over the years,all Michelins by the way.It has served me extremely well all the while.

Santro 175/60 R13 (155/70 R13 )
Fiesta 195/60 R 14 ( 175/65 R14 )
Laura 225/55 R16 on it's 3 rd set ( 205/50 R16 )
Seltos 235/55 R 17 ( 205/ 60 R17 )

[mpshah68]

Taller profile tyres are always an advantage here in India because of our roads. Some manufacturers offer higher profile tyres in their top end variant and smaller ones in the other lower variants. Apart from the fact that taller profile tyres add significantly to the car's road manners the lower profile ones would also wear off faster.

[Tucker48]

Looks do matter.
Driving skills come at play as well.
Roads are getting better.
For all in one car, avoid low profile.
If more than one car, low profile is the way forward.
Low profile for everyday commute is even better with tiny advantage in breaking and handling and not to forget road feel.
But tyres should always be compatible with car, if there is any doubt then stick with original.

[blackwasp]

Originally Posted by octane1002

Makes me wonder why Fiat did not equip Avventura with 215/65 rubber instead of the 205/55 option. Given the amount of gap between the fender and the tyres in stock form, is this up size OK?

I don't have much experience of the Avventura, but in Linea the 205/55 R16 is a good combination.

Originally Posted by blackbeast

Please do it right away.

Thanks, waiting for the current tyres to wear out.

Originally Posted by pugram

Absolutely.

As an SCROSS owner with the 205/60/16 wheels and OE tyres & recommended pressures, it is one hell of a bone jarring ride.

For reference, my uncle's Brezza with 215/60 R16 has a fantastic ride!

Originally Posted by venkyhere

Isn't the factory size of 195/55/16, the wrong refence to compare against, since you anyway dont have it on the car ?
Shouldn't the reference be the actual thing that you currently have :
205/55/16 vs 195/60/15 --> gain 4.5% sidewall, lose 2.8% circumference
205/55/16 vs 195/65/15 --> gain 13.6% sidewall, gain 0.4% circumference

I wanted to refer to the stock size as speedo is calibrated against that. But yes, your numbers also have a point, I'll still take the 4.5% sidewall gain. I'm not too sure on 195/65/15.

[pugram]

Originally Posted by sudeepg

Did you check the shocks if they are worn out? Maruti provides sub standard shocks even in their premium cars!

I got a pre-worshipped car which was out of warranty and currently being maintained by my FNG. I will check with him during the next service. I saw the posts from Dr. Naren and others on the KYB shocks and am yet to decide on them. Any Indian options available ?

Michelin P4's have definitely made the ride smoother. But the car definitely dives when braking. I miss the flat ride of Logan

Originally Posted by blackwasp

For reference, my uncle's Brezza with 215/60 R16 has a fantastic ride!
.

I think Maruti fixed the ride in Brezza with a better suspension package. Ride quality is a function of both suspension and tyre.

[evil_grin]

For my own car, I prefer taller sidewalls because of the significant improvement in ride quality. Unfortunately, the top variants come with smaller sidewalls. So I upgrade the sidewall height with taller tyres. I spend way more time driving my car then looking at the wheels.

For other people's cars, I prefer larger wheels with shorter sidewalls because they look better and I don't have to deal with their bad ride quality. I feel that exterior improvements to a car benefit observers more than the owner

[Silver Knight]

For a daily drive car I will definitely prefer near to stock tyre (I upgraded to wider tyres on stock rims/alloy on my Swift and Figo immediately)May be you can experiment with low profile tyres on your weekend ride ( if you have one). No doubt low profile tyres with bigger alloys looks suave, but the pains outnumber the gains.

[PPS]

Everyone knows low profile tyres are not meant for our roads.

For comparisons sake, when the E Class LWB was launched they came with 55 profile 17 inch tyres keeping in mind the Indian road conditions. I think the other cars in the segment like A6 & 5 series still come with 45 profile tyres. On the other hand, Toyota opted to go for low profile 235/45 tyres for their Camry, although I believe it still retains the plush ride quality!

[Ash_vtec]

Depends on intended purpose. Also this factors only ride/usage, what about larger brakes that need a minimum rim size ?

On a humorous note...this was the forum that was FOR 16in rims on an OHC/lancer/fiesta category of cars which was distinctly over tyred back in the day, irony that today there is a poll for smaller wheels lol

Keeping aside atheistic arguments which are subjective, cars have gotten heavier over the years and heavier cars need larger brakes which in turn dictate larger rims. So, yes while an innova with a 45 profile is stupid, some cars may by inherent design need larger rims.

[krishnaprasadgg]

Wow, great thread GTO and timing couldn't have been better.

Being an Ecosport S owner and having already covered 38k kms now on the 17", I have faced no problems what so ever, but I am not running on the stock Ecopias which are practically death traps with their bulging/bursting issue. I am using the Momo outrun M3 which I used to 215 section while maintaining the same 50 side profile.
I have gone over numerous potholes and speed bumps with a full load and more than ideal speed and have faced 0 tyre issues or rim bend.
As far as harsh ride is concerned I just increased the tyre pressure to 32psi all around and the ride quality was much better.

At the same time, my friend who was running on 215/45R16 for his Baleno finally gave in and went with the 205/55R16 recently and he appreciates the ride much more. So experiences do vary.

So from my experience, bigger wheels in itself isn't that bad, bigger wheels running on not the right kind of tyres for the usage you intend to do is what causes the issues. I feel my case is the best example.

A full review of the tyres I am using is in works and will update here once posted/approved by the mods.

Cheers
Krishna