56 Nomad, Ramjet 502, Viper 6-speed T56, C4 Corvette front and rear suspension
Other vehicles:
56 Chevy 2-door BelAir sedan
56 Chevy 210 4-door sedan
57 Chevy 210 4-door sedan
1962 327/340HP Corvette
1961 Willys CJ3B Jeep
2001 Porsche Boxster S
2003 Chevy Silverado 2500 HD Duramax
2019 GMC Sierra Denali Duramax
A 255/60-15 would be the safest fit at 27 inches tall, 10.2 overall section width, with 8.2 inch tread width. I think it is a good fit for a tri-five which sits on the same wheelbase as the heavier 94-96 Impala SS which ran the similar dimensions in a 255/50-17. Those were one of GM's best overall performing full-sized cars ever built. And compared to that my 13 Tahoe police pursuit on the same wheelbase even heavier runs a rare size of 265/60-17 tire, and they kick ass, Other than they are government priced at $1600 for a set of 4.
Last edited by 55 Rescue Dog; 01-19-2018 at 03:42 AM.
WTF does wheelbase have to do with tire size? You put the widest tire on the car for the best performance....that's a 275 on the rear of a stock tri5. Anything less is sub-optimal.
56 Nomad, Ramjet 502, Viper 6-speed T56, C4 Corvette front and rear suspension
Other vehicles:
56 Chevy 2-door BelAir sedan
56 Chevy 210 4-door sedan
57 Chevy 210 4-door sedan
1962 327/340HP Corvette
1961 Willys CJ3B Jeep
2001 Porsche Boxster S
2003 Chevy Silverado 2500 HD Duramax
2019 GMC Sierra Denali Duramax
56 Nomad, Ramjet 502, Viper 6-speed T56, C4 Corvette front and rear suspension
Other vehicles:
56 Chevy 2-door BelAir sedan
56 Chevy 210 4-door sedan
57 Chevy 210 4-door sedan
1962 327/340HP Corvette
1961 Willys CJ3B Jeep
2001 Porsche Boxster S
2003 Chevy Silverado 2500 HD Duramax
2019 GMC Sierra Denali Duramax
Good info. Thank you all!
It was more of a overall vehicle size comparison, with a couple vehicles that perform well that don't use a 275 wide tire. I couldn't say exactly what would be better performance wise between a 255 vs 275, but besides clearance issues, the 275 is only about 1/2 in wider, but 1 inch taller at 28in , and 3 pounds heavier if that helps a lot for performance.
A 255 tire is close to twice as wide as a "stock" tri5 tire. I like big tires too, but a 275/60-15 is maybe a bit much, and harder to find a matching front tire with similar performance for cornering/braking, I think. Tire construction, and rubber compound are more important than just a small difference in the width.
Is it really necessary for you to act an internet bully, and cuss me out, or anyone else, in so many of your replies???
Last edited by 55 Rescue Dog; 01-19-2018 at 04:47 AM.
If you had ever driven one you would know what I mean. I've had a 95 and 96 Impala SS, autocrossed them both, and they are very impressive for a boat. It would be very difficult to build a tri5 that even come close as far as handling/braking. A C4 conversion chassis probably won't. A tri5 definitely beats it on looks though.
Last edited by 55 Rescue Dog; 01-19-2018 at 04:26 AM.
Actually, at the time, magazines DID tout the performance of the Impala SS .. With the LT1 engine, they ran very well, and the car itself has been a 'collector' car almost from day 1, and still is today; there are Impala SS clubs all over the country (except for perhaps in northern Colorado??)..
In 1996, I test drove one for a weekend, and might have bought it except for the 'trunk space', if you can believe that! They put a full size spare in the trunk which reduced the available trunk space to much less than I had with my Intrepid ES, and for a family car which the wife mostly drove, trunk space is important.
Last edited by BamaNomad; 01-19-2018 at 06:02 AM.