Topic: Confusion about winter tire size & are the Toyo G-02 any good?

[susan_t]

Hey guys,

It's been awhile since I've been online.  Hope all is well with everyone.   Last year I purchased a set of Nokian Hakka 2's, tire size 175/65/14.  The tire size on my car is 195/55/15.  When I had them on last year, I didn't feel like I had a nice grip on the road due to the size difference.  It felt unstable. I am considering getting a set of Toyo G-02, size 195/60/14.  Will this size make a difference in terms of the grip on the road?  Also, are these winter tires any good?

Thank you 

[RayT]

Susan

The feeling of squirminess with a narrower winter tire is pretty normal. The rubber is softer and the tread blocks flex a bit, so they don't *feel* as solid.

The G02 is a good tire, good for snow, and heavy winter conditions.  I recommend it.

For winter tires, the first size you used is actually better. Narrower tires will slice though snow better. But if you do want a bit more stability for better on-the-road feel, the size you want should work fine.

[Minou]

Hey guys,

It's been awhile since I've been online.  Hope all is well with everyone.   Last year I purchased a set of Nokian Hakka 2's, tire size 175/65/14.  The tire size on my car is 195/55/15.  When I had them on last year, I didn't feel like I had a nice grip on the road due to the size difference.  It felt unstable. I am considering getting a set of Toyo G-02, size 195/60/14.  Will this size make a difference in terms of the grip on the road?  Also, are these winter tires any good?

Thank you 

The correct minus 1 size for your 195/55-15's would be 185/65-14, not 175's.

With that correct size, the "feeling of squirminess" might be reduced, the overall diameter of your wheels would be the same and speedometer error would be nil.

I have a set of 185/65-15 Toyo G02 Plus on a '05 Corolla.  They are very good winter tires but their harder compound might be better on heavier vehicles.  Traction and cornering are good but not necessarily the best.  They are fairly silent on dry pavement.

[susan_t]

Thanks guys for your feedback.   I think I'll go for the Toyo's.  But am I ok with the 195/60/14?  I really liked the Nokian Hakka 2's, but I did not like the drive of them with that tire size.  I didn't feel like I had control of the road.  And unfortunately Nokian tires went up by 24%, so I'm not willing to spend that much more for my proper size.  I'll be trading in my Nokian's for the Toyo's and have to pay an additional $125.  I hope I'm not getting hosed here.  I don't know how much the Toyo G-02 go for.

Thanks.

[initial_D]

A word form our sponsor, Tiretrends.com, in this section.

195/65R14  BW  89T C$ 112.11

I have the 02+ in 195/60/15 on my winter beater, and I always look  forward to  the drive on snowy days. Had them for  4 seasons already, still got over 80% tread left. I only put them on for about 4 months per year tho.


How is the hunting for the 2nd Teg? 

[susan_t]

A word form our sponsor, Tiretrends.com, in this section.

195/65R14  BW  89T C$ 112.11

I have the 02+ in 195/60/15 on my winter beater, and I always look  forward to  the drive on snowy days. Had them for  4 seasons already, still got over 80% tread left. I only put them on for about 4 months per year tho.


How is the hunting for the 2nd Teg? 

Really?  So, what's on my car now, 195/55/15, the 195/65/14 are better than 195/60/14?  So confused.     That's great to hear.  I always like to hear positive things about the tires I'm about to buy.  Makes life easier for me.

I decided not to get a 2nd car.  Too much maintenance with the one I have now.  And the 2nd car will put me in debt.  So, no 2nd Teg for me. 

[HeliDriver]

195/65R14 is doable, but not your best option. As others have said, the correct "minus-one" size is 185/65R14.

Why do you want to try 195/60R14? If you're thinking that the wider tire will be more "stable", you'll probably be very disappointed. Going up a speed rating rating or two would likely give you a much more "stable" ride. (i.e. if the Nokians were Q-rated, try a tire with an S or a T rating. Either are available in a 185/65R14.)

One other thing: Are you planning on reusing your old 14" rims that the 175/65R14s were mounted on? If so, they are probably quite narrow, and would only make a wider tire like the 195s even squirmier.

I had some Toyo G-02s (the old ones - not the G-02 plus) mounted on my Civic (185/65R14), and while their snow and ice performance was outstanding, I really couldn't put up with their horrible handling characteristics on dry roads. They definitely felt very "unstable" to me, as well. (Not to knock the Toyos too much - in my experience, any Q-rated tire will feel more or less the same.)

[susan_t]

The reason why I want 195/60/14 because that was the tire size on my 2nd Gen. Teg.  My 3rd. Gen. Teg has tire size 195/55/55.  When I had snows on my old Teg., I had the Arctic Alpins, with the same size tires and they worked great. 
Then when I got the Nokian Hakka 2's with the size 175/65/14, although they were great on the snow, it was still unstable at times and more unstable on drive pavement.  So, that's why I was thinking of sticking with 195/60/14 because the 3rd. Gen Tegs came in that tire size.  I got the Special Edition Teg. so the tire size was abit bigger but lower in profile.   I hope that made sense. 
I will be using the same 14" steel rims that I got from Acura.

[weebl]

I guess I'm not going to make your choice much easier, but I will tell you my experience.

Like your Integra, my Protege used 195/55R15 tires.  Those were my cars summer shoes.  When I got the car in 2002, tires in that size, winter or summer, were very hard to find, and the winters available were more than I wanted to spend.  The minus-1 option was 185/65R14, which incidentally, the base model Proteges came with.  Tire choices in this size was plentiful.  So that size ended up being the winter boots for my car.

With the winter tires on, I did not try to push the car to any of its handling limits, but that said, aside from a softer ride, and little less responsiveness on the steering, there wasn't much lost in most driving conditions.  There was some very slight squirminess, but only when you started to push the car hard, and not something that I found to be bothersome at all.

Summers in 195/55R15 were the awful Potenza RE92 (V-rated).  My winters were Kumho KW-11 in 185/65R14 (T-rated).

Sounds like you would only want to go T-rated as your lowest speed rating.  Any less, you'll be unhappy.  Probably an H-rated would be a better choice for you.  And if you really can't sacrafice much in handling, stay with 195/55R15 (choices are far more today then back then).

Could the Hankook IceBear W300 be your ticket?  They are H-rated, and probably available in both the 185/65R14 and 195/55R15 sizes.  People who have used them love them.  I can't say personally, but in your shoes, I would consider them.

[morty]

The 195/60/14 is the same OD as the 185/65/14 and the 2 size are commonly interchanged.  I dont believe that this will solve the instability problem. GO2+ is an ice type winter tire and as such exhibits quite a bit of tread squirm, which translates into the uneasy feeling you are describing. The 195/55/15 is more of a performance type tire and the dramatic change to a -1 ice tire can be unsettling. If you want to go with something that will handle better, but still give you a little better drivability consider staying with the stock size and running a performance winter. The W300 is one of these types of tires. There are others of course:

    Blizzak LM25
    Michelin PA2
    Kumho KW17
    Toyo Garit KX

[susan_t]

Thanks guys for your responses.   I was told by the tire shop I was dealing with the the Toyo G-02 would suit my driving habits.  Meaning, I have a tendency to speed and corner fast.   Right now I have the Toyo T1R'S as my summer tire and I love them.  So I guess when he saw what I had, he thought of Toyo's.   When I mentioned the Michelin X-ice, he did not recommend them at all.  Which was weird because I did have the Arctic Alpins for 5 yrs. and they were great for the first 3 yrs. with hardly any squirminess, with tire size 195/60/14.  I can't remember what speed rating those tires were.  I'm sure you guys would know.  I want the best of both worlds.  I want a tire that's great in the snow, but at the same time also good on dry pavement.  The Nokian Hakka 2's were great on snow, but way too soft on dry pavement.  I know they are "true snow tires", which is the reason why. 

Thanks for those tire suggestions.  I will look into them.  But again, I don't want winter performance tires.

[morty]

The G02+ is going to give you similar handling to your Hakka's. If you want better dry handling you will need to go with a performance type winter tire or you will be disappointed. The reason they have recommended it over the Michelin is because they are probably not a Michelin dealer. Both of these tires are very comparable and what recommendation you receive will depend on who you ask.

Options to consider are:
Dunlop Sport M3
Kumho KW17
Yokohama V901

[RayT]

I'm not really a fan of true "ice" tires for my own cars. Most of them I've driven on really do feel squirmier than I feel is necessary for the city conditions that I normally encounter, even in Ottawa. Especially true for a sportier car.

As for your sizing, the 195/60 size will definitely work, but I think the tire model you pick will make more of a difference in the squirminess you feel.

[susan_t]

The G02+ is going to give you similar handling to your Hakka's. If you want better dry handling you will need to go with a performance type winter tire or you will be disappointed. The reason they have recommended it over the Michelin is because they are probably not a Michelin dealer. Both of these tires are very comparable and what recommendation you receive will depend on who you ask.

Options to consider are:
Dunlop Sport M3
Kumho KW17
Yokohama V901

But could it have been the tire size that contributed to the poor handling along with the tire type?   I thought the 175/65/14 compared to 195/60/14 tires would make a difference in the performance of the vehicle.  I really don't want to lose the "snow tire" feeling when driving on snow.  So, I'm apprehensive in getting winter performance tires.

Good point.  They don't carry Michelin's at all.

[HeliDriver]

But could it have been the tire size that contributed to the poor handling along with the tire type? I thought the 175/65/14 compared to 195/60/14 tires would make a difference in the performance of the vehicle.

Assuming your rims are wide enough, and the 195s have an equal or greater speed rating than the old 175s, I'm sure the 195s would make a difference in the performance of the vehicle. The question is, would it be enough of a difference to get the results you're looking for? 

I really don't want to lose the "snow tire" feeling when driving on snow. So, I'm apprehensive in getting winter performance tires.

FYI, I also had some H-rated "performance" winter tires on the Civic, and loved them (they were Bridgestone LM-22s, 195/55R15).

Dry-road performance was more than adequate, yet I still found their snow and ice performance to be at least 80-90% as good as that of the Q-rated "ice-type" winter tires I've tried. A very acceptable trade-off, IMO.

Assuming those LM-22s were representative of the "winter performance" breed, I'd say that a "winter performance" tire is still 90% "winter" tire, and only 10% "performance" tire. I certainly had no qualms about driving them through the worst road conditions a Rocky Mountain winter could throw at me.

[morty]

The 195/60/14 actually has a taller sidewall and may increase the symptoms you are trying to avoid. The performance winters are still very capable and exhibit the characteristics you seem to be describing. I think you would be pleasantly surprised.

[susan_t]

But could it have been the tire size that contributed to the poor handling along with the tire type? I thought the 175/65/14 compared to 195/60/14 tires would make a difference in the performance of the vehicle.

Assuming your rims are wide enough, and the 195s have an equal or greater speed rating than the old 175s, I'm sure the 195s would make a difference in the performance of the vehicle. The question is, would it be enough of a difference to get the results you're looking for? 

I really don't want to lose the "snow tire" feeling when driving on snow. So, I'm apprehensive in getting winter performance tires.

FYI, I also had some H-rated "performance" winter tires on the Civic, and loved them (they were Bridgestone LM-22s, 195/55R15).

Dry-road performance was more than adequate, yet I still found their snow and ice performance to be at least 80-90% as good as that of the Q-rated "ice-type" winter tires I've tried. A very acceptable trade-off, IMO.

Assuming those LM-22s were representative of the "winter performance" breed, I'd say that a "winter performance" tire is still 90% "winter" tire, and only 10% "performance" tire. I certainly had no qualms about driving them through the worst road conditions a Rocky Mountain winter could throw at me.

Thanks for posting your opinions.  I will still be using the 14" rims.  I never really had any issues when I went with the 195/60/14 with the Arctic Alpins on.  I only started having problems with the unstable driving when I bought the Hakka 2's, size 175/65/14.  And the tires actually look odd on my 14" rims.   I will look into a performance snow tire and hopefully can make a decision this month.

[susan_t]

The 195/60/14 actually has a taller sidewall and may increase the symptoms you are trying to avoid. The performance winters are still very capable and exhibit the characteristics you seem to be describing. I think you would be pleasantly surprised.

Wouldn't a tire size 185/65/14 have a taller sidewall?     Yeah, after a few suggestions here, I will be looking into a winter performance tire.   

Thanks again.

[HeliDriver]

The 195/60/14 actually has a taller sidewall and may increase the symptoms you are trying to avoid. The performance winters are still very capable and exhibit the characteristics you seem to be describing. I think you would be pleasantly surprised.

Wouldn't a tire size 185/65/14 have a taller sidewall?     Yeah, after a few suggestions here, I will be looking into a winter performance tire.   

Thanks again.

I think morty means to say that a 195/60R14 has a taller sidewall than a 175/65R14.

Good luck on your search, and let us know how it all turns out.

[morty]

Yes that is what I meant. The 185/65/14 and 195/60/14 have the same height sidewall. However, the 195 is approximately 10mm wider than the 185.

Ah the insanity of it all....!!!!!!!