Here goes soemthing perhaps a tad crazy. Most people think bigger and wider when upgrading tires, but I am thinking how narrow can I go on my rims without impacting odo/speedo and clearance.
I have a 2012 Pathy S 4WD with 245/75/16. The intention is to improve mpgs. Perhaps the gain in mpg would be negligible? Has anybody done this?
Narrowest tire for 2012 Pathy?
Moderator: volvite
-
impulsepath
- Posts: 49
- Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 12:37 pm
- Location: Raleigh, NC
It's pretty hard to change the tire size and not change speedo unless you go to a different rim size. I never realized they only used 245's on the PF anyway...that's almost an inch more narrow than the 265-65-17" tires that come on SE models. I think the closest you could come is going to a 235-75-16 which would shave another 1/2" and only change odo/speedo by about 2%. You might gain .5mpg if you do a lot of highway driving.
-
impulsepath
- Posts: 49
- Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 12:37 pm
- Location: Raleigh, NC
Well you may be able to do that...but I personally wouldn't want to. That's an awfully narrow tire for a tall vehicle with this suspension and steering. 245 is a bit narrow in my book. I've never seen a tire impact mpg by "a few mpg" unless maybe going a couple inches wider and taller and going from a highway tread to a mud-terrain. And then it was more like 2mpg on a rather underpowered truck to begin with. I would say a 1mpg increase would be on the high-end. I certainly think the decrease will come quicker than an increase.
I guess if you need new tires anyway.....worst case you have a crappy handling (possibly unsafe) vehicle for the life of those tires. I don't think the cost/benefit is there if you're replacing good tires.
I guess if you need new tires anyway.....worst case you have a crappy handling (possibly unsafe) vehicle for the life of those tires. I don't think the cost/benefit is there if you're replacing good tires.
I'm with skinny2. Although, you might see an mpg gain just because you'll be driving slower on skates like that, they'll squeal around every corner and could be dangerous just when you need them most. I would guess different tires' harder/softer compounds have potential to make just as much difference on mpg as more/less width. Back off the throttle and you'll gain even more.
Trouble is, with a thirsty vehicle like ours, there's just not much getting away from it. My first 10K I've averaged about 17 mpg. Even if that was 18, a 6% gain, then at $3.20/gal it adds up to $105/year, so about $9/month, or one six pack of decent beer. I'll do lots of things for a six pack, but compromising the safety of my vehicle isn't one of them.
Trouble is, with a thirsty vehicle like ours, there's just not much getting away from it. My first 10K I've averaged about 17 mpg. Even if that was 18, a 6% gain, then at $3.20/gal it adds up to $105/year, so about $9/month, or one six pack of decent beer. I'll do lots of things for a six pack, but compromising the safety of my vehicle isn't one of them.
Went down one size narrower on my daughter's 2003 Ford Escape (I know it's not a Nissan) which was still within the manufactures listed tire sizes for her car. She says the ride is much smoother and thinks she is getting a little better gas mileage. Of course the change could just be because the new tires are better made than the old tires.
I've been using this Tire Size Calculator for over 10 years now 
http://www.miata.net/garage/tirecalc.html
http://www.miata.net/garage/tirecalc.html
The tires are the same height giving the same rotation, only not as wide. How wide a tire is will not effect the speedometer or tripometer, only making a tire taller or shorter would make a difference. Say change a car that came with 16" tires to 12" tires (don't laugh, I have seen that) would make a difference, in this example it would be a BIG difference.NVSteve wrote:It's most probably the fact that the speedo/trip are no longer accurate. The smaller the tire from stock, the higher the mpg gain (according to the speedo/trip/odo), when in reality it isn't.Calicajun wrote:thinks she is getting a little better gas mileage.
Oh, I'm following you. My point, which I didn't make very clear, is that a lot of the cars driving around on the roads today are giving false/inaccurate mpg readings because most vehicles' electronics and calibrations are based on one tire size only. Even if your new vehicle comes with tires of a certain size, that does not necessarily mean that the electronics are calibrated to that exact tire size, especially if other models/packages exist for that same vehicle that offer different tire sizes. I've driven a few rental cars that were not accurate, but couldn't for the life of me imagine those particular vehicles had other options available (tire sizes, etc) because, well, they suck so bad to begin with. I think it is a fully deceptive activity on the part of the mfrs.Calicajun wrote:
The tires are the same height giving the same rotation, only not as wide. How wide a tire is will not effect the speedometer or tripometer, only making a tire taller or shorter would make a difference. Say change a car that came with 16" tires to 12" tires (don't laugh, I have seen that) would make a difference, in this example it would be a BIG difference.
Steve,
I agree with you about the inaccurate readings, my PF is off by 3 miles per hour. I'm not sure if that is affecting the mileage reading, if it is then my gas mileage is better than I have been tracking (19.5 city, 22 hwy, except one trip to Las Vegas, NV got 26.2 but only 23.1 coming home).
Craig
I agree with you about the inaccurate readings, my PF is off by 3 miles per hour. I'm not sure if that is affecting the mileage reading, if it is then my gas mileage is better than I have been tracking (19.5 city, 22 hwy, except one trip to Las Vegas, NV got 26.2 but only 23.1 coming home).
Craig
Find Your Forum!