If our stock tires are really 245-45 not 225-50's than why aren't they labeled that way. If it wasn't for this website I know I wouldn't have known this and every shop or mechanic I've talked to about my car hasn't known it either. Why not label the tires for what they actually are...

 

Why is there poor consistency with clothing and shoe sizing? Why do bottles and cans have false bottoms giving the impression of more product? Why are most item marked down 5-10% when the store advertises "Up to 90% off"?

You're correct, it makes no sense to have such poor consistency.

 

I think technically, our rear OEM SO2s are 225/50's. Sizing is based on the "cross sectional" measurement and you will find that this is correct. It's just that they made the tread contact patch width wider than a normal 225 tire. It's closer to 245 but to get a 245 tread and keep the relative same overall diameter, you have to go 45 aspect ratio to keep the speedo more or less correct.

 

The section width on the OE S02 is actually a 233 so they are wider than stated. The bigger difference is the tread width.

Jim

 

I was just checking on the Cooper Tire site. It mentioned an alternate size for the S-2000 rears (245/50) but said it required a different/modified rim than the stocks. Any truth to this, or will 245s work on the stock rims?

 

245 width tires are a marginal fit on the stock 7.5" rims, but it will work. I'd be more concerned about the aspect ratio - the 245/50/16 size will have a larger diameter than stock. What you want in non-OEM rear size is a 245/45/16.

 

Thanks. I never gave a hoot about tire sizes, and just replaced my passenger vehicle tires with the same size tires as I was replacing. This is all sort of a mystry. Local tire store employees don't seem to have a great deal of knowledge about such alternatives as I'm reading here. This forum is a great wealth of information and experience. I appreciate every one's contributions.