Tallest 17" tire for the CX-5?

[leeharvey418]

Okay, so then I went and looked at what’s actually available in 225/75R17. Tire Rack has five options, all of which are E-load range LT metric tires with S speed ratings. They’re going to be stiff to begin with, and you’re going to need to inflate them to a higher pressure than what you’re probably going to want for the sake of getting them to the correct load rating. They are the last tires I’d ever put on a CX-5, or any other unibody-based crossover with a suspension built for comfort and handling.

I realize you’re going to do what you want, but I’m telling you now - it’s a horrendously bad idea.

 

[Saskabush]

Okay, so then I went and looked at what’s actually available in 225/75R17. Tire Rack has five options, all of which are E-load range LT metric tires with S speed ratings. They’re going to be stiff to begin with, and you’re going to need to inflate them to a higher pressure than what you’re probably going to want for the sake of getting them to the correct load rating. They are the last tires I’d ever put on a CX-5, or any other unibody-based crossover with a suspension built for comfort and handling.

I realize you’re going to do what you want, but I’m telling you now - it’s a horrendously bad idea.

Yeah you really gotta watch the load ratings when looking at larger/taller tires. Basically no vehicle smaller than an F-150 should be running E-load tires (or LT tires at all really). Even on my Tacoma they are too stiff. There are a few options in a 235 or 245 width for SL or even XL tires that fit a CX-5, but nothing in the 225 width in anything larger than factory diameter.

The 245/70/R17 Falken Wildpeak AT4W I run are XL tires, which are about 10lbs lighter per tire than the same thing in E-load. The ride quality is honeslty very similar to factory. But the handling is noticably more boaty due to the taller sidewalls. Which was kinda the point for me, our roads are too bad to take corners very fast anyway lol. They do float over rough terrain a lot better though.

Also you don't have to run E-load at higher PSI, that's only necessary to get the full load rating which will never be necessary with a CX-5. You can run lower (factory ish) PSI and still get even wear, but the whole thing with E-load tires is they have stiffer (more ply's) sidewalls. So even if you do air down it's still quite stiff without a heavier vehicle.

 

[forties]

"a horrendously bad idea"​

The guy said right in his post 29.5" max without a lift. There are plenty of tires in that whole 29.0" to 30.5" range that would work on a CX-5 that are non LT. A few nice options in 235/70/17 for a 30". 225/75/16 for a 29.3" minus one. There are some good black Friday deals right now too.. $100 instant rebates.

It is interesting to me.. that there is only one guy in this thread who has done it, and seems perfectly happy with it.

 

[leeharvey418]

The guy said right in his post 29.5" max without a lift.

Really? Then what’s this?

I found and played with a tire size calculator..
225-75r17 gains a inch height and width.

I never said anything to dissuade anybody from using a 29.5” tire. I said that an LT-metric tire is an awful idea.

 

[N7turbo]

What follows is merely my opinion, take it for what it's worth...

I just find it to be a parts mismatch, in that I don't believe a city slicker car-like CUV like the CX-5 makes sense with big heavy tires that will negatively affect the driving experience. While people are free to do what they want with their cars, we also want them to understand the pros and cons.

The usual justification for this is to try to soften the ride. However, there are many SUV/CUV's on the road to choose from if one wants a softer ride, and they don't need giant, heavy tires to achieve it, and none of them are set up that way.

The driving public already complains about Mazda's "heavy steering"—that will certainly be made worse as well, in addition to the mushy handling.

I think in the end, the car ends up compromised.

But also in the end, what I think doesn't matter to someone else's car. Good luck and I hope you end up with something that suits your needs.

 

[leeharvey418]

I just find it to be a parts mismatch, in that I don't believe a city slicker car-like CUV like the CX-5 makes sense with big heavy tires that will negatively affect the driving experience.

That’s not just your opinion, though. There are several objective reasons why LT-metric tires aren’t appropriate for a vehicle like the CX-5.

For one, the rubber compounds used, and the bulk volume of tread material, both contribute to hysteresis and heat buildup in the tire. You can offset this by running higher inflation pressures, but when the sidewalls are already stiffer than what’s necessary for the vehicle weight, most people end up running them under-inflated, compromising both fuel economy and safety in the name of getting a better ride.

Further contributing to the poor ride situation is the fact that LT-metric tires will weigh substantially more than a P- or Euro-metric tire of comparable size. That unsprung weight being concentrated as far as possible from the axle is worst-case for a performance detriment, and the gyroscopic effect that makes handling more sluggish is likewise exacerbated.

 

[Saskabush]

What follows is merely my opinion, take it for what it's worth...

I just find it to be a parts mismatch, in that I don't believe a city slicker car-like CUV like the CX-5 makes sense with big heavy tires that will negatively affect the driving experience. While people are free to do what they want with their cars, we also want them to understand the pros and cons.

The usual justification for this is to try to soften the ride. However, there are many SUV/CUV's on the road to choose from if one wants a softer ride, and they don't need giant, heavy tires to achieve it, and none of them are set up that way.

The driving public already complains about Mazda's "heavy steering"—that will certainly be made worse as well, in addition to the mushy handling.

I think in the end, the car ends up compromised.

But also in the end, what I think doesn't matter to someone else's car. Good luck and I hope you end up with something that suits your needs.

I think you are drastically overestimating the difference slightly larger tires make lol. They roll over rocky/bumpy roads better, that's about it. There really isn't any cons to it. Unless you go crazy with 31" 265 E-rated, they aren't heavy enough to really make a noticable difference in handling or even fuel economy. I barely notice a differece in day to day driving.

And I don't know about you, but I'm not usually taking corners at max speed so I don't really need max handling stats on my SUV lol. I just need cushioning for our s*** roads, grip for slippery/muddy roads, and clearance for snow. All of that can be acomplised with larger and more agressive tires, no need to sell my perfectly good CX-5 and drop $40k more on something that rides a little smoother but comes with a load of other issues the CX-5 doesn't have. You'd be surprised how capable the CX-5 is off road, it's far from a "city slicker" car.