i started thinking why the over sized rims? well why not. maybe they knew the car was going to be a "flop" and that many years down the line maybe it will be a classic and whats better then a classic? a classic that has low miles. how to achieve this use bigger rims. you see in order to keep the miles down well let me break it down first the term "r.p.m." stands for rotations per minute now im no engineer but if we had 16" rims the miles would rack up according to how many times that 16" rims would rotate per minute. but since we have 19" rims the rotation would take a little bit more time to come to that first complete rotation. so smaller rims equal faster rotations thus quicker miles added onto the odometer, bigger rims more time for rotation equals less miles makes sense good. now let me explain why we have 2 of the same symbols on the dial that controls the heat one for the driver and one for the passenger you see if you ....

 

thats not accurate at all.

first off, "RPM" refers to the *engine* speed, not the wheel's rotation.

secondly, speedomoters are calibrated for a car's stock wheel height, so miles dont "rack up" any faster on a car that came with 16" wheels from the factory. now, if someone went from 16" to 19", their speedos would read wrong, and their mileage would be slightly off.

and neither of these has nothing to do with it being a flop or a collectible...

 

Im not gonna comment

 

Bawaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.... that was good for a laugh... it's cool, though...

 

Surely you were not serious. Ok, I won't take the time to go into all of the points, but lets look at the obvious. What does wheel size have to do with the circumference of a tire? A 19" rim with the correct tire size will have the same circumference as a 16" rim with a proportionally correct tire size. Thus, a car with 16" rims should "rack" up miles the same as a car with 19" rims. The rest of your assertions.........

 

you think too much. stop before you hurt yourself.

 

Huh?....

 

lol lol

 

I think he was kidding...I hope he was kidding...

 

To understand this members ideas better I suggest you read his previous posts like I did.

 

Well, it certainly does put things in perspective.

 

Got it. Interesting train of thought

 

If the tire is bigger than a smaller tire, then the actual complete rotations of the wheel would be less on a larger tire.... therefore less complete rotations on the axle. The mileage is the same but the rotations are less on a larger tire. It may be 100,000 miles on the crossfire but feel like only 90,000 when compared to a car with smaller tires.

Not sure exactly what this guy is trying to say but this is what I was thinking as I was reading his post. Maybe I am nuts!!! This guy is actually thinking on a whole different level. Don't think of the miles (a mile is a mile).... think about complete rotations on the axle. Larger tires equal less COMPLETE rotations on the axle.

 

This makes about as much sense as the OP.

 

Don't know why it is so hard to understand. It may be crazy but what I decribed is true. Think about it. I don't know this poster and I am not defending him.... but I am telling you the facts are the facts. Larger tires equal less rotations on the axle than a smaller tire. Simple fact!

 

Our stock rear tire is 255/35-19. That would equate to a tire circumference of 81.769 inches. So, lets assume that someone was stupid enough to put a 255/35-16 tire on the back of the car. That would equate to a circumference of 72.345 inches. The car with 19" wheels would have to have 774.8658 axle rotations to complete a mile. The 16" wheels would have to have 875.8034 axle rotations to complete a mile. So, your assertion that the larger tires would have fewer rotations is correct.

Where you loose me, is the statement: "It may be 100,000 miles on the crossfire but feel like only 90,000 when compared to a car with smaller tires." It should feel like 100k miles on both cars.

However the reality is that you would never put a 16" rim on this car with a 35 aspect ratio for the tire height. To do this, the undercarriage would probably be sitting on the ground. If you were to go from a 19" rim to a 16" rim, you would have a larger diameter tire to account for the difference. I just do not understand the point as.... regardless of the wheel size, the manufacturer would have put on appropriate size tires with a tire diameter that is optimal for the vehicle configuration.

Have you ever seen a mustang for example with 15" wheels that have low profile tires on them? No.... if they have 15's, they have taller profile tires. If they put 19s on them, they would have to go with a lower profile tire. It all boils down to tire circumference and not wheel size. And.... for the most part.... if the owner is not a complete dumbass, he would insure that the circumference of the tires are relatively the same should he make a change to the wheel size.

 

sometimes you have to think outside the crossfire. its probably a good thing my crossfire isnt paid off yet, the things i would do to that crossfire if it was paid off. i didnt want to mention this in any of my other threads but im "dysons" son. i can remember my mom arguing with my dad all the time about vacumes and designing and blah blah. j/k but some of you get it

 

My response exactly....

 

This is a joke right? Does this mean my regular commute that used to be 20 miles is now only about 17?

 

LOL.... You did go to 18s in the back right? That would be the prevailing thought. Or, at least it should only feel like 17 according to blackcrossfire07.