Skip to main content

DICK RUZZIN / 12-1-2013
This is my replacement tire program analysis.
____________________________________________________
The first step for me was to choose a brand as a reference. There may be other brands to choose from for the sizes finally chosen but I have not gone that far yet. Ultra high speed is no problem as I do not go there. I drive my car usually in good weather on public highways, no racing or gymkhanas.
B F Goodrich is a respected brand that has a wide variety of 15 inch tires in many aspect ratios so for a number of reasons I chose them as the program study base. I did include other sizes from Mickey Thompson but those tires were configured for drag racing on the street.

MY GOALS:
1. Tires from a brand that have a good performance record, BFG has that, others might also.
2. Reduce the space between the top of the rear tire and the wheel opening above it.
3. Achieve a size differential between front and rear that is clearly discernible, both in side view height and cross section volume.
4. Lower my car front and rear, I have a 1 inch spacer on top of my rear shock that can be removed.
5. No deterioration in speed rating from my Good Year Eagles.
6. Good handling and braking qualities for street tires.

I am able to achieve all of the above by using BFG tires, front and rear.

I set up a gridded drawing and recorded diameter dimensions for the following
BF GOODRICH and MICKEY THOMPSON tires, to be used front and rear. Each vertical line that represented a tires diameter also depicted the location of the bottom of the bell-housing that defines rear road clearance. The bell-housing travels vertically with the wheel centerlines which moves up and down with the overall tire diameter.

THE FOLLOWING SIZES WERE CONSIDERED AND DIMENSIONALLY EVALUATED,
______________________________________
FRONT:

225X50
225X60
225X50 (Mickey Thompson)
235X60 (Current, Good Year)
______________________________________
REAR:

255X70
295X65 (Mickey Thompson)
275X60 (Current, Good Year)
______________________________________
The following choices resulted in the best solution for me..

FRONT:
225X60 with a 9.0 inch section.

This tire is slightly smaller in diameter as well as slightly narrower than my current 235X60 front tires. The current front tire looks too big in relation to the 275x60 rears. The 225X60s will lower the front 4/10s of an inch.

REAR:
255X70 with a 10.2 inch section.

This tire is 1.1 inches larger in diameter than my current 275X60 tires and it gives me 5 inches of rear road clearance. It also reduces the space between the top of the rear tire and the top of the rear wheel opening to 1 3/4 inches. I can also remove the 1 inch spacer on my rear shocks, resulting in 4 1/8 inches of road clearance and reducing the space above the tire to wheel opening to 3/4 of an inch.

I am currently searching for other brands that will have these sizes.

All the best,
Dick Ruzzin.
_____________________________________________________
dickruzzinDESIGN@aol.com / Phone: 313-824-0539
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

I recently went through this dilemma as well and my choice was dictated principally by availability. OK, in part it was dictated by my unwillingness to pay very high prices to a UK outfit to ship me a set of Avon tires (which even then may not have been available).

I ended up compromising on sizes but chose the BFG T/A 215x60 for the fronts and 275x60 for the rears. The rolling diameters (if I have my numbers correct) are a perfect match for the stock fronts and 1/2" taller than stock for the (much wider than stock) rears.

Part of my consideration when choosing these sizes was my desire to fit them to a set of (should they ever actually become available) the Group4 8" and 10" wheels as "driver" wheels. I would then mount my new-condition Michelin XWX tires (in the original 185-15 and 225-15 sizes) onto the factory wheels for shows and display. Either way these tires would still fit the original wheels also.

Dick, could you post some photos showing your tires and the fitment from side and rear? I would really like to see how they look. I was concerned that a 255 tire might look too skinny (and it certainly wouldn't fit a 10" wide wheel) from the back.

Mark
Mark,
My 275X60s give me, according to my local police radar, a 10% plus on the speedometer, 40mph is actually 44 on my speedometer.

I have not bought the tires yet, probably will after mulling it over a bit, so I cannot send an image. I have seen the 255X70s on other vehicles and was always surprised as to how large they looked, that is, larger than the size indicated. I am trading the taller side view look for a slightly, less than 10%, narrower tire.
I think this is because the BFG section is very square compared to others tire.
I might buy the 225s, install them and then evaluate them against my current 275s in the rear.

The surprise in this study is the bell-housing height. Low profile tires do not come in large diameters therefore robbing road clearance.

If you are going to put wide wheels on a Mangusta with diameters below 28 inches you are losing road clearance in a dramatic way, or increasing the dimension between the tire and the top of the wheel opening

My article in Automotive Quarterly, THE DESIGN OF THE DETOMASO MANGUSTA is coming out this month. I hope the photographer did a good job.

DICK RUZZIN
Thanks Dick,

I will be keeping my eyes open for the magazine.

I wasn't able to obtain the 225-60 tires here and at only 1/2" taller than stock, combined with the 255-70s in the back, should give you a nicely balanced set with some (and badly needed design-wise) increased "tuck" into the fenders. It should be a nice look and I look forward to seeing your final choice.

Cheers,
Mark
Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×