22 replies to this topic

[valve bounce]

I sometimes think the 165 tyre can be a bit too wide on a Mini in the wet and on gravel, mud or snow & nice a 145 is most definately the best width.

on my mini i use to run 145s on 4.5 in rims with minifin'ed drum brake all round with spax dampers, polly bushes, neg camber bottom arms and a 60bhp 998 engine. it was quite simlpy the best set up ive driven, so positive and precise to drive, enough power to have fun but not enough to get into any serious trouble just perfectly balanced. my 1275 on s discs and 165's doesn't have quite the same feel but it is a dam sight more reliable and faster

[Cooperman]

I've always thought that my first Cooper, a new 998 in 1964, was the best handling Mini I've ever owned. It had Dunlop 145/80 x 10 SP41's on 3.5" wheels.Of course, the road-holding was nothing like my current 1964 'S' on 165/70 x 10 Yokos and 4.5" ST Minilite wheels, but handling-wise i'm sure my old Cooper was better - 'or has time re-written every line' as the song goes.

[james.c94]

What about the guys that have engine conversions and use them on the road, most of them choose 13 inch wheels. I know that's partly for the gearing but surely they wouldnt want 200 hp + if their car wasn't any good at holding the road. 13 inch wheels can be that bad or people would be running narrow tens 10s which are supposed to be best with their engine conversions. The same goes for the z cars lot, I've seen up to 255s on the back with 300 hp on tap. Surely if they didn't handle well on 13s they would switch to 10s, even if they had to have to gearing messed with and final drive ratios made to what they want, because they deffinately have the money to do that if they want after affording a z cars conversion.

Edited by james.c94, 03 July 2012 - 10:39 PM.

[james.c94]

Yes? No?

[Cooperman]

What about the guys that have engine conversions and use them on the road, most of them choose 13 inch wheels. I know that's partly for the gearing but surely they wouldnt want 200 hp + if their car wasn't any good at holding the road. 13 inch wheels can be that bad or people would be running narrow tens 10s which are supposed to be best with their engine conversions. The same goes for the z cars lot, I've seen up to 255s on the back with 300 hp on tap. Surely if they didn't handle well on 13s they would switch to 10s, even if they had to have to gearing messed with and final drive ratios made to what they want, because they deffinately have the money to do that if they want after affording a z cars conversion.

You mention 'handling', then you mention 'road-holding'. Do you understand the very basic difference between the two?
The required size of tyre is determined by the weight of the vehicle and this is especially true in the wet. Have you ever driven a really powerful car on ultra-wide tyres in the wet? I have and it is frightening. I used to rally in the old 'works' 240Z Datsuns which had around 250 to 260 bhp. We used 175 section tyres in the wet and 185 in the dry. Car weight in rally trim was around 1250 kg (that's from memory). Tyre testing in the wet was 'exciting' if we used very wide tyres as although the handling was quite good, the road-holding was appalling due to the inability of the tyres to clear the water.
I recently drove a Mini with a 1.8 Honda V-Tec engine and it was, quite simply, horrible. It had 13" wheels with 175/50 tyres and was grossly 'over-tyred'. The owner drove my 'S' on 10" wheels with 165 section tyres and said he wished his car had that sort of road-holding and predictability of handling that mine has.
Ultra-wide tyres do not equal good road-holding - it can be quite the opposite in fact, especially when wet with a light car.

[Wil_h]

I recently drove a Mini with a 1.8 Honda V-Tec engine and it was, quite simply, horrible. It had 13" wheels with 175/50 tyres and was grossly 'over-tyred'. The owner drove my 'S' on 10" wheels with 165 section tyres and said he wished his car had that sort of road-holding and predictability of handling that mine has.
Ultra-wide tyres do not equal good road-holding - it can be quite the opposite in fact, especially when wet with a light car.

There is more to the bad handling of engine convertion minis than the tyres.

Assuming that you limit wheel size to 6" wide then this si how I see it:

Fit 10" wheels and feel like you're going fast, fit 13" wheels to actually go fast

This is not to say that you can just a bung a set of 13s on, there are a few things to consider.

[james.c94]

What about the guys that have engine conversions and use them on the road, most of them choose 13 inch wheels. I know that's partly for the gearing but surely they wouldnt want 200 hp + if their car wasn't any good at holding the road. 13 inch wheels can be that bad or people would be running narrow tens 10s which are supposed to be best with their engine conversions. The same goes for the z cars lot, I've seen up to 255s on the back with 300 hp on tap. Surely if they didn't handle well on 13s they would switch to 10s, even if they had to have to gearing messed with and final drive ratios made to what they want, because they deffinately have the money to do that if they want after affording a z cars conversion.

You mention 'handling', then you mention 'road-holding'. Do you understand the very basic difference between the two?
The required size of tyre is determined by the weight of the vehicle and this is especially true in the wet. Have you ever driven a really powerful car on ultra-wide tyres in the wet? I have and it is frightening. I used to rally in the old 'works' 240Z Datsuns which had around 250 to 260 bhp. We used 175 section tyres in the wet and 185 in the dry. Car weight in rally trim was around 1250 kg (that's from memory). Tyre testing in the wet was 'exciting' if we used very wide tyres as although the handling was quite good, the road-holding was appalling due to the inability of the tyres to clear the water.
I recently drove a Mini with a 1.8 Honda V-Tec engine and it was, quite simply, horrible. It had 13" wheels with 175/50 tyres and was grossly 'over-tyred'. The owner drove my 'S' on 10" wheels with 165 section tyres and said he wished his car had that sort of road-holding and predictability of handling that mine has.
Ultra-wide tyres do not equal good road-holding - it can be quite the opposite in fact, especially when wet with a light car.

I've mentioned both road holding and handling because I mean both, when fitting 13 inch wheels both are 'supposed' to not be as good as narrower tyres at both holding the road and have a negative affect on handling. You say about a powerful cars having bad road holding in the wet and your narrower 165s are better but really is that because the Honda conversion has heaps more power and that those size tyres need to be on there for when it's dry to get the most out of the car and stops the wheels spinning every gear change but when it's wet there is just too much power on tap to drive quickly as opposed to your 'S' which has probably less than 2/3 of the Honda conversions power. Also does anyone know what the best tyres are for 13's in the wet? Ive heard the Ao48r's are pretty good but would like to see what other people suggest, I know they're super sticky in the dry

Edited by james.c94, 04 July 2012 - 01:36 PM.

[muzzal 1275]

just a quick one
if you fit 13" wheels surely by running
a lower profile you will encounter less body roll ?