I'm really torn between 15s and 16s. Take a look at the Scion SC's tires and wheels. I believe the wheels are 16s but they look kinda strange because there is so little tire ove the wheel. The new Civics come stock with 16s, but the tire profile is too much - 55s, maybe. 16s on an older Civic would require very low profile tires - 45s to be exact. I think a 15-inch wheel with 205/50s would look good. Most 16s are at least 16 lbs and that may be more than the 14-inch steelies, which would hurt performance and braking.

So, if you do get 16s, get something that weighs less than 14 lbs, if possible. At least that way, you won't be hurting yourself in the performance department (in everything by handling and steering response).

 

sorry, its in my sig. i have an 01 ex coupe. id like all season, however i live in san diego california and as muchas it would be to good have traction in the rain (something id like) it doesnt snow at all so thats not somethign im worried about. all season doesnt sound like a bad idea however i don't really know the difference.

 

i went on that survey site that civicexracer posted. they pretty much made bridgestone potenzas seem like the best tires money could buy. what would be teh best ideal tire size, i don't know much about what all those damn numbers mean except for that the R stands for rim lol. what woudl be the best size to get? i like the look of those tires that are really wide that you see on muscle cars and beemers but i also want what would be best for my car. thanks again for all of your guy's help.

 

17's would look awesome man.. and if your roads are smooth in san dieago i'd say go for those haha.. but im just a fan of big *** rims haha and since you live where the raods are decnet i'd say give er.. hahaha but yeah im just jealous cuase it would be hard pullin off 17's in saskatchewan.. the roads suck ****.. the potholes would were them pretty fast haha specially if you were doin any racing on them

 

roads suck in sd...besides wouldnt 16s handle better?

 

yeah.. 16's would.. haha but im gonna bet thtat our roads make yours look beutiful haha

 

The Pole Position is a pretty good tire, but it may not be easy to find in the size you want and it may be pretty expensive.

The size you'd likely want for 16s would be 205/45-16s. 205 = 205mm wide, 45 = 45% of 205 is the sidewall height, 16 = the rim diameter that the tire will fit, and if there's an "R" it typically means the tire is of radial construction.

You don't necessarily need an all-season tire. Summer UHP tires are designed to resist hydroplaning and offer good wet traction in above-freezing temps. All-seasons are designed to be able to run inbelow-freezing temps, and many offer some traction in snow.

 

Speaking of tires, here's Car & Driver magazine's ratings:

AlthoughCar & Driverused "only" a 325 BMW as a test mule, you are very likely to experience similar results with your Honda. To minimize variables such as driving techniques, track surface temps, etc, C&D enlisted the help of the Tire Rack and their test mule vehicle. Although the track used was small, it's lined with sprinklers that can soak the asphalt. "It took three days to perform all the tests. We accerated to 50 mph and then braked to a standstill. There was a benefit to that lower speed: It ensured that we were measuring the braking performance of the tires and not just brake fade."

"In addition to factoring the wet and dry scores, we gave points based on a tires's price and tread-wear grade, which is a rough estimate of how long a tire will have usable tread." "Our test focused on measuring performance, so we decided that results in the dry-lateral grip, for example - would carry the most weight."

So, without further adeau, here're the results:

(Best to worst):

NUMBER 1: Goodyear GSD3: "As an all-around performance tire, you can't beat this Goodyear. It was the best performer in all three wet-track tests and was very competent in the dry. It generated .94g on the dry skidpad, only .01g off the first place (dry) BFGoodrich and tied with the Yokohama and Hankook.
The Goodyear gripped so well, that you might not have been certain that the road was wet. It held onto the wet track with .82g of stick, an impressive figure considering the worst tire in that test made only .67g.
...And like the Continental, the Goodyear had a high 280 trad-wear grade. At $145, ieach, it's $34 cheaper than the most expensive (guess which tires have THAT distinction!).

2nd place: Continental ContiSportContact 2: "It simply didn't feel as sporty as the others.....on dry surfaces, the Conti never rose above third from last among 11 tires. It felt soft and imprecise. But in the wet, the spread from best to worse was 15 percent, which made for a larger point spread (giving the Contis a boost). Plus the Continental had a 280tread-wear grade that was the highest (tied) for this test.

3rd place: Yokohama Advan Neova AD07: Excellent dry performance, but a bit on the slippery end in the wet stuff - expensive at $175 apiece.

4th place: Michelin Pilot Sport PS2: "At $179, the PS2 is the most expensive tire in the test." Competent, but expensive sums up this tire.

5th place; Hankook Ventus R-S2 Z212: At $99 each, these are the least expensive tires - very good on dry pavement, but "greasy and slow to recover" on the wet stuff.

6th place: Dunlop SP Sport Max: "In the dry, the tire seemed to lose its confidence..."

7th place: Pirelli P Zero Rosso Asimmetrico:"In the dry-lateral-grip test, the Pirelli tied for second to last, and it finished seventh in the dry-braking test.

8th place: Toyo Proxes T1R: "...the Proxes never placed higher than eighth in any test"...nuff said!

9th place: Bridgestone Potenza RE050A: "it felt dull and disconnected and was somewhat soft and imprecise when driven hard."

10th place: BFGoodrich g-Force T/A KD: Outstanding performance on dry surfaces, but very scary on wet surfaces - don't get caught in a rainstorm wearing these shoes...

11th place: Kumho Ecsta MX: "They didn't offer much grip and the time of 30.28 seconds in the dry autocross was .62 second slower than the fastest tire. That may not seem like much, but our course was only 0.3 mille long, and on a longer track, that gap would be commensurately greater." "And although the MX - at $136 per - was the third-least-expensive tire in our test, the high score in the price category wasn't enough to regain ground lost in the performance tests."

 

ej6buddy has 15 inch rims doesnt he? they look sick on his car IMO

 

13's FTW lol