1.2 with 16's shocker!

~~****~~ · 11-01-2007, 23:39

I've been running my 1.2 on 16's for a few days and I have found the difference rather shocking. This morning I did a mixture of motorway and town driving (75/25% split), 29MPG average honest to god. I've averaged sub 35MPG and I normally see early 40's on 14" alloys.

The car has creaked and groaned more, is less responsive (I expected as much) so tonight I've stuck my 14" steels back on (tyres on the 14" alloys were getting a bit low). Checked the tyre pressures and went for a blast, the difference was very noticeable.

I'll have to have a long hard think about what I can do wheel wise now!

PoloGaz · 12-01-2007, 00:15

im guessing the 16s are alot heavier? what profile tyres did you use?

Lady Elanore · 12-01-2007, 02:42

If you have increased the width of the tyre you will have to reduce the profile quite dramatically to maintain the same rolling radius as the 14’s. I think you might have overgeared the car a bit.

Fabia 12v · 12-01-2007, 08:20

Ran/Running 16" vRS alloys on my 1.2 12v no probem. Assume ur using 45 profile tyes?

~~****~~ · 12-01-2007, 09:56

205/45/16 Tyres.

irfant · 12-01-2007, 11:37

IMO the result is normal with 205/45/16 Tyres for 1.2!

ScoobyChris · 12-01-2007, 12:07

Yeah, I'd agree, you're increasing the weight and also the rolling resistance which will have an impact on economy and performance, but will allow you to carry more speed through corners.

I think the overall rolling radius is still the same (or as near to the same) as with the originals so the gearing should be the same

Chris

TeflonTom · 12-01-2007, 13:01

fitting bigger (and wider) wheels often does have an adverse affect on the handling of any car, it's quite often the biggest mistake that modifiers make when they are 'hotting up' thier motor...

i allways tend to choose the smallest wheels possible, so long as the brakes fit inside them of course

~~****~~ · 12-01-2007, 13:06

So it looks like refurbing the 14's and getting some new rubber for them.

Oh well!

EddyH · 12-01-2007, 13:10

What brand are the 16" wheels? If they're cheap they'll be heavy. Go for a quality brand such as OZ, BBS etc.. and the weight will be much more comparable to the wheels you've removed.

~~****~~ · 12-01-2007, 15:48

Team Dynamics Monza's apparently built using the materials as the Pro Race series of alloys.

They weigh a lot more than the 14" alloys/steels.

Bigw2069 · 12-01-2007, 15:53

Are the tyres newer on the 16's than on the 14" wheels, i notice a dramatic reduction in MPG when putting new boots on due to the increased grip too.

Chrispy · 12-01-2007, 19:04

I noticed this when fitting 17's to my 320i. It killed the performance (not that there was much to start with) and my mpg was even worse than before.
It's unsprung weight that does it. Heavier wheels carry more inertia and are thus harder to turn.
They also tramlined more and caused a harsher ride.

Hard to believe people fitted 19's to those things. You might as well be driving a 2CV in the end it'll be that slow. I wont ever do that again. Big mistake.

~~****~~ · 12-01-2007, 20:34

The 16's had brand new Goodyear F1's and the 14's were close to needing changing.

I just did a 35 mile run on the M4 @ 65MPH and got 49MPG. Yesterday I was doing a tad more than that but not much more!

PEMBO · 13-01-2007, 00:46

And to think you offered to sell them to me

Still, might be up for them - where about do you live?

11-01-2007, 23:39	#1
~~****~~ Briskodian Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: --\|\|\|\|-- Posts: 80 Members Car: Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	1.2 with 16's shocker! I've been running my 1.2 on 16's for a few days and I have found the difference rather shocking. This morning I did a mixture of motorway and town driving (75/25% split), 29MPG average honest to god. I've averaged sub 35MPG and I normally see early 40's on 14" alloys. The car has creaked and groaned more, is less responsive (I expected as much) so tonight I've stuck my 14" steels back on (tyres on the 14" alloys were getting a bit low). Checked the tyre pressures and went for a blast, the difference was very noticeable. I'll have to have a long hard think about what I can do wheel wise now!

12-01-2007, 00:15	#2
PoloGaz Briskodian Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 162 Members Car: SEAT Cordoba SE TDI PD130 Thanks: 9 Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post	Re: 1.2 with 16's shocker! im guessing the 16s are alot heavier? what profile tyres did you use? __________________

12-01-2007, 02:42	#3
Lady Elanore Briskodian Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 11,148 Members Car: . Thanks: 221 Thanked 231 Times in 140 Posts	Re: 1.2 with 16's shocker! If you have increased the width of the tyre you will have to reduce the profile quite dramatically to maintain the same rolling radius as the 14’s. I think you might have overgeared the car a bit.

12-01-2007, 08:20	#4
Fabia 12v RICHARD Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Twickenham - Middlesex Posts: 5,027 Members Car: Skoda Fabia >> VW Golf >> Seat Ibiza >> VW Polo Thanks: 11 Thanked 26 Times in 23 Posts	Re: 1.2 with 16's shocker! Ran/Running 16" vRS alloys on my 1.2 12v no probem. Assume ur using 45 profile tyes? __________________ First Car: Skoda Fabia MK1 1.2 12v Comfort Replaced with: Volkswagen Golf MK4 GT 1.9TDI Replaced with: Seat Ibiza MK4 Sport 1.9TDI Replaced with: Volkswagen Polo MK6 Ltd. Edition Sport 1.4 16v

12-01-2007, 09:56	#5
~~****~~ Briskodian Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: --\|\|\|\|-- Posts: 80 Members Car: Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Re: 1.2 with 16's shocker! 205/45/16 Tyres.

12-01-2007, 11:37	#6
irfant Briskodian Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Istanbul ,TR Posts: 471 Members Car: 2007 Roomi 1.4 85 BHP Thanks: 116 Thanked 65 Times in 49 Posts	Re: 1.2 with 16's shocker! IMO the result is normal with 205/45/16 Tyres for 1.2! __________________ *2007 Roomster 1.4 16V - after 3 years with 2004 Fabia 1.2 12V* *http://www.skodaclubturkey.com*

12-01-2007, 12:07	#7
ScoobyChris Briskodian Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Andover Posts: 18,267 Members Car: Fiat Panda Thanks: 16 Thanked 353 Times in 304 Posts	Re: 1.2 with 16's shocker! Yeah, I'd agree, you're increasing the weight and also the rolling resistance which will have an impact on economy and performance, but will allow you to carry more speed through corners. I think the overall rolling radius is still the same (or as near to the same) as with the originals so the gearing should be the same Chris __________________ Holding up the traffic in a little Italian..........

12-01-2007, 13:01	#8
TeflonTom Briskodiodion Join Date: May 2006 Location: Hayling Island, Hampshire Posts: 8,387 Members Car: Fabia 2.0/Felicia Thanks: 53 Thanked 250 Times in 221 Posts	Re: 1.2 with 16's shocker! fitting bigger (and wider) wheels often does have an adverse affect on the handling of any car, it's quite often the biggest mistake that modifiers make when they are 'hotting up' thier motor... i allways tend to choose the smallest wheels possible, so long as the brakes fit inside them of course

12-01-2007, 13:06	#9
~~****~~ Briskodian Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: --\|\|\|\|-- Posts: 80 Members Car: Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Re: 1.2 with 16's shocker! So it looks like refurbing the 14's and getting some new rubber for them. Oh well!

12-01-2007, 13:10	#10
EddyH Briskodian Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: West Yorkshire Posts: 4,839 Members Car: Audi A6 Thanks: 36 Thanked 26 Times in 26 Posts	Re: 1.2 with 16's shocker! What brand are the 16" wheels? If they're cheap they'll be heavy. Go for a quality brand such as OZ, BBS etc.. and the weight will be much more comparable to the wheels you've removed. __________________ EddyH Audi A6 Avant 2.7 TDI Audi A3 2.0 TDI Sport

12-01-2007, 15:48	#11
~~****~~ Briskodian Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: --\|\|\|\|-- Posts: 80 Members Car: Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Re: 1.2 with 16's shocker! Team Dynamics Monza's apparently built using the materials as the Pro Race series of alloys. They weigh a lot more than the 14" alloys/steels.

12-01-2007, 15:53	#12
Bigw2069 Moderator Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Rosyth,Scotland Posts: 5,821 Members Car: Noddy Car Images: 2 Thanks: 214 Thanked 253 Times in 212 Posts	Re: 1.2 with 16's shocker! Are the tyres newer on the 16's than on the 14" wheels, i notice a dramatic reduction in MPG when putting new boots on due to the increased grip too. __________________

12-01-2007, 19:04	#13
Chrispy Briskodian Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Normanton, West Yorks Posts: 1,766 Members Car: 2004 Fabia vRS Thanks: 38 Thanked 68 Times in 57 Posts	Re: 1.2 with 16's shocker! I noticed this when fitting 17's to my 320i. It killed the performance (not that there was much to start with) and my mpg was even worse than before. It's unsprung weight that does it. Heavier wheels carry more inertia and are thus harder to turn. They also tramlined more and caused a harsher ride. Hard to believe people fitted 19's to those things. You might as well be driving a 2CV in the end it'll be that slow. I wont ever do that again. Big mistake. __________________ Silver '04 Fabia vRS. Jabba Custom Remap, Seat Surgeons Leather interior, Whiteline RARB, Cupra Console Bushes

12-01-2007, 20:34	#14
~~****~~ Briskodian Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: --\|\|\|\|-- Posts: 80 Members Car: Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Re: 1.2 with 16's shocker! The 16's had brand new Goodyear F1's and the 14's were close to needing changing. I just did a 35 mile run on the M4 @ 65MPH and got 49MPG. Yesterday I was doing a tad more than that but not much more!

13-01-2007, 00:46	#15
PEMBO Briskodian Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Middlesbrough, home of legends :P (not the worst place in the UK at all...honest guv) Posts: 3,054 Members Car: 1.4 16V Fabia Comfort Thanks: 176 Thanked 100 Times in 30 Posts	Re: 1.2 with 16's shocker! And to think you offered to sell them to me Still, might be up for them - where about do you live? __________________ 1.4 16v Comfort 2001 - Average 40.21 MPG (REAL) over 14,909 miles YAR! Subliminal Advertising..Buy PEMBO a PINT!!!! YAR!

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode