265 or 275 PSS on stock 18 inch wheels???
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
265 or 275 PSS on stock 18 inch wheels???
There is no clear definitive answer based on my searching for PSS rear tires on 18 inch stock wheels (there is a clear preference for 245s on the front)
Please evaluate these 3 factors:
1)Appearance
2)Function/Grip/Drivability
3)Rubbing
Does anybody have any pics from the rear to see how wide these tires look?
Thanks.
Please evaluate these 3 factors:
1)Appearance
2)Function/Grip/Drivability
3)Rubbing
Does anybody have any pics from the rear to see how wide these tires look?
Thanks.
#2
Super Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2009 C63, 2000 ML 430, 1994 Del Sol Vtec
I think this has been beaten to death in this forum, but here we go again..
1.) This is subjective, I think it looks fine.
2.) Both work the same, you'll get a little more grip from 275's having a larger contact patch.
3.) No rubbing with either on stock wheels with stock suspension.
Here is a photo of my 275 PSS on my stock wheels at stock height.
1.) This is subjective, I think it looks fine.
2.) Both work the same, you'll get a little more grip from 275's having a larger contact patch.
3.) No rubbing with either on stock wheels with stock suspension.
Here is a photo of my 275 PSS on my stock wheels at stock height.
#3
I know I'll be shot down for this thought, but maybe it's worth considering that AMG chose the stock tire widths for a reason.
I'm not passing judgment on anyone that runs wider tire widths on the stock wheels. But, it just seems to me AMG felt 235/255 was best for handling.
If it were me and I wanted to run wider than stock rubber, I would go 265's.
I'm not passing judgment on anyone that runs wider tire widths on the stock wheels. But, it just seems to me AMG felt 235/255 was best for handling.
If it were me and I wanted to run wider than stock rubber, I would go 265's.
#5
It would be interesting to know which width AMG uses in their driving academy cars. I think cost and packaging would be less of a factor for the upkeep of those vehicles.
Even if cost and packaging is the primary reason, that doesn't negate the possibility that altering the tire width from OEM specs may change the suspension geometry somewhat.
#6
#7
I would then ask, is that leveling in height preferable to the stock dimensions?
My next question would be, what happens to the relative height (front of car to rear) when you install 275's instead of 265's?
Trending Topics
#8
That's very specific information. I appreciate learning that.
I would then ask, is that leveling in height preferable to the stock dimensions?
My next question would be, what happens to the relative height (front of car to rear) when you install 275's instead of 265's?
I would then ask, is that leveling in height preferable to the stock dimensions?
My next question would be, what happens to the relative height (front of car to rear) when you install 275's instead of 265's?
#9
The first week I owned the car I thought the front tire just looked a little tall in relation to the rear. When I checked it out on Tire Rack I was actually surprised to see there was so much of a difference. IMO 265's give the car a subtly more aggressive stance...perhaps it's my imagination but I think not. Everyone who uses 275's in the rear does so in conjunction with 245's on the front so it would be the same relatively speaking as 235/265. I went from OE P30 to coilovers anyway so I guess it's a moot point now.
#10
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Chapel Hill, NC
Posts: 324
Likes: 0
Received 9 Likes
on
9 Posts
2015 C63S E1; 2016 C450 AMG
Does the change in tire size (larger than stock) affect the speedo / odometer in any meaningful way? Does it mess with the traction control or stability control?
TIA,
Ira
TIA,
Ira
#12
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by hhughes1
Tread width for the 265 is actually listed as wider than that for the 275. Mounted on 9" wheels will likely yield a larger contact patch with the 265. Additionally any decrease in sidewall height looks better in my point of view especially with the drop from the H&R springs. I have run the 265/245 combination for several years now and just feel comfortable with it on the stock wheels.
Comments?
How is it possible for 265s to have a larger contact patch than 275s???
Tread width for the 265 is actually listed as wider than that for the 275. Mounted on 9" wheels will likely yield a larger contact patch with the 265. Additionally any decrease in sidewall height looks better in my point of view especially with the drop from the H&R springs. I have run the 265/245 combination for several years now and just feel comfortable with it on the stock wheels.
Comments?
How is it possible for 265s to have a larger contact patch than 275s???
#13
No and no. The difference in the speedo reading going from 255's to 265's on the rear is 1 mph lower at 70 mph, so given the (on the low side) error engineered into the typical speedo you are closer to true speed with the 265's.
#14
MBWorld Fanatic!
Originally Posted by hhughes1
Tread width for the 265 is actually listed as wider than that for the 275. Mounted on 9" wheels will likely yield a larger contact patch with the 265. Additionally any decrease in sidewall height looks better in my point of view especially with the drop from the H&R springs. I have run the 265/245 combination for several years now and just feel comfortable with it on the stock wheels.
Comments?
How is it possible for 265s to have a larger contact patch than 275s???
Tread width for the 265 is actually listed as wider than that for the 275. Mounted on 9" wheels will likely yield a larger contact patch with the 265. Additionally any decrease in sidewall height looks better in my point of view especially with the drop from the H&R springs. I have run the 265/245 combination for several years now and just feel comfortable with it on the stock wheels.
Comments?
How is it possible for 265s to have a larger contact patch than 275s???
I am baffled by how often people overlook this matter, even car techs
#15
MBWorld Fanatic!
Probably, but not necessarily.
It would be interesting to know which width AMG uses in their driving academy cars. I think cost and packaging would be less of a factor for the upkeep of those vehicles.
Even if cost and packaging is the primary reason, that doesn't negate the possibility that altering the tire width from OEM specs may change the suspension geometry somewhat.
It would be interesting to know which width AMG uses in their driving academy cars. I think cost and packaging would be less of a factor for the upkeep of those vehicles.
Even if cost and packaging is the primary reason, that doesn't negate the possibility that altering the tire width from OEM specs may change the suspension geometry somewhat.
Your point regarding suspension geometry is valid, but I doubt if that applies to the c. May be sls.
Imo, It is only in the case of low volume production cars like the exotics that tires are selected for specific performance. For our cars, it's a matter of which tire manufacturer wins the bid. Again IMO, both Pirellis and contis that are oe for c63 are inferior compare to what is available.
#16
Senior Member
Thread Starter
I think this has been beaten to death in this forum, but here we go again..
1.) This is subjective, I think it looks fine.
2.) Both work the same, you'll get a little more grip from 275's having a larger contact patch.
3.) No rubbing with either on stock wheels with stock suspension.
Here is a photo of my 275 PSS on my stock wheels at stock height.
1.) This is subjective, I think it looks fine.
2.) Both work the same, you'll get a little more grip from 275's having a larger contact patch.
3.) No rubbing with either on stock wheels with stock suspension.
Here is a photo of my 275 PSS on my stock wheels at stock height.
Can you comment on this post regarding the contact patch?
Originally Posted by hhughes1
Tread width for the 265 is actually listed as wider than that for the 275. Mounted on 9" wheels will likely yield a larger contact patch with the 265. Additionally any decrease in sidewall height looks better in my point of view especially with the drop from the H&R springs. I have run the 265/245 combination for several years now and just feel comfortable with it on the stock wheels.
Comments?
How is it possible for 265s to have a larger contact patch than 275s???
#17
My car was delivered with Pirellis. My spare wheels are now a new set of the OE split-5 spoke wheels with Contis. IMO there is no comparison between the two tires. The P Zeros were a thoroughly average tire in all respects. The Contis IMO are a vastly superior all-round tire, lots of grip in the dry and excellent wet weather braking and cornering performance, as I found out during the recent heavy rains here.
#18
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 2,290
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
2011 P31 C63 2015 CLA45
I and many others run 275 rears. Will run 245 front when oe tires wear out. No rubbing that I know of. Clearance on inside well is very small. I think that is max width for stock offset without spacers.
#19
MBWorld Fanatic!
There was a guy in some older threads who talked about buying 275s and returning them because of the sidewall size. Specifically the PSS'. Don't know if he posted pics but do a search and you may find them.
#20
Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
09 C63 AMG, 03 C320 Sport Coupe 96 Mustang
I put Conti 265's on the rear of my car and they look and behave quite nicely. Almost didn't, as while they were getting installed a somewhat rookie put the wheel back on and came in to tell me they were rubbing. When I went to look, omg, yes they were rubbing the inside fender well - when the wheel was hanging with the car on the lift (what a dimwit!) He had a hard time believing that they wouldn't rub when the car was on the ground. Fortunately the owner (also an AMG owner) was there to keep him in line.
#22
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,491
Received 429 Likes
on
352 Posts
2012 C63;1971 280SE 3.5(Sold);2023 EQS 450 SUV 4 Matic (Wife's)
Originally Posted by hhughes1
Tread width for the 265 is actually listed as wider than that for the 275. Mounted on 9" wheels will likely yield a larger contact patch with the 265. Additionally any decrease in sidewall height looks better in my point of view especially with the drop from the H&R springs. I have run the 265/245 combination for several years now and just feel comfortable with it on the stock wheels.
Comments?
How is it possible for 265s to have a larger contact patch than 275s???
Tread width for the 265 is actually listed as wider than that for the 275. Mounted on 9" wheels will likely yield a larger contact patch with the 265. Additionally any decrease in sidewall height looks better in my point of view especially with the drop from the H&R springs. I have run the 265/245 combination for several years now and just feel comfortable with it on the stock wheels.
Comments?
How is it possible for 265s to have a larger contact patch than 275s???
and you will see the tread width on the 265/35/18 is 10.1" and for the 275/35/18 is 10.0". Therefore the contact patch is slightly larger for the 265. The 265 or 275 refers to section (total) width of the tire on a measured rim width, thus the tread width can vary depending on how square or rounded the shoulders are on a particular tire. You will see the section width of the 265/35/18 is 10.7" and for the 275/35/18 is 10.9" so it is larger in section and how the tire size is rated.
Last edited by Mort; 09-06-2012 at 10:09 AM.
#23
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Check the specs on Tire Rack http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires....ot+Super+Sport
and you will see the tread width on the 265/35/18 is 10.1" and for the 275/35/18 is 10.0". Therefore the contact patch is slightly larger for the 265. The 265 or 275 refers to section (total) width of the tire on a measured rim width, thus the tread width can vary depending on how square or rounded the shoulders are on a particular tire. You will see the section width of the 265/35/18 is 10.7" and for the 275/35/18 is 10.9" so it is larger in section and how the tire size is rated.
and you will see the tread width on the 265/35/18 is 10.1" and for the 275/35/18 is 10.0". Therefore the contact patch is slightly larger for the 265. The 265 or 275 refers to section (total) width of the tire on a measured rim width, thus the tread width can vary depending on how square or rounded the shoulders are on a particular tire. You will see the section width of the 265/35/18 is 10.7" and for the 275/35/18 is 10.9" so it is larger in section and how the tire size is rated.
Wouldn't 265s give better drivability and traction since the tread width is more important than the section width?
Or is the section width more important than the tread width for traction and drivability?
I am very confused...
#24
#25
Check the specs on Tire Rack http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires....ot+Super+Sport
and you will see the tread width on the 265/35/18 is 10.1" and for the 275/35/18 is 10.0". Therefore the contact patch is slightly larger for the 265. The 265 or 275 refers to section (total) width of the tire on a measured rim width, thus the tread width can vary depending on how square or rounded the shoulders are on a particular tire. You will see the section width of the 265/35/18 is 10.7" and for the 275/35/18 is 10.9" so it is larger in section and how the tire size is rated.
and you will see the tread width on the 265/35/18 is 10.1" and for the 275/35/18 is 10.0". Therefore the contact patch is slightly larger for the 265. The 265 or 275 refers to section (total) width of the tire on a measured rim width, thus the tread width can vary depending on how square or rounded the shoulders are on a particular tire. You will see the section width of the 265/35/18 is 10.7" and for the 275/35/18 is 10.9" so it is larger in section and how the tire size is rated.