c5 z06 advice needed: Will Conti DWS work on aftermarket wheel sizes?
08-08-2013, 09:07 AM
#1
Drifting
Thread Starter
c5 z06 advice needed: Will Conti DWS work on aftermarket wheel sizes?
I bought a set of Continental ExtremeContact DWS's for my c5 z06.
Stock tire and wheel sizes are:
front: 265-40x17 on 17x9.5 wheels
rear: 295-35x18 on 18x10.5 wheels
The front tires in DWS size are 275-40x17. (Continental doesn't offer a 265 in the DWS line.) The difference in tire height is .4", not .7" as OEM specifies. I read up on the "up-sizing" to DWS's on stock wheels, and lots of guys claim they are running the 275's up front on stock c5Z wheels without causing any AH/TC problems.
I wanna replace the OEM wheels with a set of Billet Specialties SLG45's, but the wheel sizes aren't exactly the same as OEM.
Instead of mounting:
front: 265-40x17 on 17x9.5 wheels
rear: 295-35x18 on 18x10.5 wheels
I'd be mounting:
front: 275-40x17 on 17x10 wheels
rear: 295-35x18 on 18x10 wheels
Would that screw up the AH/TC sensors? I would think the coincidence of running 10"-wide wheels all around would actually help... theoretically, the fronts would run just a little shorter, and the rears just a little taller, than stock. Do ya'll agree that there shouldn't be any trouble with AH/TC?
Thanks very much for your replies!
Stock tire and wheel sizes are:
front: 265-40x17 on 17x9.5 wheels
rear: 295-35x18 on 18x10.5 wheels
The front tires in DWS size are 275-40x17. (Continental doesn't offer a 265 in the DWS line.) The difference in tire height is .4", not .7" as OEM specifies. I read up on the "up-sizing" to DWS's on stock wheels, and lots of guys claim they are running the 275's up front on stock c5Z wheels without causing any AH/TC problems.
I wanna replace the OEM wheels with a set of Billet Specialties SLG45's, but the wheel sizes aren't exactly the same as OEM.
Instead of mounting:
front: 265-40x17 on 17x9.5 wheels
rear: 295-35x18 on 18x10.5 wheels
I'd be mounting:
front: 275-40x17 on 17x10 wheels
rear: 295-35x18 on 18x10 wheels
Would that screw up the AH/TC sensors? I would think the coincidence of running 10"-wide wheels all around would actually help... theoretically, the fronts would run just a little shorter, and the rears just a little taller, than stock. Do ya'll agree that there shouldn't be any trouble with AH/TC?
Thanks very much for your replies!
08-08-2013, 09:31 AM
#2
Safety Car
It'll be fine, the widths won't affect the OD of the tires. Going to wider wheels up front and narrower ones out back will make a visual difference of how the tires fit on the wheel, but shouldn't be overly noticeable.
08-12-2013, 12:55 PM
#3
Drifting
Thread Starter
Thank you, B02!
08-12-2013, 09:01 PM
#4
Actually, increasing the front tire's section width does affect its OD. The stock front OD should be 25.35". The new OD will be 25.66". Every manufacturer varies a bit, but the numbers for that tire on tire rack jive.
Still, I've heard 2 things about TC/AH issues, and I don't know which is right. The first I've heard is that the rears should be 1/2" larger OD than the fronts to prevent those issues. The other thing I've heard is that the rear just needs to be larger or equal to the front. The stock rear OD is 26.13. So as you can see, your OD difference has been reduced to .47" from .78". So, according to the rules of thumb, one says your safe, the other says your just under the ragged edge.
I don't think either is a very good rule of thumb, because it really comes down to the difference in the rotational speed of the wheels at a given vehicle speed. The rotational speed ratio between the fronts and the rears has changed by about 1.2%
While researching a bit for this reply, I found this thread with more detailed information: http://www.z06vette.com/forums/f5/tr...orners-116350/
Now, that thread is the best explanation I've heard and seems to indicate that the TCS will start to kick in somewhere perhaps slightly above 5% slip. So, bottom line is that you should be ok with your setup, but you probably wouldn't want to run brand new fronts in that size with bald or nearly bald rears. Then you might start to notice TCS issues. Hope this helps.
Still, I've heard 2 things about TC/AH issues, and I don't know which is right. The first I've heard is that the rears should be 1/2" larger OD than the fronts to prevent those issues. The other thing I've heard is that the rear just needs to be larger or equal to the front. The stock rear OD is 26.13. So as you can see, your OD difference has been reduced to .47" from .78". So, according to the rules of thumb, one says your safe, the other says your just under the ragged edge.
I don't think either is a very good rule of thumb, because it really comes down to the difference in the rotational speed of the wheels at a given vehicle speed. The rotational speed ratio between the fronts and the rears has changed by about 1.2%
While researching a bit for this reply, I found this thread with more detailed information: http://www.z06vette.com/forums/f5/tr...orners-116350/
Now, that thread is the best explanation I've heard and seems to indicate that the TCS will start to kick in somewhere perhaps slightly above 5% slip. So, bottom line is that you should be ok with your setup, but you probably wouldn't want to run brand new fronts in that size with bald or nearly bald rears. Then you might start to notice TCS issues. Hope this helps.
08-12-2013, 09:45 PM
#5
Race Director
Actually, increasing the front tire's section width does affect its OD. The stock front OD should be 25.35". The new OD will be 25.66". Every manufacturer varies a bit, but the numbers for that tire on tire rack jive.
Still, I've heard 2 things about TC/AH issues, and I don't know which is right. The first I've heard is that the rears should be 1/2" larger OD than the fronts to prevent those issues. The other thing I've heard is that the rear just needs to be larger or equal to the front. The stock rear OD is 26.13. So as you can see, your OD difference has been reduced to .47" from .78". So, according to the rules of thumb, one says your safe, the other says your just under the ragged edge.
I don't think either is a very good rule of thumb, because it really comes down to the difference in the rotational speed of the wheels at a given vehicle speed. The rotational speed ratio between the fronts and the rears has changed by about 1.2%
While researching a bit for this reply, I found this thread with more detailed information: http://www.z06vette.com/forums/f5/tr...orners-116350/
Now, that thread is the best explanation I've heard and seems to indicate that the TCS will start to kick in somewhere perhaps slightly above 5% slip. So, bottom line is that you should be ok with your setup, but you probably wouldn't want to run brand new fronts in that size with bald or nearly bald rears. Then you might start to notice TCS issues. Hope this helps.
Still, I've heard 2 things about TC/AH issues, and I don't know which is right. The first I've heard is that the rears should be 1/2" larger OD than the fronts to prevent those issues. The other thing I've heard is that the rear just needs to be larger or equal to the front. The stock rear OD is 26.13. So as you can see, your OD difference has been reduced to .47" from .78". So, according to the rules of thumb, one says your safe, the other says your just under the ragged edge.
I don't think either is a very good rule of thumb, because it really comes down to the difference in the rotational speed of the wheels at a given vehicle speed. The rotational speed ratio between the fronts and the rears has changed by about 1.2%
While researching a bit for this reply, I found this thread with more detailed information: http://www.z06vette.com/forums/f5/tr...orners-116350/
Now, that thread is the best explanation I've heard and seems to indicate that the TCS will start to kick in somewhere perhaps slightly above 5% slip. So, bottom line is that you should be ok with your setup, but you probably wouldn't want to run brand new fronts in that size with bald or nearly bald rears. Then you might start to notice TCS issues. Hope this helps.
always check the OD height. the nitto nt05 for example is a tall 295 and short 275 and guys use it frequently on the z06
conti is a standard 275 and standard 295. if you wear the rears down faster than the front you will be inside .4" which is where reported issues start coming in
by the way, why are you using a dws on a z06? that's a rock hard commuter all season tire
unless you plan on snow and ice the conti DW is going to perform better in the dry and wet above 40deg
08-13-2013, 11:06 AM
#6
Drifting
Thread Starter
Thanks, Gents, for your replies.
Chris, I appreciate the other link. I agree with you, I think the 275 up front would put me much closer the 'ragged edge' of the TC's tolerances than a 265 would. I'll have to face the problem of rear tires balding sooner when I get to it. (Of course, the goal in this car is to drive it hard enough to have to replace the rears twice as often as the fronts.
)
I'm thinking the move to a 10"-wide wheel on all four corners will actually increase the differences between front and rear in my favor, since each axle will net a 1/2" wheel-width change in the "wrong direction" from OEM specifications--1/2" wider from 9.5" in the front, and 1/2" narrower from 10.5" in the back. I think the 10" front wheel would spread the sidewalls and lower the front OD's just a hair, while the 10" rear wheels would make the tires 'skinny up' to a taller stance. It does have me a little nervous to plunk down ~$2200 for the wheels without absolute numbers, but I think I might try it.
Racebum, I've looked at dry numbers from a couple vendor sources for the OD's on both tires, and the difference is supposedly "about .4" ", as Chris' figures match up, though his number comes up as a high .4". There are a couple threads on different forums where guys claim they're running 275's up front (and 2 individuals claim they're running the DWS's) and supposedly there are no TC/AH problems. If it's on the internet it must be true... so I'll take the chance.
The reason for the DWS's instead of the DW's is the weather here really fluctuates seasonally. For about 4-6 months of the spring and summer we get a LOT of rain. It's not uncommon to see 1" an hour; the worst I've seen is 13" in a day, though the average seasonal high is probably closer to 8" in a day. In the winter, and it's not uncommon to see mid-teen temperatures, and the concrete bridges black ice-over 'way before that. I really would have preferred the Toyo Proxes T1R, which are on the car now, but I couldn't find a source anywhere. They've been exceptional tires, damn the weather. I've got the DWS's on the other car and they handle very well (for what they're supposed to do) no matter the road conditions. I guess, essentially, the reason for DWS's (w/o T1R's as a choice) is, I like the way they deal with cold weather challenges.
Chris, I appreciate the other link. I agree with you, I think the 275 up front would put me much closer the 'ragged edge' of the TC's tolerances than a 265 would. I'll have to face the problem of rear tires balding sooner when I get to it. (Of course, the goal in this car is to drive it hard enough to have to replace the rears twice as often as the fronts.
) I'm thinking the move to a 10"-wide wheel on all four corners will actually increase the differences between front and rear in my favor, since each axle will net a 1/2" wheel-width change in the "wrong direction" from OEM specifications--1/2" wider from 9.5" in the front, and 1/2" narrower from 10.5" in the back. I think the 10" front wheel would spread the sidewalls and lower the front OD's just a hair, while the 10" rear wheels would make the tires 'skinny up' to a taller stance. It does have me a little nervous to plunk down ~$2200 for the wheels without absolute numbers, but I think I might try it.
Racebum, I've looked at dry numbers from a couple vendor sources for the OD's on both tires, and the difference is supposedly "about .4" ", as Chris' figures match up, though his number comes up as a high .4". There are a couple threads on different forums where guys claim they're running 275's up front (and 2 individuals claim they're running the DWS's) and supposedly there are no TC/AH problems. If it's on the internet it must be true... so I'll take the chance.
The reason for the DWS's instead of the DW's is the weather here really fluctuates seasonally. For about 4-6 months of the spring and summer we get a LOT of rain. It's not uncommon to see 1" an hour; the worst I've seen is 13" in a day, though the average seasonal high is probably closer to 8" in a day. In the winter, and it's not uncommon to see mid-teen temperatures, and the concrete bridges black ice-over 'way before that. I really would have preferred the Toyo Proxes T1R, which are on the car now, but I couldn't find a source anywhere. They've been exceptional tires, damn the weather. I've got the DWS's on the other car and they handle very well (for what they're supposed to do) no matter the road conditions. I guess, essentially, the reason for DWS's (w/o T1R's as a choice) is, I like the way they deal with cold weather challenges.
08-13-2013, 11:13 AM
#7
Race Director
Member Since: Jul 2007
Location: Reno is so close to Hell you can see Sparks , State Of Confusion
Posts: 18,681
Likes: 0
Received 38 Likes
on
23 Posts
St. Jude Donor '12-'13-'14
Good luck with your tires, But I think this question should of been asked before you bought your tires.
08-13-2013, 02:03 PM
#8
Drifting
Thread Starter
Actually, I didn't have much concern about the change in front tire width. It was after I bought the tires (with the intention of mounting them on the OEM wheels) that I saw the Billet Specialties 17- and 18x10s that made me wonder if the fit would work. I'm on the fence on the new wheels even at that.