205/45/17???
- Thread starter Yaga
- Start date
I doubt that
I highly doubt that.
I know for sure that the stock 17" 3's come with either 215 or 225.
Usually if You keep the tire size within a reasonable limit to stock size you won't have any issues with your speedometer timing. But anyways fatter is better (spin)
I highly doubt that.
I know for sure that the stock 17" 3's come with either 215 or 225.
Usually if You keep the tire size within a reasonable limit to stock size you won't have any issues with your speedometer timing. But anyways fatter is better (spin)
i think that it just means that going 100kph (by your speedo) you'd actually be going 103kph.. or 102.9 since the speedo is calibrated for certain tire/wheel size and weight.. but i'm not 100% sure since i'm a n00b to these things 
EDIT.. ugh.. didn't see above post.. see shows u i'm a n00b
EDIT.. ugh.. didn't see above post.. see shows u i'm a n00b
Last edited:
goldwing2000
OG Mazda Mafia
- :
- 2004 Mazda3s Hatch; 346,000 mi (sold)
2024 CX-5 CE; 7,500 mi (so far)
Tire Science 101
Actually, they would be slow. ie., your speedometer would be reading slower than your actual speed. Here's how it works:
A metric tire size is comprised of three numbers.
The first number is the cross-section width, that is to say, the width from the outside of one sidewall to the outside of the opposite sidewall with the tire installed in an optimal-sized wheel and inflated to recommended pressure.
The second number is a percentage. This percentage represents the ratio of the height of the sidewall (from the bead to the tread) compared to the cross-section width (the first number).
The third number is simply wheel diameter.
The various letters in between the numbers represent application and speed-rating data and are not important to this discussion.
Using this knowledge and a chart of manufacturer tire specs (Yokohama Avid H/V4 in this case), the following comparison can be made:
A 215/50-17 tire has a cross-section width of 215mm, a sidewall height of 107.5mm and a wheel diameter of 17 inches. The diameter of this tire is approximately 25.7 inches which makes the circumference 80.74 inches. If you rotate this tire 100 times, it will cover 8074 inches or 672.83 feet.
A 215/45-17 tire has a cross-section width of 215mm, a sidewall height of 96.75mm and a wheel diameter of 17 inches. The diameter of this tire is approximately 24.7 inches which makes the circumference 77.6 inches. If you rotate this tire 100 times, it will cover 7760 inches or 646.67 feet.
In each example, your drivetrain has traveled the same number of revolutions (100) but the smaller diameter tire has taken you a shorter distance, therefore you were traveling at a slower rate of speed. In this case, it was approximately 3.9% slower.
While the slower speed is an issue, it's not as much of an issue as a faster speed would be if you were to put a larger diameter tire on. Performance-wise, the smaller tires will accelerate faster but will have a lower top speed. The shorter sidewall will corner better but will have a harsher ride.
I'd try to stick with the stock diameter, regardless of the actual tire size. For instance, you could go with a 225/45-17 and it would have the same overall diameter and sidewall height but a wider section width. It won't fit on the stock wheels, though. You need a wheel at least 7 inches in width.
Hope this helps!
Actually, they would be slow. ie., your speedometer would be reading slower than your actual speed. Here's how it works:
A metric tire size is comprised of three numbers.
The first number is the cross-section width, that is to say, the width from the outside of one sidewall to the outside of the opposite sidewall with the tire installed in an optimal-sized wheel and inflated to recommended pressure.
The second number is a percentage. This percentage represents the ratio of the height of the sidewall (from the bead to the tread) compared to the cross-section width (the first number).
The third number is simply wheel diameter.
The various letters in between the numbers represent application and speed-rating data and are not important to this discussion.
Using this knowledge and a chart of manufacturer tire specs (Yokohama Avid H/V4 in this case), the following comparison can be made:
A 215/50-17 tire has a cross-section width of 215mm, a sidewall height of 107.5mm and a wheel diameter of 17 inches. The diameter of this tire is approximately 25.7 inches which makes the circumference 80.74 inches. If you rotate this tire 100 times, it will cover 8074 inches or 672.83 feet.
A 215/45-17 tire has a cross-section width of 215mm, a sidewall height of 96.75mm and a wheel diameter of 17 inches. The diameter of this tire is approximately 24.7 inches which makes the circumference 77.6 inches. If you rotate this tire 100 times, it will cover 7760 inches or 646.67 feet.
In each example, your drivetrain has traveled the same number of revolutions (100) but the smaller diameter tire has taken you a shorter distance, therefore you were traveling at a slower rate of speed. In this case, it was approximately 3.9% slower.
While the slower speed is an issue, it's not as much of an issue as a faster speed would be if you were to put a larger diameter tire on. Performance-wise, the smaller tires will accelerate faster but will have a lower top speed. The shorter sidewall will corner better but will have a harsher ride.
I'd try to stick with the stock diameter, regardless of the actual tire size. For instance, you could go with a 225/45-17 and it would have the same overall diameter and sidewall height but a wider section width. It won't fit on the stock wheels, though. You need a wheel at least 7 inches in width.
Hope this helps!
LoL I hope you copied and pasted that.
Hell I have a hard time explaining to customers what all the numbers mean heh.
but here is simple one:
here is tire 205/45/17z
205=tire width
45=sidewall thickness
17=tire size
z=speed rating
Optionally some tires have a LT or P before the tire size for example
P205/45/15z
P=passenger tire
LT=light truck
Another good thing to look for when purchasing tires is tread depth
For your everyday driving tire you want a good tread depth of around 280+
(longer lasting tire) 260ish is avg wear.
Here are my fav. Tires according to everyday driving and strip/roadcourse
1) Falcon Ziex- Yes a bit pricey, but some of the best grip tires, Offer comfortable ride, haven't noticed any problems as far as tire defects, etc
2) Kumho Ecsta Supra 712- Excellent bang for the buck, good handling, a little bit of a harsh ride, but not too bad. Known issues is bubbling in the sidewalls rarely, but does happen. They will get replaced for free as they are a factory defect.(happens with every tire, but seems to happen to kumho's more often)
3) Yokohama's - I have tried several specs, had the same overall effect.
Handle very well, ok ride comfort. Known issues is a lot of out of round and vibrations. I like these tires for the handling, but not for everyday driving.
Hell I have a hard time explaining to customers what all the numbers mean heh.
but here is simple one:
here is tire 205/45/17z
205=tire width
45=sidewall thickness
17=tire size
z=speed rating
Optionally some tires have a LT or P before the tire size for example
P205/45/15z
P=passenger tire
LT=light truck
Another good thing to look for when purchasing tires is tread depth
For your everyday driving tire you want a good tread depth of around 280+
(longer lasting tire) 260ish is avg wear.
Here are my fav. Tires according to everyday driving and strip/roadcourse
1) Falcon Ziex- Yes a bit pricey, but some of the best grip tires, Offer comfortable ride, haven't noticed any problems as far as tire defects, etc
2) Kumho Ecsta Supra 712- Excellent bang for the buck, good handling, a little bit of a harsh ride, but not too bad. Known issues is bubbling in the sidewalls rarely, but does happen. They will get replaced for free as they are a factory defect.(happens with every tire, but seems to happen to kumho's more often)
3) Yokohama's - I have tried several specs, had the same overall effect.
Handle very well, ok ride comfort. Known issues is a lot of out of round and vibrations. I like these tires for the handling, but not for everyday driving.
goldwing2000
OG Mazda Mafia
- :
- 2004 Mazda3s Hatch; 346,000 mi (sold)
2024 CX-5 CE; 7,500 mi (so far)
Nope. Wrote it all out. 
The treadwear numbers are not necessary indicative of tread depth. And a 280 treadwear is not really average anymore. With some manufacturers putting out tires with treadwear ratings of 700, a 280 is a pretty short-lived tire. With longer wear comes lower traction, though. A tire with a 600-700 treadwear will generally only have a B traction rating.
As a general rule of thumb, multiply your treadwear rating by 100 and that will give you a VERY rough estimate of the number of miles you will get from the tire. A 280 will get you about 28,000 miles. Of course, it's all dependent on driving style and road conditions where you live.
The best I've found for the Mazda 3 is a 400 on the Michelin Pilot Sport A/S.
The treadwear numbers are not necessary indicative of tread depth. And a 280 treadwear is not really average anymore. With some manufacturers putting out tires with treadwear ratings of 700, a 280 is a pretty short-lived tire. With longer wear comes lower traction, though. A tire with a 600-700 treadwear will generally only have a B traction rating.
As a general rule of thumb, multiply your treadwear rating by 100 and that will give you a VERY rough estimate of the number of miles you will get from the tire. A 280 will get you about 28,000 miles. Of course, it's all dependent on driving style and road conditions where you live.
The best I've found for the Mazda 3 is a 400 on the Michelin Pilot Sport A/S.
ok
When I was referring to tread wear, I was referring to the avg tire that would be mounted on a 17"+ wheel, generally those tires have a higher speedrating/traction and have lower tread depth.
Though I'll admit I'm not familiar with the Higher priced tires that are $200+ per tire, I'd certainly hope they would have better wear rating
When I was referring to tread wear, I was referring to the avg tire that would be mounted on a 17"+ wheel, generally those tires have a higher speedrating/traction and have lower tread depth.
Though I'll admit I'm not familiar with the Higher priced tires that are $200+ per tire, I'd certainly hope they would have better wear rating
goldwing2000
OG Mazda Mafia
- :
- 2004 Mazda3s Hatch; 346,000 mi (sold)
2024 CX-5 CE; 7,500 mi (so far)
Not to keep beating a dead horse, but higher-priced tires are usually higher-performance tires and have even worse treadwear ratings! I've seen them as low as 80!
But yeah, 280 is about average for the tires that will fit on a Mazda 3.
The Michelins I mentioned are $173 each from Tire Rack.
But yeah, 280 is about average for the tires that will fit on a Mazda 3.
The Michelins I mentioned are $173 each from Tire Rack.
- :
- 96 Miata M-Edition, 2015 Mazda 3 Hatch
I'm gonna back you up on the pilot sports.. I've already got a set sitting in my garage and I don't even have the car yet.. they're waiting for my mazda
goldwing2000
OG Mazda Mafia
- :
- 2004 Mazda3s Hatch; 346,000 mi (sold)
2024 CX-5 CE; 7,500 mi (so far)
seanmcsean said:
LoL... planning ahead, eh? Well, let us know how you like them. If you sell the crappy GSAs, I'll buy 'em off you cheap.
