Skip to main content
Topic: input on tire sizes vs times at the track (Read 1732 times) previous topic - next topic

input on tire sizes vs times at the track

im currently running 225 55 16 on the front but im gonna swap spindles so i can put 13 inch brakes on it but am im gonna slow it down switching to 245 45 17 thanks let me know guys, cause i dont wanna slow it down any switching to a wider tire?????

any input needed

thanks
Robert

input on tire sizes vs times at the track

Reply #1
the larger your tires are, and the faster you run, the more your tires weigh. Throw some 16" skinnies on the front.
Quote from: jcassity
I honestly dont think you could exceed the cost of a new car buy installing new *stock* parts everywhere in your coug our tbird. Its just plain impossible. You could revamp the entire drivetrain/engine/suspenstion and still come out ahead.
Hooligans! 
1988 Crown Vic wagon. 120K California car. Wifes grocery getter. (junked)
1987 Ford Thunderbird LX. 5.0. s.o., sn-95 t-5 and an f-150 clutch. Driven daily and going strong.
1986 cougar.
lilsammywasapunkrocker@yahoo.com

input on tire sizes vs times at the track

Reply #2
it wouldnt really effect et enough (probably not a noticable ammount) to warrent not upgrading brakes/wheels unless you are serious at the track. then skinnies wouldnt be a bad idea if thats your concern but in terms of being any slower than the wheels and tires you have already....probably not.
:america: 1988 Thunderbird Sport, Former 4.6 DOHC T56 conversion project.

Rest of the country, Welcome to Massachusettes. Enjoy your stay.

 
Halfbreed... Mango Orange Y2K Mustang GT
FRPP complete 2000 Cobra engine swap, T56 n' junk...
~John~

input on tire sizes vs times at the track

Reply #3
Those sizes are close.  If you search you could most likely find a rim/tire combo that is lighter than what you're currently running while getting the 17's so you can have the 13" brakes.  The question is are you willing to pay for it?

Why do you want 13 inch brakes anyway?
-- 05 Mustang GT-Whipplecharged !!
--87 5.0 Trick Flow Heads & Intake - Custom Cam - Many other goodies...3100Lbs...Low12's!

input on tire sizes vs times at the track

Reply #4
The reason for the 13in brakes is the fact that the cougars are very heavy.

 That is the reason for the 13in brakes on my car.  I would put them
on there and not be worried about the track times dropping much.

 Just my  2cents




SCT Tuned by Me(Greg@SpeedyDyno.com)

E.T. 10.28 @ 136.5 MPH 1/4 mile: List of Mods; 351 EFI, AFR heads,AOD,Rousch 13in frt brakes,11in rear brakes, AirRide Tech air ride system, Sub frame connetors,2400 RPM stall, 3.50,BBK shorties,T62PT Turbos  air to air intercooled, Home built kit.
Car weights 3705lbs without driver:burnout:

input on tire sizes vs times at the track

Reply #5
what fastcat said the car is strapping over 128 mph in the 1/4 mile and it may be better than that if i add some more timing, basically the 11 inch brakes werent cutting it, also the 98 gt wheels should look good

another question is swapping the 94 mustang spindles gonna throw the camber outta whack? i know i had to compress the spring more to be able to bolt up the strut, ill check the alignment this week, cause i hope to have it back on the track by sunday my rear rotors will be ready tomorrow


Robert

input on tire sizes vs times at the track

Reply #6
http://www.coolcats.net/tech/advanced/4to5lug.html
Quote from: jcassity
I honestly dont think you could exceed the cost of a new car buy installing new *stock* parts everywhere in your coug our tbird. Its just plain impossible. You could revamp the entire drivetrain/engine/suspenstion and still come out ahead.
Hooligans! 
1988 Crown Vic wagon. 120K California car. Wifes grocery getter. (junked)
1987 Ford Thunderbird LX. 5.0. s.o., sn-95 t-5 and an f-150 clutch. Driven daily and going strong.
1986 cougar.
lilsammywasapunkrocker@yahoo.com

input on tire sizes vs times at the track

Reply #7
Quote
what fastcat said the car is strapping over 128 mph in the 1/4 mile


1.  That's a valid and very good reason
2.  128 MPH? I hate you :hick:
-- 05 Mustang GT-Whipplecharged !!
--87 5.0 Trick Flow Heads & Intake - Custom Cam - Many other goodies...3100Lbs...Low12's!

input on tire sizes vs times at the track

Reply #8
Quote from: 5.8fastcat;249171
The reason for the 13in brakes is the fact that the cougars are very heavy.

 That is the reason for the 13in brakes on my car.  I would put them
on there and not be worried about the track times dropping much.

 Just my  2cents


the words heavy and cougar dont really belong together. FoMoCo hit the power to weight ratio about perfect on these car for sport/daily use. With a v8 anyways.

and for the e.t.,

the wider tire causing that much more rolling resistance might cost you a tenth or two, doubtful you loose much more. Im at a loss to some peoples aspects of wider tires though, unless its a weekend driver the wider tires are not much help in foul weather. ie. hydroplaning and things of the sort. I guess what they loose in versatility they gain in dry traction though.
Current-
87 Cougar
88 Crown Vic LTD
84 Yamaha Xt600

previous cars -
1990 Dodge Daytona -
1990 Geo Prizm -
1987 Honda Accord - 140mph wonder? Rally ready..... K.I.A. at WOT due to massive head failure. Still had the best paint-job EVER...
1998 Suzuki Sidekick 4D -
1969 Falcon Futura w/ Sports Coupe option (now go try and find that? And if you do tell me where it is!!)


The Cougar will never be for sale, Only up for trade on a 68,69 Falcon 2D.

input on tire sizes vs times at the track

Reply #9
Quote
the wider tire causing that much more rolling resistance might cost you a tenth or two, doubtful you loose much more. Im at a loss to some peoples aspects of wider tires though, unless its a weekend driver the wider tires are not much help in foul weather. ie. hydroplaning and things of the sort. I guess what they loose in versatility they gain in dry traction though.
well yeah...every time you mod your car for performance, you lose an ammount of streetability. tis the nature of the game. on the other hand, a new set of 245s or even 275s arent going to hydroplane any more than a 225 if driven reasonably.
 
Quote
the words heavy and cougar dont really belong together. FoMoCo hit the power to weight ratio about perfect on these car for sport/daily use. With a v8 anyways.

not sure i got this. tbirds and cougars are porkey. i do think they are over exaagerated when people call them heavy, but they arent light. with the stock engines and aods in them they feel just gross. my tbirds werent much heavier than my new edge but my new edge is heavy too.....
:america: 1988 Thunderbird Sport, Former 4.6 DOHC T56 conversion project.

Rest of the country, Welcome to Massachusettes. Enjoy your stay.

 
Halfbreed... Mango Orange Y2K Mustang GT
FRPP complete 2000 Cobra engine swap, T56 n' junk...
~John~

 

input on tire sizes vs times at the track

Reply #10
Atleast the new edge car had 285HP which is alot better than
the 150HP NonHO Cougars




SCT Tuned by Me(Greg@SpeedyDyno.com)

E.T. 10.28 @ 136.5 MPH 1/4 mile: List of Mods; 351 EFI, AFR heads,AOD,Rousch 13in frt brakes,11in rear brakes, AirRide Tech air ride system, Sub frame connetors,2400 RPM stall, 3.50,BBK shorties,T62PT Turbos  air to air intercooled, Home built kit.
Car weights 3705lbs without driver:burnout:

input on tire sizes vs times at the track

Reply #11
new edge = 260...
-- 05 Mustang GT-Whipplecharged !!
--87 5.0 Trick Flow Heads & Intake - Custom Cam - Many other goodies...3100Lbs...Low12's!

input on tire sizes vs times at the track

Reply #12
Quote
Atleast the new edge car had 285HP which is alot better than
the 150HP NonHO Cougars

true that.
 
Quote
new edge = 260...

yep. still both heavy though. :0(
:america: 1988 Thunderbird Sport, Former 4.6 DOHC T56 conversion project.

Rest of the country, Welcome to Massachusettes. Enjoy your stay.

 
Halfbreed... Mango Orange Y2K Mustang GT
FRPP complete 2000 Cobra engine swap, T56 n' junk...
~John~