Tire Plus-Sizing Question: Why MUST Tire/Wheel Get WIDER When +Sizing?

[ckoz...@snet.net]

Traditional "Plus-Sizing" involves changes of dimensions in two directions: The plus-size rim and tire both get wider, and the sidewall of the tire becomes shorter("lower profile"), maintaining correct speedometer ratios.

My perception of plus-sizing is that the only thing that should change size is the diameter of the rim. The width(side to side) of both the rim and tire used should remain the same. The only difference is the sidewall of the new tire will be shorter("lower profile"), to compensate for taller rim and maintaining height for correct speedometer.

The advantages of the above:

-The same "looks" of traditional plus-sizing(where all dimensions including width change).

-Less chance of tire/wheel scuffing wheel well or suspension parts while turning.

-Better straight-line tracking given the same specs for caster & SAI(kingpin).

-More weight per contact patch and more longitudinal contact patch(both good for negoticating rain and snow).

-Slightly lower weight per wheel than traditional plus-sizing.

So why is this type of plus-sizing(maintaining width of the package but keeping correct height for speedometer) so hard to accomplish?

-ChrisCoaster

[Alan Baker]

In article
<1698260.160.1334688173788.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynhh34>,

Who says it's hard?

--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."

[Nate Nagel]

On 04/17/2012 02:42 PM, ckoz...@snet.net wrote:
> Traditional "Plus-Sizing" involves changes of dimensions in two directions: The plus-size rim and tire both get wider, and the sidewall of the tire becomes shorter("lower profile"), maintaining correct speedometer ratios.
>
> My perception of plus-sizing is that the only thing that should change size is the diameter of the rim. The width(side to side) of both the rim and tire used should remain the same. The only difference is the sidewall of the new tire will be shorter("lower profile"), to compensate for taller rim and maintaining height for correct speedometer.
>
> The advantages of the above:
>
> -The same "looks" of traditional plus-sizing(where all dimensions including width change).
>
> -Less chance of tire/wheel scuffing wheel well or suspension parts while turning.
>

> -Better straight-line tracking given the same specs for caster& SAI(kingpin).

>
> -More weight per contact patch and more longitudinal contact patch(both good for negoticating rain and snow).
>
> -Slightly lower weight per wheel than traditional plus-sizing.
>
> So why is this type of plus-sizing(maintaining width of the package but keeping correct height for speedometer) so hard to accomplish?
>
> -ChrisCoaster

It's not "hard" just do the math... but most of the time when someone
goes to the trouble of buying a wheel/tire package in a non-standard
size, they are looking for a wider footprint for better dry cornering.

If you're worried about snow driving, "plus-sizing" is probably not for
you. What I would recommend is getting a summer and winter set of
wheels/tires - using your stock wheels (possibly with *narrower* tires,
if it's recommended by the manufacturer) with dedicated snow tires for
winter, and the "plus-sized" ones for summer. If you're just after the
big rim look... well, it can be done, but I'm over that... not real
concerned about what you think my car looks like so much as how it
drives. If I even owned a "car" anymore, which I don't, but that's
another story for another time.

nate

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel

[Ed Treijs]

On Apr 17, 2:42 pm, ckozi...@snet.net wrote:

> My perception of plus-sizing is that the only thing that should change size is the diameter of the rim.  The width(side to side) of both the rim and tire used should remain the same.  The only difference is the sidewall of the new tire will be shorter("lower profile"), to compensate for taller rim and maintaining height for correct speedometer.

> So why is this type of plus-sizing(maintaining width of the package but keeping correct height for speedometer) so hard to accomplish?

The lower the profile, the wider the tread and rim size required, even
if the nominal tire width (the 225 part of 225/60-15, for example)
remains the same. And the load the tire can handle depends on the air
inside it, so if you have less sidewall, you have to compensate by
going wider or you will lose your load rating.

Your scheme would actually require to "upgrade" from say a 225/60-16
to a. 215/55-17. Except that you have now lost one unit of load, and
that tire is bigger in diameter anyway. a (slightly smaller diameter)
215/50-17 loses you a lot of load capacity.

[Alan Baker]

In article
<05d33fc5-0505-4832...@dc2g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,

Ed Treijs <ed.to...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Apr 17, 2:42 pm, ckozi...@snet.net wrote:
>
> > My perception of plus-sizing is that the only thing that should change size
> > is the diameter of the rim.  The width(side to side) of both the rim and
> > tire used should remain the same.  The only difference is the sidewall of
> > the new tire will be shorter("lower profile"), to compensate for taller rim
> > and maintaining height for correct speedometer.
>
> > So why is this type of plus-sizing(maintaining width of the package but
> > keeping correct height for speedometer) so hard to accomplish?
>
> The lower the profile, the wider the tread and rim size required, even
> if the nominal tire width (the 225 part of 225/60-15, for example)
> remains the same. And the load the tire can handle depends on the air
> inside it, so if you have less sidewall, you have to compensate by
> going wider or you will lose your load rating.

I'm sorry, but most of that simply isn't true.

Less sidewall usually means a stiffer sidewall, which in turn means that
the tire's flex under loads--particularly cornering--can be adequately
controlled at lower inflation pressures. Since the size of the contact
patch is inversely proportional to the inflation pressure and since
rubber is not a truly linear friction material, you get better grip with
lower pressures from shorter sidewalls.

Making the tire wider doesn't change that.

>
> Your scheme would actually require to "upgrade" from say a 225/60-16
> to a. 215/55-17. Except that you have now lost one unit of load, and
> that tire is bigger in diameter anyway. a (slightly smaller diameter)
> 215/50-17 loses you a lot of load capacity.

Nope. Simply not so.

Case in point:

Toyo Proxes T1 Sport tires in 235/45-17 are 24.3" in diameter and have a
load rating of 1477 pounds.. Upsize to 18" rims and keep the same width,
and you'll run 235/40-18s which are 24.7" in diameter and have a max
load of 1521 pounds.

[jim beam]

it's not "hard to accomplish" - it's simple math. if you don't want to
do that yourself, use this:

<http://www.miata.net/garage/tirecalc.html>


--
nomina rutrum rutrum

[jim beam]

On 04/18/2012 11:29 AM, Ed Treijs wrote:
> On Apr 17, 2:42�pm, ckozi...@snet.net wrote:
>
>> My perception of plus-sizing is that the only thing that should
>> change size is the diameter of the rim. �The width(side to side) of
>> both the rim and tire used should remain the same. �The only
>> difference is the sidewall of the new tire will be shorter("lower
>> profile"), to compensate for taller rim and maintaining height for
>> correct speedometer.
>
>> So why is this type of plus-sizing(maintaining width of the package
>> but keeping correct height for speedometer) so hard to accomplish?
>
> The lower the profile, the wider the tread and rim size required,
> even if the nominal tire width (the 225 part of 225/60-15, for
> example) remains the same.

untrue.

> And the load the tire can handle depends on the air inside it, so if
> you have less sidewall, you have to compensate by going wider or you
> will lose your load rating.

untrue.

>
> Your scheme would actually require to "upgrade" from say a 225/60-16
> to a. 215/55-17.

that is a downgrade on tire width.

> Except that you have now lost one unit of load, and that tire is
> bigger in diameter anyway. a (slightly smaller diameter) 215/50-17
> loses you a lot of load capacity.

no, you're confused between tire diameter and rim diameter. it's
possible to increase wheel diameter an reduce tire diameter at the same
time. or vice versa.

load is nothing to do with size and everything to do with the tire
cordage and construction.


--
nomina rutrum rutrum

[ckoz...@snet.net]

So in short it is possible to do what I want, it's just may be a little more challenging and expensive to find the combo that will also keep the speedometer accurate. My speedometer is already indicating 2-3mph faster than I'm actually going(GPS) so I can't afford to err even more in that direction. :)

[Vic Smith]

On Sat, 21 Apr 2012 11:09:48 -0700 (PDT), ckoz...@snet.net wrote:

>So in short it is possible to do what I want, it's just may be a little more challenging and expensive to find the combo that will also keep the speedometer accurate. My speedometer is already indicating 2-3mph faster than I'm actually going(GPS)

I noticed my mph was showing fast with the tires that came with the
car (used.) Something like the speedo would show 60 but I really was
doing 58.
When it was time to replace them I used the OEM size. That fixed
that.
Wouldn't trust the GPS I have. I used highway mile markers and a
stopwatch while on cruise, which is rock steady on my Lumina.

--
Vic

[ckoz...@snet.net]

The GPS finding was confirmed by another source: p-o'd drivers highbeaming me and passing me like Meat Loaf! I finally adjusted for true 65mph, which is 68 on my speedometer, and I was more with the flow.

-CC

[Ashton Crusher]

The answer is simple, most people who "plus" size don't want to also
spend money on a new set of rims.

[ckoz...@snet.net]

That makes NO sense Ashton! Any plus-sizing(the traditional waybor the way I want to) requires taller and/or wider rims. Go back, read what you just posted, and think real hard about it.

-CC

[Scott Dorsey]

<ckoz...@snet.net> wrote:
>That makes NO sense Ashton! Any plus-sizing(the traditional waybor the way I want to) requires taller and/or wider rims. Go back, read what you just posted, and think real hard about it.

I hate to point this out but a lot of people do a lot of things with tires
that make no sense. Between the plus-sizing, the dubs, the rotating hubcaps
and the blue lights, it's a wonder you can get stock tires anymore.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[ckoz...@snet.net]

On Monday, April 23, 2012 10:20:14 AM UTC-4, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> <c

>
> I hate to point this out but a lot of people do a lot of things with tires
> that make no sense. Between the plus-sizing, the dubs, the rotating hubcaps
> and the blue lights, it's a wonder you can get stock tires anymore.
> --scott
> --
> "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

______________
What he said made no sense - about people not wanting to spend money on new rims - that's what I was pointing out. Of course your rim size will change when you +size. LOL!

-CC

-CC

[Ashton Crusher]

All the plus sizing things I've seen are for wider tires with a lower
aspect ratio - the net result is the same rolling radius.

Here's what wikipedia says: Plus sizing is the practice of changing a
specific tire to a larger size while compensating with reductions in
other aspects of the tire's size so that the new tire has the same
diameter and circumference as the original tire to prevent any changes
in speedometer accuracy, torque and traction control.

The LOL's on you.

[ckoz...@snet.net]

"While compensating in reductions of other aspects of the tire's size" implies that side wall height(profile) will change, in turn implying a change in RIM diameter. You stated earlier "people dont want to spend money on new RIMS". ALL plus-sizing, wheth the traditional method(lower profile & wider) or my method(lower profile tire but same width tire & rim) require purchase of appropriate size rims to compensate. Even a rancher from Texas knows that!

[ckoz...@snet.net]

I think this conversation has become muddied by confusion over the terms "width" and "diameter". Think of it this way: WIDTH is the measurement of the rim/tire as you are facing the front or back of car head on. DIAMETER is the measurement of the wheel package when you are facing the SIDE of the vehicle. A US Quarter(25 cents just so we're on the same page!) is NOT 15/16" wide(!) - it is 15/16" in DIAMETER. It is only about 3/32" WIDE!

[Ashton Crusher]

On Tue, 1 May 2012 04:38:50 -0700 (PDT), ckoz...@snet.net wrote:

>I think this conversation has become muddied by confusion over the terms "width" and "diameter". Think of it this way: WIDTH is the measurement of the rim/tire as you are facing the front or back of car head on. DIAMETER is the measurement of the wheel package when you are facing the SIDE of the vehicle. A US Quarter(25 cents just so we're on the same page!) is NOT 15/16" wide(!) - it is 15/16" in DIAMETER. It is only about 3/32" WIDE!

Maybe you're confused but I'm not. Plus sizing NEVER referred to
anything but wider-and-lower-profile tires on the same rims. If you
use different rims then you aren't plus sizing, you are "buying a
different tire and wheel package". There's nothing complicated or
confusing about it.

[ckoz...@snet.net]

Then you need to check out: http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tiretech/techpage.jsp?techid=25

It sure looks to me like the rims in that diagram are changing dimensions! Anyone else?

-CC

[Nate Nagel]

No, plus sizing refers to getting different rims and also tires with
about the same rolling diameter. e.g.

stock: 175/70R13
+1: 185/60R14
+2: 195/50R15
+3: 205/40R16

(to use an example with which I'm familiar; that is, the typical tire
sizes used on an A1 or A2 chassis Volkswagen. I've used all of the
above at one time or another save for the +3; +2 is a little stiff with
aftermarket springs and shocks on anything but a well maintained road.)

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tiretech/techpage.jsp?techid=25

that's the way that term has been used for decades...

(hint: don't search for "plus size" without any other keywords...)

[ckoz...@snet.net]

On Tuesday, May 1, 2012 12:51:09 PM UTC-4, Nate Nagel wrote:

>
> No, plus sizing refers to getting different rims and also tires with
> about the same rolling diameter. e.g.
>
> stock: 175/70R13
> +1: 185/60R14
> +2: 195/50R15
> +3: 205/40R16
>
> (to use an example with which I'm familiar; that is, the typical tire
> sizes used on an A1 or A2 chassis Volkswagen. I've used all of the
> above at one time or another save for the +3; +2 is a little stiff with
> aftermarket springs and shocks on anything but a well maintained road.)
>
> http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tiretech/techpage.jsp?techid=25
>
> that's the way that term has been used for decades...
>
> (hint: don't search for "plus size" without any other keywords...)
>
> nate

> --
> replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
> http://members.cox.net/njnagel

______________________
Thanks Nate!(although he'll probably say you're wrong too - LMAO!)

Now what I'm aiming to do - for reasons I stated originally above, is to keep the number on the left, using your example:

stock: 175/70R13
+1: 185/60R14
+2: 195/50R15
+3: 205/40R16

The same. IOW: maintain the WIDTH at 185mm for both +2 and +3(if I wanted to go that far).

I just want to know if there exists tire & rim combos to achieve what I have in mind, and maintain overall outside diameter within 1/2" to preserve speedometer accuracy. I hope between what Nate posted and what I'm writing here clarifies what I aim to achieve. I do not necessarily want the whole wider thing.

-ChrisCoaster

[Nate Nagel]

> I just want to know if there exists tire& rim combos to achieve what I have in mind, and maintain overall outside diameter within 1/2" to preserve speedometer accuracy. I hope between what Nate posted and what I'm writing here clarifies what I aim to achieve. I do not necessarily want the whole wider thing.
>
> -ChrisCoaster
>

I think the problem that you're going to find is that the tire size that
will theoretically fit won't be available. Using the example above,
even a 195/50R15 is narrow enough as to not be widely available anymore,
and that's a very common "upgrade" size for a car made only 15-20 years
ago (and was the factory size for a Corrado G60, IIRC.) Tire Rack only
lists 7 tires in all categories in that size... Surprisingly, trying a
185/55R15 (my best guess at a "close" size without actually doing the
math) yields 11 results which I didn't expect.

But to answer your question, what you need to do is just "do the math"
and match rolling diameters, which by the numbers should be, assuming
the tires' size is given as follows:

S/A R D (for Section width, Aspect ratio, and wheel Diameter, respectively)

RD (in inches) = 2(S*A*0.254) + D

hold RD constant, plug in your desired numbers for S and D, then solve
for A and then go to Tire Rack's site and see what's available in that
size. A should be rounded to the nearest 5. (e.g. aspect ratios are
commonly given as 50, 55, 60, 65, 70, 75 etc.) You probably won't run
into this, but if a tire is given as 155R15 the aspect ratio is assumed
to be 82. (that would be a size for an old Beetle or Porsche 914, I
don't imagine that's what we're talking about here.)

[Ashton Crusher]

Note that the title of this thread is *TIRE* plus sizing, not TIRE AND
WHEEL plus sizing. If you want to TIRE plus size you go wider and
shorter, end of story. Extending the use of the term Plus Sizing to
both the tires and wheels may work as a marketing strategy but is a
meaningless term and was not the title of the tread. I will certainly
agree that if you want to make the term plus sizing so broad that
ANYTHING can fall within it, then yes, you can include wheels as well
as tires.

[Ashton Crusher]

As I said to Chorizo, if the term is considered to apply to not only
tires but wheels too than sure, have a ball with it but you've
stripped it of all meaning as you aren't really "plus sizing" anymore,
you are simply buying different tires and wheels.

On Tue, 01 May 2012 12:51:09 -0400, Nate Nagel <njn...@roosters.net>
wrote:

[ckoz...@snet.net]

______________
Since I am the OP of this thread I am making the declaration that further replies to any input by a certain Ashton Crusher may result in dementia suffered by person replying to him.

Certainly I could have included "/Wheel" in the title, but it seems that most participants here have the common sense to understand what is involved in plus-sizing.

-ChrisCoaster

[ckoz...@snet.net]

On Tuesday, May 1, 2012 3:25:37 PM UTC-4, Nate Nagel wrote:

> S/A R D (for Section width, Aspect ratio, and wheel Diameter, respectively)
>
> RD (in inches) = 2(S*A*0.254) + D
>
> hold RD constant, plug in your desired numbers for S and D, then solve
> for A and then go to Tire Rack's site and see what's available in that
> size. A should be rounded to the nearest 5. (e.g. aspect ratios are
> commonly given as 50, 55, 60, 65, 70, 75 etc.) You probably won't run
> into this, but if a tire is given as 155R15 the aspect ratio is assumed
> to be 82. (that would be a size for an old Beetle or Porsche 914, I
> don't imagine that's what we're talking about here.)
>
> nate
>
>
> --
> replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
> http://members.cox.net/njnagel

_________

I just used the sizes you posted as an example. The car I would like to do this has the following dimension: P-205/60R16.

My goal is: P-205/___R17. This means that the correct tire will have a lower profile sidewall to accommodate the 1-inch increase in rim diameter.

I also neglected to include another advantage of what I'm aiming to do - hence my surprise it hasn't been done this way all along - a "longitudinal" contact patch is more fuel economical than a more "lateral"(wider relatively) patch, in addition to the other advantages I listed above.


-CC

[jim beam]

On 05/01/2012 06:12 PM, Ashton Crusher wrote:
> As I said to Chorizo, if the term is considered to apply to not only
> tires but wheels too than sure, have a ball with it but you've
> stripped it of all meaning as you aren't really "plus sizing"
> anymore, you are simply buying different tires and wheels.

indeed.

--
nomina rutrum rutrum

[Alan Baker]

In article <3410q716m3t4n369s...@4ax.com>,

You are absolutely, incontrovertibly... ...wrong.

The "plus" in "plus sizing" refers to changing the wheel diameter.

"Plus sizing is the practice of changing a specific tire to a larger
size while compensating with reductions in other aspects of the tire's
size so that the new tire has the same diameter and circumference as the
original tire to prevent any changes in speedometer accuracy, torque and
traction control.

The number following the "plus" describes the number of inches which is
added to the diameter of the rim. For example, plus one sizing means
increasing the wheel by one inch."

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plus_sizing>

[jim beam]

On 05/02/2012 12:10 AM, Alan Baker wrote:
> In article<3410q716m3t4n369s...@4ax.com>,
> Ashton Crusher<de...@moore.net> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 1 May 2012 04:38:50 -0700 (PDT), ckoz...@snet.net wrote:
>>
>>> I think this conversation has become muddied by confusion over the terms
>>> "width" and "diameter". Think of it this way: WIDTH is the measurement of
>>> the rim/tire as you are facing the front or back of car head on. DIAMETER
>>> is the measurement of the wheel package when you are facing the SIDE of the
>>> vehicle. A US Quarter(25 cents just so we're on the same page!) is NOT
>>> 15/16" wide(!) - it is 15/16" in DIAMETER. It is only about 3/32" WIDE!
>>
>> Maybe you're confused but I'm not. Plus sizing NEVER referred to
>> anything but wider-and-lower-profile tires on the same rims. If you
>> use different rims then you aren't plus sizing, you are "buying a
>> different tire and wheel package". There's nothing complicated or
>> confusing about it.
>
> You are absolutely, incontrovertibly... ...wrong.

no he's not. "plus sizing" is fitting a larger tire to the same size
wheel. buying larger wheels is simply that - buying larger wheels.

>
> The "plus" in "plus sizing" refers to changing the wheel diameter.
>
> "Plus sizing is the practice of changing a specific tire to a larger
> size while compensating with reductions in other aspects of the tire's
> size so that the new tire has the same diameter and circumference as the
> original tire to prevent any changes in speedometer accuracy, torque and
> traction control.
> The number following the "plus" describes the number of inches which is
> added to the diameter of the rim. For example, plus one sizing means
> increasing the wheel by one inch."
>
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plus_sizing>

what part of "This article is written like a personal reflection or
essay rather than an encyclopedic description of the subject" did you
miss in that "cite"?

what part of "This article does not cite any references or sources" did
you miss in that "cite"?

and what part of "This article contains weasel words: vague phrasing
that often accompanies biased or unverifiable information" did you miss
in that "cite"?


--
nomina rutrum rutrum

[Ashton Crusher]

In other words, in order to cast yourself as "right" you will go back
and change what your actual question was. My replies were in terms of
the question YOU asked, which was about TIRE plus sizing, not tire and
wheel plus sizing. Pardon me for not reading your mind. As I've
already said, if you are talking about Plus-ing tires/wheel then sure,
change anything at all in the mix.

[Kevin Bottorff]

jim beam <m...@privacy.net> wrote in news:jnslhj$jtc$3...@speranza.aioe.org:

Jim give UP!!!! those of us that have been around a while know that
plus sizing didn`t happen until larger rims were availble to do any plus
sizing to begin with. The plus in plus sizing was always plus rim size.
there is no plus tire sizing. Now go find something you might actually
know something about to harp on. KB

[jim beam]

hey kev, sorry to rattle y'all's cage - seems i inadvertently stumbled
across another one of your stupidity contests while i was reading a
newsgroup called rec.autos.TECH. my mistake for assuming y'all had any
interest in facts or accuracy. carry on as you were.


--
nomina rutrum rutrum

[ckoz...@snet.net]

Kevin: respectfully I suggest we refrain from debating this with the likes of Beam or Crusher. I posted the ultimate reference to this topic - on Tire Rack - they know tires! Clearly it has no effect on them, and by responding to them we are giving them more fuel for fodder. You and I know what constitutes plus-sizing. We stop reacting - and that is the most edfective thing we can do to them. :)

[Kevin Bottorff]

ckoz...@snet.net wrote in
news:2357078.3659.1336064726918.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbbgl4:

I know but every once in a while he gets so far out on the edge you just
got to give him a push. :) KB

[jim beam]

so who's winning the stupidity contest? i can't tell.


--
nomina rutrum rutrum

[Alan Baker]

In article <jnv90k$9l7$2...@speranza.aioe.org>, jim beam <m...@privacy.net>
wrote:

No one has matched you that I can see.

"Plus" sizing is so named because you add one, two, or even three inches
to your standard rim diameter. That there was a later revision of "Plus
0" that was added doesn't change the basic meaning of the term.

[jim beam]

On 05/03/2012 07:17 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
> In article<jnv90k$9l7$2...@speranza.aioe.org>, jim beam<m...@privacy.net>
> wrote:
>
>> On 05/03/2012 03:42 PM, Kevin Bottorff wrote:
>>> ckoz...@snet.net wrote in
>>> news:2357078.3659.1336064726918.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbbgl4:
>>>
>>>> Kevin: respectfully I suggest we refrain from debating this with the
>>>> likes of Beam or Crusher. I posted the ultimate reference to this
>>>> topic - on Tire Rack - they know tires! Clearly it has no effect on
>>>> them, and by responding to them we are giving them more fuel for
>>>> fodder. You and I know what constitutes plus-sizing. We stop reacting
>>>> - and that is the most edfective thing we can do to them. :)
>>>>
>>>
>>> I know but every once in a while he gets so far out on the edge you just
>>> got to give him a push. :) KB
>>
>> so who's winning the stupidity contest? i can't tell.
>
> No one has matched you that I can see.
>
> "Plus" sizing is so named because you add one, two, or even three inches
> to your standard rim diameter. That there was a later revision of "Plus
> 0" that was added doesn't change the basic meaning of the term.
>

so the delusional all circle-jerking to the same numbers makes their
ignorance ok? i think we have a wiener!


--
nomina rutrum rutrum

[jim beam]

i think we're wasting our time. some people just can't stand being
confronted with their own ignorance and will nail themselves to the
cross of martyrdom before they'll actually consent to learn anything.


--
nomina rutrum rutrum

[Alan Baker]

In article <jnvifu$srt$1...@speranza.aioe.org>, jim beam <m...@privacy.net>

I think you bore me too much to bother with anymore.

[jim beam]

On 05/03/2012 09:45 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
> In article<jnvifu$srt$1...@speranza.aioe.org>, jim beam<m...@privacy.net>

> wrote:
>
>> On 05/03/2012 07:17 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
>>> In article<jnv90k$9l7$2...@speranza.aioe.org>, jim beam<m...@privacy.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 05/03/2012 03:42 PM, Kevin Bottorff wrote:
>>>>> ckoz...@snet.net wrote in
>>>>> news:2357078.3659.1336064726918.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbbgl4:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Kevin: respectfully I suggest we refrain from debating this with the
>>>>>> likes of Beam or Crusher. I posted the ultimate reference to this
>>>>>> topic - on Tire Rack - they know tires! Clearly it has no effect on
>>>>>> them, and by responding to them we are giving them more fuel for
>>>>>> fodder. You and I know what constitutes plus-sizing. We stop reacting
>>>>>> - and that is the most edfective thing we can do to them. :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I know but every once in a while he gets so far out on the edge you just
>>>>> got to give him a push. :) KB
>>>>
>>>> so who's winning the stupidity contest? i can't tell.
>>>
>>> No one has matched you that I can see.
>>>
>>> "Plus" sizing is so named because you add one, two, or even three inches
>>> to your standard rim diameter. That there was a later revision of "Plus
>>> 0" that was added doesn't change the basic meaning of the term.
>>>
>>
>> so the delusional all circle-jerking to the same numbers makes their
>> ignorance ok? i think we have a wiener!
>
> I think you bore me too much to bother with anymore.
>

do you need some more nails there alan? or just a hammer?


--
nomina rutrum rutrum

[Kevin Bottorff]

jim beam <m...@privacy.net> wrote in news:jnvj8c$u56$2...@speranza.aioe.org:

Hey pot meet kettle. KB
>

[ckoz...@snet.net]

Adding to the rim diameter is fine - exactly what I want to do. But apparently it is more expensive to do and more difficult to find tires in the size necessary to accomplish this. But tradtitional plus-sizing involves both the diameter AND the width of the rim being increased - more common and easily attainable. I do NOT want WIDER. I just want an inch taller rim in diameter and the appropriate tire profile to maintain the correct overall height for speedometer purposes. I wish there was a way to visualize what I want to do here because #1 I think the way I'm explaining it isn't clear enough, and #2 there are a couple of folks on here who don't even know what plus-sizing IS.

-CC

-CC

[jim beam]

On 05/06/2012 08:06 AM, ckoz...@snet.net wrote:
> Adding to the rim diameter is fine - exactly what I want to do. But
> apparently it is more expensive to do and more difficult to find
> tires in the size necessary to accomplish this. But tradtitional
> plus-sizing involves both the diameter AND the width of the rim being
> increased - more common and easily attainable. I do NOT want WIDER.
> I just want an inch taller rim in diameter and the appropriate tire
> profile to maintain the correct overall height for speedometer
> purposes.

all of which appears to be utterly pointless. but let's go back to your
stated objectives:

> -The same "looks" of traditional plus-sizing(where all dimensions including width change).

you want a larger wheel, but the same diameter/width tire to retain the
same "looks"??? that's just plain stupid.

>
> -Less chance of tire/wheel scuffing wheel well or suspension parts while turning.

see above - there's no point changing the wheels.

>
> -Better straight-line tracking given the same specs for caster & SAI(kingpin).

neither of which are affected by the wheel...

>
> -More weight per contact patch and more longitudinal contact patch(both good for negoticating rain and snow).

if you want more longitudinal contact, you want bigger overall tire
diameter, not the same size, your stated objective...

>
> -Slightly lower weight per wheel than traditional plus-sizing.

which conflicts with the above...

> I wish there was a way to visualize what I want to do here
> because #1 I think the way I'm explaining it isn't clear enough,

you can't explain it because you don't understand it.

> and
> #2 there are a couple of folks on here who don't even know what
> plus-sizing IS.

funny. the guy that can't explain what he wants or why he wants it,
/can/ explain what he thinks everyone else thinks. that's really funny.


--
nomina rutrum rutrum

[Alan Baker]

In article
<4597603.202.1336316793538.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbbgl4>,

You're explaining it fine.