kent-k

There is soo much talk about wheel weights and the lightweight volks, ray's, ssr's, etc. I have a set of the light type-c's myself. but who figures the tire wieghts into their buying decisions?

IIRC, according to the TIRE RACK website, there can be a several lb difference in tire weights between brands and models. that is a significant # considering it it at the very outermost part of the rotating mass assembly.

it would seem that a heavy tire could easily negate any weight savings a very expensive set of wheels could achieve.

any thoughts?

aggie

It matters since the weight is furthest from the center, but most tires are about the same. The heavier ones typically have stiffer sidewalls and/or wider tread, which obviously has benefits.

Race Miata

When I had my miata (lightweight and therefore very sensitive to wheel/tire weight), I was very aware of tire weights besides wheel weights. I went from grippy BFG to Yoko A520. To many people, it may be a downgrade, but to me the A520 fit my miata setup much better. Like aggie said, heavier tires are usually the higher speed-rated ones with stiffer sidewall/tread construction. Since my miata didn't have much hp to require Z-rated speed, the V-rated Yoko gave me the weight saving (-3lb in the same 195/50/15 size). And furthermore, the softer Yoko was nice for my stiff suspension setup in that they yielded comfy ride and more importantly yielded my so-call "rubberband" effect. This rubberband effect works wonders in performance on bumpy pavement. For many people, a soft sidewall tire means dull steering response. My miata with modified suspension had go-kart-like steering response, with a soft sidewall tire to tame down the steering response it became just right for my taste. So bascially, the softer/lighter/lower-speed-rated Yoko was a win-win for my miata.

However with the S, I don't think there's a decent V-rated tire for the size but I still choose one with soft sidewall for bumpy pavement handling. The Kumho SPT I chose may not have the softest sidewall, but it does yield the "rubberband" effect I want over the cheap old hardened Hankook K102. I haven't taken the new tires to the track yet but I'm much more confident pushing the car's limit with the new tires. The rubberband effect seems to tame down the scary factor from the AP1 bumpsteer significantly.

I don't think there'll be much weight different between different brands of the same size tire for the S because of the same speed rating so that's why tire weight hasn't been mentioned much here.

kent-k

^good points!

i jotted down the weights for 245/40-17 for the AP2 rear and here are the weights

ADVAN NEOVA AD07 -27lbs
BFG T/A KD - 26lbs
F1-GS - 26lbs
RE050 - 26lbs
S-03 PP - 26lbs
EXSTA MX - 23lbs
PILOT SPORT - 23lbs
PS2 - 22LBS

NFRS2K3

I am also one who takes the tire weight into consideration during my purchases. In fact, the tire weight was the deciding factor for me between going with Michelin PS II's over the Good Year GS-D3's. The Good Years weighed 3lbs per tire more for the rear 255 x 17 sizes. It was definitely surprising to see how much of a difference some brands had over others for the same size rubber. With my new Volk CE28n's and the Michelin PSII's I am looking at a total weight per corner of approx 35lbs running 17's. Not too shabby

rai

I have run-flat tires on my minivan that weigh over 40 lbs each. I am changing to non-RFT when they wear out. Besides being very harsh they also effect gas mileage (I think). I have non-RFT on the van for winter tires and it feels much better.

Of course this is an extreme example. I'm not sure how much difference you'll notice with 2-3 lbs per tire as opposed to 10 lbs per tire that I'm talking about with the RFTs.

kent-k

i have the factory run-flats on an 03 anniversary C5 vette and they're a little harsh. my neighbor who has an 01 C5 has changed to standard sidewall tires and his feels alot more comfortable. he is still using the pressure sensors as well.

i'm kinda afraid to deviate from the run-flats, as i've had SIX punctures since late 2003!

and NFRS2K3, i think i'm gonna try the PSII's as well. i think they've deleted the front tire size from the listing, though. i gotta check because one of the Hawaii S2Ki members has them on his MF10's.

NFRS2K3

The PS II's in 225 x 45 x 17's are listed at 23lbs each & 255 x 40 x 17's are listed at 24lbs each.

Also, one other thing to think about while watching your total weight is the Lug Nuts.....

For me by going with the Volk Lugs I figured out that I will be shaving an additional 2.3lbs of rotating mass across all 4 wheels....