Snows - Is it ok not to do the minus-one thing? - Page 3 - Ford Focus Forum, Ford Focus ST Forum
Ford Focus Forum
HomeContact UsAbout UsGalleryDiscussion ForumsMarketplace


Go Back   Ford Focus Forum, Ford Focus ST Forum > Ford Focus Tech Discussions > Wheels & Tires - Sponsored By Tire Rack

Wheels & Tires - Sponsored By Tire Rack The place to go for answers on wheel types, tire sizes, offset, wheel patterns and more.
Sponsored By:
Tire Rack


Search This Forum | Image Search | Advanced Search    
Ford Focus Tire & Wheels FocusFanatics Merchandise

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-26-2012, 03:16 PM   #21
sailor
"Elder"
 
sailor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Fan#: 57268
Location: Williamsville, NY
What I Drive: 2004 Pitch Black ZTS 2.3 5spd.

Posts: 13,787
Points 8,920, Level 63
Points: 8,920, Level: 63 Points: 8,920, Level: 63 Points: 8,920, Level: 63
Level Up 57% Completed
Level up: 57% Level up: 57% Level up: 57%
Forum Activity 99%
Activity: 99% Activity: 99% Activity: 99%
FF Reputation: 69 sailor Excellent Standing Member
Buy-Sell-Trade Rating: (0)
IMHO, lack of recent experimental evidence is primarily because it's hard to justify a grant to "research" something that's generally considered as "obvious".

The use of "tall & narrow" wheels & tires to "cut through" loose or soft material to firmer material underneath both for traction & to reduce rolling resistance has been "standard" since Horse & Buggy days. You'll note that tractors had been designed in this manner until recently, when "no-till" or "low-till" farming became more common & wider &/or longer tread for flotation came into play to reduce soil compaction. A similar situation can be noted on "Jeeps", where tall & narrow was std. for general purpose & snow use while wide "flotation" tires were special purpose for flotation on soft terrain of all types.

Wide tires for automotive use originated in racing, where reducing contact time with the pavement reduced heating of the tread & subsequent loss of traction. Hydroplaning becomes more of an issue with wide tires, and is combated with wider tread grooves to allow water to escape.

Would less then 10% increase in width be noticeable in a winter tire? (20 mil is 9% of 215, the difference from 195's). I can only speak from my experience here, to whit:

Similar weight vehicles owned years ago, one with 155's & the other with low profile 175's (both had been avail. with the same std. size & profile tires in different model years) - BOTH worked quite well in "normal" snow & ice conditions without an obvious major difference in capability UNTIL deep slush was encountered, at which point the "hydroplane" effect on the wider tires was quite dramatic. The sports car that was such a "beast" in snow of all depths with 4 corner studded snows would get tossed around quite a bit when the tires couldn't cut through the deep slush. A foot of loose snow or more, drive it like a wet road! 3" of slush, look out! (at highway speeds)

Sounds kinda dramatic, but that car was GREAT fun in the winter until hitting that deep salted slush that tosses everyone around.... that combo worse than any others I've owned.

Hope that helps a bit, snow is such a different driving environment with it's own variations in handling depending on conditions - you really need an Eskimo vocabulary of 100 different words for "snow" to describe the different conditions possible!

To go on a bit..

For example, vehicles that "oversteer" or "understeer" naturally due to weight bias on pavement usually react the OPPOSITE way on snow. "Skid School" practice cars to demonstrate this years ago (sticking to RWD) were often a Mustang for nose heavy and a Corvair for tail heavy. Skid pad circle in the wet, the Mustang would plow & the Corvair would hang the tail out. Repeat on snow and the reverse would be the case as the added weight gave more traction to that end on packed snow. Given enough speed to break things loose the results would reverse again - proving the advantage of inherent balance.

On our FWD cars, that extra weight on the drives can help at low speeds. You just have to remember that the added momentum can also make it "push" as speeds & cornering loads increase. The "kicker" is to remember that if the tail gets loose you need to keep your foot in it as you countersteer, back off the gas when it's skidding already & the tail will become the front!

Luck!
sailor is online now  
    Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 11-26-2012, 03:29 PM   #22
JonathanGennick
Focus Enthusiast
 
JonathanGennick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Fan#: 105685
Location: Munising, MI
What I Drive: 2013 Race Red Focus SE

Posts: 121
FF Reputation: 1 JonathanGennick Good Standing Member
Buy-Sell-Trade Rating: (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by sailor View Post
Similar weight vehicles owned years ago, one with 155's & the other with low profile 175's (both had been avail. with the same std. size & profile tires in different model years) - BOTH worked quite well in "normal" snow & ice conditions without an obvious major difference in capability UNTIL deep slush was encountered, at which point the "hydroplane" effect on the wider tires was quite dramatic.
Hey, that's helpful to know, thanks.

I've pretty much decided on the narrower tires. The hydroplaning aspect that I read about in my earlier link, and again in your anecdote, has pretty much convinced me.

I did run the "buy a second Focus so I can test wide versus narrow" by my wife just now. That one did not fly.

Your point about "snow" encompassing so very much is well-taken. Today we have unplowed and unmelted snow to deal with. Other days it will be slushy muck. Then there the days when it's just cold, bare pavement. Then you've got the cold, hard-iced pavement. Is narrower better in all those conditions? I dunno. It'd be fun to have two cars and run some tests.
JonathanGennick is offline  
    Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2012, 03:53 PM   #23
sailor
"Elder"
 
sailor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Fan#: 57268
Location: Williamsville, NY
What I Drive: 2004 Pitch Black ZTS 2.3 5spd.

Posts: 13,787
Points 8,920, Level 63
Points: 8,920, Level: 63 Points: 8,920, Level: 63 Points: 8,920, Level: 63
Level Up 57% Completed
Level up: 57% Level up: 57% Level up: 57%
Forum Activity 99%
Activity: 99% Activity: 99% Activity: 99%
FF Reputation: 69 sailor Excellent Standing Member
Buy-Sell-Trade Rating: (0)
Honestly, it'd be nice to have both wide & narrow tires (grin).

Narrow for the deep crud, and wide for the bare or Icy.

Now THIS theory is REALLY temperature dependent, since sliding on snow & ice results from the frozen stuff melting to make a water layer you actually slide on....

When it's stinkin' cold, you want the tread to stay planted as long as possible so it can take a grip. Closer to the melting point a bit shorter time in contact MIGHT reduce that melting.

I agree, it's probably a moot point in most cases since ice traction is minimal anyways except in very cold weather but it'd be fun to test!

cheers!
sailor is online now  
    Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2012, 08:36 AM   #24
JonathanGennick
Focus Enthusiast
 
JonathanGennick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Fan#: 105685
Location: Munising, MI
What I Drive: 2013 Race Red Focus SE

Posts: 121
FF Reputation: 1 JonathanGennick Good Standing Member
Buy-Sell-Trade Rating: (0)
I went the stock size -- 215/55R16. Just got walloped this morning with a $700+ bill on repairing the minivan. Decided that a second set of rims and TPMS chips will need to wait until next year, and that pretty much decided the question of what size tire to get.

My mechanic is putting in the order this morning. With a little shipping-luck I'll have the tires on the car for the weekend.
JonathanGennick is offline  
    Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2012, 01:05 PM   #25
Joeywhat
Strichmädchen & Koks
 
Joeywhat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Fan#: 85247
Location: Brighton, MI
What I Drive: 2014 Mustang 3.7L SGM

Posts: 2,739
Points 7,259, Level 56
Points: 7,259, Level: 56 Points: 7,259, Level: 56 Points: 7,259, Level: 56
Level Up 55% Completed
Level up: 55% Level up: 55% Level up: 55%
Forum Activity 10%
Activity: 10% Activity: 10% Activity: 10%
FF Reputation: 11 Joeywhat Great Standing Member
Buy-Sell-Trade Rating: (1)
The whole "narrow vs wide" argument is mostly moot on passenger vehicles. In most cases, you can't even get tires that are significantly narrower then stock sizes anyways, so there's not a huge difference in tread width. If you're comparing a huge truck tire to something off a smart car then yes, I'm sure there are notable differences, but otherwise it's not making a huge difference.

Find wheels you like that are within budget, put quality tires on them that are of an appropriate size, and be on your way. Going down a size or two likely won't make any appreciable difference.

And remember, significantly smaller tires will have significantly different load ratings then stock options, so going to a very small/thin tire may not even be safe for your vehicle.
__________________
Hatch Nation #29
Joeywhat is online now  
    Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks & Social Networks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:04 PM.


Copyright 2002-2014 FocusFanatics.com. All Rights Reserved : Terms of Use : Privacy Policy : Advertise Information

Focus Fanatics Ford Focus Forum offers many fun ways for you to engage with other Ford Focus Owners from across the world. Whether it be about the aftermarket performance modifications, technical how-to's, European tuned suspension or awesome fuel economy similar to the Acura TLX or Fiesta ST. You can find all Ford Focus and Focus ST related information here. Join our Ford Focus discussion forums and chat with local Focus enthusiasts in your area.