2001 4.2 - 235 45/17 vs. 245 45/17
Thread Starter
Audiworld Junior Member
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
2001 4.2 - 235 45/17 vs. 245 45/17
Hey Gents…I currently have worn 255 40/17 mounted on “Fat 5” factory rims, which I believe are 8inch rims. Looking for alternative size recommendations. I can’t decide between the 235-45/17 or the 245-45/17. Anyone have experience using this as an alternative size on the A6 4.2. I’d like to go with the 245’s but concerned with the increase in overall diameter?
Thanks in advance..!
Thanks in advance..!
Tech Guru
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 8,010
Likes: 192
From: Olney, MD
Increase in dia. Results in slower acceleration, worse braking, speedo error. 45 series might ride a tad softer depending on load rating of the tire.
I like conti DW tires, good price for performance.
I like conti DW tires, good price for performance.
Audiworld Junior Member
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
From: Washington, DC
Within a week of buying my 2000 4.2 I put on a set of 245-45/17 Conti ExtremeContact DWS tires, a decision mainly based on reading opinions in this forum. I've been very pleased with the results of that decision. I think the speedo error is 0.6 percent (BFD).
Having a sport suspension, the slight softening was OK with me. After nearly 2.5 years and nearly 25K miles, I think there may be another 10K or so left on them. Obviously, I don't drive the car very hard...but a quick 2nd gear pull now and then keeps my ya-ya's grinning for a while.
I also recommend road-force balancing.
Having a sport suspension, the slight softening was OK with me. After nearly 2.5 years and nearly 25K miles, I think there may be another 10K or so left on them. Obviously, I don't drive the car very hard...but a quick 2nd gear pull now and then keeps my ya-ya's grinning for a while.
I also recommend road-force balancing.
AudiWorld Super User
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 15,311
Likes: 696
From: SF Bay Area, CA
Actually, it helps correct the speedo error...
Like most, Audi's read optimistic. The larger diameter actually gets it closer to true.
Meanwhile, remember RS6's run 255/40 18, which diameter wise is similar to 255/45 17. I have run the RS6 OEM wheels with the stock 18's (Dunlop 9000's) on my 4.2, hence know of the speedo. No obvious differences in braking, handling, ride, mileage.
From 40 to 45--which I have also experimented w in 17's--little difference in ride comfort, which surprised me a bit.
No clearance issues w/ any of these on OEM wheels, and obviously it closes up some fender gap. The RS6 wheels are 8 1/2's, though at ET30 instead of ET35 on the 8" 4.2 17's, the tire edge lands just about the same relative to the fenders. Mine is non-sport as built, though I switched to S6 bars and recently finally installed the Bilstein HD's I ordered years ago. Ride height remains stock.
Meanwhile, remember RS6's run 255/40 18, which diameter wise is similar to 255/45 17. I have run the RS6 OEM wheels with the stock 18's (Dunlop 9000's) on my 4.2, hence know of the speedo. No obvious differences in braking, handling, ride, mileage.
From 40 to 45--which I have also experimented w in 17's--little difference in ride comfort, which surprised me a bit.
No clearance issues w/ any of these on OEM wheels, and obviously it closes up some fender gap. The RS6 wheels are 8 1/2's, though at ET30 instead of ET35 on the 8" 4.2 17's, the tire edge lands just about the same relative to the fenders. Mine is non-sport as built, though I switched to S6 bars and recently finally installed the Bilstein HD's I ordered years ago. Ride height remains stock.
Last edited by MP4.2+6.0; Apr 3, 2012 at 09:36 PM.
Tech Guru
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 6,006
Likes: 2
goodness - all that is somewhat true, but we are talking a circumference of 1.026x that of 235/45. Not terribly much. I would suspect the larger contact patch will actually improve both lateral adhesion and braking.
All will be quite small.
G
All will be quite small.
G
Tech Guru
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 8,010
Likes: 192
From: Olney, MD
Why do you think a larger contact patch would result? F=P*A, i.e., assume relatively equal sidewall force, then the only thing affecting A, contact patch area, assuming the weight of the car doesn't change, is P, tire pressure. A narrower contact patch by 10mm, for sure.
Trending Topics
Tech Guru
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 8,010
Likes: 192
From: Olney, MD
Also, you/me get 2.6% speedo change vs another guy's .6%. Since the speedo already generally reads 3-4mph fast at 60mph, 2mph won't make much difference/gets you a more accurate reading.
OTOH, the 255/40R17 on my 02S6 read exact at 60mph according to my radar gun....so a couple mph there would put me over the speed limit or within range of a 12mph grace if I'm pushing 10 over....
10mm isn't much for summer, but 20mm is significantly narrower. I run 235s in the winter tire size.
OTOH, the 255/40R17 on my 02S6 read exact at 60mph according to my radar gun....so a couple mph there would put me over the speed limit or within range of a 12mph grace if I'm pushing 10 over....
10mm isn't much for summer, but 20mm is significantly narrower. I run 235s in the winter tire size.
Last edited by SloopJohnB@mac.com; Apr 4, 2012 at 10:36 AM.
AudiWorld Stories
Bringing Audi to Life for Audi Fans
10 Strangest Audi Designs That Actually Made Production
Joe Kucinski
2027 Audi Q7 and SQ7: Audi Upgraded EVERYTHING!
Michael S. Palmer
Audi Unveils Absurdly Cool New Supercar: 10 Things You Need to Know!
Verdad Gallardo
The Highs & Lows of Every Audi C-Class Generation
Joe Kucinski
Top 10 Most Expensive Audis Ever Sold on Bring-A-Trailer
Brett Foote
10 Audi Features & Options We Miss the Most!
Joe Kucinski
Audi Recreates Crazy-Looking Speed Record Breaker From 1935
Verdad Gallardo
Coachbuilder Recreates the 1995 Audi TTS Concept
Verdad Gallardo
Every Audi V10 Car Ranked!
Joe Kucinski
Tech Guru
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 6,006
Likes: 2
from what i have read, tires do not behave int hat manner - and a larger tire, due to physical rigidity, does in fact have a larger contact area. In fact, look at contact prints.
Why do you think we use wider tires? If not we'd all be on 110/200-17s.
The other fallacy that we can fall into is that friction = F*c(f). In its basic definition, friction has nothing to do with area. Clearly this is wrong, w/r/t cars (or we're all really suckers, including those dumb-*** F1 teams and all their Hoyt-toity PhDs). The secret is that friction is not the limiting factor in 99.9% of dry adhesion - shear is. And more rubber = less shear.
Simple physics is simplistic. Actually, i was thrilled to see these used by Prof Lewin as fun examples in 8.01 (Classical Mechanics at MIT), since i had thought about the conundrum earlier (even asked Ross Bentley about it)
G
Why do you think we use wider tires? If not we'd all be on 110/200-17s.
The other fallacy that we can fall into is that friction = F*c(f). In its basic definition, friction has nothing to do with area. Clearly this is wrong, w/r/t cars (or we're all really suckers, including those dumb-*** F1 teams and all their Hoyt-toity PhDs). The secret is that friction is not the limiting factor in 99.9% of dry adhesion - shear is. And more rubber = less shear.
Simple physics is simplistic. Actually, i was thrilled to see these used by Prof Lewin as fun examples in 8.01 (Classical Mechanics at MIT), since i had thought about the conundrum earlier (even asked Ross Bentley about it)
G
Audiworld Junior Member
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
From: Washington, DC
Yep, 2.6%. Sorry, gotta remember not to trust my memory...but I keep forgetting to. Lets see if I can remember how to embed a link.
http://www.miata.net/garage/tirecalc.html
http://www.miata.net/garage/tirecalc.html