RWD - Wider rear tyres & thinner fronts?
Discussion
I've heard many folks going down this route but I've never fully understood where & why it's applicable & what the merits generally are?
For example, the next car I'm looking at is a Chimaera & I know a few owners have put wider rear tyres on to help put down power, but where does it begin to make sense in doing this practise & when it does it just become useless?
For example, the next car I'm looking at is a Chimaera & I know a few owners have put wider rear tyres on to help put down power, but where does it begin to make sense in doing this practise & when it does it just become useless?
Edited by ironictwist on Monday 17th January 10:13
I think it's a compromise - wider tyres on the front would improve grip levels at the front as well but would also rob the steering of feel and put more stress on the steering system (either the PAS or your arms or both). There isn't really a disadvantage to having wider tyres on the back.
Many high performance cars come with wider rear tyres as standard.
I suppose when you want to do it will depend on personal preference. Some people like a car to be able to break traction under power, some don't.
Obviously, wider rears will mean that it takes less standing water for the rears to aquaplane than the fronts, which can be nasty if you drive a lot in the wet.
Many high performance cars come with wider rear tyres as standard.
I suppose when you want to do it will depend on personal preference. Some people like a car to be able to break traction under power, some don't.
Obviously, wider rears will mean that it takes less standing water for the rears to aquaplane than the fronts, which can be nasty if you drive a lot in the wet.
Edited by kambites on Monday 17th January 10:18
I've had a few, there are some obvious ones where it needs no explaination
911
Elise/Vx220
Smart car.
Also these ones, some of which was a surprise
944 turbo
968 sport
928 S4
BMW E46/E36 M3 3.2
M Coupe (z)
even the lower powered E36 328 sport has wider rears
The thing is they are all designed like that hence will be set up to allow for the extra grip at the rear, if you change a car from standard set up you might not feel it but it might increase understeer.
911
Elise/Vx220
Smart car.
Also these ones, some of which was a surprise
944 turbo
968 sport
928 S4
BMW E46/E36 M3 3.2
M Coupe (z)
even the lower powered E36 328 sport has wider rears
The thing is they are all designed like that hence will be set up to allow for the extra grip at the rear, if you change a car from standard set up you might not feel it but it might increase understeer.
6potdave said:
More grip - simple. But yeah as said above it all depends how much power you have as to whether it's worthwhile or not. I wouldn't bother on the MR2 as it only has 160bhp or so.
It is thought that MR2s are very sensitive to having the correct tyre stagger(wider on the back) despite not being powerfully engined, certainly in Mk3 guise.So careful on that one.
I'm not even slightly an expert on these things, but my car (e46 325) normally has 255 rear and 235 front (on 18" staggered 8.5J rear, 8J front wheels). I've switched to 16" 205s all round for winter and I've noticed that its far easier to get the traction control system to trigger on straight line acceleration, but the narrower wheels make the car noticeably quicker and more controlled in corners.
Admittedly not a particularly rigorous, controlled, experiment but thought it might be useful just to give you an idea; I've noticed the straight line grip benefit even with only 190ish horsepower. Prior to changing wheels I felt that the larger staggered sport wheels were entirely for show.
Admittedly not a particularly rigorous, controlled, experiment but thought it might be useful just to give you an idea; I've noticed the straight line grip benefit even with only 190ish horsepower. Prior to changing wheels I felt that the larger staggered sport wheels were entirely for show.
kambites said:
I think it's a compromise - wider tyres on the front would improve grip levels at the front as well but would also rob the steering of feel and put more stress on the steering system (either the PAS or your arms or both). There isn't really a disadvantage to having wider tyres on the back.
Many high performance cars come with wider rear tyres as standard.
I suppose when you want to do it will depend on personal preference. Some people like a car to be able to break traction under power, some don't.
Obviously, wider rears will mean that it takes less standing water for the rears to aquaplane than the fronts, which can be nasty if you drive a lot in the wet.
Would it not increase understeer on neutral throttle? I mean, if you had same tyres front and rear, all 4 tyres would have roughly the same slip, but with wider rears, the fronts would be slipping more?Many high performance cars come with wider rear tyres as standard.
I suppose when you want to do it will depend on personal preference. Some people like a car to be able to break traction under power, some don't.
Obviously, wider rears will mean that it takes less standing water for the rears to aquaplane than the fronts, which can be nasty if you drive a lot in the wet.
Edited by kambites on Monday 17th January 10:18
I know that this is talking about 10/10s driving.
Obviously allows more power to be put down, and will allow a more aggressive front (sharper turn in, more feel etc), while staying stable. Of course with the same set up there will be more under steer than with equal width tyres.
An extreme example would be something like an Enzo, with mid engine weight distribution, and loads of power. It has something like 100mm different width front to rear to compensate. It would be undrivable at anything more than a gentle cruise with same width front/rear, what ever is done with the suspension.
An extreme example would be something like an Enzo, with mid engine weight distribution, and loads of power. It has something like 100mm different width front to rear to compensate. It would be undrivable at anything more than a gentle cruise with same width front/rear, what ever is done with the suspension.
doogz said:
DanGPR said:
kambites said:
I think it's a compromise - wider tyres on the front would improve grip levels at the front as well but would also rob the steering of feel and put more stress on the steering system (either the PAS or your arms or both). There isn't really a disadvantage to having wider tyres on the back.
Many high performance cars come with wider rear tyres as standard.
I suppose when you want to do it will depend on personal preference. Some people like a car to be able to break traction under power, some don't.
Obviously, wider rears will mean that it takes less standing water for the rears to aquaplane than the fronts, which can be nasty if you drive a lot in the wet.
Would it not increase understeer on neutral throttle? I mean, if you had same tyres front and rear, all 4 tyres would have roughly the same slip, but with wider rears, the fronts would be slipping more?Many high performance cars come with wider rear tyres as standard.
I suppose when you want to do it will depend on personal preference. Some people like a car to be able to break traction under power, some don't.
Obviously, wider rears will mean that it takes less standing water for the rears to aquaplane than the fronts, which can be nasty if you drive a lot in the wet.
Edited by kambites on Monday 17th January 10:18
I know that this is talking about 10/10s driving.
I'm not interested in arguing physics with you, having just read your and havocs set-to, which, funnily was about a similar matter.
If I'm wrong, could you explain why? I suspect quite a few people on here, whilst driving at ten tenths, have entered a corner with too much speed (not that anyone could possibly ever admit that on PistonHeads!), the fronts would be slipping more than the rears, would they not?
Mighty Flex said:
Obviously allows more power to be put down, and will allow a more aggressive front (sharper turn in, more feel etc), while staying stable. Of course with the same set up there will be more under steer than with equal width tyres.
An extreme example would be something like an Enzo, with mid engine weight distribution, and loads of power. It has something like 100mm different width front to rear to compensate. It would be undrivable at anything more than a gentle cruise with same width front/rear, what ever is done with the suspension.
Mid engined - CheckAn extreme example would be something like an Enzo, with mid engine weight distribution, and loads of power. It has something like 100mm different width front to rear to compensate. It would be undrivable at anything more than a gentle cruise with same width front/rear, what ever is done with the suspension.
Loads of power - Check
Same width front and rear - Check
Undrivable at anything more than a gentle cruise - erm?
Off the top of my head, the new R18 looks like it is going the same way.
Munter said:
Parsnip said:
Same width front and rear - Check
Regulation or choice? I'd suggest it's regulation in that case.(Your basic point might be right, but that's a poor example I think.)
It isn't the best example when related to road cars - but then again, the Enzo isn't exactly the best either.
Are they the same width? The rear bodywork looks much wider and presumably the fronts will need extra space for steering movement. Assuming you're right, the car was clearly originally designed to give the option of wider rears, so they obviously weren't sure.
Edited by kambites on Monday 17th January 10:55
kambites said:
Jobbo said:
The new Audi RS3 has slightly narrower rears, which seems an awful fudge on a £40k car.
Why is wider fronts any more of a fudge than wider rears? 
I found it interesting that Lotus fitted narrower front tyres to the S2 Elise than the S1 to make the car less snappy on the limit and reduce likely hood of lift-off oversteer.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff