Real world consumption

[Rich_Jamo]

Hello All,

Chasing some real world consumption figures of 265/60R18 vs 265/65R18 on a sdv6. Fuel wise.

TIA.

Rich

[BradC]

I reckon depending on use and compound they'll do a set of tyres about every 60,000ks.

[SimmAus]

I don’t think you’d get much difference in fuel use between those 2 tyre options…probably a greater impact depending if you’re listening to AC/DC or Beethoven.

[Rich_Jamo]

Sorry should have specified fuel consumption

[BradC]

We know, but it's a "how long is a piece of string" question. Aside from any change in frictional losses due to tread footprint and inertial loss due to rotating mass, there would be SFA real world difference. It still takes the same amount of energy to accelerate the vehicle mass. The vehicle still has the same wind resistance, so aside from minor bordering on irrelevant changes to gearing I'd wager AC/DC would use more fuel than Beethoven because you'd be inclined to be a bit heavier on the loud pedal.

You're talking a 3.3% difference in rolling circumference (2433mm vs 2517mm)

Edit: and it'll ride 14mm higher.

[Rich_Jamo]

Haha love it.

Yah that kinda what I was thinking.

After the last car and bigger tyres I’m missing rubber…

[josh.huber]

Getting the spare in the hole might be an issue.. Someone on here would have listed it as an issue in another thread

[Tombie]

I’ve had both. The larger being slightly more aggressive.

I’ll be going back to 60 profile next set as I’ve seen no real offroad gain, however economy, handling and acceleration are all marginally impacted with the 65 profile.

For record dropping my vehicle 15mm at highway speed gains me 0.5l/100km - but then a moderate/decent bump will have the rear tyres hit under the guards.

[Rich_Jamo]

Should have mentioned spare will be on the rear bar.

My main reason for wanting to go up a size is having a bit more sidewall and ‘bag’ out when off road. I’m finding the combo of air suspension and smaller tyres rather firm off road.

But from what I’ve heard and you lot are saying is there is not much to be gained from going to a 65 profile.

Rich

[veebs]

I’m running the 265/60 r18 size, and find it softer than the stock 255/55R19.

Fuel is up a bit, but I put that down to more in the car (set up for a big camping trip), knobbly tyres, a bit taller so more drag, taller gearing in stop/start traffic, wet weather vs summer, I could go on. Going to 65 profile would just be one more factor I think.

We went with the 18” in order to get a more common tyre size when remote, however didn’t really have a drama with the 19”. The extra sidewall is nice, but not essential by my measure, but then I am a fairly sedate driver in the rough stuff…

[Rich_Jamo]

Many thanks for all the replies.

I’ve actually never driven the car on 19’s. Dad always ran the 18’s when I was driving it.

Guess it would seem that saving the money on tyres and extra fuel for very little gain is the consensus.

Can’t see me beating the disco up 35-37 tyre territory.

Rich

[josh.huber]

Many thanks for all the replies.

I’ve actually never driven the car on 19’s. Dad always ran the 18’s when I was driving it.

Guess it would seem that saving the money on tyres and extra fuel for very little gain is the consensus.

Can’t see me beating the disco up 35-37 tyre territory.

Rich

I've been off-road and in crappy conditions on the factory 20's mine has. Went further then lifted and mt tyres. Also does well on sand when you know what's the go with these things. I've got a set of 18's I use from time to time. Great for Fraser etc when towing..