TeamSwift

Home of the Suzuki mini-compacts ! Your Home for all things Suzuki Swift, Geo Metro, Holden Barina, Chevy Sprint, Pontiac Firefly, and Suzuki Cultus. TeamSwift is a technical performance oriented community!
It is currently Tue Nov 21, 2017 1:19 am

Underbody braces, turbos and more!

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Jul 11, 2009 1:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 2:11 am
Posts: 4
I have a 1987 Sprint Plus that I bought with 13" metro wheels on it. It has always gotten around 38 mpg with about 80% highway driving. The tire/wheel combo diameter is about 1" taller than the original making speedometer off by about 3 mph at 55 mph. My mpg figure was adjusted up slightly to account for that.

I never thought much about it until I came across this review...

"I bought my first in 1986. Got about 47mpg around town and over 50 on the highway. I replaced the wheels with 13" ones at one point, with low profile tires the same diameter as the 12" originals. This change alone reduced the gas miliage to 37 in town. I sold it to a friend in 1994 and have since owned 3 additional Geo Metros. The Metros never got as good mileage as the 86, only 37 to 40 around town. I attribute that to the Metro's 13" wheels (the fuel injection should have helped)."

Is there any truth to this? Has anyone else experienced this? It doesn't really make sense to me why that would happen.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 11, 2009 9:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2008 9:08 am
Posts: 41
Location: Florida
I find it highly unlikely that +1" diameter rims with the same overall diameter tires could reduce mileage by 10 MPG all by itself...

_________________
1991 Geo Metro 2dr HB 1.0 Auto


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 13, 2009 2:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 11:29 am
Posts: 83
Location: Kentucky, USA
When I upgraded to 13's the height was 7% taller and I expected little to no mileage effect what I saw for two years was an increase of of 2.5 MPG. I'd suspect something else.

_________________
1990 Metro G10 5-speed
Econo cam +8 degrees, Miata 14s

54 MPG


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 13, 2009 2:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 2:11 am
Posts: 4
Ok thanks. I would have expected a slightly increase due to the higher effective gearing. Interesting.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 02, 2010 10:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2009 10:18 pm
Posts: 110
Location: Levittown PA USA
did you correct for the tire size difference? IE your odometer would no longer be correct.

when I went from 12's to 13's my odo changed by a factor of 1.05 ie I "lost .1 miles every 2 miles.

so when my odometer says I have gone 100 miles I have actually gone 105 miles. IE your FE might actually be UP but because your odo is no longer correct you might "measure" lower.

the difference for me is quite a lot. if we assume 50 mpg for 500 miles 10 gallons

but if the odo is "off" by 1.05 then the the actual distance traveled is 525 miles or 52.5mpg

the lower your FE the "bigger" this difference will be.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 03, 2010 12:38 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2006 6:37 pm
Posts: 784
Location: Palmdale, Ca
You have to look at the weight difference too. A heavier wheel/tire combo take more power to move and stop.

_________________
1987 Chevrolet Sprint Turbo under construction


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 11, 2010 2:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 6:16 pm
Posts: 146
Location: Fort Lauderdale, Florida
Maybe someone should actually weigh a 12" wheel with the standard tire size and a 13" tire/wheel combo to have a measurable standard.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 11, 2010 4:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2008 9:08 am
Posts: 41
Location: Florida
I gained about 1 MPG after the 13" swap. I still have the 12's too so maybe I'll weigh them next time I have the wheels off the car, which should be pretty soon.

_________________
1991 Geo Metro 2dr HB 1.0 Auto


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 24, 2010 6:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 6:41 pm
Posts: 44
Location: Santa Barbara, California
I did a different swap.. I got rid of my 12's (which weighed 21.5 lbs each on my scale- in OLD condition) and put on some 155/60/15's (which weighed around 29 lbs each on the same scale). There's a 6% increase in diameter going to the 15's, and I accounted for that in my mileage calculations. I haven't noticed a big change in mileage one way or the other. The 15's do a bit better on the highway, and the 12's probably did better around town, but I didn't notice a difference as my driving is almost always a mix. Just for handling and safety issues I would NEVER go back to the 12's though. Too flabby in a car that's so narrow. And does anyone make a GOOD 155R12 anymore? Having had a blowout in a Sprint, I just don't trust the 12s anymore. (This is one of my pet topics! Can you tell?)
Hope that's helpful!

_________________
85 Chevy Sprint Plus
87 Chevy Sprint Plus
It may only have 3 cylinders and be less than 1 liter.....
BUT IT'S GOT A HEMI!!
XD


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 18, 2013 1:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Aug 13, 2013 11:48 pm
Posts: 14
Location: Pomona, CA
When I first bought my MK1 it had 13" wheels on it...needless to say I took them off and put the factory 12" wheels on it.
I should have weighed them but the weight difference was HUGE.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group