Ideal wheel and tyre size?

Nissan Navara Forum

Help Support Nissan Navara Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

FrootStik

Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2014
Messages
94
Reaction score
0
Location
Perth, Western Australia
Hey guys

I am starting to look around for wheels and tyres for my ST, but in all honesty have little idea about all the talk with offset, and sizes.

In my situation with a 2" lift, what would be the best wheel and tyre combo?
So that i don't get rubbing or any problems?

Any help on this would be great.
Thanks
 
Well g'day there "Froots".

Depends what your intended use is I guess but this is what I just put on mine.
Went from some pimped 20 inch chromies(previous owner) to some 2013 ST-X rims ($400 on gumtree) and some Hankook MT's in 265 70 R17.The tyres now sit ever so slightly out of the guard...only about 10mm...so if you want an extra wide track you would have to flare the guards with the rubber ones to be legal.

Everyone seems to be going "black" these days so I'm going to concentrate on the "silver and blue" theme for something different.

These are basically 32' inch tyres but with a little "massaging "of the guards you can go to 33's if you must.My car also has the 50 mm lift.
I think + 30 is the ideal offset...have a search these forums mate there is plenty of info.r

I reckon these look big enuff for now.

Pjw
 

Attachments

  • Nav's new wheels 5 14 003.jpg
    Nav's new wheels 5 14 003.jpg
    228.3 KB · Views: 137
  • Nav's new wheels 5 14 010.jpg
    Nav's new wheels 5 14 010.jpg
    220.8 KB · Views: 129
  • Nav's new wheels 5 14 005.jpg
    Nav's new wheels 5 14 005.jpg
    226.4 KB · Views: 152
  • Nav's new wheels 5 14 009.jpg
    Nav's new wheels 5 14 009.jpg
    227.4 KB · Views: 149
Last edited:
I think the best is to keep the size/offset combination as close to standard as possible. Yeah I know boring but it will give you the best fuel consumption, acceleration, braking and handling performance.

All you really have to work out is what type of surface you will be mostly driving on and buy the best tyre you can afford that suits.
 
There are several ways to approach this particular issue.

One way - look at it from a clearance point of view. The bigger the better! The larger diameter wheel you have, the higher your diff is off the ground - so ruts and logs and rocks have that much further to leap up to nab the underside of your car. Add a 125mm Calmini lift and 50mm body lift to 315/85R16 tyres and you're really talking some height.

Another way is to look at it from an economy point of view. The standard tyres are designed to put the standard engine (no chip or other engine mods) in the top of the torque climb zone at marginally under the average highway speed in your area. So in Australia that's around 95km/h and in my 2009 D40 that's about 2000rpm or so. This torque point is NOT the peak torque area. This point I'm referring to is the top of the steep climb your torque curve goes through as the revs and boost rises. It should be about 1700rpm in the V9X, around 2000rpm in the YD25 D40 (the YD25 D22 has a different turbo, head etc and its point will be nearer 2700rpm). Let's refer to this point as the "sweet spot". From a more simple point of view, it's the point in the RPM range where the engine is producing the most torque it can for the fuel going in. Put in less fuel, you'll get MUCH less torque. Put in more fuel, you'll get a LITTLE more torque but the fuel rate is higher than the torque increase rate - so you're LESS economical beyond that point.

SO, after all that, if you size your tyres based on the cruise speed that YOU want to do at those RPM, you'll do well economically, with the caveat that the engine has to actually have enough power to hold the car's weight (and wind resistance) at that speed. Choose a tyre that's too large, the engine will have too much difficulty turning it over to get you the speed and you'll use more fuel. Use a smaller tyre and you'll not go as fast as you might have, but your car will have a much easier time of it. Balance that with the ground clearance you're seeking, of course!

Offset is something else, and doesn't affect the economy much although you could argue that the increased width of the vehicle increases the wind resistance so going for a more negative offset increases fuel consumption. What it WILL do is increase your vehicle's stance - that's excellent for stability, not so good for parking lots or tight garages. I'd love to increase the offset on each side by 45-50mm (giving me 90-100mm of increased width) and flare the guards with Arctic guards. Go on, click on the link, the cars look awesome.

You don't ever really want to reduce your offset (increase the positive offset) because your tyres will sit closer to the centre of the vehicle increasing the chance of scrubbing against the guards and interference with the brakes. Here's a website that explains offset with pictures.

Some people choose two sets of tyres - one "standard" (or near standard) for around town, fitted with long-lasting tyres (highway "HT" usually) and another set of ginormous great big honking muddies (see the AT38 Navara on the Arctic website). Most don't actually go THAT far, but it's possible!
 
good sense

Nice post OT, I haven't seen it explained as clearly. Cleared up a lot of questions that I had. My muddies have taken approx. 100 kms from a tank of diesel. Time to go back to standard tyres I think with a slightly wider stance.
 
Sorry hijack but tony does about 2400rpm at 110-120kmph seem about right. Seems cruising at that speed my ute uses more fuel?
Froots I run 265/70/17 on stock rims and have no issues at all (ran them on my ute before the lift aswell) Equals a touch over 32" tyres.
 
You'll use a lot more fuel at much higher speeds as wind resistance becomes a big factor and your fuel input is not giving you as much extra beans as it did up to the "sweet spot".

My wife and I drove to Melbourne at 95km/h (sticking to 2,000rpm as much as possible) and after a little driving around Melbourne we refuelled (9 Jun 2013) and the figures were 10.42 LPHK on the trip down. On the way back, we sat at the speed limit, refuelling when we returned (11 Jun 2013) giving us a figure of 11.6LPHK. There was no change in anything other than the direction travelled and the speed taken. It's fairly much proof that higher speeds will consume more fuel.

Bigger tyres mean a longer lever (distance between the centre of the axle and the road surface is physically equal to a lever of the same length) and not only is it harder to turn the tyre over, but it's easier for the tyre to slow the axle (up hills) so the effect is worsened anywhere but the Stuart Highway (which rightly should be called "Ballerina Highway" because it's as flat as a tack). So that will add to the effect as well.

Putting your tyre size and RPM into my spreadsheet gives me a speed (at 2400rpm) of 116.8 if you've got a standard diff (3.538:1). That's a little higher RPM than your car's optimum RPM (which is around 2000rpm) and your most efficient cruise speed on those tyres is 97km/h (read from a GPS, not your speedo). Any faster than that and you're pouring a larger amount of extra fuel in to get a smaller amount of extra power, which is why you're seeing higher consumption at those speeds.
 
That's for that mate I was just a little concerned it was revving a little high for a std freeway speed. Fuel consumption explanation makes sense u should write a book mate you'd make a killing. Could call it complex issues explained to dummies. I'd buy it
 

Latest posts

Back
Top