? 16" SNOW tires and rims

subiemech85 · #1 08-24-2009, 12:29 AM

the plan: 16" steel crown vic wheels and winterforce tires

225/50/16 overall diameter 25" or 225/60/16 overall diameter 27.8

comments?

JaySVX · #2 08-24-2009, 03:56 AM

If they're strickly snow tires you should consider going narrower for better traction. 195 or so.

SVX_MY_BABY · #3 08-24-2009, 06:52 AM

I wouldn't go with 225/60.
Have you checked the offset?
The way snow & ice build up in the wheel well would be a major problem with a larger diameter wheel, especially if the offset was significantly different.

LetItSnow · #4 08-24-2009, 10:11 AM

If you're looking for an alternative, I've got a set of 205/55/16 Blizzaks on stock SVX wheels with mmmmmmaybe 5k miles on them that I no longer need since my SVX will never see snow again during my watch!

(EDIT: These are sold!)

Blacky · #5 08-24-2009, 10:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LetItSnow

If you're looking for an alternative, I've got a set of 205/55/16 Blizzaks on stock SVX wheels with mmmmmmaybe 5k miles on them that I no longer need since my SVX will never see snow again during my watch!

I'd be interested in that set. I'll send you a pm.

subiemech85 · #6 08-24-2009, 12:23 PM

tire tread width 6.5 - 7.8 overall diameter 25 - 27.8

http://www.bridgestonetire.com/tires...roduct_ID=2023

steel rims are $15 each, 54mm offset

will likely go with the 215/60

1986nate · #7 08-24-2009, 06:39 PM

I have 215/60 Blizzak WS50's mounted on 16" Nissan steelies. They have a +42mm offset and although I haven't driven on them yet, they are on my parts car and clear the fenders fine.

subiemech85 · #8 12-09-2009, 05:46 PM

ended up getting the 255/60/16
some slight rubbing occasionally

LetItSnow · #9 12-10-2009, 07:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by subiemech85

255/60/16

That would be impressive.

Quote:

Originally Posted by subiemech85

some slight rubbing occasionally

That would be likely.

Nevin · #10 12-13-2009, 08:25 PM

A 205/55R16 would be the same diameter as the stock 225/50R16 tire. Like it has been mentioned though, a narrower tire is better suited for winter.

I actually have a set of 205/55R16 Firestone WinterForce tires on my Mazda MX-6, and it gets around great. If I were to buy some for the SVX, I would buy the exact same thing for it, same size and all. I work at a tire shop, and have mounted more than a few sets of the WinterForce tires. I have heard NO complaints, and I am of the opinion that there is not a better tire for the money as far as snow tires are concerned.

A skinnier tire "sinks in" better, and can get more traction for itself, whereas a wider tire doesn't put as much pressure on the ground, so it doesn't get as much "bite" you could say.

SoCal LS-L · #11 12-13-2009, 08:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nevin

A 205/55R16 would be the same diameter as the stock 225/50R16 tire. Like it has been mentioned though, a narrower tire is better suited for winter.

I actually have a set of 205/55R16 Firestone WinterForce tires on my Mazda MX-6, and it gets around great. If I were to buy some for the SVX, I would buy the exact same thing for it, same size and all. I work at a tire shop, and have mounted more than a few sets of the WinterForce tires. I have heard NO complaints, and I am of the opinion that there is not a better tire for the money as far as snow tires are concerned.

A skinnier tire "sinks in" better, and can get more traction for itself, whereas a wider tire doesn't put as much pressure on the ground, so it doesn't get as much "bite" you could say.

Im sorry, I sell those, and I think theyre absolute garbage.

Most wear out by the end of the first season, and they lack the siping that higher quality tires have...... Firestone just recently put their name on these. They do have an aggressive tread but as far as snow traction, you would see a marked increase if you tried something like a Blizzak, or Continental Extreme Winter contact, which have a far superior siping pattern.

Most people I sell to that have used the Winterforce request a different tire lol, they are better than an all-terrain but as far as quality, you get hwat you pay for.

Nevin · #12 12-13-2009, 09:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SoCal LS-L

Im sorry, I sell those, and I think theyre absolute garbage.

Most wear out by the end of the first season, and they lack the siping that higher quality tires have...... Firestone just recently put their name on these. They do have an aggressive tread but as far as snow traction, you would see a marked increase if you tried something like a Blizzak, or Continental Extreme Winter contact, which have a far superior siping pattern.

Most people I sell to that have used the Winterforce request a different tire lol, they are better than an all-terrain but as far as quality, you get hwat you pay for.

I am not trying to disrespect your opinion, but the people that have used them here love them, and I do as well. I had them on another car a few years ago and it got around great, and the guy I sold it to is still running the same tires on it 3 years later.

They also get very high marks on tirerack's site a few months back when I was looking. I would easily concede that they may not be as high of quality as a few that you have mentioned, but like I said in bold in my previous post, "for the money" they are a good tire.

Here is a link to a comparison on tirerack's site. http://www.tirerack.com/tires/survey...sp?type=W&VT=C

Also, since they are a studable tire, comparing them directly to a non-studded tire isn't quite a fair comparison. A bit of apples to oranges, if you will. And I'm not bashing any of your selections at all, I'm just saying that I think this is a winter tire that is worth consideration.

SoCal LS-L · #13 12-14-2009, 05:07 PM

Cool, im glad you have had a better experience with them than what I hear about here. Ive actually had people want a partial refund after wearing them out in a few months time, I usually warn people against using them on dry pavement for more than a short season. I guess it depends on how you use them.