maybe this explanation will help you grasp the concept: it's pretty
clearly laid out here:
http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tiretech/techpage.jsp?techid=7&;
you need to get the idea that the '65' is a measurement out of your
head; it's a *ratio*, not a fixed measurement.
per the Tire Rack site:
"The second number is the aspect ratio. This is a ratio of sidewall
height to width."
in the old days when we were upsizing tires, the old rule-'o-thumb
was that for approximately every 2 sizes up you'd go in width, you'd
have to come *down* one size in Aspect Ratio to maintain a rollout that
was the same as what you started with.
'zat help? ;-)
cheers!
e
Wonko the Sane wrote:
Your explanation seemed illogical so I looked for a second opinion. Seems
the jury is still out.
I am having a difficult time convincing myself that a 65 isn't a 65, no
matter how wide the tire is. Just because the tire is wider, it shouldn't
necessarily be taller.
[I sense the start of a new "oil" thread.]
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 8:45 PM, OK Don <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I told you about this the last time we discussed tire size - pay
attention this time.
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 6:35 PM, Wonko the Sane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I will just buy 195s next time. :-)
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 6:25 PM, Wilton Strickland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
"Tall/height" meaning distance from rim to tread expressed as percentage
of
width. Tire dia = rim dia plus 2 X tire height.
--
OK Don, KD5NRO
_______________________________________
http://www.okiebenz.com
For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com
To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
