Alternate (larger) tires for 2015+ Transit - Page 2 - Ford Transit USA Forum
 239Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #11 of 518 (permalink) Old 09-10-2014, 04:17:PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 890
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 296 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by bbird View Post
I noticed they are run a 65 profile, I will be running a 75 or possibly 85 profile on my ist tire change. The main reason is to bring the rpms down so to gain MPG on the open road. The Ecoboost and the diesel have more than enough torque to pull the van. However if some one is usung their van for contract work and always carring 3,000+ lbs. this may not work for you
Changing axle ratio, if possible, may be a more efficient way to accomplish lowering of RPMs if higher MPGs is the goal. Of course there is no guarantee that lower RPMs will work -- depends on engine load. If engine ends up running more in 5th versus 6th then change may be negative.

Anyway, taller tires raise the vehicle and that usually hurts fuel economy. That's why lowering RPMs through gearing is normally more efficient. Granted, most people like bigger tires because of looks and because it cost much less.

As a side note, it's interesting Ford is not offering 3.55 gears. Previously they offered 3.31, 3.55, 3.73, and 4.10.
Chance is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #12 of 518 (permalink) Old 09-10-2014, 04:37:PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 264
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 58 Post(s)
>>> Granted, most people like bigger tires because of looks and because it cost much less.

And to help clear steep driveways, like mine.
Brad is online now  
post #13 of 518 (permalink) Old 09-10-2014, 05:08:PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Occidental, Ca.
Posts: 2,807
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1003 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chance View Post
Changing axle ratio, if possible, may be a more efficient way to accomplish lowering of RPMs if higher MPGs is the goal. Of course there is no guarantee that lower RPMs will work -- depends on engine load. If engine ends up running more in 5th versus 6th then change may be negative.

Anyway, taller tires raise the vehicle and that usually hurts fuel economy. That's why lowering RPMs through gearing is normally more efficient. Granted, most people like bigger tires because of looks and because it cost much less.

As a side note, it's interesting Ford is not offering 3.55 gears. Previously they offered 3.31, 3.55, 3.73, and 4.10.
What ratio would you buy for a long WB tall van with the 3.5 Ecoboost? Ford seems to select the 3.31 on all the Ecoboosts I have seen and the 3.73 for the 3.7. The Ecoboost does produce its torque at lower engine speeds.
Jskierpx likes this.
orton is online now  
 
post #14 of 518 (permalink) Old 09-10-2014, 05:38:PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 890
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 296 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by orton View Post
What ratio would you buy for a long WB tall van with the 3.5 Ecoboost? Ford seems to select the 3.31 on all the Ecoboosts I have seen and the 3.73 for the 3.7. The Ecoboost does produce its torque at lower engine speeds.
I'm not considering an EcoBoost, but regardless of engine I would likely go with the taller standard gearing because of two factors: I don't tow often enough to warrant lower gears, and I live in a very flat part of the country. I think the standard 3.7L V6 with 4.10 gears has a significant GCWR advantage over the 3.73 gears so that's the only factor that may sway my thinking.

Whether the engine produces max torque at lower or higher RPMs isn't that important to me. What's more important is available versus required torque at that RPM; hence not whether it's close to peak or not.
orton likes this.
Chance is offline  
post #15 of 518 (permalink) Old 12-14-2014, 08:50:PM
Senior Member
 
Whitedog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Bend, Oregon
Posts: 583
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 160 Post(s)
Garage
It looks like we will be taking the tires off of the dead 6.0L E450 and putting them on the Transit. They are 225/75/16s - the same as on our Sprinter. My tire guy was having trouble finding studs in the stock sizes. I will have to do some road testing to verify the odometer.
Whitedog is offline  
post #16 of 518 (permalink) Old 12-14-2014, 09:42:PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 323
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 100 Post(s)
[QUOTE=Whitedog;72193]It looks like we will be taking the tires off of the dead 6.0L E450 and putting them on the Transit. They are 225/75/16s - the same as on our Sprinter. My tire guy was having trouble finding studs in the stock sizes. I will have to do some road testing to verify the odometer.[/QUOT




Keep in mind the difference in max load (Lbs.) is over a 1,000 lbs, a tire. So your loosing about 4,000 Lbs from your gvwr
bbird is online now  
post #17 of 518 (permalink) Old 12-14-2014, 09:54:PM
Senior Member
 
Whitedog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Bend, Oregon
Posts: 583
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 160 Post(s)
Garage
[quote=bbird;72273]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitedog View Post
It looks like we will be taking the tires off of the dead 6.0L E450 and putting them on the Transit. They are 225/75/16s - the same as on our Sprinter. My tire guy was having trouble finding studs in the stock sizes. I will have to do some road testing to verify the odometer.[/QUOT




Keep in mind the difference in max load (Lbs.) is over a 1,000 lbs, a tire. So your loosing about 4,000 Lbs from your gvwr
The 225/75s have a higher load rating than what is available in the stock sizes.
Whitedog is offline  
post #18 of 518 (permalink) Old 12-15-2014, 10:53:PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 157
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 40 Post(s)
Garage
Stock tire max load is 3195 lb per tire. Are you sure the 225/75R16 is rated higher than that?
SuprMover is offline  
post #19 of 518 (permalink) Old 12-16-2014, 06:18:AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 323
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 100 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuprMover View Post
Stock tire max load is 3195 lb per tire. Are you sure the 225/75R16 is rated higher than that?



Glad someone else knows this
bbird is online now  
post #20 of 518 (permalink) Old 12-16-2014, 10:11:AM
Senior Member
 
Whitedog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Bend, Oregon
Posts: 583
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 160 Post(s)
Garage
The 225/75s are rated at 2650 for singles the 195/75s are rated at 2150 for singles. My tire guy doesn't have any studdable winter tires in the bigger tire size of the right load range. Even at 2500/ tire, that comes to 15,000 lb which is well over the GVWR.

Last edited by Whitedog; 12-16-2014 at 10:22:AM.
Whitedog is offline  
Reply

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off