Team-BHP (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/)

-   Tyre & Alloy wheel Section (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/tyre-alloy-wheel-section/)

-   -   Tall tyres & regular wheels versus low-profile tyres & large wheels (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/tyre-alloy-wheel-section/220044-tall-tyres-regular-wheels-versus-low-profile-tyres-large-wheels-6.html)

The Critical thing is not the profile per se but the sidewall height. This is why when you upgrade, instead of going for +1 on wheel size, it is much better to fit a wider tyre of an appropriate profile so that the sidewall height remains nearly the same.

Where the manufacturers are erring is that they are blindly upping the wheel size which means the sidewall height is reduced significantly causing poor ride quality, tyre and wheel damage. The manufacturers should in my opinion provide wider tyres mounted on on wider rims on their more powerful engined variants instead of providing larger diameter wheels.

Shorter stiffer sidewalls roll less and provide sharper steering response while bigger sidewalls provide better comfort and bump absorption. On a passenger vehicle meant to ply on normal roads, especially our notorious roads the balance should always be skewed towards comfort and ride quality.

I have voted for Traditional trend of regular wheels & taller profile tyres.
However, I wonder if an average buyer even understands the implication of 1" difference in wheel size and subsequent change in tyre wall size. Most probably he only looks at the overall silhouette of the car and how it looks with the bigger tyres. Also, the variant with bigger wheels is generally the top most version, which has further, all the chrome in the world to make it look even more attractive.
I just feel all of us, who are on this forum, are in minority and marketability of the product is the reason for the change in the tire size.

But then, if one goes for bigger alloys, and keeps the sidewall height the same, the rolling diameter changes, and there's a lot of speedo error.

Example, 185/60/R14 upsizes to 185/60R15. Thats a difference of 4.4%. If one keeps the sidewall height the same.

Even in i20, the Magna comes with 185/70/r14 and the Asta (O) comes with 195/55/R16.

Tyre profile has to be dropped if order to avoid speedo error.

Main reason why I am hesitant to buy a fast sedan which mostly will come with low profile tyre. Refering to cars which can do 0-100 less than 6 sec.
We have already seen cases of vrs, c300d tyre and alloy damage in forum aswell.

Some like low and some like high porfile tyres, can companies alter its model to accomodate high profile tyres and give us option of selecting the max possible high profile tyre in any model ?

Or get Michelin uptis asap
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=27iJWJXBmnc

For me practicality, performance and peace is more important than looks on Indian roads.

Toyota discontinued the 17 inch rims from higher variants of the Innova Crysta after repeated complaints from customers regarding harsh ride quality and wheel damage in some cases due to heavy loads. After a while though, the 17 inchers were back again! Don't know the exact reason behind Toyota's decision of bringing them back. The 17 inchers look great IMO but the 16 inchers are much more well suited to our road conditions.

The topic of this thread has been the biggest headache with regards to my 2 year old Verna. I have not touched 30k on the meter yet but have already had 2 tyres burst on me. First one at some 3000 odd kilometers and the second one at 22k itself! Though I have to admit the first one came when I went over a pothole filled with water during incessant rains, the second one burst on a damn new highway with a jump due to a bridge mismatched with the road.

Anyway, talked to the company (all tyres are Hankook make) officials who along with the tyre dealer I purchase from, told me that this is a common issue with Verna and all because of low profile tyres. The dealer advised me to run these ones out and upsize around 35k. Wonder that’s the life of a Hankook tyre!

Anyway, long story short, Car makers are screwing their customers left right and centre on this and there seems to be nothing happening to them.

Commenting four months (or, 1 coronaseason, as it is now known ;) ) later...

Although I may sometimes give the impression that I am, I really am not a century old! But thin-sided, low-profile tyres, far from looking sexy to me, make me think of road rollers and industrial machines with steel wheels and solid-rubber tyres! Do not like!

Higher profile tyres & smaller wheels any day!

Indian roads may be getting better (especially highways & expressways), but they are still nowhere close to First World standards. Large wheels and low profile tyres just wouldn't do for India.

As a matter of fact, I'm planning a profile upgrade for our (i-gen) i20 as its first set of tyres have gotten old (but still have decent tread left in them). The stock 185/65 R14 is a decent-enough profile, but I'm planning a switch to higher profile 185/70 R14 tyres on the stock alloys. I want the additional GC and even better ride comfort provided by the latter.

Hello BHPians,
These days, there are many factory fitted wheel sizes to choose from in the same car. Normally, lower variants get wheel with taller side walls (More rubber) and smaller alloy/steel rims whereas higher variant gets shorter sidewalls (Less rubber) and bigger alloy wheels.

Taller side walls + Smaller rims:

The picture shown here is the 16" alloy wheel of the Innova Crysta. It would offer better ride due to more rubber and taller sidewalls.

Due to increase rubber, the bump soaking capabilities of the wheel gets better. Even though the major role is played by the suspension, the size of the wheels do give that last degree of finesse to the ride/handling. In this case Ride quality would be much better but the overall handling of the car would be compromised.

Shorter side walls + Larger rims:

This picture is of the 17" alloy of the Innova Crysta. Due to larger rims, the sidewall has been reduced hence, the car would be a lot better to handle compared to the lower variants.

With this combination, the car feels more agile and makes it a better handler. However, there would be a compromise on ride quality due to shorter side walls.

Verdict -
Would you prefer to have good ride quality on the expense of handling or would you prefer good handling but compromise on ride quality?
(P.S. - I am talking about factory fitted alloys only, There can be modifications done from the outside for everyone's personal likings).

It’s depends upon the car. If the car has a stiffer suspension like Seltos, I prefer taller side walls and if the suspension is soft like old gen Creta, I’d choose lower profile tyres.

Voted for depending on the car. But for me, would always prefer ride and handing to be well balanced.

For Indian conditions, it has to be taller sidewalls and smaller rims. I say this as the owner of a Hexa with 19” alloys and a Compass with 18 inchers. Skinny rubber on huge alloys is a silly fad that everyone has inexplicably caught on. It just does not work. The rubber is costlier and less durable, ride quality suffers big time, alloys are prone to damage and suspensions are put through extra abuse. And it’s not like your SUV starts handling like a Porsche. There is basically no change. It is loose loose loose in every way.

I voted for depends.

For a sports car ,sedan , wagon or a hatch, I would prefer more handling than comfort. Therefore I would go for shorter side walls and bigger wheels.

For a SUV or minivan , I would prefer more comfort. Therefore I would go for taller side walls and smaller wheels.

But I would honestly like a car with a balance of both handling and comfort.

Again, this is a rather rushed or limited multiple choice question of an aspect that is far more technical and multi-dimensional. Tyres do aid in ride quality and/or handling, also, ride quality and handling aren't antonyms, there are perfectly balanced cars that can do both but it also is dependent on driver preferences, most people call GT TSi as comfortable to sit in, I found it rock hard, and most people completely trashed prev-gen i20 and Verna for a super soft ride quality and while that is true, in city traffic they both were more than manageable and completely supportive/silent over bad roads.

I took those examples because a brand defines what behavior its car must exhibit, each have various permutations & combinations, some as below :

* Springy soft suspension with large rims and low profile rubber - result is still soft ride quality.

* Neutral suspension with large rims and low profile rubber - best of both worlds

* Slightly stiff suspension with small rims and thicker sidewall - best of both worlds

* Springy soft suspension with small rims and thicker sidewall - a very pliable movement with constant shakes and jiggles

* Hard suspension with low profile rubber and large rims - bone-jarring

I've driven exactly the same cars with different tyre setups, the difference tyres make is not more than 25%, rest is defined by 1) shock-absorber type 2) chassis stiffness and 3) type of struts 4 ) quality of linkages, bushings and joints (please do note that tyres + struts + shocks and bushings form the majority of suspension system).

The way I've experienced it, tyres help in tackling road aberrations, small pebbles, stones, expansion joints, minor potholes, grip etc, the suspension system tackles large potholes, major road undulations, car-load management and handling. Sidewall should preferably be fatter in developing and underdeveloped countries while the 8 lane highway countries can be happy with low-profile tyres to zip via hundreds of miles of smooth tarmac.

I prefer a perfect balance of ride-quality and handling, some cars that I found extremely impressive were the Duster, 2020 i20, Fiat Punto and most D segment sedans with multi-link suspension.

It depends on the car chassis, its suspension dynamics, powertrain, brakes and also the quality of seat design, cushioning, the occupant/luggage load, occupant's level of fitness, and a host of other intangibles.