Rim diameter question

I'm trying to learn about the pros and cons of 15" vs. 16" tire rims - especially with respect to onroad vs. offroad use

Research so far appears to reveal the following general beliefs/"facts":

1) All else equal, 15" rims may be better offroad due to higher tire sidewall (increased flex)

2) 16" rims may be better onroad, due to less tire sidewall (decreased flex)

3) 16" rims fit only metric-sized tires (? is this correct?), but such tires tend to cost more (? again, is this true?)

4) Despite "fact" #1, 16" rims are preferred for rock crawling (if true, why?)

5) Internationally, 16" rims are more "standard" and tires to fit them are more readily available

6) Generally speaking, 16" tires may be used more widely by SUV manufacturers who realize the primary use of such vehicles is onroad (? if true, why would Jeep choose 16" tires as the standard rim size for the Rubicon, unless "fact" #4 is actually true?)

Would appreciate someone verifying these "facts" or setting me straight...

PLM

Reply to
Patrick Mills
Loading thread data ...

Correct. The sidewalls - and more accurately, the shoulder of the tread - is a very important traction aid when the tires are aired-down. But, when the tires are aired down, the rim can be exposed to more damage if the sidewalls are smaller.

Again, correct. The smaller sidewalls have less flex, therefore they provide a more sure footed driving experience on the highway.

I have to do some research on this one, but my knee-jerk response is that you are wrong on this point. The metric size that comes on the Rubi can be translated into a 31x9.50 or 31x10.50 (I forget which). But, I am almost 99% positive that you can get a 32" ~ 35" on a 16" rim.

I am not sure this is true. Given the explanation that I used, I would lean towards the 15" as the better choice. I happen to think that the Rubi has other features that make the 16" tires an "acceptable risk."

I don't think this is true at all. 15" rims have been around for decades,

16" is a relatively new option.

This is a good question, one that I have asked myself. I think that in the grand scheme of things, the manufacturer has to be concerned with liability issues relative to tall tires. I suppose they can mitigate some of those issues with a larger rim. I really don't think the manufacturers set out to build the extreme rock crawlers that we so enjoy. They look at what we do, and try to blend the needs of highway safety with the desire for extreme offroading, and the 16" tires on the Rubi are a happy medium where these two worlds meet.

Reply to
CRWLR

I would consider using 16" wheels if needed to provide clearance for larger calipers - don't know if that has anything to do with the reason the rubi has them....

Reply to
Carlo

The Rubi can run 15" or 16" wheels, it uses 16" (probably) due to larger wheels being more stylish right now.

Jerry

beliefs/"facts":

Reply to
Jerry Bransford

I don't think the Rubi gets larger brakes than the other TJ models though. It gets discs on all four corners, but they are the same discs that the other TJs get.

beliefs/"facts":

Reply to
CRWLR

Correct

snip

Reply to
mabar

Reply to
L.W.(ßill)

interesting picture...excuse me while I throw up............ahh - that's better

Since you like to collect the odd pic now and then, I think you'll enjoy this:

formatting link
PLM [ ] __OIIIIO__ |||=oo=||| ||| |||

Reply to
Patrick Mills

so much for that theory...............

Reply to
Carlo

Reply to
L.W.(ßill)

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.