Would this size be okay to use on a 2008 Fit Sport? Thanks.

 

No, I don't think so. Its 24.2" diameter while stock is 23.4"? Except for heavy back-seaters or dips you might get away with it but the drop in mpg and acceleration will cost you big time. Count on 3.5% change in speedo and odo; 62 true mph at indicated 60.

 

yep..
i use 195/55/15.
it's better to use 55 or even 195/50/15 on your GD

 

Thanks Mahout and itoo, it's a good thing that I asked before buying the tires. I have not bought anything because my tires are still in ok condition but I know that I will need to switch soon due to winter.

 

I bought new tires today in the 195/60 size. Yes, the speedo reads 2 mph fast at 60 mph, verified by GPS.

Changing to the taller tires will marginally affect acceleration, but I don't notice the difference. It doesn't seem to be a big enough change to affect gas mileage. The roof rack that I'm about to put on will have a much greater affect on fuel consumption than the tires.

So why did I buy 60 series? The OEM Dunflops are crap, (rated #22 out of 23 per TireRack), I needed new tires for winter, and the 60's were $90 cheaper than the 55's.

 

going from 55 to 60 series on a 195 should be fine. Yes, it will be taller overall by almost one inch (that's overall height, so only raises the car less than 1/2 inch), which might not be a bad thing if it's for snow tires.

Yes, they will affect the speedo. It will read slower than before with the 55 series at the same speed. However, Keep in mind that Honda was sued for speedos and therefore odometers reading too fast, including the Fit. So if anything, going to 60 series would get you closer to an accurate speedo reading; As noted by edzintar's post: Even with 60 series, the car is still reading faster than actual speed.

And if in fact you spend a lot of time at highway speeds during your commute, the 60 series would actually slightly lower your cruising RPM, thus improving your fuel mileage.

The opposite of everything above would be true for going to a 50 series. Lower ground clearance (not fender gap), higher speedo reading (raking up miles on your odometer faster), slightly quicker acceleration, but at the expense of lower top speed and higher cruising RPM.

 

Silly question, but didn't you ask this same question over in H-T a couple of days ago? LOL!

 

I believe they are too large and will decrease your acceleration 9which isn't all that great to begin with) and mpg (even after correcting the mileage). The oem 185/55x16 tires are 24" in diameter but of course weigh less than 195's of equal diameter.
195/60x15's are typically 24.2 inches in diameter and weigh more, both of which reduce your mpg and acceleration.
195/55x15's are the oem for 08 sports and are 23.4" in diameter which help acceleration and have little effect on mpg's.
175/65x15's are 213 96" diuameter.
That help?

 

I don't remember LOL but I know I asked for the wheels and tires of different in the other forum of this site.

 

Is the 60 series worth it?

 

what about 205/50/15???????????

 

It's worth it to me. The car won't handle quite as crisply with taller tires; not an issue. (The car will sit 1 cm higher than previous.) This car will be driven for commuting/camping/skiing/hauling, not autocross. The 3% taller ratio won't affect acceleration enough to matter. The tires should do fine in the snow they're going to see, at least for this winter. (If this car remains in Montana next year I'll probably get dedicated winter tires.) I don't believe fuel consumption is going to be significantly different. I saved a lot of money compared to the 195/55 size.

The car belongs to my daughter who's in college. She needed good tires at a reasonable price that will last longer than 30k miles. BTW, I bought Kumho KR21 tires, probably the best value out there.

 

If the tires fit in the wheel well you should be fine. You can also go 185/60/15 which is closer to the diameter of the stock 195/55/15. Performance and mpg change will be minimal at most. Let's face the fact, acceleration is pretty slow no matter what tires are on there anyways.

 

Thanks I am leaning on getting this size since they are cheaper than the 55 series. Or the 185/60/15 just like wil524 series suggested.

Thanks again.

 

Hmmm... anyone know if 195/50/15 is also a good size? I wonder if 50 series is better than 60 series especially when it comes to fuel economy? Thanks.

I was about to buy the 60 series but then I saw the 50 series and got me confused lol!

 

195/50x15 is an excellent size. Its diameter is 22.22.67" and the diameterof the 195/60x15 is 24.2". The major part of a tires weight is the tread section so the farther from the wheel center the more effort the engine must expend to turn the wheel. When you have only 107 Lb-ft to turn all four wheels the heavier and farther out the tread the more acceleraton and mpg are reduced.
If you have an 08 the standard tire 195/55x15 sport has a diameter of 23.4" so the 195/50x15 will yield better accelerqation and a little better mpg than 'standard' and the 195/60x15 will reduce mpg and acceleration.
If you have an 09 the 195/60x15 will be about the same but because its a little bigger diameter and weight than the standard 185/55x15 tire it will cost you a little.
The speedometer error is not significant in any case; the 195/50x15 compared to 185/55x15 (the biggest change from 'standard') is only 5.5% or 3 mph at 60 mph. Or 55 miles per 1000 on the odometer. Significant only if you have awarranty problem at 52.750 miles indicated on the smaller tires.

 

I'm under the impression that a smaller diameter tire will worsen gas mileage due to more revolutions more per mile & shorter final drive, though it will help acceleration due to shorter final drive. You can't have it both ways can you?

 

I respectfully disagree.

If a 195/50 tire is will accelerate faster and a give better mileage than the the 55, why not go to a 195/40 size for even better performance? I'm sorry, your reasoning is flawed. You completely ignore the effect of engine rpm on fuel mileage. Once up to speed rotating mass has no effect on mileage.

I submit that a 195/60 tire will accelerate a little slower than the 55, provide the same mileage, and give a speedo reading 2 mph slower than actual at 60 mph.

I also submit that a 195/50 tire will accelerate a little faster than the 55, provide the same mileage, and give a speedo reading 2 mph faster than actual at 60 mph.

I also know that the 195/60 size will cost substantially less than either the 55 or the 50.

That's all I got to say about that.

 

Actually, yes but it isn't automatic and as another poster presumed it doesn't go on forever.. You can gaion both mpg and reduce 60 to 100 times with a 1% change in tire size/weight and the lose both mpg and 60-100 times by changing 2%.
Manufacturers spend large chunks of money evaluating final drive ratios and tire sizes to 'optimize' performance and mpg. the ratio of gears also enters the design as it doesn't pay off in reloability if the same teeth mesh together all the time which is why only some ratios are useful.
Small changes in tire size and axle drive ratios can improve the mpg and acceleration but just because a 1% change gained or lost 2% doesn't mean that 2% you gain or lose 45. Engine torque curves and transissioon gearing are involved too.
It has to do with how much power is consumed to turn the wheels and tires, most mostly tires at constant speed and accelerating, especially on grades. EPA gets involved too.We test tires here (since 1963 long before TireRack) and wee find the 195/50x15 is the best performance mpg combo fot Fits, 195/40x17 next.Oddly we have never tested 16" though we probably will next year. All 205 tires have proven slower accelerating and less mpg primarily due to weight. Unless of course you run HGoosiers as one does here and all bets are off. he has enough cash that a new set of Hoosiers ($800) every 3 months doesn't bother him. he just loves blowing off vettes on crooked back woods roads. He figures he's given a least half-a- dozen vette drivers nervous breakdons.

 

195/40 works well on 17" wheels; performs in both mpg and acceleration as well as stock, corners better, and tracks much better.
We found 195/60x15's cost 4 to 5% in mpg and 7% in acceleration from 195/55x15's. I don't think that 195/60x15 is that much cheaper either.