why do people stretch tires?
- Thread starter vw2p5
- Start date
- :
- Mazda, Protege5 2002
performance and fit below wheelwell
jonridinhi
Member
- :
- 2001 MP3/2010 MX5/1996 MILLINIA (donor)
not really much cheaper but it dose drive better but you got no protection for your rims either. Some of us do it to fit a rim that will not fit with a bigger tire and remain lowered. Different people different reasons.
THERE IS NO PERFORMANCE BENEFIT!
Performance comes from tires (and brakes and suspensions geometry, etc.), not wheels. The wider the tire, the better the grip, but obviously if you go too wide you lose some response. This is why it is so necessary to properly match your wheels and tires.
That being said, stretch is mosty always an appearance thing (maybe cost). Stretch the tire and the sidewall is no longer parallel to the wheel face, which, with negative camber, can allow you run lower offsets and wider wheels. It's also popular in drifting because some n00bs got the incorrect notion that it's required to drift the car (it's not).
Sorry for the rant but there's so much incorrect crap about this fad going around that someone's going to end up hurt. If you want the appearance go for it but do not put 17x9 +20 wheels with 205/45/R17 tires on your Protege and expect it to be a handling marvel.
Performance comes from tires (and brakes and suspensions geometry, etc.), not wheels. The wider the tire, the better the grip, but obviously if you go too wide you lose some response. This is why it is so necessary to properly match your wheels and tires.
That being said, stretch is mosty always an appearance thing (maybe cost). Stretch the tire and the sidewall is no longer parallel to the wheel face, which, with negative camber, can allow you run lower offsets and wider wheels. It's also popular in drifting because some n00bs got the incorrect notion that it's required to drift the car (it's not).
Sorry for the rant but there's so much incorrect crap about this fad going around that someone's going to end up hurt. If you want the appearance go for it but do not put 17x9 +20 wheels with 205/45/R17 tires on your Protege and expect it to be a handling marvel.
Think about it. If you're stretching the tires the contact patch is smaller than it could be. More contact area = more grip in corners.
The assumption concerning stretched tires in drifting is that they are required for low-powered cars so they can spin the rear wheels (less traction). While this will work, I understand it's more about entry speed and angle in the corners than the traction (or lack thereof) of the rear wheels.
Also bear in mind if you are stretching tires you're likely trying to fit large, heavy wheels, which is a big impact to performance (unsprung weight). The same can be said of the other extreme (tiny wheels and large tires) so against this stresses the importance of a properly matched wheel/tire combination.
The assumption concerning stretched tires in drifting is that they are required for low-powered cars so they can spin the rear wheels (less traction). While this will work, I understand it's more about entry speed and angle in the corners than the traction (or lack thereof) of the rear wheels.
Also bear in mind if you are stretching tires you're likely trying to fit large, heavy wheels, which is a big impact to performance (unsprung weight). The same can be said of the other extreme (tiny wheels and large tires) so against this stresses the importance of a properly matched wheel/tire combination.
Wagonbacker9
Member
- :
- 2004 'Hoe
+1 to everything said by magnump5.
and I really don't think its about cost for very many people either, because wider wheels are not cheap. 99% of the time, its about appearance (sacrificing functionality in the process), and to those who are into the "baller" look of deep dished low offset wheels which are cambered way over so that the tire rides on the shoulder instead of the tread face, its the dopest thing on the block since lowriders and hydros.
I almost feel like my 225/45/16s have a little stretch to them on my 8" wide FDs. I wish I could fit 245s on the back, but unless I score a deal before summer, I'll be running 225s all around next year.
and I really don't think its about cost for very many people either, because wider wheels are not cheap. 99% of the time, its about appearance (sacrificing functionality in the process), and to those who are into the "baller" look of deep dished low offset wheels which are cambered way over so that the tire rides on the shoulder instead of the tread face, its the dopest thing on the block since lowriders and hydros.
I almost feel like my 225/45/16s have a little stretch to them on my 8" wide FDs. I wish I could fit 245s on the back, but unless I score a deal before summer, I'll be running 225s all around next year.
Last edited:
Don't get me wrong. I think the "flush" fitment looks pretty good, but it can be taken too far and I'm not willing to sacrifice the handling of my car for "the look". I'll admit some of those cars look pretty good. I can appreciate a "little" stretch, reasonable negative camber and ZERO POKE. A good example of this is a MS3 owned by the forum member Strick.
I feel the same way. I have 225/50R16's on mine because I chickened out of 245/45R16's. The rear would have been no problem but the front is so close the coilover already I have to use camber bolts to spacer it out a bit.
Wagonbacker9
Member
- :
- 2004 'Hoe
I totally agree on the flush concept. my 8" wide, +47s, with 245s front, 225s rear sit pretty flush in my opinion... Exhibit A:
and here is a comparison of the above spec, to the MSP factor 215/45/16 at either +55 or +52 (Can't remember if I had my 3mm spacers in or not):
and here is a comparison of the above spec, to the MSP factor 215/45/16 at either +55 or +52 (Can't remember if I had my 3mm spacers in or not):
jonridinhi
Member
- :
- 2001 MP3/2010 MX5/1996 MILLINIA (donor)
yes agreed not peformance but there is no sidewall to roll so handleing is increased. Stiffer ride but i was not even getting into the contact patch. I got a little strech on my rx-8's but not enough to effect it negatively.
You're not following this: there is no performance benefit to stretching tires - at least not over a properly setup wheel/tire combination. There will also always be sidewall deformation even if the tires are stretched. A nice stiff sidewall will improve the "responsiveness" of the steering, and while stretching can accomplish this, all that "responsiveness" means nothing if you can't maintain traction. The best way to reduce tire flex is to maintain proper levels of inflaction and use proper tires for the application.
I guess I'll put it this way, if stretching really was a performance improvement why is it that no does it in F1, Grand Am, Le Mans, etc?
Wagonbacker9
Member
- :
- 2004 'Hoe
nor any form of racing on earth... (since speed is not a goal of drifting but rather showmanship, for the purposes of this discussion, I choose to not call that 'racing')
If you choose to argue that point, then I will compare it this way: for many movie chase scenes, they use wet roads, because it is much easier to predictably drive a car in a way that 'looks' like it is on the edge, when it in fact is not. This is due to reduced forces necessary to break traction. Same principle applies to tire stretch. You're effectively reducing traction. If you get a little more "responsiveness" all you've really accomplish is narrowing the window between when you're in control, and out of it. I don't call that a benefit.
jonridinhi
Member
- :
- 2001 MP3/2010 MX5/1996 MILLINIA (donor)
No i will put it this way so maybe you can fathem something and follow this.....
Running biggers rims if heavier agreed. On most we do agree but your whole performance thing in general....
Ok we will step onto the protege for a second, stock size is a 215/45/17 cool and to run the 8 inch wide 18's easily and remain lowered you run a 215/35/18. So in theroy you got a wider heavier rim yes but you got less sidewall to absorb the road and no less traction (same tread width). You could run a 225 if you wanted but you would need a hell of a roll to run with a nice drop. So why do they not do it on race cars well atleast you got something right with your performance statement. So you can get back on your performance kick but i can vouch that 17's with the same tires as i got on the 18's grip the same just one is a little better feel in the corners. Also with streched tires you have no feed back from the tires so when she goes she lets loose. Now you can go to the saftey issues if you want but for a mild strech it has not been proven to effect it. The crazy ass vw's on the other hand have proven there is a limit.
End result if you get a wider rim and run the same width tire you get a small strech and it will get you a strech look and have its down falls and perks all in one. The results are minimal.
Running biggers rims if heavier agreed. On most we do agree but your whole performance thing in general....
Ok we will step onto the protege for a second, stock size is a 215/45/17 cool and to run the 8 inch wide 18's easily and remain lowered you run a 215/35/18. So in theroy you got a wider heavier rim yes but you got less sidewall to absorb the road and no less traction (same tread width). You could run a 225 if you wanted but you would need a hell of a roll to run with a nice drop. So why do they not do it on race cars well atleast you got something right with your performance statement. So you can get back on your performance kick but i can vouch that 17's with the same tires as i got on the 18's grip the same just one is a little better feel in the corners. Also with streched tires you have no feed back from the tires so when she goes she lets loose. Now you can go to the saftey issues if you want but for a mild strech it has not been proven to effect it. The crazy ass vw's on the other hand have proven there is a limit.
End result if you get a wider rim and run the same width tire you get a small strech and it will get you a strech look and have its down falls and perks all in one. The results are minimal.
^^^ To that point it isn't even required for drifting. I can take my 160 HP, torque-less wonder out and easily swing the rear end out by entering a corner hot and applying some moderate trail-braking. The stretched tires in drifting came about because someone got the notion that they HAD to produce less traction in low-powered cars to brake loose. I've got some pictures of a guy that drifts his FC RX-7 over in the Czech Republic and he runs something like 255 series tires with a good amount of sidewell in the back. He doe,s however, have a very complex rear brake setup which allows him to snap the back around just about whenever he wants (it involves using two brake calipers on each rear wheel).
Also, jonridinhi, I really didn't mean to sound accusatory (or like an ass if you will) in the last post. Tire stretching is just something that really gets to me when people start to claim performance improvements. Again, I can understand and appreciate the look but I just have to disagree with any performance claim.
Also, jonridinhi, I really didn't mean to sound accusatory (or like an ass if you will) in the last post. Tire stretching is just something that really gets to me when people start to claim performance improvements. Again, I can understand and appreciate the look but I just have to disagree with any performance claim.
Wagonbacker9
Member
- :
- 2004 'Hoe
OK, I found our problem. 215 on a 8" isn't "stretch" at least not according to most.. I believe 8" is even inside the recommended size window for most tires in that size. When I said I "feel like my 225s are a bit stretched" I was just speaking in my own impression, I LOVE the meatyness of my 245s on the 16x8. Others hate it, and I'm OK with that.
I would argue that you and I were both trying to get as much tire under our cars as possible, given a goal. You constrained yours by an 18" tall wheel, which I respect. I constrained mine by an 8" wide wheel. Basically it boils down to this: if you COULD fit more rubber under the car on those wheels, you would, am I right? And even if I'm wrong, you would NOT consider running less. That I believe is the difference between you, and "stretch".
required no. and for them I'm sure some of it is pure 'style points' too... just trying to use it as an example more than anything. for them a narrow breakaway point in traction is actually an advantage, but they're pretty much the only place on earth where that is the case. lol
Last edited:
jonridinhi
Member
- :
- 2001 MP3/2010 MX5/1996 MILLINIA (donor)
I disagree with performance but the handleing is slightly improved and can vouch for it. Most of us do it for the look or to cram rims on a car they are not ment to be on. End of point. Not trying to be a dick either but there is 2 sides to this. I am in the middle on this, cause the handleing is improved but a slight loss in acceleration (due to weight not traction) and a painful ride sometimes but it looks good. I am actually selling mine here soon and the next car will be far from streched but like all things people take it way to far.
And for once i agree with Carl. mark the calander!!!!!!!!!!!
And for once i agree with Carl. mark the calander!!!!!!!!!!!
MazdaSpeeder
Member
- :
- Protege5 (5-spd)
Good to finally hear some sanity on this subject (magnump5 and wagonbacker)...the suggestion that it makes a positive performance difference is pretty silly. And it looks terrible...awful. (Of course, that's just my opinion) Smaller Tires->Decreased contact patch->less grip. Sidewall flex is more a function of tire construction and sidewall height than anything else.
