terrasmak

iTrader: (8)

Your theory works in snow and mud, but PSI is PSI when it comes to hydroplaning. Now stability while up on plane will be affected by width.

sleeper400

iTrader: (4)

Well my hummer h2 has 275's all around and it obviously has greater PSI of ground force than my g35 with 275's all around has and the im pretty sure if you put both cars in the same situaiton (speed, straightline/cornering, amount of water) the g35 will hydroplane while the hummer sails on through to certain limits of course

Sensi09

Excellent! Might as well post a pic while you're at it.

I'm just a regular member like anyone else before being added on as a sponsor to assist this company. Didn't know I wasn't allowed to posts threads or ask questions anymore.

You've seemed to have lost the meaning of these forums long ago. It's no wonder that you've long been on my ignore list.

Sensi09

I have a stock Nismo Z so have limited adjustment as is. Well thanks for the input guys, when the times comes, I will probably give the 265s a try as they really don't cost that much more. In the past, I've ran 255s on a different Z without any complaints.

=Cerberus=

iTrader: (1)

PSI width (which is part of the PSI) & speed all matter. It all depends if the force it takes to move a square inch of water out of the way is greater then the force you car is applying to the same square inch of pavement.

Your H2 probably has a lot different lug pattern (IE more aggressive and deeper) then a high performance summer tire. Combined with how well the H2 tires evacuates water and its weight, is why it doesn't hydroplane where the G would.

terrasmak

iTrader: (8)

Lets see, set up a course and run your cars both at 60 mph ( on plane ) and see what happens. Neither result will be good. The extra weight of your yuppy sized POS may feel more stable in a straight line, but its still up on plane. Then just wait till its lets go LOL, have fun.

Sensi09

Do you think there is a maximum rake that should not be exceeded?

My stock sizes are:
18x9
245/40/18
Diameter: 25.71

19x10
265/35/19
Diameter: 26.30

Upgraded sizes:
265/35/18
Diameter: 25.30

285/35/19
Diameter: 26.86

285/30/19
Diameter: 25.73

If I run 265/35/18s up front, it will have a smaller diameter of 25.30. With 265s up front, am I better off with 285/35 or 285/30s in the rear? The 285/30s will maintain a rake closer to stock.

Z1 Performance

iTrader: (564)

rake doesn't come into the equation from my perspective- rolling diameter vs stock and front/back stagger are the 2 important things. Rake becomes a matter of personal choice. If you get the 2 other aspects right, rake takes care of itself

Sensi09

It might be obvious, but with more rake, will I be more likely to scrape my front lip, or does it not work like that.

I'm a bit concerned with the lack of sidewall with a 30 series. Was this ever a concern with your setup?

Thanks in advance.

Z1 Performance

iTrader: (564)

the "30" sidewall really means nothing...much like the "285" really means nothing. Tires are like shirts - a 285 from one brand won't equal another. As a result, the aspect ratio (the "30") which is a % of the first, also won't translate from one brand to another. So, you can have a 285/30 which runs narrower, and has a taller sidewall, vs another brand. Toyo's T1R, for example, has a much bulgier sidewall, and narrower section width, vs, say a PS2 or an RE050A.

My car gets driven all over...and the roads are a mix of excellent (highway) to horrible - I've yet to encounter any issues on any tire that's been on my Z. On the flipside, I just had to replace a tire on my Saab (235/45/17) because it bubbled after hitting a bad patch of road near where my brother lives

sleeper400

iTrader: (4)

wow real mature...

but on a real note, id rather be in my yuppy sized POS hummer than my g35 ANY day if i was to hydroplane considering it has NEVER hydroplaned once since i made the purchase back in 2002. The g on the other hand had its fair share of water skiing encounters but nothing to serious. I have had snow tires, all seasonals, ultra performance and r compounds and will the same results in the rain on highways.... just have to drive around 60 and under and your good.

Spike100

I think you ask a very good question.

From my personal experience (driving in the wet and dry, and on less than ideal road surfaces)… If your preference is bump-steer, hydroplaning on the front tires in the wet, and more resistance when turning your front wheels… 275mm wide tires on the front are your best choice.

I tried using wide fronts for a short time, and could not get back to 245's on the front soon enough (245's on the front are much better in every way when driving on various surfaces and in varying conditions).

--Spike

terrasmak

iTrader: (8)

So are you going to set up a wet course slalom or what ??? The POS should come out ahead.

sleeper400

iTrader: (4)

Why must you be such an arrogant imbecile? You are of NO help to this thread and are simply portraying your self to come off as a child that just found out he can be a tough guy over the internet

mcarther101

iTrader: (8)

Sounds fine to me. And you can upgrade tire size a bit if you want later with that wheel size.

Spike100

I think that you might be missing terrasmak’s real point.

terrasmak is simply pointing out that it’s not the vehicle but rather the tire’s makeup (its thread design, sidewall stiffness, compound structure, etc.) that determines handling in dry and wet conditions. His point is that it is ludicrous to compare a large and heavy SUV running all-terrain/all-season tires with a small and light sport car running summer-performance tires.

I would only like to mention that terrasmak participation here is appreciated since he consistently provides useful and accurate information and advice.

--Spike

rob6118

Cuz its my350z.com.

For what its worth I agree with your point. I much prefer my Cherokee in the rain. Much less likely to hydroplane then the car, which compensates for a lack of ABS and higher CoG. Besides if I DO hit anything its just a Jeep HAHA I will most likely cry if I ever hit anything in the Z.

To the OP in my research 255/275 seems the biggest. People running that setup have to use spacers some of the time and beyond it seems the increased scrub radius takes away alot of the 'feel' of the car. I'm used to this issue with off road vehicles where its not such a big deal because the power steering is designed beefy for handling in ruts and stuff. In trucks I prefer to not go any more then 20% more width then stock when if forces you to increase scrub (i.e. using offsets to fit a bigger tire due to inner clearance), I would stay more conservative for the Z. I think 255/275 will achieve my goal of more stopping power w/o compromising turning ability.

Spike100

^^ Perfect... Absolutely a great post! I agree with everything you say. I do the same with my Jeep Commander (and my Z) as you describe.

Nice Job… Well stated.

--Spike

terrasmak

iTrader: (8)

Yes, and all that goes out the window once the vehicle reaches the speed that it hydroplanes. Once on plane the tread and other just factor into stability. You have the same traction in your car, truck or whatever once it is up on plane.

I actually like my Z better on a typical rainy day, i have a lot better control over it than my truck and the tires are better suited for the rain. Now if it is raining to the point of flooding, i'll drive my truck.

sleeper400

iTrader: (4)

[QUOTE=terrasmak;6965474]Yes, and all that goes out the window once the vehicle reaches the speed that it hydroplanes. Once on plane the tread and other just factor into stability. You have the same traction in your car, truck or whatever once it is up on plane.

QUOTE]

i agree with you on this. but where im coming from with the PSI of ground force is that it will take MORE speed if you have more PSI to hydroplain with the same width tires (considering both are all seasonal tires in good shape which both my cars have)