Why are low profile tyres more expensive?

missile

Hintza wrote: »

I was just pointing out that if you are daft enough to buy silly wheel/tyre sizes it's only sensible for the tyre company to maximise their profits and relieve you of as much hard earned as possible.

In a few years folk will realise that for most cars low profile tyres really offer a dreadful ride.

Lets not call each other names. :A

SUVs have many pros but one of the cons is they are prone to excessive roll in corners. In this respect I find 19in 55 aspect roll less better than 17in 65 aspect. I find it does not affect the ride quality.

missile

photome wrote: »

You havent compared like for like, how can more materials be required for the 65 profile 17 inch when the 55 profile is a 19inch tyre. (lots more steel required)

I think you will find the rolling radius of a 17in 65 aspect is very near to a 19in 55 aspect. The width is the same. The only difference being the hieght of the side wall. Thus there is more material used to make the 65 aspect tyre.

Material costs can be higher for low profiles as exotic materials such as kevlar may be used for the higher speed rating.

Both tyres have the same speed rating and afik the construction is similar.

missile

Gloomendoom wrote: »

I don't think it matters. I have a sneaking suspicion that the real purpose of this thread was to rub it in to the rest of us that the OP drives an expensive Audi with big wheels.

Of course, I may be wrong.

It was not my intention to "rub it in". When I was a yoof I made do with bangers and second hand remoulds. Having worked hard, I am fortunate to be able to afford a better car. I do not consider that makes me a better person.

It was my intention to raise an item for discussion. I am sorry this thread has turned into an arguement.

Jakg

Supply and demand - some sizes are more common than others.

My car uses 225/45/18, which isn't used that much (MG ZT, e46's & RX8's are the only ones I can think of...)... 225/40/18's are a lot more popular, and so are a lot cheaper (think £70 vs £100 per corner).

photome

missile wrote: »

I think you will find the rolling radius of a 17in 65 aspect is very near to a 19in 55 aspect. The width is the same. The only difference being the hieght of the side wall. Thus there is more material used to make the 65 aspect tyre.

Both tyres have the same speed rating and afik the construction is similar.

the diameter of the 17inch trye is 171.5 and the diameter of the 19inch is 176.7 so more materials in the 19inch, less in production and a different rolling radius (as long as my maths is right)

missile

photome wrote: »

the diameter of the 17inch trye is 171.5 and the diameter of the 19inch is 176.7 so more materials in the 19inch, less in production and a different rolling radius (as long as my maths is right)

Your maths are wrong.

As I said

the rolling radius of a 17in 65 aspect is very near to a 19in 55 aspect

The diameters are 737.3 and 741.1mm respectively i.e. the 19in is 0.52% larger.

What does your maths say about the material required for the increase in hieght of the side wall?

bungle4by4

low profile tyres on a 4x4, as pointless as a sausage at a gun fight.

photome

missile wrote: »

Your maths are wrong.

As I said The diameters are 737.3 and 741.1mm respectively i.e. the 19in is 0.52% larger.

What does your maths say about the material required for the increase in hieght of the side wall?

apologies I only added 1 sidewall and then added that to the wheel diameter in cm and not mm..totally wrong, your figures are right although I was doing it in my head and not using a conversion chart..I didnt know there was such a thing.

I am going to bow out now as you are going to disagree with everyone who tries to give you an explanation as to pssible reasons for the price difference.

I did say in my original post that it may just be down to the manufacturer and retailer wanting to make a healthy profit...after all they are in business to do just that

missile

I did say in my original post that it may just be down to the manufacturer and retailer wanting to make a healthy profit...

I think this is correct and as far as I can see no one has offered another explanation.