Eliminating spare tires

JDgreen227 · Aug 23, 2012

Was coming home from the local grocery store and stopped behind a late model Jeep that had a huge spare tire hanging on the back end...reminded me of the column a Detroit Free Press auto writer recently authored about automakers wanting to eliminate spare tires.

He wrote, quote: "Automakers are concerned with saving GRAMS OF WEIGHT...." (emphasis added) so they want to eliminate spare tires...."

So I contacted him: "I just put a 1995 vintage, full tread 1995 F-150 STEEL RIM with a mounted and fully inflated P235-75R 15 tire on a scale, and the weight was 66 pounds. According to my research, a new 2012 F-150 20-inch tire and ALUMINUM rim weigh over 85 pounds. So, if automakers are so concerned with saving "grams of weight" as you term it, why don't they use 15-16 inch rims and tires instead of 20 inch? Can you imagine the grams (actually POUNDS) of weight saved by using the smaller size, especially if mounted on an aluminum rim, rather than the steel one I used as a comparison? Additional benefits would be much less unsprung weight, and the cost of 20 inch replacement tires is obscene."

My wifes brother-in-law recently replaced the 20 inch OEM tires on a 4 year old Silverado---$350 each. That is more than DOUBLE what a 16 inch tire would have cost, and the quality OEM tires only lasted 52,000 miles in conservative driving.

The auto writer actually agreed with me !!!

cmore · Aug 23, 2012

I agree. The only reason I can think of for larger tires is looks. My car has a spare storage area but the std tire and rim won't fit the area. The car comes with smaller tires for the base model but the smaller tires and not available for my model. No spare may be somewhat ok while the 3 yr warranty is active not not good after it expires. They want to eliminate the spare to save some money in addition to weight.

JDgreen227 · Aug 23, 2012

cmore said:
I agree. The only reason I can think of for larger tires is looks. My car has a spare storage area but the std tire and rim won't fit the area. The car comes with smaller tires for the base model but the smaller tires and not available for my model. No spare may be somewhat ok while the 3 yr warranty is active not not good after it expires. They want to eliminate the spare to save some money in addition to weight.

Just FYI, the compact spare and jack and lug wrench for my 2004 Lesabre weigh 36 pounds total with a steel rim, so using the compact spare saves at least 30-35 pounds over a full size spare with jack and lug wrench. IMO the REAL reason automakers want to eliminate the spares is just to make more profit.

cmore · Aug 23, 2012

I would be happy or at least happier, IF they offered a compact spare. The only way I can carry a spare is to take up a lot of trunk space with a 20" tire and rim.

murphy1244 · Aug 23, 2012

The spare cost extra on my 08 focus.

Diamondpilot · Aug 23, 2012

Bigger wheels and tires give bettrr final drive ratios and help mpg ratings. They alsp add ground clrarance but do cost. You pay to play.

Smallest wheel I have in my fleet is 17"

Chris

dkhntr04 · Aug 23, 2012

Bigger wheels also allow more room for bigger brakes.

Bird · Aug 23, 2012

dkhntr04 said:
Bigger wheels also allow more room for bigger brakes.

I can remember when that was the claimed reason for the wheels on some smaller motorhomes. Maybe I'm lucky I have old Fords.:laughing: The Crown Vic has 16" wheels and the Ranger has 15" wheels. But they do both have full size spares. Maybe I'm just old fashioned, but I much prefer the full sized spares even though I've used the Ranger spare only once and never used the Crown Vic spare.

JDgreen227 · Aug 23, 2012

BIGGER BRAKES??? Who needs 'em, what with antilocks you cannot lock the wheels anyway so what is the reason for bigger brakes? My '04 Lesabre has 16-inch 4 wheel discs, weighs almost 3,900 pounds with two people aboard and will stop an unbraked 1800 pound utility trailer behind it easily. Bigger brakes mean more UNSPRUNG weight and the higher cost of bigger rotors and pads mean more $$$ at replacement time. 20 inch rims and tires are simply for looks, because of the short sidewalls they ride rougher and because of the wider tread they have poorer traction in ice and snow. They should NEVER have gone over 16 inches in rim size except for 3/4 and 1-ton trucks. $350 for a new tire? Simply obscene.

WilliamBos · Aug 23, 2012

JDgreen227 said:
BIGGER BRAKES??? Who needs 'em, what with antilocks you cannot lock the wheels anyway so what is the reason for bigger brakes? My '04 Lesabre has 16-inch 4 wheel discs, weighs almost 3,900 pounds with two people aboard and will stop an unbraked 1800 pound utility trailer behind it easily. Bigger brakes mean more UNSPRUNG weight and the higher cost of bigger rotors and pads mean more $$$ at replacement time. 20 inch rims and tires are simply for looks, because of the short sidewalls they ride rougher and because of the wider tread they have poorer traction in ice and snow. They should NEVER have gone over 16 inches in rim size except for 3/4 and 1-ton trucks. $350 for a new tire? Simply obscene.

What crook do you buy your tires from? A dealer? The bigger brakes give more surface area on the rotor, which runs cooler. Bigger brakes are not a waste!! I will not buy anything smaller than 17" again, but not bigger either. Don't need the unit bearings spinning any faster, and with smaller rims, they would.