Don't mind me, I'm new...

[Anonymous]

Sorry, just had to sign up on here as I couldn't understand what I was being told!

A quick introduction, I'm Slurpy J's brother.. he's been emailing me about the car whilst he's been deciding what to get, and he mentioned to me that he'd bought new wheels. Fair enough, so long as they're a good size (correct for the car), and have decent tyres I said, you should be fine. I don't know a lot about the MR-2, but he said he'd been told the fitment was correct, and they were supplied with Toyo Proxes, which aren't exactly lacking in performance, so all seemed fine. Then he emailed me today telling me that he was being told his car was a death trap and he was being told he only had one week to live!   s:lol: :lol: s:lol:  

So I've wandered over here to see what the fuss is about, and I'm having a really hard time believing what I'm seeing. Are we saying here that the MR-2 becomes a death-trap to all driving it if the tyres aren't 20mm wider than the fronts at the back?? I'm struggling to believe it!

Before I get flamed (!), I'm not calling everyone liars, but I am genuinely interested to hear why the difference is night and day on what is a relatively small change. I come from a fairly varied car background. My current car is a VX220 Turbo (so not dissimilar to the MR2, RWD, mid-engined, albeit with a bit more power), before that I drove a Tuscan S and an RX-8. I started RWD life with an MX-5 (that'll probably raise some eyebrows on here, but it was before the MR-S was around, and I'm not a fan at all of the Mk2  s:P s:P ).

The VX comes with thinner wheels up front to promote understeer also, but there are plenty of people who fit same-size wheels all round and don't seem to end up falling into hedges....

My gut reaction, as I've just noticed the previous poster has pointed out, is that people have come a cropper in the past, and blamed the car and/or tyres. Yes, they can make a difference, but I think the main fact of the matter is this is a RWD mid-engined sports car so oversteer is part of the package. If you want your car to handle like a hatch and plough on at the first corner, then fair enough, but surely thats not what these cars are about...?

I have yet to drive my brothers car yet with the new wheels, but I'll be interested to see how it compares to the VX. I did go out briefly tonighbut that was before the new wheels/tyres were on, and I noticed (and so did he) that it was pulling to one side under acceleration and on lift-off. This was with standard-fitment tyres and wheels. Tyre pressures were way off, but even correcting these didn't cure it completely, and when we removed the old tyres the inside was worn badly and the outer edge was almost new, so we're taking the car to be setup and aligned on Saturday morning...


Anyway... I'm sure i'll stir things up a bit with this post. And I am honestly interested to hear why these cars are so dangerous with the tyre combination my brother has fitted. I'm as concerned for his well-being as he is!


-andy-

[Gazz]

Its not a case of bad or good driving and driving accordingly, its about safety. You have a responsibility to yourself and to other road users to keep the car/tyres in a safe condition.

How would you feel if you ran into someone else because you lost control due to "the ultimate combo of bad tyres" that you were aware of   s:?: :?: s:?:  

Don't get me wrong, have fun with the car (I do) but do it as safely as you can (if that makes sense).

[Anonymous]

How would you feel if you ran into someone else because you lost control due to "the ultimate combo of bad tyres" that you were aware of   s:?: :?: s:?:  

But I just don't buy that 20mm of difference between front and back tyres can turn the car from one of the best handling cars in its class to a complete death trap.

And tyres aren't what cause a driver to lose control. The driver loses control period. The car doesn't drive itself. The tyres don't drive the car. If you lose control on the road and blame the tyres then you need to look at your driving again!! Not to say that people (and myself included) don't "push-on" on the roads, but doing so enough to overcome the tyres of a car would probably raise the eyebrows of local plod should they see you driving that way, and so as I said, it's driving and driving ability that is at fault, not the car. In such a case it would be more likely that the driver was either driving too fast for the conditions or not paying attention etc.  To blame tyres for an accident is to fool yourself about who or what is really at fault....


-andy-

[kanujunkie]

agree to a certain point Andy, but, the tyres do make a difference as to wether the car handles in a controllable or damn right dangerous manner in itself.The mixture, wrong size, tread pattern, type of rubber, compound etc etc all go to make up the control you have with the road. Saying its the driver and not the tyres is foolish, the driver only initiates the ride, a million and one other factors can cause an accident to happen.

[Bongo]

20mm off the rear does represent about 10% the tyre - that's quite a lot...

[Anonymous]

Ok, I was simplifying things a little, and I agree, in an accident there is a lot more than just the driver in some cases. Yes, of course tyres can make a difference - a worn or incorrectly inflated tyre can blow out - but then what we're really talking about here (in the case of my bro) isn't quite as complicated as that, rather simply whether the 20mm extra width (or not) on the rear tyres can complete transform the car from benign, safe handler, to something that should be feared by all living men!

The tyres are all the same make and size (on the same axle), they're a well-known, good tyre with excellent performance, they're correctly inflated, and they're all brand new with tens of millimeters of tread on them.

So is the fact that the same size is being used all round (the actual arguement in discussion here) really going to turn the car into a death trap like some people have been saying? I'm inclined to say no?


-andy-

[Anonymous]

sixspeed has made my point better than me, if you want understeer, buy a front wheel drive car.

Gazz, I used that phrase lightheatedly. If I believed they were a immediate safety risk I would have changed them. Believe me I have no interest in crashing and my point is a safety one, simply trying to make people think about their driving. Good tyres i.e. grip, shouldn't mean that people don't bother trying to learn about car control. Then at least if the grip does run out one day you have a chance of keeping it sunny side up.

Didn't mean to suggest anyone here was a bad driver of course.

[Tem]

Whatever you choose to use, be careful out there. Mid-engined car is quite different from any other and it tends to bite when you least expect it.

[edward.carter]

The VX comes with thinner wheels up front to promote understeer also

Well if toyota do it, Vauxhall do it and lotus do it on the elise too there must be a good reason.  I havent been around here very long, but I remember when i asked about upgrading wheels. One other factor is that going to 17's over the 15's yes you will have more grip in the bends initially but when it does lose grip you will get snap oversteer, not progressive like with the standard wheels.

[Liz]

The way I see it, its up to you what you do with the tyres, the way I see it is that Toyota set the vehicle up with lightweight (and they are very light) wheels and tyres with an offset.  Personally I think that putting the same side tyres all round and heavier alloys is going against what the car was designed like in the first place, you won't find that many people on here have changed their wheels, and those that have noticed a difference in handling.

The people on this forum have alot of experience with the car. Its down to you whether you take the advice or not, but you have been warned, we are far to polite to say I told you so!

Another point, what about your insurance, you going to tell them that you have got the wrong size tyres on the back of the car and after market alloys?

[Anonymous]

Yes, there is a reason to do it and that is to promote understeer in the car, which the majority of people find safer than oversteer to control.

I'm not going to argue about it much more anyway. I think we all agree that it is going to reduce the amount of understeer, but whether the car is a complete deathtrap I guess lies in the hands of the driver, and their capabilities. I would argue that it might make oversteer more prone, but oversteer can be controlled just as well as understeer by a driver that is expecting it.

It's up to my brother what he does anyway, as it's his car. I'm sure he'll take it easy out there anyway as he's quite fond of the car, and he's been given plenty of warning about it's possible behaviour with the setup he's chosen.

One last thing, as I mentioned in a few posts back the car didn't feel right on the standard wheels, so we're taking it to Plans Motorsport this weekend (they do setups on Nobles, Elises, Exiges, VXs etc for road and track use) to have the alignment done. A lot of the behaviour of a car can be changed through the geometry setup as much as the wheels/tyres combination. I know when I first got my VX, at the limit it would understeer and then snap oversteer quite quickly. After a geometry setup the car became beautifully balanced with much more progressive and controllable oversteer characteristics, with barely any understeer at all (which you don't really want at all in a mid-engine RWD sportscar, i'd argue). Be interesting to see what the MR2 behaves like when they've done their work on it..


-andy-

[markiii]

ok let me put it this way.

your right in that if we wanted it to handle like a fwd hatch we wouldn't have purchased a midengined c rwd car.

however.

if the car is prone to understeer you will get far more warning when you do find teh point that teh back end is going, than you will if the same size tyres are all round.

by the time it starts to go with 205s all round the chances are it's way to late to catch it.

second point is that you will no doubt be expecting an mr2 to allow you to corner faster and more aggressively than a typical hatch.

stick 205s all round and it won't . with all teh weight at the back teh car will want to bring the back end around, decreasing the rear width bias so dramatically will allow it to do just that.

I'll bow to your experience with the VX but while aftermarket wheels may often come in teh same wdith as opposed to teh roadsters 6" 6.5" rear split I'll be surprised if they are running teh same width tyres as well.

can you name one midengined sportscar that comes from teh factory with teh same size wheels and tyres all round? Ferrari, Lambo, Lotus, anything else? I can't think of one. It's for a reason.

on a related point, since they are proxies be aware that with such a light car it can take a while to fully scrub off the release agent which makes them cough "interesting" for the first few hundred miles.

[Tem]

Yes, there is a reason to do it and that is to promote understeer in the car, which the majority of people find safer than oversteer to control.

Personally, I find oversteer the easiest to handle. But only in a front engined RWD car. Mid engined car has already spun when you still have time to scratch your head before making corrective actions in a front engined car. I understand that's not easy to believe, if you're not used to it though.

I would argue that it might make oversteer more prone, but oversteer can be controlled just as well as understeer by a driver that is expecting it.

And by a driver who can handle it. Anyone can handle oversteering front engined car, it's not a big deal. Even the best drivers in the world are having trouble handling oversteer in a mid engined car. I'm not sure if you or your brother are those that can, so I'll just repeat myself. Be careful.

It's up to my brother what he does anyway, as it's his car. I'm sure he'll take it easy out there anyway as he's quite fond of the car, and he's been given plenty of warning about it's possible behaviour with the setup he's chosen.

That's usually how it goes. First you take it easy. Then you find out how great it actually handles and start to take it less easy. Then you get used to it and don't pay that much attention to it. Then it caughts you off guard. Whoops!  s:oops: :oops: s:oops:  

Of course he can do what he wants to. Many have. Search for 'crash'.  s:? :? s:?

[Anonymous]

Of course he can do what he wants to. Many have. Search for 'crash'.  s:? :? s:?

Ok, I just did this to see if I could work out what all these big accidents were. And to be honest, they all come across as people who were caught out by a mid-engined RWD car. The ones I read were all cars on standard wheels! There's a lot of blame put on "diesel" on the roads (one of the most regular excuses for RWD accidents). I don't see any evidence at the moment (but can someone send me some links as I'm sure there must be judging by this thread!) that having the same tyres all round has resulted in a crash.


-andy-

[filcee]

when we removed the old tyres the inside was worn badly and the outer edge was almost new,

If these are the fronts you are talking about - then that's how Toyota set it up at the factory.  Very worn inner edges ('shouldered') tyres  are the norm and when the tyres get to this stage it does make the car tramline horribly - this may have been the 'pulling' you experienced.
I believe the set up is like that to promote fast turn-in/direction change when cornering.

so we're taking the car to be setup and aligned on Saturday morning...

If it's the rears that are 'shouldered', then I would probably do this.  For the fronts, I wouldn't worry too much - maybe get them checked at the next service, provided it's not too far away.

[Anonymous]

It did seem a bit excessive to me. The outer edge of the tyre was barely touched. The inner shoulders of the tyre were practically bald! I'm not sure it was tramlining either - it was a definate change in direction, completely related to the power going through the rear wheels, and not the surface of the road.

I remember a similar sensation when I had a slow puncture on a rear tyre on my MX-5, and the difference in rolling circumfrence between the left and right tyres meant the LSD was trying to correct and pulled the car to one side when power was applied.

The previous owner may well have fitted aftermarket wheels and put the standard ones back on to sell it. Either that, or they were shoddy at looking after their car! When we checked the pressures they were:

Front Left - 22psi
Front Right - 18psi
Rear Left - 13psi (!!)
Rear Right - 17psi

A mess I'm sure you'll agree! The symptoms did more or less disappear once we'd corrected those, but not completely.

According to my brother earlier, since fitting the new wheels and tyres last night and driving into work this morning he said the car seemed much better. We're still going to get the geo looked at on Saturday morning to be sure. I'll check the tread on the old rear tyres tonight and see if they were worn abnormally.


-andy-

[filcee]

It did seem a bit excessive to me. The outer edge of the tyre was barely touched. The inner shoulders of the tyre were practically bald! I'm not sure it was tramlining either - it was a definate change in direction, completely related to the power going through the rear wheels, and not the surface of the road.

I've been driving around a similar problem for (a few) months now.  As a result of the missus driving the '2 on Saturday last, I'm getting mine changed tomorrow.  I can't believe I've coped with it for so long after the complete hash she made of a straight dual carriageway - though she did say she felt like she was in a fight with the steering wheel.

Front Left - 22psi
Front Right - 18psi
Rear Left - 13psi (!!)
Rear Right - 17psi

s:!: :!: s:!:  
I've known a 10% difference in either direction from stock pressure make a noticeable difference to handling.  Those pressures are just daft.  Once your bro' has driven it for a while, he will be able to tell when the pressures a skewiff - it really is that noticeable a difference.

[Anonymous]

Who Supplies tryes in 205/40 and 225/35 in 17's 7 inch width? tried Michelin and Toyo and bridgestone no hope. Any suggestions or reviews would be great.

[markiii]

I think you will find both of them do

also Goodyear should do.
 
and Falken

[xdesign]

Where did this guy go anyhow???

LOL   s:lol: :lol: s:lol:

[Anonymous]

This is Going to sound a stupid question but what does offset measure?

[rmowbray]

IIRC

Offset if the position of the mating face of the wheel (to the hub) relative to the centre line of the wheel, measured in mm, and can be +ve or -ve.

For the 2 you are looking for +45 I think, although I think some people have fitted wheels down to +35. The further away you are from the spec the more chance of rubbing, especially if you're lowered the car.

The easiest way to imagine it is that changing the offset moves the whole wheel either further into or out of the wheelarch.

Richard

[Darth Paul]

Who Supplies tryes in 205/40 and 225/35 in 17's 7 inch width? tried Michelin and Toyo and bridgestone no hope. Any suggestions or reviews would be great.

IIRC Goodyear don't do 17x225/35 in F1 GSD3. I wish they did.  s:? :? s:?   I have 225/45s on the rear and they are too tall, especially as I want to lower the car. I think the closest they do is 215/35, which is probably the way I'll go when I need new rubber in the spring.

[markiii]

Paul,

if you go 215 better gong 215/40 than 215/35 they will be rubber bands, and if your lowering you don't want too little tyre sidewall or your kidneys will not thanks you.

[Anonymous]

Really finding it Hard to get a 225/35 that will comfortably fit on 7" wide 17's, Hankook do a 225/35 as well as a 205/40 in their Ventus Sport K104, so do Falken but they say there 235 won't fit a 7" width. Anyone ever tried Hankook, know the name but haven't seem them around.

On the Offset issue, if stock is 45 ,does 38 then mean my wheel is placed higher/closer to the rim than stock?

Sorry about this but its really confusing