Hello. I am in need of new tires and need AS (dedicated winters is ideal but not an option). My completely stock Fit is mostly used for DD on HWY but do see a good bit of stop and go city duty. I like sidewall. I’m looking for a budget AS right now and I’m liking the Kumho Ecsta PA31 (HP-AS). I am tempted to upsize to 205/55 but while a wider tire is great for dry traction, it is a trade-off in the wet and snow. I also like the larger diameter for HWY cruising. My concern is the unspring weight affects on acceleration. The little engine that could is already at it’s peak, how well does it handle the larger tire? Is it noticeable? I hope to get some feedback from current 205/55/16 users and if they regret their choice.
Thanks!


NOTE:
-I don’t care that the speedo is off +/- small x%. It is only a gauge and I believe in the “flow” of traffic.
-I’ve read some of the 205/55/16 threads (interesting debates).
-Former Miata owners and I’ve done the tire calc.
-185/55 vs 205/55 is $8 difference on the latter.

 

Compare tire weights, that is more important than the diameter difference. If the 205/55 are are heavier then it will effect your fuel efficiency, acceleration and handling. Doubly so (to fuel efficiency) with the wider width.

Increasing diameter will not overly increase your mileage by itself, the L15 is capable of 40mpg at 3500 RPM, so lowering your effective final ratio is not really needed. At higher speeds the Fit's poor aerodynamics will kill any chance of gains by using the larger diameter tires anyway.

 

I thought most people were going the 205/50/16 route not 205/55/16.

205/50-16 Tires for Your Honda Fit Sport - The Truth About Tires | Tire Rack

 

Just went to 205/50's myself. The car rides so much smoother, and the road noise is greatly reduces. I haven't noticed any difference in mile per gallon either.

 

If I'm upsizing, I'd skip 205/50 and just go 205/55 for a little more sidewall, esp since it's been confirmed it doesn't rub. The 55 is also ~$40 cheaper per set

My main concern is weight. Also, any impact does to HWY passing? Fit's low end gearing is pretty good for round about runs but I'm concerned with 40-60 HWY passing.

 

What width rim are you on? This is the deciding factor if you can even run a 205.

It is true that a thinner tire is better in the snow... To a degree. It depends on the contact patch psi and friction coefficient... Yeah it’s boring unless you’re into engineering.

Simplify using extreme cases; how well would a tire that is paper thin be? Not very good. The smaller contact patch will raise the psi (which is good) higher psi the higher the normal forces, the higher the mechanical grip. But the contact patch is so small that it loses any benefit.

Ok so that was painfully boring, I run a 205 Conti Extreme Contact in New England and I love them. It handles better in the slick than the 185s I had on.

Side note, I just added the cusco front upper tie bar last week and the car has been better on the ice under stopping.

 

i run 205/50/16. 205/55/16 is too tall.

 

Stock 09 Sport rims.

Were the 185s also DWS and comparably new or were they stokers?? Great tires btw.

So your are saying the Cusco FTB help with stopping on ice?? How many mount points is this?

 

what do you mean "too" tall? Do you have exp. with rubbing? This would be great to know.

 

I may be wrong, but the OEM wheels are 6" wide. The max you can run is a 185. If they are a 7" wide rim, then a 205 can be used.

I had the OEM set up, tires were stock. I have the DWS on the WRX also, but in a 225 and they are great. I love the Extreme DWS, huge fan.

Yes, the FTB helped braking. I would suspect that there is a lot of chassis flex in our vehicles. This has to do with the sum of the forces in the Y direction in the front end, more engineering nonsense.

Basically our chassis is a wet noddle. It didn't make such a impact on my other cars.

The Cusco is technically three mounting points (one under the cowl). At first I was very skeptical about the functionality of the bar because of the way it mounts. But since installed, I am happy with it. It is a Flexible FTB designed for the FIT, for ride quality.




There is only one 10 mm bolt holding down the brace, this is why I was skeptical.

 

i put 195/60/15s in place of stock 175/65/15s and noticed no difference in mpg or car response. one pound heavier tires.

better handling and more driving comfort was noticed!!

 

well silentnoise, all I can say is that I applaud you for your research on the PA31s. They too are on my very short list for both my Fit and Vibe. I am waiting for tirerack to do their winter test on the tires up in Sweden in February. If they turn out to be as good as the aggressive tread would indicate, I'll be buying them. Tirerack already fell in love with them during their summer testing. If you buy them, please report your initial findings, especially if you spend any time driving in light snow.

 

I got the Michelin Pilot Sport A/S 3 205/50/16 based on tread life , handling and overall top rated tire on Consumer Reports. No reduction in gas mileage.

 

He means it would change the diameter of the tire. 185/55 and 205/50 are both 24in diameter ( it think its 24) the 205s are just wider.

 

I believe the stock rims are 6.5" actually, and 205/50/16 tires are usually rated for 5.5"-7.5" rim widths. (In the case of DWS's, they are tested on a 6.5" wide rim)

 

I am replacing a set of 205/50 Ecopia EP422s.

These tires yielded an incredible 4 mpg improvement at 65-70 MPH. I can get 40 MPG with the A/C off at 70 with these tires, inflated to 40 psi all around.

I was considering the new Yokohama 185/55, but a Prius owner reported greatly reduced mileage with that tire (in a different size).

The 205/50 are almost exactly the same diameter as the 185/55, so the speedometer/odometer accuracy is retained. It's the stock height on the sidewall.

I did not notice any difference is acceleration. The tires do ride better on rough streets, and they're allowed for 6.5 rim width. (Costco, unfortunately, won't install anything other than OEM, so you can't get these there). I'm working with Tire Rack and a local shop.

I have not noticed any loss of acceleration with these wider tires.

 

sidewall of tires are measured by how tall (height) they are.


basically the width (mm) x aspect ratio (%) is your sidewall height.
just because it doesn't rub means it fits.

 

I run 185 width (on 15" alloys) for snows and 205 (stock sport wheel) for summers. If I were to go all season for year round driving, I'd stick with 185, especially in the philly area where you deal more with "slush/frozen slush" than Snow (formerly from Jersey). I do run 185/60 on my snows which makes the fit ride a little bit higher in the winter (preferable for cutting back on the snow plow effect) but for the summers, I like to be stock height.

If you are going to be tossing the car into the corners as this IS a fun car to drive, I'd go with stock height 185 or 205/50 (not 55). If this is a commuter car, the 205/55 would likely be fine at stock ride height (no drop). That said, I'd still probably run 185's for year round driving.

~SB

 

Yes, I'm aware of sidewall measurements and such. I just wasn't sure what you mean by "too" tall. I'm also not sure what you mean by the statement above. If it doesn't rub, wouldn't that make it "fit"? It may not be an ideal fit but that's a different discussion I am not interested going into.

This is an interesting discussion on 205/55/16.
https://www.fitfreak.net/forums/showthread.php?t=62904

 

thanks! This is good feedback. The Fit is a sporty drive but I'm not going to fool myself in thinking this is a sports car. Also, Fit is almost 95% commuter hence I prefer the taller sidewall. Perhaps I should look into 185/60/16?... Not sure if that's a common ($).


So anyone here used 205/55/16 and can give some first hand feedback??