What do ya think about 225/60/16's on the front...

[atc3434]

Stock is 225/50/16, right? I've got a chance at a good pair of snows for dirt cheap. I'm not worried about it pissing off the computer because of the wheel speed sensors seeing a different speed at the front vs rear tires (only putting snows up front) because I've got a bad wheelspeed sensor and a shot abs controller anyways, so I roll oldschool, no abs or trac control anyways. I just wanna make sure they arn't going rub, or cause some othre unforseen problem. I'll probably just buy them and get them put on, but it never hurts to put it to the old GAGT.com test as well.

[AaronGTR]

Bad idea I think. They'd probably fit fine, but they would also throw off your speedometer and odometer a lot, especially the odometer if you drove on them for any length of time. You'd go from 811 revolutions per mile to 757 rev/mile. Thats a lot. Your speedometer would read 7.1% slow so when it's says 60mph you're actually going 64.3mph.

If it were me I'd think about fixing the abs before spending any money on tires. That's just me I guess... I prefer to have everything in perfect, safe working order on my daily drivers.

[bballr4567]

Also its highly highly discouraged against to just get two snows and two all season tires. The reason is because the snows will get the traction and then the back end will break out because the snows are grabbing so hard.

[atc3434]

I'm gonna have to go ahead and disagree here. First, I do agree having the speedometer off is less than ideal. However, I don't feel that abs makes a safer daily driver, I'm quite content without it. I do need to figure out how to disable the power steering pump from running full pressure at higher speeds, I do hate the touchy steering.

Second, 2 snows and 2 all seasons has always served me very well in the snow. I don't mind a loose back end on the car, fwd makes its super easy to combat that anyways, especially with good rubber on the front. Not a problem at all in my opinion.

Now, I did go look at the car, and strut to tire clearance isn't going to allow me to run the bigger tires, so I'll just rock the all seasons for the rest of the winter. At this rate, we're not getting much winter anyways.

[Bryan]

Originally Posted by AaronGTR

If it were me I'd think about fixing the abs before spending any money on tires. That's just me I guess... I prefer to have everything in perfect, safe working order on my daily drivers.

Just knowing somethings not right, even if it doesnt effect how the car drives, bugs the hell outta me.

[atc3434]

Originally Posted by bryanwhitegt

Just knowing somethings not right, even if it doesnt effect how the car drives, bugs the hell outta me.

Yea, that part sucks. I hate the lights, I've gotta find a way to pull the bulb for abs and trac off, driving with those lights is terrible, especially at night.

[AaronGTR]

If you think having the abs working doesn't make the car stop shorter or more controllabe and doesn't make it a safer daily driver, then you're beyond help. Mainly because you'd be disagreeing with pretty much every major auto manufacturer and engineer, as well as every automotive magazine editor and every instrumented test they've ever done on abs. Do you really think you know better than all of them combined? If that kind of imperical evidence doesn't convince you I don't know what will. And just because you've done ok without it so far means nothing... it's probably because you haven't got into a situation that required it. If you ever do get into that situation and you don't have it you'll be in trouble and your car will be F'd. In other words it's a ticking time bomb!

[bballr4567]

You cant take the bulbs out.

Anyways I completely agree with Aaron. If you have never had to activate the ABS then you have never been in a bad spot.

Its not cars but its even more dramatic

[atc3434]

I've used the ABS in the car plenty of times while it was working, and I don't miss it one bit. I put about 35,000 miles a year on a car, I've been into plenty of situations where I've had to make emergency manuveurs, there hasn't been a single situation that abs has been the saving grace. ABS shortens stopping distances only in situations where the driver is otherwise incapable of modulating the brake pedal appropriatly. You know, its funny, the highest performance racing machines don't use abs, they use the computer between their ears. There is a reason for that. I'm not sure how much track/autox/twisty performance type events you've been involved in, but I do quite a bit, including some yearly racing schools. I've yet to see a car brake better with ABS. Anybody trying to extract maximum braking power usually ends up disabling the system, because it actual tends to hinder maximum braking performance under threshold braking.

Now, you're point is valide in the case of the average daily driver type that doesn't know what to do with a car thats locking a tire, or getting out of shape under heavy braking and steering manuveours, the average drive doesn't even realize these things are happening quick enough to matter. For that type, ABS is certainly an advantage. My mom needs abs, my sister needs abs. The 1000's of people I share the highway with every day on the way to work need abs. Its not because ABS can make your car have some superpower that makes it stop better, it simple corrects for operator error. The GA I drive had ABS for years, and I'd had the system activate plenty of times. Having it not working does not present a problem to me at all, and is actually more desirable to me.

The video provided is a rediculous example, one motorcycle (the abs equipped one) makes a well controlled, abs assisted stop, the other bike without abs simply applies full braking pressure instantly, and just allows the bike to go out of control and spin on the training wheels, hardly a fair comparison, once you let the machine out of control like that you ruin its ability to slow down effectively. ABS is simply a crutch for the daily driver, just like automatic transmissions and traction control. The automatic I can let go for creature comforts, but traction control, if you can move your right foot, you don't need that. But I guess if the computer between the ears doesn't work so well, or maybe just isn't programed right, having those things can be helpful. I don't need them.

[AaronGTR]

Believe whatever you want man. Testing has shown that it's impossible for a human being to modulate brake pressure at the limit as well as a properly designed computer controlled ABS system. That is a simple fact that you choose to ignore. Maybe you can control braking limit ok under dry conditions with lots of traction, but abs is designed for when you don't have lots of traction.

And using race cars is a poor example. Many of them don't use ABS because the rules of their governing body don't allow it. Also they are trying to keep weight and complexity down and make the brake system as quickly and easily servicable as possible. On top of that most race cars are on race tires, highly modified suspensions, and use aero devices. They have MUCH higher traction limits than street cars. You can't even compare the needs of the two and doing so is stupid.

[bballr4567]

You have yet to see a car make a better stop with ABS??? That is just a retarded, idiotic statement. Why do you think that its a STANDARD feature on all cars now along with stability control being an option on almost all new cars?? The reason because it has been proven 100% that both these systems are better then the driver trying to control the car. Here is a video of cars http://www.devilducky.com/media/55038/

Your whole second paragraph just says what most insurance companies believe, that a 18-25 y/o male wants to believe he is the best driver in the world and doesnt need any assitance. I mean your statements continue to go against all engineerers in the automotive world.

Now go look up what kind of traction control systems that F1 cars have. Youll be surprised right there. F1 info Ohh it says that traction control has been around since the 1980s!!!! They dont have ABS because it was outlawed in the early 90's but then again we dont have carbon fiber composite discs in ours.

Also that video is certainly applicable here. Both bikes hit the brakes as hard as they could and that is what happens. That is what ABS does. It controls the amount of pressure that the breaks can apply according to the traction that is available.

[atc3434]

Guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I have seen first hand, a car equipped with abs make a full emergency dry stop, with and without abs, and you can in fact stop quicker without abs with proper brake pedal modulation. Under wet condition, its pretty hard to match that, I'll agree with that. The bike example is still a terrible example, the rider without abs didn't make an attempt to make a hard stop and modulate his brakes, he just pulled them full on and let it go out of control.

As I said, abs is useful. I don't feel it is a requirement for safe driving. Its not going to replace the need to analyize the road conditions and make the proper decisions.

To each his own.

[bballr4567]

Yea lets just do that.

However I think that you cant just take out the lights as they are actually in the dash themselves. Not too sure about that.

[Rich]

you can remove the lights but you cant just pop them out. you have to desolder the LEDs from the board.

[atc3434]

Originally Posted by Rich

you can remove the lights but you cant just pop them out. you have to desolder the LEDs from the board.

Thanks Rich, I'll have to look into that. Again, I might be too lazy to deal with it at all, I'll have to get the dash apart. Its really my fiances car, so she's gotta deal with the lights on a daily basis.

[Rich]

no problem. heres my source if your interested:

Full LED gauge cluster

[ryanbgb22]

bigger tires = less miles going on to the car - correct? , bigger tires ftw-jk

[Skullrot]

I have to agree with atc and everyone else.

First, I have never had my abs system come on and yes, I have been in a spot were it would/should come on. So, I can see his point. I "think" it has been proven that a person with the right know-how can stop a car faster with out abs. I will try to find the article to back this up.

Now, I can also see everyone else's veiw on this. The road is filled with the sub-par driver that doesn't give a damn about being a good driver. ABS, IMOP, was made for those poeple. With those types behind a wheel they can stop faster with ABS.

If you cant tell, I don't like ABS or track ctrl. I have never need either of them and when it comes to track ctrl...... Well it has nearly wrecked me a few times. I brought a wheel off the ground in a trun (be it going to fast or a bump) and the damn system lets the breaks go tryin to get the wheel in the air to start turning.... that will make the heart skip a beat or two....

[atc3434]

Originally Posted by bballr4567

Here is a video of cars http://www.devilducky.com/media/55038/ that is available.

I know we put this to rest, but I would like to debate this video a little. First, the ABS test. The test without abs, the driver locks the tires and just keeps them locked. I don't think this is a fair representation of non-abs braking. A brake pedal is not an on/off switch (although some people drive like that) put its a proportional control. That car could have been brought to a quicker and controlled stop w/o the abs with proper brake pedal use.

Second, the traction control video. Wow. Stopped, at the edge of the ice, or approaching at 5mph, and he can't make the grade w/o traction control. Shocking. Then, the traction control assisted shot, he comes at it with about 10-15 mph of speed, and gets up the ice. Funny, we never saw a shot of the traction controlled car trying the same manuvoers that the non-traction controlled version was trying. Thats because there wasn't a chance that traction control could have helped that car get up that ice from a stop, or the slow roll that they had tried. Thats a pathetically biased an unreasonable test. Do the exact test, on both cars, and see what happens.

The stability control test was more impressive, it defintely kept the car stable. Now, do I think that emergency lane change manuvoer (I know, I can't spell that stupid word) could be done without a loss of control, without the stability control system, but defintely not with average driving. This was the most fair test of the three, I don't consider the other two tests viable.

I guess the systems have their uses in the common driver, and defintely increase safety. I don't feel that they increase my personal safety when operating my own vehicle, and as skullrot mentioned, there are situations that the systems actually all less helpful than when disabled. I can't tell you how many times when my traction control worked that I needed to disable it and rock the car to get it out of a hole it dug in my friends driveway. (country gentlemen don't believe in pavement or plows) We had a snow/ice storm up here last night, and this conversation sparked some adt'l testing of my non-abs stopping capabilities, and compared with the stopping the car was pervious capable of, I don't feel the stopping has been hindered, and defintely hasn't affect stability. Again, to each his own.

[bballr4567]

I do agree that the tests were a little out there but they showed the advantages of the systems. With the ABS I think they wanted to show the night and day difference with them. Hell they dont even teach the pump your brakes if you feel a lock up anymore in drivers ed. I will agree that the average drivers skill has gone down hill in the 10 or so yrs that Ive been driving.

The stability control was awesome to me. That test showed probably exactly what a driver would of done on the road and so on. I personally just like to watch that test.

Anyways like you said to each his own but if the lights are on during an inspection dont expect it to pass, I know from expeirence.