Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [solectria_ev] New and Old Tires Review

Expand Messages
  • Joshua Goldstein
    Thanks to Todd for his tire info. I have some other tire questions. My 99 Force has worn through its tires way too quickly (from overinflating?
    Message 1 of 7 , Apr 2 11:21 AM
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Thanks to Todd for his tire info. I have some other tire questions. My '99
      Force has worn through its tires way too quickly (from overinflating?
      misalignment?) and I'm looking for replacements. (We do almost all
      around-town and country-road driving.) The originals were P155/80 R13's but
      people on this list seem to have been replacing those with P175/70 R13's.
      Does anyone think that's a good/bad idea? (There aren't that many P155/80's
      out there.)
      Also, the Sumitomos that Todd and others have bought are summer tires and
      I live in New England so does anyone have an idea for an all-weather tire?
      Presumably that would increase rolling resistance but then again it's nice
      not to go sliding into snow banks as happened this winter (no harm done this
      time).
      This leads to the more philosophical question -- how to reduce rolling
      resistance other than overinflating the tires or having them get bald (both
      of which reduce control). Someone posted a link to the Consumer Reports
      article on rolling resistance, but the recommended tires were all R14 and
      up.
      Wondering how others have dealt with these tire issues...
      Joshua Goldstein
      '99 Force
      Amherst, MA



      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Todd Martin" <larsthelean@...>
      To: <solectria_ev@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2009 5:44 PM
      Subject: [solectria_ev] New and Old Tires Review


      > In April 2006, I bought my 1997 Solectria Force with 9500 miles on it.
      > It came with Dunlop SP40 A/S tires (P155/80 R13 79S). The previous
      > owner explained that the original Force tires had died of old age (tire
      > rot). I kept the tire pressure at 44psi instead of the recommended
      > 35psi for better rolling efficiency. Over 2 years and 8 months, and
      > 21000 miles, the Dunlop tires wore down to the steel belt. My
      > efficiency numbers had gradually improved with the very smooth tires
      > gliding down the road.
      >
      > In December 2008, I bought Sumitomo HTR200 tires (P175/70 R13 82H)
      > which fit on the same original rims, even though the tires are a
      > slightly different size. Discount Tire charged me $85.56 to install
      > the tires with "computer spin balance" and I paid $43.40 per tire
      > ($231.90 total including shipping etc) from www.tires-easy.com. Total
      > expense was $317.46 I chose these tires since they were recommended by
      > the Green Seal report for low rolling resistance.
      >
      > So far, my efficiency has been pretty poor, with a loss of 15-20%.
      > Some of this is because Discount Tires inflated my new tires to 32psi,
      > and I haven't increased that yet (it's been cold outside). A lot of
      > this is because these are new tires instead of bald tires.
      >
      > Todd Martin
      > '97 Force
      > Elgin IL
      >
      >
    • Doug Brentlinger
      I have a Geo Metro Convertible and installed Kumho Solus KR21, 175/70-13.  The original tires were 155s as well.  I found two different programs that
      Message 2 of 7 , Apr 2 1:39 PM
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        I have a Geo Metro Convertible and installed Kumho Solus KR21, 175/70-13.  The original tires were 155s as well.  I found two different programs that calculated about 8% slower rotation of tires due to the larger diameter which results in a slower spedo and odometer.  I ran the tires for 3 months to let them get use to going around and tested mileage.  These tires result in about a 4% reduction in mileage from my old tires, tho the mileage per tank continues to improve. 
        I think it would be better to stay with the original size tires, unless you take your Geo on the race track!  The larger tires with cost you in straight line performance and may make the motor work harder which would result in lost range.
        Michlien makes a tire that has very low rolling resistance and would probably work fine in the 13" size.
        Good luck and let us know what you decide to do.
        I have a Dodge Rampage pickup which I converted to EV 6 years ago and love it.  I will attach a picture.
        doug



        ________________________________
        From: Joshua Goldstein <jg@...>
        To: solectria_ev@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Thursday, April 2, 2009 11:21:56 AM
        Subject: Re: [solectria_ev] New and Old Tires Review


        Thanks to Todd for his tire info. I have some other tire questions. My '99
        Force has worn through its tires way too quickly (from overinflating?
        misalignment? ) and I'm looking for replacements. (We do almost all
        around-town and country-road driving.) The originals were P155/80 R13's but
        people on this list seem to have been replacing those with P175/70 R13's.
        Does anyone think that's a good/bad idea? (There aren't that many P155/80's
        out there.)
        Also, the Sumitomos that Todd and others have bought are summer tires and
        I live in New England so does anyone have an idea for an all-weather tire?
        Presumably that would increase rolling resistance but then again it's nice
        not to go sliding into snow banks as happened this winter (no harm done this
        time).
        This leads to the more philosophical question -- how to reduce rolling
        resistance other than overinflating the tires or having them get bald (both
        of which reduce control). Someone posted a link to the Consumer Reports
        article on rolling resistance, but the recommended tires were all R14 and
        up.
        Wondering how others have dealt with these tire issues...
        Joshua Goldstein
        '99 Force
        Amherst, MA

        ----- Original Message -----
        From: "Todd Martin" <larsthelean@ yahoo.com>
        To: <solectria_ev@ yahoogroups. com>
        Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2009 5:44 PM
        Subject: [solectria_ev] New and Old Tires Review

        > In April 2006, I bought my 1997 Solectria Force with 9500 miles on it.
        > It came with Dunlop SP40 A/S tires (P155/80 R13 79S). The previous
        > owner explained that the original Force tires had died of old age (tire
        > rot). I kept the tire pressure at 44psi instead of the recommended
        > 35psi for better rolling efficiency. Over 2 years and 8 months, and
        > 21000 miles, the Dunlop tires wore down to the steel belt. My
        > efficiency numbers had gradually improved with the very smooth tires
        > gliding down the road.
        >
        > In December 2008, I bought Sumitomo HTR200 tires (P175/70 R13 82H)
        > which fit on the same original rims, even though the tires are a
        > slightly different size. Discount Tire charged me $85.56 to install
        > the tires with "computer spin balance" and I paid $43.40 per tire
        > ($231.90 total including shipping etc) from www.tires-easy. com. Total
        > expense was $317.46 I chose these tires since they were recommended by
        > the Green Seal report for low rolling resistance.
        >
        > So far, my efficiency has been pretty poor, with a loss of 15-20%.
        > Some of this is because Discount Tires inflated my new tires to 32psi,
        > and I haven't increased that yet (it's been cold outside). A lot of
        > this is because these are new tires instead of bald tires.
        >
        > Todd Martin
        > '97 Force
        > Elgin IL
        >
        >




        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Todd Martin
        Hi Joshua, Let me give you an update. The original tire installer (Discount Tires) inflated the Sumitomo s to 32psi and I had poor efficiency numbers. In
        Message 3 of 7 , Apr 3 6:11 AM
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          Hi Joshua,

          Let me give you an update.

          The original tire installer (Discount Tires) inflated the Sumitomo's to 32psi and I had poor efficiency numbers. In February, I increased the tire pressure to the maximum recommended on the tire sidewall: 55psi. This made a BIG difference, and I now have efficiency numbers just as good as my former completely bald (with steel belt showing) Dunlops.

          Regarding the tire sizes, I did not have any problems in switching from P155/80 R13 to P175/70 R13. The original rims worked just fine.

          I drove the car in Chicago area winter (February on) with the Sumitomo's at 55psi without any complaints. Yes, I did get stuck in the driveway once with 6 inches of snow. I won't blame the tires on that though.

          I like the new tires and now recommend them.

          Best regards,
          Todd Martin
          '97 Force
          Elgin, IL

          --- In solectria_ev@yahoogroups.com, "Joshua Goldstein" <jg@...> wrote:
          >
          > Thanks to Todd for his tire info. I have some other tire questions. My '99
          > Force has worn through its tires way too quickly (from overinflating?
          > misalignment?) and I'm looking for replacements. (We do almost all
          > around-town and country-road driving.) The originals were P155/80 R13's but
          > people on this list seem to have been replacing those with P175/70 R13's.
          > Does anyone think that's a good/bad idea? (There aren't that many P155/80's
          > out there.)
          > Also, the Sumitomos that Todd and others have bought are summer tires and
          > I live in New England so does anyone have an idea for an all-weather tire?
          > Presumably that would increase rolling resistance but then again it's nice
          > not to go sliding into snow banks as happened this winter (no harm done this
          > time).
          > This leads to the more philosophical question -- how to reduce rolling
          > resistance other than overinflating the tires or having them get bald (both
          > of which reduce control). Someone posted a link to the Consumer Reports
          > article on rolling resistance, but the recommended tires were all R14 and
          > up.
          > Wondering how others have dealt with these tire issues...
          > Joshua Goldstein
          > '99 Force
          > Amherst, MA
          >
          >
          >
          > ----- Original Message -----
          > From: "Todd Martin" <larsthelean@...>
          > To: <solectria_ev@yahoogroups.com>
          > Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2009 5:44 PM
          > Subject: [solectria_ev] New and Old Tires Review
          >
          >
          > > In April 2006, I bought my 1997 Solectria Force with 9500 miles on it.
          > > It came with Dunlop SP40 A/S tires (P155/80 R13 79S). The previous
          > > owner explained that the original Force tires had died of old age (tire
          > > rot). I kept the tire pressure at 44psi instead of the recommended
          > > 35psi for better rolling efficiency. Over 2 years and 8 months, and
          > > 21000 miles, the Dunlop tires wore down to the steel belt. My
          > > efficiency numbers had gradually improved with the very smooth tires
          > > gliding down the road.
          > >
          > > In December 2008, I bought Sumitomo HTR200 tires (P175/70 R13 82H)
          > > which fit on the same original rims, even though the tires are a
          > > slightly different size. Discount Tire charged me $85.56 to install
          > > the tires with "computer spin balance" and I paid $43.40 per tire
          > > ($231.90 total including shipping etc) from www.tires-easy.com. Total
          > > expense was $317.46 I chose these tires since they were recommended by
          > > the Green Seal report for low rolling resistance.
          > >
          > > So far, my efficiency has been pretty poor, with a loss of 15-20%.
          > > Some of this is because Discount Tires inflated my new tires to 32psi,
          > > and I haven't increased that yet (it's been cold outside). A lot of
          > > this is because these are new tires instead of bald tires.
          > >
          > > Todd Martin
          > > '97 Force
          > > Elgin IL
          > >
          > >
          >
        • Ken Olum
          ... I m confused. Did you have 155/80R13 before? I thought (see http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tiretech/techpage.jsp?techid=46) that the rim-to-tread distance
          Message 4 of 7 , Apr 3 7:38 AM
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            >I have a Geo Metro Convertible and installed Kumho Solus KR21, 175/70-13. The
            >original tires were 155s as well. I found two different programs that
            >calculated about 8% slower rotation of tires due to the larger diameter which
            >results in a slower spedo and odometer.

            I'm confused. Did you have 155/80R13 before? I thought (see
            http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tiretech/techpage.jsp?techid=46) that
            the rim-to-tread distance was proportional to the product of the first
            two numbers. 155*0.80 = 124mm, 175*0.70 = 122.5mm, nearly the same.

            In any event, wider tires (175mm vs. 155mm) don't seem desirable. For
            efficiency, you want narrow tires with lots of pressure, like a
            bicycle.

            Ken
          • Doug Brentlinger
            Hi again from Doug, I live in the San Francisco bay area and go over highway 17 to Santa Cruz weekly and I use to pull the grades in 4th gear with ease.  The
            Message 5 of 7 , Apr 3 8:28 AM
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              Hi again from Doug,
              I live in the San Francisco bay area and go over highway 17 to Santa Cruz weekly and I use to pull the grades in 4th gear with ease.  The new tires require 3rd on a couple of the steapest grades.  They are bigger around but I didn't measure the old ones.  Sorry bout that...
              doug

              ________________________________
              From: Ken Olum <kdo@...>
              To: solectria_ev@yahoogroups.com
              Sent: Friday, April 3, 2009 7:38:59 AM
              Subject: Re: [solectria_ev] Re: New and Old Tires Review


              >I have a Geo Metro Convertible and installed Kumho Solus KR21, 175/70-13. The
              >original tires were 155s as well. I found two different programs that
              >calculated about 8% slower rotation of tires due to the larger diameter which
              >results in a slower spedo and odometer.

              I'm confused. Did you have 155/80R13 before? I thought (see
              http://www.tirerack .com/tires/ tiretech/ techpage. jsp?techid= 46) that
              the rim-to-tread distance was proportional to the product of the first
              two numbers. 155*0.80 = 124mm, 175*0.70 = 122.5mm, nearly the same.

              In any event, wider tires (175mm vs. 155mm) don't seem desirable. For
              efficiency, you want narrow tires with lots of pressure, like a
              bicycle.

              Ken




              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Joshua Goldstein
              Thanks to several people for tire ideas. I went with Kumho Solus KR21 s in the original size, P155 / 80 R13. There are few tires available in this size and I
              Message 6 of 7 , Apr 9 5:36 AM
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                Thanks to several people for tire ideas. I went with Kumho Solus KR21's in
                the original size, P155 / 80 R13. There are few tires available in this
                size and I expect worse mileage per amp hour than before, but it's a narrow
                tire and a lot safer than the bald ones I had. There is something to be
                said for using "normal" stuff on the nonelectric parts of the car and then
                just getting in and driving, though of course hypermiling can be fun.
                Now I badly need an alignment (clear from the wear pattern on the old
                tires which wore out way too quickly). The tire shop wondered if there are
                different alignment specs for the Force as compared with the gas Metro
                (given weight difference etc.). The only thing I found on the group site is
                a suggestion to set the front at zero toe-in. Any other ideas would be
                welcome.
                Joshua Goldstein, '99 Force


                ----- Original Message -----
                From: "Ken Olum" <kdo@...>
                To: <solectria_ev@yahoogroups.com>
                Sent: Friday, April 03, 2009 10:38 AM
                Subject: Re: [solectria_ev] Re: New and Old Tires Review


                > >I have a Geo Metro Convertible and installed Kumho Solus KR21, 175/70-13.
                > >The
                >>original tires were 155s as well. I found two different programs that
                >>calculated about 8% slower rotation of tires due to the larger diameter
                >>which
                >>results in a slower spedo and odometer.
                >
                > I'm confused. Did you have 155/80R13 before? I thought (see
                > http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tiretech/techpage.jsp?techid=46) that
                > the rim-to-tread distance was proportional to the product of the first
                > two numbers. 155*0.80 = 124mm, 175*0.70 = 122.5mm, nearly the same.
                >
                > In any event, wider tires (175mm vs. 155mm) don't seem desirable. For
                > efficiency, you want narrow tires with lots of pressure, like a
                > bicycle.
                >
                > Ken
                >
                >
                >
                > ------------------------------------
                >
                > Yahoo! Groups Links
                >
                >
                >
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.