Much difference between 17" or 16" wheels?

[jas_kidd32]

I'm contemplating whether to get a 17 or 16inch wheels for my DC5R. Is there much difference in performance and weight? What about price per tyre?

[chargeR]

I would base your decision on tyre choice, aesthetics and budget. There is a much wider choice of tyres in 17" to suit dc5s although they will be correspondingly more expensive than 16s. There is basically nothing in a 16" high performance tyre wider than 225.

Weight difference per wheel will vary a lot, but it is fairly easy to get a 17" wheel that will weigh less than the stock 16s which weigh around 16lb. With the right 17" wheel and tyre you will not increase unsprung mass, and any increase in rotational intertia will be more than offset by having nice sticky, new and wider tyres.

[string]

A thinner sidewall will develop greater lateral forces at less slip angles.
In English, they're less floppy and more responsive.

The trade-off comes when you consider the extra mass of a larger rim and tyre combo.

[nick_sixx]

IMO 16's will look waaaay too small for a DC5, 17's at least, 18's even better. i'm normally all for small wheels. but any honda post 2001, 17" minimum

[nd55]

> Is there much difference in performance and weight?

Yes, but are the tenths of a second important to you or the aesthetics?

I will also second the comments made by ChargeR, that 16 inch high performance rubber isn't a market best served by tyre manufacturers.

For example: Falken Azenis RT-615 are made in 16", however the local distributor chooses not to bring them in.
Yoko AD-07 in 205/45R16 - also made, but good luck finding them.
Bridgestone RE-01R and RE-001 are well supported I think.
Toyo RA-1 the distributor has never heard of them, R1-R 205/45R16 is available, but for some reason is marketed as a road racing type tyre, when it's a soft sidewall drag/street tyre. R888 not in 16's.

What's performance rubber to you?

Probably easier to decide what tyre you want to run and try and fit that to your vehicle.

Nick.

[nd55]

> but how did you infer that he was after racing rubber

The Falken RT-615, Yoko AD-07 and Bridgestones are all UTQG approx 200.

None of these are racing tyres...... to me.

I assume somebody asking about performance for a Type R isn't after a 100,00km tyre.

Nick.

[Sexc86]

agreed!... on a dc5, 16s would look way too small.. and tyres for the 17s wouldnt be as expensive as say putting them on a civic or dc2 because your profile would no have to be as small.

Good luck!

[EK1.6LCIV]

17s are cheaper for tyres compared to 16" size tyres, I get mine for 139 each for the street tyres I use and in 16 theyre another 40 ontop of that, they claim its due to it being more of a european size lol

[Sp00ny]

On average Comparing Yokohama S-Drives/BS RE001's in 17's/16's the tyres are about $20-30 more per tyre.

[45SET]

You should look into other aspects of rims/tyres BEFORE you start worrying about weight. Eg size, width, tyre sizes, rim offset (Talk to chargeR :p)tread pattern, material, bling factor... hey how did that slip in there :p

But yes, most 17's are going to be heavier then 16's... but the trade off is that your going to have a thinner side wall which is going to be more of a positive then the overall weight of the rim itself.

But what are you going to be using it for? track, street... hard parking?

[Sp00ny]

But yes, most 17's are going to be heavier then 16's... but the trade off is that your going to have a thinner side wall which is going to be more of a positive then the overall weight of the rim itself.

I'm not too sure if I completely agree with that statement. Although in theory the lower the profile the stiffer the sidewall has to be in order to support the weight this is only held completely true in the same brand/model tyre.

You can't compare Silverstone 205/45/R16 to Bridgestone RE001 215/40/R17 and state that the stiffness in the sidewall is due to the lower profile....

Also everyone is saying that the differance is very very noticable...but through real life testing and experience...it isn't. (This is between 215/40/R17, 205/50/R15 S-Drives/RE001's compared to 195/55/R15 Silverstones.... I'm not saying it isn't noticable I'm saying people exagerate the differance far to much so it misleads people into a misconception of what their rim/tyre combo is going to achieve.

You would get more gain by having stiffer suspension/Polyurethane bushings/steering rack bushes than a lower profile tyre...or even a better branded tyre than a lower profile cheaper one...it isn't an absolute truth.

[45SET]

I'm not too sure if I completely agree with that statement. Although in theory the lower the profile the stiffer the sidewall has to be in order to support the weight this is only held completely true in the same brand/model tyre.

1) You can't compare Silverstone 205/45/R16 to Bridgestone RE001 215/40/R17 and state that the stiffness in the sidewall is due to the lower profile....

Also everyone is saying that the differance is very very noticable...but through real life testing and experience...it isn't. (This is between 215/40/R17, 205/50/R15 S-Drives/RE001's compared to 195/55/R15 Silverstones.... I'm not saying it's not noticable I'm saying people exagerate the differance far to much so it misleads people into a misconception of what their rim/tyre combo is going to achieve.

You would get more gain by having stiffer suspension/Polyurethane bushings/steering rack bushes than a lower profile tyre...or even a better branded tyre than a lower profile cheaper one...it isn't an absolute truth.

1) So why throw that question into the equation?

2) Yes that is true, but the OEM rims on the AUDM DC5R are very... well... shit for the size of car it is. (Rims themselves are good, but just not for the car). It is the type of car that really needs 17's under it to take full advantage of the space... and it was good that Honda realised this when they released the DC5S.

The guy has a DC5R.

Stock it has 205/55/16. If he got 17s, he would be going to at least 215/45/17. There is going to be a noticeable difference at higher speeds going around a corner with the lower profile tyre... and its going to be better.

Stop trying to compare apples and oranges and throwing irrelevant information into the mix.

But in my real life experiance, with a DC5R, going from the stock 16's (Which had a decent of 205/55/16 on them) to a set of 17's (with Kuhmo 225/45/17) there was a noticeable difference it almost every aspect... and all for the better.

[Sp00ny]

1) So why throw that question into the equation?

2) Yes that is true, but the OEM rims on the AUDM DC5R are very... well... shit for the size of car it is. (Rims themselves are good, but just not for the car). It is the type of car that really needs 17's under it to take full advantage of the space... and it was good that Honda realised this when they released the DC5S.

The guy has a DC5R.

Stock it has 205/55/16. If he got 17s, he would be going to at least 215/45/17. There is going to be a noticeable difference at higher speeds going around a corner with the lower profile tyre... and its going to be better.

Stop trying to compare apples and oranges and throwing irrelevant information into the mix.

But in my real life experiance, with a DC5R, going from the stock 16's (Which had a decent of 205/55/16 on them) to a set of 17's (with Kuhmo 225/45/17) there was a noticeable difference it almost every aspect... and all for the better.

I don't beleive its irrelevant...it's information so that he can deal with his situation realistically. I'm saying dont go with 17's if you just want the lower profiles for responsiveness....as you would be better of spending the money elsewhere. If he prefers the looks of 17's so-be-it. Not once did I say it wouldnt make a differance...i stated there are many more things you would be better off spending money on.

Also a poor quality tyre in 215/40/17 would most likely have single ply sidewalls and be designed not as well as a good quality 215/45/16.

If what your saying is true...that a smaller sidewall is stiffer regardless then why don't people go to the track on integra's with 18's/19's? See where im coming from? Even if you count unsprung weight etc...

Don't forget that in your comparasion the tyre is a differant brand am I correct? Did you look at the specifications of the sidewalls? Ply's/Material? It's also a wider tyre with more contact pitch...so its going to have more grip regardless.

I do agree expessially aesthetics wise that the DC5 R does need larger rims to fill the wheel base and not make the car look old/cheap.

Bottom Line: It's not an absolute truth. Although the basic theory can be true, there are many other variables to be considered.

Anywho if you have anymore to say just PM me as I don't want to flood this guys thread.

[45SET]

I don't beleive its irrelevant...it's information so that he can deal with his situation realistically. I'm saying dont go with 17's if you just want the lower profiles for responsiveness....as you would be better of spending the money elsewhere. If he prefers the looks of 17's so-be-it. Not once did I say it wouldnt make a differance...i stated there are many more things you would be better off spending money on.

Also a poor quality tyre in 215/40/17 would most likely have single ply sidewalls and be designed not as well as a good quality 215/45/16.

If what your saying is true...that a smaller sidewall is stiffer regardless then why don't people go to the track on integra's with 18's/19's? See where im coming from?

Bottom Line: It's not an absolute truth. Although the basic theory can be true.

Why do Lamborghini's, Porches and Ferrari's have 18's and 19's?

OP is only comparing 16's and 17's.

And really... we have both taken it to far... he only asked about weight, and we have both turned it into a argument about suspension components and tyre quality.

OP should come back on here, say what he wants to use the rims for (race or show) and THEN go from there... plus its to late for me to argue with you... if you can wait till tomorrow morning i'll be fresh and ready to argue again :p

[Sp00ny]

Why do Lamborghini's, Porches and Ferrari's have 18's and 19's?

OP is only comparing 16's and 17's.

And really... we have both taken it to far... he only asked about weight, and we have both turned it into a argument about suspension components and tyre quality.

OP should come back on here, say what he wants to use the rims for (race or show) and THEN go from there... plus its to late for me to argue with you... if you can wait till tomorrow morning i'll be fresh and ready to argue again :p

LOL now thats true...

Your making a mistake im not arguing...im just stating its not an absolute truth...so dont go getting "Silverstone/SPORT-ONE" 17's thinking that their response will be superior to a smaller size Yokohama S-Drive.

Also porches used to have 16's etc...as they developed their wheel bases got larger and would look damn horrible with 16's lol. Not to mention who wants to spend thousands on a car and get ugly looking 15's/16's haha.

My honest opinion for OP is to get 17's...the wheelbase on DC5's are far to large to have anything under.

[chargeR]

My honest opinion for OP is to get 17's...the wheelbase on DC5's are far to large to have anything under.

I agree. There is no reason to go an aftermarket 16" wheel on a DC5 except for price.

I recently went to 17s after 7 years with 16s and I noticed a bit of a difference in response. I also changed to 14kg/mm front springs and a 9.5" low offset wheel with 245/40 A048s at the same time though so the difference in comfort or response is hard to judge. Once I track on my new setup I will be better able to estimate the difference.