Hi,

 

I'm hoping someone can hold my hand slightly and give me the vital reassurance I need before I spend any money!

 

I have a Superb II 170CR 2.0 with 18" alloys (Elegance spec). Driving in Ireland, on crap roads, I'm beginning to get really fed-up of feeling every bump and pothole vibrate through the car. I'm also getting very fed-up of the cost of replacing the tyres every 6 months and the big bills that follow (I drive about 60,000 km per year, so typically get about 6 months out of the front tyres - and I'm not an aggressive driver by any means).

 

So what I want to do is down-size the alloys to 16". From looking around and reading as much as I can find, I think I'm right in saying that what I need are 16" alloys with a 7.0j ET45 spec. At least, that seems to be the spec if I was to buy new Skoda alloys from an online dealer that they say are suitable for the Superb 170. I was 99.99% sure that I was right, until I had a look at this site. They seem to suggest (unless I'm reading it wrongly) that the 170 2.0 Superb can only go down to a 17" alloy. But the 140 2.0 can use a 16" rim. Does anybody know if that is right or not? I know the 170 is more powerful, but I thought the cars weighed the same, hence my suprise (and confusion). So before I commit to spending some money, can someone please, please allay my fears and tell me it's fine to put 16" alloys on my car? I've read posts on here where people with the 170 are running on 16" rims, so I just want some final assurance really.

 

Also, on a related topic, does anyone have a thought on running the car on 215/55/16 tyres instead of the normal 205/55/16 tyres? I've read a couple of posts where people are eulogising about the 215's, so just wondered if there were strong reasons for doing / not doing the same?

 

I'll post this in the Wheels zone forum as well (I really need a response as quick as possible as someone is holding some rims for me until I know I can definitely use them), so apologies if anyone gets their knickers in a twist on the double posting.

 

Many thanks in advance.

Plenty of people have gone 205/55/16. Check your fuel flap it's listed as a size in mine. I think the SE 170 bhp model comes with 16" as standard. 

Edited 31 May, 20179 yr by gav_is_con
Correction

3 minutes ago, gav_is_con said:

Plenty of people have gone 205/55/16. Check your fuel flap it's listed as a size in mine. I think the SE 170 bhp model comes with 16" as standard. 

Thanks for the response!

Have a search on the Superb II forum. There are posts on here and one recently. I am also thinking the same as you, even though I am a motorway user. 

 

According to Skoda's service manual, the type-approved sizes for the 170 bhp TDI are (<tyre size> on <rim size>):

205/55/R16 94V on  7Jx16 ET45

225/45/R17 94W on 7Jx17 ET49

225/45/R17 94W on 7.5jx17 ET49

225/40/R18 92Y on 7.5Jx18 ET46

 

This doesn't include the sizes approved for use with winter tyres.

 

215/55/R16 is a much rarer fitment than 205/55/R16 so the tyres are going to be a lot more expensive. You're also going to end up with a speedometer error.

 

If you want to keep a decent amount of rubber on the road and improve the ride quality, the 17s are quite a good compromise.

10 hours ago, chimaera said:

According to Skoda's service manual, the type-approved sizes for the 170 bhp TDI are (<tyre size> on <rim size>):

205/55/R16 94V on  7Jx16 ET45

225/45/R17 94W on 7Jx17 ET49

225/45/R17 94W on 7.5jx17 ET49

225/40/R18 92Y on 7.5Jx18 ET46

 

This doesn't include the sizes approved for use with winter tyres.

 

215/55/R16 is a much rarer fitment than 205/55/R16 so the tyres are going to be a lot more expensive. You're also going to end up with a speedometer error.

 

If you want to keep a decent amount of rubber on the road and improve the ride quality, the 17s are quite a good compromise.

Thanks Chimaera, that's great.

 

I'm not overly bothered about the amount of rubber to be honest, and want to maximise comfort and value-  hence looking at the 16" rims. I'm not even someone who pays much attention to the tyres themselves, although I do buy premium tyres on occasion. But the simple fact is, I've never noticed any difference in any tyre on any car I've ever had. I've driven plenty of cars over the years, both owned and rental, with budget / no name / mid-range and premium tyres fitted. I've never had a car lose traction or control, never felt it under-steering or over-steering or anything else. Maybe I'm just not sensitive enough! But I've read reviews of budget tyres over the years where posters have claime they put 4 new tyres of said budget brand on their car, drive at low speed onto a roundabout in dry conditions and had the car do a 360 degree spin on them... I don't know what the hell you have to do to make a car do that, but I've never managed it! But like I say, that's just my experience. And having said all that, I'm thinking of treating the 16" rims to Hankook tyres first time - just because the Hankooks have done very well in tests by Auto Bild.

34 minutes ago, Declan O'Shaughnessy said:

Thanks Chimaera, that's great.

 

I'm not overly bothered about the amount of rubber to be honest, and want to maximise comfort and value-  hence looking at the 16" rims. I'm not even someone who pays much attention to the tyres themselves, although I do buy premium tyres on occasion. But the simple fact is, I've never noticed any difference in any tyre on any car I've ever had. I've driven plenty of cars over the years, both owned and rental, with budget / no name / mid-range and premium tyres fitted. I've never had a car lose traction or control, never felt it under-steering or over-steering or anything else. Maybe I'm just not sensitive enough! But I've read reviews of budget tyres over the years where posters have claime they put 4 new tyres of said budget brand on their car, drive at low speed onto a roundabout in dry conditions and had the car do a 360 degree spin on them... I don't know what the hell you have to do to make a car do that, but I've never managed it! But like I say, that's just my experience. And having said all that, I'm thinking of treating the 16" rims to Hankook tyres first time - just because the Hankooks have done very well in tests by Auto Bild.

It is very easy to spin a car on a roundabout, all you have to do is drive like a complete twonk! 

And even then it would probably have to be wet and or have oil/Diesel on the surface.

I've had instances where the car has lost traction on a roundabout, but this is normally understeer which is controllable by reducing power and steering input, you have to be going way too fast for it to be dangerous.  To do a 360 you'd have to be either going too fast while turning, crap yourself and lift off the throttle unloading the rear tyres or give it too much power.  Most of this is related more to RWD than FWD.

I personally wouldn't use 'oriental' Fuk-Yew type tyres but mid-range should be OK.  I'd much rather have a well looked after mid range tyre than an abused top end one.  I wince when I see a badly parked car with the tyre deformed on the edge of a kerb.

 

My car is fitted with 16" wheels (being an Elegance it should have 18s), I'd prefer the 18s from a visual point of view but every time I hit a bump I'm glad I have that extra inch of rubber and air between the wheel and the road.

Edited 1 June, 20179 yr by Gdcobra

I comfortably got 35,000  miles out of my original 205/55 16 Continentals with Spectrum Alloys (fitted to both the Superb and Yeti) - that's about 55,000 km.  The cost of 205/55 R16 tyres is much cheaper as it is a very common size.

 

I can't compare the ride as mine has never been fitted with 18" wheels but my Supeb irons out bumps really well and has very low road noise (Now fitted with Michelin Cross Climates). Saying that I have a much lighter, less torquey engine up front.

 

I think it's just the V6 where you can't fit the 16" alloys?

Edited 1 June, 20179 yr by bigjohn

2 minutes ago, bigjohn said:

I comfortably got 35,000  miles out of my original 205/55 16 Continentals with Spectrum Alloys (fitted to both the Superb and Yeti) - that's about 55,000 km.  The cost of 205/55 R16 tyres is much cheaper as it is a very common size.

 

I can't compare the ride as mine has never been fitted with 18" wheels but my Supeb irons out bumps really well and has very low road noise (Now fitted with Michelin Cross Climates). Saying that I have a much lighter engine up front.

 

I think it's just the V6 where you can't fit the 16" alloys?

Thanks for that. I really struggle with tyre life on the 18" rims on the Superb. Especially on the front. Having said that, I did have problems with sticking brake calipers for a few months last year, so maybe that played a part in the terrible lifespan of the Continentals I had on there at the time. I have Cooper tyres on the front since before Xmas, and they have a bit left on them I think, and something like Nordexx (I think) on the back which are wearing reasonably okay so far (again since early December).

 

Spent quite a bit of time this morning looking at tyre tests. Quite frankly, no two magazines seem to be able to agree. Even allowing for them testing different tyre sizes across the different magazines, I've learned that the Hankooks I was looking at either have: great wet and dry performance, great dry poor wet performance, average dry good wet performance, prone to aquaplaning or resistant to aquaplaning, comfortable or not comfortable, provide good handling or are prone to understeer. Similar story with the Uniroyals I was considering as an alternative (although most magazines do at least agree that the Uniroyals stop quickly in wet conditions).

 

I've come to the conclusion that I'll be fine with Hankook, Uniroyal or just about anything else quite frankly!

Uniroyal all the time well priced, good quality.

It always bugs me when people say something along the lines "I don't drive hard enough so I don't need excellent tyres". Sure, in normal driving where you are in control the budget option might be fine, but it's when you're in an emergency that the last 15-20 % of the tyre's performance really matters. Braking distances can vary hugely  between good and bad tyres.

 

This is an old test, but it illustrates the point well: http://www.tyrereviews.co.uk/Article/2012-Autobild-50-Tyre-Braking-Test.htm

The difference in wet braking from 100 km/h between best and worst was 28 metres! That's nearly 6 times the length of the Superb!

 

Bottom line is there are 4 patches of rubber the size of your palm keeping you on the road: it's worth investing in that.

36 minutes ago, Declan O'Shaughnessy said:

 

 

Spent quite a bit of time this morning looking at tyre tests. Quite frankly, no two magazines seem to be able to agree. Even allowing for them testing different tyre sizes across the different magazines, I've learned that the Hankooks I was looking at either have: great wet and dry performance, great dry poor wet performance, average dry good wet performance, prone to aquaplaning or resistant to aquaplaning, comfortable or not comfortable, provide good handling or are prone to understeer. Similar story with the Uniroyals I was considering as an alternative (although most magazines do at least agree that the Uniroyals stop quickly in wet conditions).

 

 

Yes - I'd agree with the tyre tests - I struggled to make my mind up before I finally picked the Michelin Cross Climates (which are fantastic by the way - very quiet and stick like glue in bad weather, amazing in very wet conditions)

 

Uniroyals are really good but don't last as long. I've never had Hankooks but a friend of mine thinks they are great

 

 

 

Edited 1 June, 20179 yr by bigjohn
Sorry - can't type

4 minutes ago, chimaera said:

It always bugs me when people say something along the lines "I don't drive hard enough so I don't need excellent tyres". Sure, in normal driving where you are in control the budget option might be fine, but it's when you're in an emergency that the last 15-20 % of the tyre's performance really matters. Braking distances can vary hugely  between good and bad tyres.

 

This is an old test, but it illustrates the point well: http://www.tyrereviews.co.uk/Article/2012-Autobild-50-Tyre-Braking-Test.htm

The difference in wet braking from 100 km/h between best and worst was 28 metres! That's nearly 6 times the length of the Superb!

 

Bottom line is there are 4 patches of rubber the size of your palm keeping you on the road: it's worth investing in that.

 

I did appreciate good quality tyres a few weeks ago when I had to do a 65mph to zero emergency stop on the A1 -  If I'd had mediocre tyres the outcome would have been very different

 

2 hours ago, chimaera said:

It always bugs me when people say something along the lines "I don't drive hard enough so I don't need excellent tyres". Sure, in normal driving where you are in control the budget option might be fine, but it's when you're in an emergency that the last 15-20 % of the tyre's performance really matters. Braking distances can vary hugely  between good and bad tyres.

 

This is an old test, but it illustrates the point well: http://www.tyrereviews.co.uk/Article/2012-Autobild-50-Tyre-Braking-Test.htm

The difference in wet braking from 100 km/h between best and worst was 28 metres! That's nearly 6 times the length of the Superb!

 

Bottom line is there are 4 patches of rubber the size of your palm keeping you on the road: it's worth investing in that.

What that test indicates to me is that there is little significant difference between any of the tyres id ever fit (mid range to top end) although there were a few surprises how far down some of the highly regarded makes were.

 

i also wouldn't be surprised if some of the more performance oriented ones lose more of their performance one temperatures drop. Be interesting to see the same test at low single figure temperatures.

I am also going to downsize to 16" alloys next year.

I have just had to replace another tyre ( 2 months old) thanks to Gloucestershire potholes. Every summer I have to replace at least one tyre and in four years I have replaced two wheels too.

Not cheap either on the L&k.  Its a real dilemma as the L&k wheels are just beautiful (IMO) but the costs are downright stupid.

Bear in mind that I bought a full set of 16" steels for winter use four years back. they are on the car for about six months and appear to have not worn at all, in that time I have bought 8 18" tyres and two wheels.

 

I should point out that a lot of our roads are narrow and often it is just not possible to avoid a pothole due to oncoming traffic.

Also Gloucestershire highways delight in making off centre roundabouts, chicanes and jutting out curbs which all contribute to a lot of extra tyre wear ( good job there is no cost to the planet)

lol

 

ps. we also have pedestrian crossings within 3 metres of a roundabout!   it is beyond belief.

3 hours ago, chimaera said:

It always bugs me when people say something along the lines "I don't drive hard enough so I don't need excellent tyres". Sure, in normal driving where you are in control the budget option might be fine, but it's when you're in an emergency that the last 15-20 % of the tyre's performance really matters. Braking distances can vary hugely  between good and bad tyres.

 

This is an old test, but it illustrates the point well: http://www.tyrereviews.co.uk/Article/2012-Autobild-50-Tyre-Braking-Test.htm

The difference in wet braking from 100 km/h between best and worst was 28 metres! That's nearly 6 times the length of the Superb!

 

Bottom line is there are 4 patches of rubber the size of your palm keeping you on the road: it's worth investing in that.

 

To be honest, there's a hell of a lot of things that bug me when it comes to tyres and drivers, but I must be much less zen than yourself! I get more wound up by the ****wits around Limerick / Cork / Tipperary / Waterford who think they can drive like Ayrton Senna (without winding up dead like Aryton Senna) just because they've fitted a "premium" tyre to there car. If you drive like an idiot, time after time, then even the best tyres in the world won't save you at some point. Personally, I try to keep as far back from these idiots as I can, regardless of conditions because (a) it's better for my sanity and (b) I can't remember if whatever tyres I have on the car were top-rated for braking in wet conditions or dry conditions or warn conditions or cold conditions or whatever bloody conditions it happens to be at the time. And I'm struggling to find a tyre that out-performs everything else in every scenario. Hence I try to be as cautious as I can. But I know damn well it won't be my choice of tyres that kills me (if I should die in a traffic accident) - it'll be a ****wit of another driver.

 

I also get wound up by the absolute lack of consistency in the whole tyre industry, and the problem with "perceived wisdom". For example: tyre manufacturers generally seem to recommend newest tyres be fitted to the back of the car, to prevent aquaplaning. Every single tyre fitter I've used over the years has argued with me when I've asked them to do this. To a man, they have all said newest tyres should go on the front because that's where you want the rubber in an emergency. I've had to argue with them to comply with the manufacturers recommendations. And then there's the issue that every tyre garage will recommend a different tyre to me, largely based (I'm assuming) on what they have in stock, what they get bigger margins on and what they think I'm willing to pay. None of the tyre fitters over the years have ever asked me what PSI I want in the tyres, or check what the recommended PSI is. They just seem to inflate to some magical number in their own heads. I know, because I check them once the tyres have cooled down and they're never what the guide inside the ful cap says they should be.

 

 

I went for a balance of cosmetics, comfort and pothole protection so went with 17" alloys.

 

The Triffid in particular as it is the wheel fitted to the SE and SE Plus in the UK.

 

The 16" looks too small on a Superb and like you've discovered the 18" combined with it's low profile tyres isn't suited to today's roads.

 

I actually increased the profile size on my tyres for increased pothole resistance and to fill the arches a little more (note insurance implications of running a non-approved tyre).

 

The car is transformed, to the point I won't go back.

 

Here it is, albeit on it's winter rubber (same size as the summers)...

 

 

From this (17", low profile)...

 

 

...to this, 17" higher profile...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Potholes? What potholes 

By the way, I got sick of this too (previous car, an Octavia vRS with 18" alloys fitted with rubber bands!)...

 

 

 

Declan, I changed from 18's to 17's (50 profile) a while back for exactly the same reasons as you. My tire cost must be at least half of what it was running the 18's. I got a set of genuine Audi wheels. 

According to ERWIN you can fit any of these combinations:

9 hours ago, 26DIPP said:

According to ERWIN you can fit any of these combinations:

Thanks, that's very helpful.

I totally see where you're coming from, having experience of the same roads myself on a daily basis.  The standard 225/40/18s are quite harsh on the SII and it never made sense to me why they went with this tyre as standard fit on what should be a refined cruiser.  I also changed the tyres on my last Superb but decided to keep the 18s (it was an L&K and the wheels really made the car) so I went with a higher profile tyre (225/45/18).  They worked and fitted fine however they weren't the easiest tyre to source but really transformed the comfort of the car.  If aesthetics are an issue, this could be an option however the 16s do make good sense for our roads if you don't mind the something smaller in the arches.