235/85R16 vs. 265/75R16 vs. 255/85R16

**VladTepes** · 9th March 2005, 03:25 PM

so the 265/75 is slighty wider and taller than 235/85 ?

(The calc only goes to 80 not 85 but I'll forgive you).

If this is the case (ie ever so slight height increase and marginal width increase), why would anyone NOT get the 265 and opt for the 235 instead ?

**dungarover** · 9th March 2005, 04:37 PM

Vlad, I almost bopght 265/75's and decided against it as my theory is narrow tyres leave wide ones for deal in off-road terrain.

The reasion is they can bite in and bain traction much quicker (especially in mud) compared to a wider tread tyre. With a narrower tyre you can always drop the tyre pressure a bit to gain more footprinting in certain situations (such as sand).

Also, a 265 is 31.6 wheras a 235 is 31.7, nothing in it really.

Trav

**VladTepes** · 9th March 2005, 04:56 PM

Thanks Mate.

I have 235/85's on the Defender and will stick with that size.

Don't know what I'll end up with on the Rangie - I get what I get.

**one_iota** · 9th March 2005, 06:31 PM

As I understand it it's the length of the tread in contact with the road that gives traction. Never mind the width. Tyre pressure is the regulator.

**Pedro_The_Swift** · 10th March 2005, 05:10 AM

Originally posted by VladTepes
so the 265/75 is slighty wider and taller than 235/85 ?

(The calc only goes to 80 not 85 but I'll forgive you).

If this is the case (ie ever so slight height increase and marginal width increase), why would anyone NOT get the 265 and opt for the 235 instead ?

please clarify "marginal width increase"

more or less than 245-75's???

**VladTepes** · 10th March 2005, 10:15 AM

Go look for yourself.

(Well, that's what you people normally say to me!)

Defender200Tdi · 10th March 2005, 10:39 AM

Another one of those online tyre calculators (that goes beyond 85 profile):

http://www.tyremaster.com.au/fitment_tips/...s/diam_calc.htm

Paul [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif[/img]

**incisor** · 10th March 2005, 11:08 AM

Originally posted by VladTepes
Go look for yourself.

(Well, that's what you people normally say to me!)

when was that ?

we have been XTRA nice to you i thought

hehehehehehe

that would be right, knight's a man and your the old woman!

**Pedro_The_Swift** · 10th March 2005, 02:04 PM

Originally posted by VladTepes
Go look for yourself.

(Well, that's what you people normally say to me!)

ooopss!!!

ops:

**uninformed** · 14th March 2005, 07:59 PM

basicly brand to brand they will vary slightly but for a 235/85 r16 it is:
235 = 235 mm wide
85 = aspect ratio in height, 85% 0f 235 = 199.75
r = radial
16 = inch rim, 16 x 25.4 = 406.4

therefore 199.75 x 2 (tyre above rim and tyre below rim) + 406.4 = 805.9mm or 31.72834646 inches tall
this will also vary due to rim width and air pressure.
now IMO a narrowISH tyre is better because it has less rolling resistance. think of it this way look across the width of the tyre and imagine this pushing through soft sand or mud its actullay creating friction so the wider the more friction or resistance. Now grond pressure is different, this is where a tall tyre is good because its long foot print supports the vehicle and stops it digging straight down
serg

Thread: 235/85R16 vs. 265/75R16 vs. 255/85R16

Thread Tools

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions