Lude Generation

Had a check on the wiki for recommended tyre sizes for 5th Gen, but it doesn't mention the size 225/45/17.

Is there a reason for this? Are these not recommended, and if not, why?

The wiki mentions the following:

215/40/17 - Larger Contact Patch, Recommended 17” Size Tire
215/45/17 - Larger Contact Patch, Overall Diameter is Larger
225/40/17 - Even Larger Contact Patch, Very Limited Selection of Brands

What would be the benefits/drawbacks if i tried to use 225/45/17?

I will be running 8J wheels

Its just that 225/45/17 seem to be much more readily available and i am after a used bargain so i can get the wheels on for the Scottish meet

Thank you kindly

i recently fitted 225/45/17 macky

45 profile not quite as harsh when going over bumps and potholes etc, a comfier drive

still got 40 profiles on the back for now (lack of lude fundage)

got two barums supplied and fitted for £130

225/45/17 is fine. Stock being 205/50 so 225/45 will keep the same sidewall height which is optimum for the suspensions setup. You may rub though.
I rub on 225/45/16.

Ok cool, thanks for that guys!

Ratty, one question i have regards the fact that 2 of my wheels are 8J, the other 2 are 8.5J. Will this affect ATTS with them being different?

225 is width of the tyre and 45 is the hight of the side wall

40 is low profile and lower profile is supposed to be better mpg but as said above potholes you will be having to avoid. you might find police behind you wondering if you drink driving. i bet 225/40 will look great on the wheel

No it shouldn't effect atts. 40 profile tyre to mpg sounds utter tosh but not sure. Actual tyre compound will have more effect. Is still stick with a 45. But imo 225 on 8j + will rub. Try 215/45.

I am currently running 235/35/18 front & 235/40/18 rear without any rubbing. Although the arch liners have been removed

The reason for the ATTS question was that i know that uneven profiles affect it and was wondering if the difference of 8J front 8.5J rear would mean that the rear tyres would be slightly more stretched on the 8.5J wheel, creating a difference on the overall circumference? Or would this be so small as to be insignificant?

Lower profile tyres doesn't mean better handling and better mpg ?

ziyaan wrote:Lower profile tyres doesn't mean better handling and better mpg ?

In my experience the handling really suffers when you drop the profile too much, as the suspension setup expects some give in the tyre (give that's removed when you have no sidewall). This is why I run 16's, fills the arch better than the stock 15's, and feels better than 17's both ride and handling wise.

If you knew the surface you would be driving on was mint - I could understand running really low profiles then (track cars for example).

^^^this. too low a profile will see you skittering about the place looking for grip, if your pushing it.

214 45 17 ftw imo. too low a profile just makes a road car look daft and badly thought out.