Wheel size

Apr 15, 2006 25 Replies

Forgive my ignorance about this, but why may I ask do larger wheel sizes keep being pushed? My 03 Ram has 17's which seem plenty big enough. I keep getting asked though, why not put 20's on it? I can see that it would be good for top end speeds but it sure would seem to be a lot more work getting there IMO. Thanks in advance. John


Seems to be a new thing to want more metal and less rubber. I think a truck or SUV with 20"+ wheels looks down right funny. Why do some people think more rim looks better than more rubber? Whats more is that the rather low profile sidewalls of such tires have got to mess up handling and ride comfort.

My 2004 Durango has 17" and thats fine for me. My Ram has 16". I'd rather have 16" on my Durango as new tires for it were expensive and selection very limited. No reason for the 17".

15" is fine for smaller trucks and cars. I think they're too small for full sized trucks and SUV's. Thing about the new 20"'ers is the overall diameter of the tire isn't increased much. Just more rim, less rubber.

heck what was wrong with the old 15" wheels?

Its the gansta ghetto attitude

John, Wheel size is not circumference. Short side walls provide less sidewall shift to the sides when cornering and therefore are more surefooted when cornering under high speed conditions, but they do so at the cost of comfort and load carrying ability. Your 17" wheels were an upgrade from 16s to provide more crearance for larger brakes. If you have a 2500 or 3500 with an

8 lug bolt pattern, you can find conversions for 19", 22" and 24" 10 bolt truck wheels. These have the load bearing ability and go fast wheels do not. Steve

In trucks, it's all about marketing. Most people who drive trucks use them simply as grocery getters and commuters, and they want that look. Off roaders and haulers continue to use smaller wheel sizes.

Yeah, I use if for all that too. I don't go off road at all, but sometimes I haul things for the house and yard. I love my Ram though. It fits me like a glove (I'm 6'8") where other trucks and cars don't--I even have a good reach for the radio knob with my long arms. It's plenty fast enough with the 4.7 -- could use a bit less gas though, especially these days. It also seems to get a little more respect on the roads. I'll stick with the 17's. Might get some aluminum wheels though, :-) John

Which makes little sense. Mopar brakes have never been very good. Other manufactures still use 16" with fewer problems than Dodge. Main issue is that the Mopar rotors are junk. Rather than make them larger diameter Dodge should have focused their efforts on just making them decent quality.

At 35K the Rotors on my 2004 Durango need replacing. They've already been turned twice by the dealer under warranty and probably have little metal left. Same problems with my 2001 Ram. Come on Dodge, make a frigg'n decent rotor!!

I've been of the belief that the folks using a air gun are the cause of a lot of rotor problems. Gotta use a "click wrench" and set them to spec's properly imho.

Roy

That can happen but I still think that Mopar rotors are junk. Most dealers and independent shops I've been too have signs posted all over saying lug nuts are hand torqued.

Why did this become such a problem lately? Or was it that sometime in the late 80's or 90's shops failed to hand torque? I never ever had rotor issues back then like I do now.

Always was a bit of a problem. But when the tire stores really came into vogue it took off.

Roy

Right... a beam-style wrench will warp 'em sure as hell! :)

Personally I prefer hydraulic torque wrenches. Far more accurate than anything else and more powerful when high torque values are needed. Course the several $1000 cost is kind of a killer.

A store tried to convince me that after 30K, our Neon needed new rotors. I was extremely dubious. After a bunch of back and forth, I finally got it out of them that the rotor thickness was below spec to face it. I asked to see the book. They assured me over and over that Dodge rotors are crap, and it was almost unheard of that rotors could be "turned."

When I finally got the caliper readings and the book side by side, it turns out they were looking under the "new" column. Duh. No wonder. How many rotors are still at "new" thickness by the time you need pads changed? The question is... was it intentional, or were the folks there just idiots? I complained to the AAA (which this place was approved by), it closed, but then reopened under another name right after.

This may not be very common, but I bet it happens more than people might want to believe.

Not me. Like I said I've never had brake troubles until my two Dodges. My 2 1993 Nissans both had over 140,000 and I only replaced the pads once. Rotors were fine. I'm pretty light on brakes, coasting to stops rather than going straight from gas to brake as some do...or ride the brakes and alot of snowbirds do here!

ive had several full sized half ton trucks that performed fine under load with 15" wheels. although i agree you can get larger brakes under a 16 or 17 wheel i still see little added benefit other than the larger brake capability with the larger wheel.

ive seen them also have their "own" rotor spec book and if they dont have the specs for your rotors in their book then its a automatic replacement in their minds. never try to look in the FSM to findout what detriot has to say about discard thickness.

Join the Discussion

Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.

Didn't find your answer?

Ask the community — no account required