What size tyres people running on 17' rims

I run 265/70 17's Cooper s/t maxx on factory rims. never had an issue with them rubbing at any height. I don't have rear a/c and never had a seam rolled or folded. I was originally told that they wouldn't fit but i'm on my second set now. Previous set lasted 90,000+ kms.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kenthead

I run 265/70 17's Cooper s/t maxx on factory rims. never had an issue with them rubbing at any height. I don't have rear a/c and never had a seam rolled or folded. I was originally told that they wouldn't fit but i'm on my second set now. Previous set lasted 90,000+ kms.

---

Sweet, that's awesome news, was the size I was hoping would work with.

If some are saying that 265/70/17 rub and some aren't, would it be as simple as the tyres that rub are M/T with the more chunky tread or the tread blocks on the shoulder rubbing and the less aggressive A/T not rubbing ?


Just a simple thought.


Cheers Ean

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ean Austral

If some are saying that 265/70/17 rub and some aren't, would it be as simple as the tyres that rub are M/T with the more chunky tread or the tread blocks on the shoulder rubbing and the less aggressive A/T not rubbing ?


Just a simple thought.


Cheers Ean

---

This could be the case Ean, also, just because the size says 265, this doesn't mean that the acual width is 265, it depends on where the manufacturer measures the tyre from, some are measured from the edge, whereas some are measured from down the shoudler.

As an excample, our 255/60/18s were actually physically wider than the 265/70/17s when you put them side by side, because our 255 GG AT2s were measured from the tyres edge and the 265 Kumhos were measured from down the shoulder.

Baz.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Redback

This could be the case Ean, also, just because the size says 265, this doesn't mean that the acual width is 265, it depends on where the manufacturer measures the tyre from, some are measured from the edge, whereas some are measured from down the shoudler.

As an excample, our 255/60/18s were actually physically wider than the 265/70/17s when you put them side by side, because our 255 GG AT2s were measured from the tyres edge and the 265 Kumhos were measured from down the shoulder.

Baz.

---

Yep the same with the OEM wranglers at 255 are wider than the Dunlop 265 I have on at the moment.




Cheers Ean

But more to the point on the rears it's overall diameter that causes the rubbing, width to a lesser extent.
On the front width also matters more.

I may be wrong, but was under the impression that all tires were measured from the widest point, ie if the side wall bulges wider than the tread width etc.
yeh i know a different width rim can influence that, but the specified rim the manufacturer of tire stipulates is designed for.
Interesting comment re tread style.

I've always understood that the metric width size specification is the nominal section width in mm on the tyre manufacturer's nominated width rim.

This will answer a few tyre questions.

Hours of reading…….


http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tirete...#39;techid=202

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Graeme

I've always understood that the metric width size specification is the nominal section width in mm on the tyre manufacturer's nominated width rim.

---

Hey Greame, I was just going off of what a mate who owns a tyre store told me, as i'd thought the same as you till I measured a few tyres and they measured narrower than the size they were.
Ps, I have been kown to be wrong before. lol, no seriously I have,