Welcome to the all new Geo Metro Forum. We hope you enjoy your visit.You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are features you can't use and images you can't see. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: Join our community! |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| best fof mpg; 14's or 15's for better fuel economy | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jan 17 2012, 08:08 PM (2,914 Views) | |
| kel | Jan 17 2012, 08:08 PM Post #1 |
![]()
|
I have a 91 geo,with flat top 1.3 Suzuki pistons, 3cyl will be rebuild entirely, xfi cam, xfi ecu, xfi tranny,and adding 4wheel disc breaks from 89 Suzuki swift. With all that mentioned what alloy rims would be better 14's or 15's? |
![]() |
|
| sphenicie | Jan 17 2012, 08:48 PM Post #2 |
![]()
|
I highly dought you would notice any differance at all. the differance between the two diameters, with your tires included, is going to fairly insignificant relitive to the circumference. lets face it your fenderwell will only let you gain so much circumference. i would think that if you gain 1 inch of diameter on the rim, you will have to reduce your tire diameter to prevent hitting the fender. i switch between 12's and 13's and cant tell the difference, consistantly, over the course of a tank |
![]() |
|
| mjspiess | Jan 17 2012, 08:50 PM Post #3 |
![]()
|
Tallest skinniest tires you can fit in the wheel well are best for fuel econemy. If you want your speedo/odo to be correct, see this chart:
|
![]() |
|
| kel | Jan 17 2012, 09:38 PM Post #4 |
![]()
|
I C. I think I might do 14's. Not sure. Or I'll just stick with my 13's. |
![]() |
|
| nerys | Jan 17 2012, 10:40 PM Post #5 |
|
Grr
![]()
|
that depends. how wide? how tall? how heavy? city or highway? even pressure rating will have an impact. a higher rating means a stiffer tire (lousy ride but less rolling resistance) in theory the tallest tire will net the best fuel economy but ONLY under cruise. ie steady state driving. its like increasing your gear ratio. but this has issues. this means you need more energy to "get going" both in larger tires and higher rotational mass. ie your going to LOSE a lot of fuel economy on acceleration and its going to take longer to accelerate making it even worse. but if you spend the vast majority of your miles cruising along like I do. you will see rather nice net gains in fuel economy (don't forget to figure our a calibration figure for your odometer its no longer going to be accurate) now if your doing almost all accelerations IE city driving you want the opposite. you want to get to 5th as soon as possible even at the cost of rev preservation and you want it with the least rotational mass IE you want tiny 12" skinnies. (if your 94 or earlier they won't fit on 95+) so it just depends on your driving style and your typical route conditions. |
![]() |
|
| Coche Blanco | Jan 17 2012, 11:25 PM Post #6 |
|
Troll Certified
![]()
|
It's like asking what kind of lubricant is the best. It all depends on how you plan on using it... |
![]() |
|
| MattHamby | Feb 7 2012, 12:50 PM Post #7 |
|
Advanced Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I have found these: American Racing Estrella with mounting these: Michelin X-Radials From what I can tell, there is an increase in size of about an inch in diameter and even though the rims are 1.5" wider the result should be about an inch more of tire width. This is not set in stone, but this is the way I am leaning! |
![]() |
|
| Woodie | Feb 8 2012, 06:24 AM Post #8 |
![]()
|
That's a nice choice, larger in both directions but nothing outrageous that would cause any problems. With a speedo drive from a GEN3 car, your speedometer and odometer will be very close to right. Those tires are closer to plastic than rubber. With an 80K warranty and 740 UTQG they can't possibly offer much grip. I lean very much toward performance rather than economy, but I think any UTQG over 400 is too hard. Plus I despise the French, so I'd never buy a Michelin, but that's just me. |
![]() |
|
| MattHamby | Feb 10 2012, 03:04 PM Post #9 |
|
Advanced Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
oh, i love michelins, i used to use other tire and put some x radials on and the ride was soo much better it was like a new truck. I have been putting them on everything ever since! |
![]() |
|
| robertino | Feb 15 2012, 12:05 AM Post #10 |
![]()
|
I used to have those rims on my Prelude...they were very nice ! |
![]() |
|
| kel | Feb 15 2012, 01:02 AM Post #11 |
![]()
|
Nice post MattHamby. |
![]() |
|
| 99metro | Feb 16 2012, 12:19 PM Post #12 |
|
putt-putt
![]()
|
IMO. regardless of wheel size or tire size, and of course mph/odometer correction, my "opinion" is keeping the tire/wheel combo weight as light as possible. Aftermarket aluminum wheel versus factory steely...hmmm. Also if going to a taller overall diameter, you gears will be longer and you'll have a lower cruise rpm. Might be like putting an xfi tranny in a non-xfi metro. Could be a wash between 13" steely vs 15" aluminum as far as MPGs. Somebody do tell. |
![]() |
|
| 19metro95 | Mar 3 2012, 10:39 AM Post #13 |
|
Fresh Fish
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I have these wheels on my metro now.. I like em but AR went out of business so finding new centercaps is getting harder
|
![]() |
|
| MattHamby | Jun 27 2012, 11:11 AM Post #14 |
|
Advanced Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
when did AR go out of business? I just looked on line - their website is current, nothing in their news, forcasted items for later this year etc... |
![]() |
|
| nwgeo | Jun 27 2012, 03:28 PM Post #15 |
![]()
|
What was the original spec tire for speedo for 89 to 94 geos? |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Tires/Wheels/Bearings/Brakes · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2


Welcome to the all new Geo Metro Forum. We hope you enjoy your visit.






![]](http://z3.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)

9:50 AM Jul 11