Hi everyone. Just a question regarding tyre sizes for my 2010 Mazda Atenza 2.0 sedan.
The car currently has 205/55/16 tyres which i believe are not the correct size as the wheel arch gaps are quite large (last owner fitted these)
Upon inspecting the info sticker in the drivers side door jamb it says the car should have 195/65/16 tyres. I thought they would be too skinny to have good grip?
Saw someone elses similar atenza in a carpark which had 215/60/16 tyres on it?
What size would you guys recommend fitting to this car? The current tyres do make the car feel a bit jarry on course chip roads. Any advice appreciated
intrade,
Mar 1, 2:00pm
original rim or aftermarket?
tamarillo,
Mar 1, 2:18pm
If it’s on original rims put on original size, like ty of grip in a 195.
vr4_legnum,
Mar 1, 3:22pm
All of the 2008-2012 Mazda Anteza I've seen, that had 16" rims, Have all been on 205/60x16 tyres
nesta129,
Mar 1, 3:33pm
Thats interesting,it shows online that the factory rim sizes are 205/65R16.Maybe thats just the american spec and not the Japanese spec or NZ one.Follow whats written on the driver's door.Those other sizes you saw is not in line with factory specs,especially their sidewall height should be 65.On factory 16inch rims you could try fitting 205/65R16 tyres,ask at a tyre shop. Or if cheaper,look for 215/55R17 rims and tyres.I think some came with that. Someone else correct me if im wrong but sometimes cheap,crap tyres give bad grip so look into better tyres for the car.
gpg58,
Mar 1, 3:41pm
Looking on tires size dot com, a 205 is 5.2% wider, so theoretically needs a cert if fitted, as the rules are only up 5% different in height or width. Those 55 profiles are 4.1% smaller in diameter, so ok with that bit.
If you can continue to get away with the 205's, you could go for a taller version in 70 series, which is exactly 5% over factory fitted ones, but suspect that would make the 205 width, more likely to be noticed by some pedantic idiot inspector. 205-60-16 is 1.2% under factory height, but still that annoying 0.2% too wide in theory, to avoid needing a cert. https://tiresize.com/comparison/
kazbanz,
Mar 2, 2:06am
ignoring everything else- from a comfort point of view I would go to 205 60 16
tygertung,
Mar 2, 3:14am
195 is pretty wide, so should have good grip.
Just remember that wider tyres don't actually have better grip. Actually skinnier tyres have better grip, up until the point which they are overloaded. They have more force on the contact area so grip better.
Wider tyres will overload at a higher point, but will need more load on them to grip better.
Tyres should be sized to the application. Wider isn't always better.
Wider tyres are often fitted due to fashion reasons.
franc123,
Mar 2, 3:47am
205/60 16 is the logical choice there.
tgray,
Mar 2, 4:14am
You have to ask yourself, is it worth buying 4 new tyres when you have 4 perfectly good ones already on it? Do you often drive on coarse chip roads? Is the price to change them worth it? Reality is, it probably won't feel much different.
vtecintegra,
Mar 2, 5:50am
Yep that's the factory size after all
josephjdm,
Mar 3, 7:28am
Hi everyone. Apologies in the delay in getting back to you all. Thank you all for the advice.
The car is sitting on factory 16 inch steel wheels. It is the base model atenza with no extras.
The current 205/55/16 tyres i have on i definitely want to change as the wheel arch gaps look quite large which makes the car look like its driving on biscuit wheels. Also the cars front end hits the ground really easily turning into even shallow dip driveways even if driving very slow so thought a taller height tyre might help that.
Seems a 205/60/16 would be the best middle ground. Would there be much difference in comfort and handling between a 205/60/16 and the 195/65/16 which is the recommended size on my door jamb sticker?
Thanks
lythande1,
Mar 3, 7:32am
better to stick with manufacturer size.
kazbanz,
Mar 3, 8:41am
205/60/16 is 10mm wider and so close to the same height as the 195 to make very little difference.
tygertung,
Mar 3, 9:18am
The skinnier 195 tyre may have less drag giving better fuel economy, meaning more money for beers.
evotime,
Mar 3, 10:12am
Where are you getting this rule from? as far as I read no more that 5% bigger circumference no rules about smaller, must meet the Tyre to rim chart sizing is all. Nothing about 5% width?
tamarillo,
Mar 3, 10:39am
So car seems to need taller tyres which point to the 195/65 as it says on sticker. There’s almost an inch more height in them so better clearance and better ride.
scuba,
Mar 3, 2:07pm
A few posters on this thread have no idea of the difference between theory and on road real world practical Kaz - your commonsense answers are getting swamped.
the 205 55 16 fitted were always going to be harder riding than original fitment so any 60 or 65 series means a bigger airbag/ softer ride.
The 205 70 16 mentioned by another poster would probably be too big-enough to alter ride behavior / cornering and even gearing maybe noticeable in take off and climbing hills but you would have to try them and see. An expensive mistake if you don't like the end result. So OP left with returning to door tag sizing of 195 65 16 or 205 60 16 alternative you offer. I would look at what size has the best quality and easiest available range of tyre. Looks like a lot of these vehicles have upgraded to 205 60 16 already by what has been posted by others.
gpg58,
Mar 3, 3:16pm
Was what i was told many times over the years, but agree i can only find diameter in current rules. (Table 10-1-1) Good, that will help me as well, with making a choice for my current vehicle's. So if ops vehicle was mine, i would likely go for 70 series, if they fitted clearance wise(better speed bump clearance, and imo smoother ride, and likely will get speedo to read closer to true as well). https://vehicleinspection.nzta.govt.nz/virms/in-service-wof-and-cof/general/tyres,-wheels-and-hubs/tyres-and-wheels
tygertung,
Mar 4, 2:16am
70 series is only for the moon buggy surely? a 205 70?!
josephjdm,
Mar 8, 1:32pm
Hi all, almost forgot to post an update. In the end i went for the factory 195/65/16 tyre size recommended on the door jamb sticker. Wow what a difference, car is a lot higher off the ground and doesnt scrape going into the driveway. Ride comfort is also a lot softer & smoother on coarse chip roads. i find the body roll still quite low & controlled but obviously not as good as it was with the 205/55/16 fitted.
Unfortunately upon replacement of the tyres the mechanic noticed that the rear shock absorbers were leaking quite badly, had a look myself and both were very damp and oily looking. Was very suprised as the car has supposedly only travelled 64,000kms. Makes me wonder if the car has actually done more or is it common for this kind of atenza to get leaky shocks early on?
intrade,
Sep 5, 9:15am
premature wear of items is normal for modern cars its called corner cutting manufacturing fuel injectors also wont last. like the used to.
Since the public registrations are closed, you must have an invite from a current member to be able to register and post in this thread.
Have an account? Login here.