[79Y84x2]

Working on a 79 WS6 car with 15x8s. I know factory size was 225 70s, just curious what other tires people have run on them. 255 60s in the rear? Are those too big for front? 245 60s for front? Any pictures? So limited in RWL tire choices anymore, seems to be Radial T/As and Cooper Cobras.

[Skip Fix]

255-60 on the front also but hard dips and the original springs sometimes rub. With the new stiffer spring have not driven yet

[vtxman]

I like to run 265-50's all the way around. And then I lower the car a little. My last Trans Am (1980 Pace Car) I ran 265-50 in the front and 295-50's in the rear. This gave the car a great stance. The only think I didn't like is the 295-50's had some bulge on the sidewall. They need an another inch of rim. But they didn't look bad at all.

[78w72]

closest to stock 225/70's are 255/60's, but like skip mentioned they can rub up front a little if teh car is sagging or lowered more than about 1-1.5". best option then for a wider tire is a 245/60. i run 275/60's in the rear for a fatter look, they are 28" tall & fill the wheel wells nicely. 265 & 295/50's are too short & fat IMO for 2nd gen cars, unless they are substantially lowered.

[Alvin]

For 255/60/15's on WS6 front removed one of the inner fender bolts @ upper radius fender opening...for agressive high speed and speed bump suspension compression on a '79.

For 245/60/15 on WS6 nothing needed on a '78.

Sometimes the 255's look too big (tall) and the 245's look to small (short) but look great because of their wide profiles. The OEM 225/70/15 looks pretty slick on many TA's.

Check out what cars are running that you like and go with that IMO

[Grand73Am]

I like 245-60's if going with all the same size. They're about 1/2" shorter than stock, which I like, and the width is good. They work well on a couple of my cars, so I find it's a good all around tire size. The shorter tire helps acceleration a little bit too, if you have highway gears.

255-60's are a bit wide and heavy on front for me. The front track on the TA is actually wider than the rear track width by about an inch, so 255's on front will stick out, while the rears are even, which doesn't look as good. Since 225-70's are basically the same diameter as 255-60's, I've thought that 225-70's on front and 255-60's on back would be a great combo. The stock size 225-70 won't stick out in front, and not feel heavy on the steering. And the 255's would have the extra width to fill out the rear wheel well without sticking out, and help with traction.

[79Y84x2]

I appreciate all the input!! Anyone have any pictures they can post of either 245 or 255 60s on 15x8s on these cars?

[78w72]

not the best pics but gives you an idea...

the stock 225/70's are about 27.5" tall. 245/60 are 26.5" tall... a full inch shorter. 255/60's are 26.8 or almost 27" tall. so, the 255/60 is 1/2" shorther than a 225/70 stock size tire. IMO the 245's are too short to fill the wheel wells of a stock height 2nd gen car, if lowered a little they are ok... the 255/60 fits & works great on my cars that are lowered almost 2". & the 275/60 is a nice option if you want wider & taller but not too tall... only about .5" taller than stock at 28" tall but much wider & fits 15x8 rims great.

81- 255/60's all the way around

78- 275/60 in rear & 255/60 up front.

both cars lowered about 2" in the front

[Grand73Am]

Your numbers are a little off, so there's not as much difference as you might think. The BFG TA Radial specs are: The 255-60-15 diameter is 27.1", measured on a 7.5" wheel. The 225-70-15 is 27.4", measured on a 6.5" wide wheel. So, that's no more than a .3" difference, not .5".

But, I don't think you'd even see a .3" difference, because in this case we're putting each tire on an 8" wheel, not the size wheels they were measured on in the specs. So, that changes the tire height measurement a little bit. The 225-70 would be stretched 1-1/2" more on an 8" wheel, compared to being on the 6.5" wheel in the spec, effectively shortening the tire a little. And the 255-60 being on a wheel that's only 1/2" difference in width from the spec wheel, wouldn't change much. So, that would make them practically the same height on 8" wheels, without any noticeable difference in height. This is the reason I think they'd work well together and be the same height front and back.

The 245-60-15 spec is 26.6", measured on an 8.5" wheel, so it's no more than .8" shorter than the factory size 225-70 at 27.4", so much closer to 3/4", not an inch. And it's only 1/2" shorter than the 255-60's 27.1" spec. And installing the 245-60 on an 8" wheel might make it a tad taller, compared to the 8.5" spec wheel that it was measured on. I don't think they look too short. Unfortunately my engine/trans is out of my TA right now for some work, so can't show a picture of how they look on a TA right now with the front end up in the air . I have some on my 75 Lemans though, so I'll put up a photo of it. I think they're a good fit.

Of course, tire size(among other things) is a matter of personal taste, within reason , and depends on what the original poster likes.

[78w72]

grand73am: i was just replying to your first post that said 245/60's are 1/2" shorter than stock 225/70's... but as you just posted on your break down of the numbers, they are actually .8 different, which you now said is closer to 3/4". .8 is closer to 1" that it is to 1/2". but we both are using terms like "close to" & "about" so its just a rounded estimate for the subject of this thread. & i agree you wont notice .2-.3 either way, on most cars.

but if you do the math on the numbers, a 245 vs 255 tire is 10mm wider, & for a 60 series tire that works out to about 6mm difference on the sidewall, which converts to .236 or basically 1/4" shorter of the sidewall than a 255. so the overall height isnt much but the tires sidewall looks noticeably shorter than a 255/60.

i like your pic of the grand am but the wheel wells are different than a 2nd gen bird & any given tire will look different on different cars... plus every cars suspension height is going to be different, what works on 1 car may not work/look good on another. rule of thumb for 2nd gen cars has always been a 255/60 is the closest match to the 225/70 height, just a little wider which is what most people like on 15" rims, unless they want to be 100% original using 225/70's.

[79Y84x2]

I do appreciate all the replies!! I should have the snowflakes back from Keystone in about 3 weeks, leaning towards 255s and 245s in the front.

[78w72]

245 & 255 is a nice combo... but remember when you do mis match tires you cant rotate them properly. not a big deal on low mile driven cars... but chances are your rear tires will wear out much faster than the fronts!

[74Grandville]

I have 255/60 both front and back with hotchkis 2" lowered suspension. the only rubbing in the front I have is in a parking lot on a hard turn on the WS6 swaybar.

[Alvin]

Originally Posted by 74Grandville

I have 255/60 both front and back with hotchkis 2" lowered suspension. the only rubbing in the front I have is in a parking lot on a hard turn on the WS6 swaybar.

Agree, minor rub of frt bar is my experience also.