215/70 15 or 225/70 15?

[JonMac46]

We've just bought a used camper on a 1999 2.8idTD Ducato base. Someone has put 225's on the front and 215's on the back.

I've read lots of posts here about camping tyres versus van tyres. I am a long term fan of Michelin tyres, and I like M&S as our main trips will be in the winter when the garden is dormant.

I intend to buy 4 Michelin Agilis Camping tyres. On their website it says:

215 load 109 fuel E

225 load 112 fuel C.

The competent technician at the dealer said we'd see no difference between 215 and 225.

It seems like a no-brainer to buy 225's.

Am I missing something?

Thanks.

[BGD]

Get the 225's.

 

And if you can get them in bog-standard form rather than overpriced and over-hyped "camping" form, I'd say go for those, they'll be a lot cheaper.

I've got "ordinary" Agilis tyres on my MH, and am very very happy with them indeed.

[lennyhb]

Standard Agilis tyres are not M&S rated, Jon said he wanted M&S tyres which the Camping Agilis is, unless you go for the Alpin version which would not be suitable for summer use as it's a full winter tyre.

[Derek Uzzell]

The original tyres on your motorhome would have been 215/70 R15C size.

 

Going to 225/70 R15C MIGHT result in rear-tyre clearance problems. This tyre-size would never have been allowed for by the motorhome manufacturer and the increase in width (although small) over the originals MIGHT cause a tyre to contact the rear wheel arch under load. It also MIGHT make changing the rear tyres more difficult. (This MIGHT explain why 215s are on the rear.)

 

You MIGHT also find that, should you need to replace a badly damaged tyre, that Agilis Camping would be more readily available in 215/70 R15C size.

 

The 225/70 R15C Agilis Camping has greater load-carrying potential than the 215/70 R15C version and is labelled as having a significantly lower rolling resistance. If there's no great purchase-price difference and the caveats I've mentioned in the last two paragraphs can be ignored, you might as well opt for the 225s.

[euroserv]

I am confused.

 

In 1999 the van versions of these vehicles would have been fitted with 15 inch wheels with 195/70 tyres or 16 inch with 205/75 tyres.

There would have been an option (normally exercised by converters) to change this to 205/70 15 or 215/75 16.

215 or 225 section tyres were not specified by Fiat for any application therefore it is reasonable to suspect that the speedometer drive will be wrong and the gearing will be affected.

 

Whoever built the vehicle in question will have provided an identifying plate of some kind on which the correct (designed) tyre size should be stated and this is the size that should be fitted; no matter what the previous owner has done.

 

The fitting of wider tyres on the front will have an adverse effect on ball joints and track rod ends. Larger, heavier vehicles with 16 inch wheels had bigger, heavier joints to cope with greater loads and these never had such wide tyres!

 

This will ensure that the gearing is somewhere near appropriate and that your speedometer in up to 10% optimistic, such as we have come to expect. Also is makes sure that the vehicle complies with it's original specification and will prevent insurer's from walking away from it in the event of an accident.

 

By the way; Camping tyres are pure snake oil. The load index on the side of the tyre is the 'last word' in terms of load rating and no matter what any of the makers (mainly Conti and Michelin) say; there is no 'extra reserve rating' on a CP tyre or they would stamp a higher rating on the sidewall!

What you can do is buy a higher load rated version of a normal tyre.....

For example; A standard 205/75 16 or 215/75 16 tyre on a 2002 type Ducato is rated at 113/111 and an X250 tyre of the same size is rated at 116/114. The former is an '8 ply' tyre, the latter a '10 ply'. There is no reason not to go for a higher rated tyre if there is one available.

In addition CP tyre makers claim that their tyres have additional protection from UV light to prevent degradation when parked in the sun. This would be beneficial if it were true but only if tyres were supposed to last for 10 years! Makers are telling us that a tyre should only be used for 5 years; and I can assure you that ANY tyre is more than capable of that , no matter what you do with it. They would have you changing them with barely any wear on them at all!

Save money, don't believe the hype. Van tyres are fine.

 

Nick

 

 

[Airstream]

Hi,

look in the handbook for your van - it may list the range of factory fitted tyre options - the Fiat 2006 on handbook shows the 225/75 r15 as an option and it is what is now fitted to my van as the 215 did not have the weight capacity when I upgraded the rear axle loading

 

Have a look at Conti Vanco four season they are dual branded to give a higher weight loading ie 115N at lower max speed of 87mph they also have M+S marking and an agressive tread patern and suitable for all year use

 

Ray

[JonMac46]

I managed to get a copy of the motorhome manual [in German] and it shows tyre pressures for both 225/70 and 215/70; no way to tell what was originally fitted.

[Derek Uzzell]

JonMac46

 

It would be helpful if you provided details of the make and model of motorhome you own.

 

Nick's comment about 1999 Ducato tyre sizes tallies with Michelin's handbook. However, Ducato-based coachbuilt motorhomes were being factory-fitted with 215/70 R15C tyres then (and for some years prior to 1999) as part of Fiat's 'camping-car' package that included heavier springs and Michelin "XC Camping" tyres. In fact, it would have been unusual for 1999-built Ducato-based coachbuilt motorhomes with 15" wheels not to have 215/70 R15C Michelin "XC Camping" tyres as original equipment.

 

"XC Camping" was available in 225/70 R15C size, but this size would never have been factory-fitted to a 1999-built Ducato-based motorhome.

[JonMac46]

It is a Dethlefffs Globetrotter Esprit, built in 1999. I just looked at the stickers and it says the tyres were originally 215/70 R 15 C. It was imported used into Ireland in 2003.

One of the rear tyres is a 2004 Michelin Camping.

The front tyres are Firestone 225's.

It looks like there is lots of room for 225's on the rear.

[Brian Kirby]

If you're going to opt for the Camping type tyres, which run at higher pressures than the standard "white van" tyres for the same load, check that the valves fitted to the wheels are of metal, clamp-in, type. As the fronts have been changed for non-camping type, it is possible a fitter has taken out the metal valves and substituted standard rubber bodied snap-in valves that will not be suitable for pressures in the region of 5.0 bar.

[Derek Uzzell]

JonMac46 - 2013-07-17 5:01 PM

 

It is a Dethlefffs Globetrotter Esprit, built in 1999. I just looked at the stickers and it says the tyres were originally 215/70 R 15 C. It was imported used into Ireland in 2003.

One of the rear tyres is a 2004 Michelin Camping.

The front tyres are Firestone 225's.

It looks like there is lots of room for 225's on the rear.

 

Globetrotter Esprits were made in all sorts of shapes and sizes and it's the model 'designator' (eg. 5880) that identifies one model from another. I note that a 1999 Esprit was being offered for sale by Pat Horan Motors in Ireland earlier this year and I'm guessing this might be the vehicle you own: however, there's no clue in the Pat Horan reference as to which model of Esprit it was.

 

A load-index of 109 indicates that a tyre has been designed to have a maximum load-carrying capability of 1030kg, whereas a load-index of 112 indicates a maximum load-carrying capability of 1120kg. Your Dethleffs original tyres would have had a load-index of 109 and the vehicle's maximum authorised axle-loads (per axle) would have been less than 2060kg (2 x 1030kg). Consequently, any 215/70 R15C tyre with a 109 load-index should be technically adequate for your motorhome.

 

'Camping-car' tyres (Michelin "Agilis Camping", Continental "VancoCamper" or Pirelli "Chrono Camper") are marketed as being especially suitable for motorhomes for the reasons given on Continental's website:

 

http://www.continental-tires.com/www/tires_de_en/themes/van-tires/summer-tires_summer-tires-folderdoc/vancocamper/vancocamper.html?page=4

 

However (particularly if the motorhome's measured axle-loadings in normal use are well below the maximum indicated by the tyres' load-index) it's acceptable to fit 'white van' tyres instead. In your case, only one of your motorhome's tyres is a 'camping-car' tyre, with the remainder being 'white van' tyres.

 

I'm not going to attempt to dissuade you from choosing Michelin "Agils Camping" tyres, nor am I going to try to dissuade you from fitting 225/70 tyres rather than 215/70 ones. I'm doubtful that you'd gain anything worthwhile from the 225/70's "C" fuel marking compared to the 215/70's "E" marking, as the former's lower rolling-resistance will be offset by its wider tread surface. The 225/70's greater load-carrying potential could be useful if you operated your motorhome with any of its axle-loadings close to (or beyond!) 2060kg but, if that's not the case, 215/70 tyres with a 109 load-index should be adequate, as should 'white van' tyres rather than 'camping-car' tyres. It's your choice...

 

A few months ago the German motorhome magazine "Promobil" published an article on tyre buying based on tyre 'labelling'. Six tyre patterns were compared, all with 215/70 R15C 109/107 specification. Two were 'camping-car' tyres (VancoCamper and Agilis Camping) and the former was rated higher than the latter. The other four tyre patterns tested were 'white van' type. Of all six tyre-patterns tested Hankook's "Vantra LT" RA18 scored highest by a significant margin, particularly on wet-surface performance.

 

Promobil wasn't (obviously) able to compare ALL 215/70 R15C tyres on the market, so it's possible that, say, Pirelli's Chrono Camper or Yokohama's Y354 All Season tyre would have proved truly marvellous. However, it's reasonable to say that, if you were comfortable not fitting 'camping-car' tyres, Hankook Vantra LTs should be a good choice for winter use (it's M+S marked) and should cost a good deal less to buy than Agilis Camping.

[JonMac46]

Derek,

Excellent sleuthing on your part - Pat Horan Campers it was indeed.

It is a A5820.

Thanks a lot for your help [and the other people too].

[JonMac46]

PS.

Plated weights are

front axle 1690kg

rear axle 1750kg

total max 3200kg

[Derek Uzzell]

A quite compact and lightish design (based on on-line adverts), so there should be no pressing need to go for tyres with a load-index higher than 109. And - unless you are carrying a heavy motorbike on the back or smuggling gold bullion - fitting 'white van' tyres should be OK.

 

In fact, with a maximum permitted axle load of 1750kg (rear axle) and a 109 load-index equating to a 2060kg axle-limit, the vehicle would be seriously overloaded well before you reached a 215/70 R15C tyre's design load-limit.

 

Suggest you explore the price of four 215/70 R15C Hankook Vantra LT RA18s, versus the price of four Agilis Camping tyres...

[Billggski]

As a newbie, but fiddled with cars for many years, I pondered this for a long time before biting the bullet.

With my 2009 Dethleffs being built on a 2007 chassis (checking the tyre dates) I reckoned a change was due as, like most, it will have been standing still for the majority of that time. It had vanco camping on all four, and no spare. So I picked up a brand new wheel and tyre on eBay (from auto-trail as I was in Grimsby that week).

I had problems on my steep gravel drive with the front tyres down to 4mm, still legal, but marginal for me.

After agonising over the alternatives, "white van", conti, michelin I worked out that the extra cost of the recommended "camping" tyres was minimal in the grand scheme of things. The extra £100 on a £30,000 vehicle is neither here nor there for the peace of mind of having the correct tyres for the job, especially touring in far off places. So I got the michelin agelis camping as they are m&s rated,

When taking the old tyres off, the fitter found a cut in a front, and a nail in a rear tyre. Close thing!

You could save a bit by buying ordinary van tyres, but for the cost of a tankful of diesel I can let my kids borrow the bus with confidence.

[DAVLINS]

sorry if this has been a thread previously. My Swift Kontiki 610 came with 215/70/15 Michelin XC tyres. - I am soon to replace my tyres . Could I safely replace them with 225/70/15 Commercial tyres on the same rim?

[Billggski]

Short answer is why?

A marginal gain and possible problems.

[Steve928]

DAVLINS - 2014-02-26 7:32 PM

 

sorry if this has been a thread previously. My Swift Kontiki 610 came with 215/70/15 Michelin XC tyres. - I am soon to replace my tyres . Could I safely replace them with 225/70/15 Commercial tyres on the same rim?

 

We made the change from 215/70 (Conti Vanco Campers) to 225/70 van tyres on our previous van.

No problems to report but the gains were a useful lengthening of the gearing and a less harsh ride.

 

I don't know what base your Kontiki is on but the X2/50 can have 225/70s as an option from the factory so there are no clearance, or other, issues.

[DAVLINS]

Steve928 - 2014-02-26 8:10 PM

 

DAVLINS - 2014-02-26 7:32 PM

 

sorry if this has been a thread previously. My Swift Kontiki 610 came with 215/70/15 Michelin XC tyres. - I am soon to replace my tyres . Could I safely replace them with 225/70/15 Commercial tyres on the same rim?

 

We made the change from 215/70 (Conti Vanco Campers) to 225/70 van tyres on our previous van.

No problems to report but the gains were a useful lengthening of the gearing and a less harsh ride.

 

I don't know what base your Kontiki is on but the X2/50 can have 225/70s as an option from the factory so there are no clearance, or other, issues.

 

hello Steve. Thanks for the reply. My Swift Kontiki 610 is on an Al-Ko Low Frame 3.4T.

[DAVLINS]

Billggski - 2014-02-26 7:50 PM

 

Short answer is why?

A marginal gain and possible problems.

 

Don't know enough about the subject and therefore my thread question . I was working on the assumption that a broader profile tyre would be beneficial but would like to hear about the potential problems you refer to ?

[Derek Uzzell]

DAVLINS

 

I thought replacements for your motorhomes's tyres had been thoroughly explored here

 

http://www.outandaboutlive.co.uk/forums/Motorhomes/Motorhome-Matters/M-S-MOTORHOME-TYRES/34065/

 

The main potential problem with going from the present 215/70 profile to 225/70 (as I said in my 17 July 2013 9:25 AM posting above) is lack of clearance within the wheel-arches, particularly within the rear wheel-arches.

 

Your Kon-Tiki 610 is 2004 vintage and 225/70 profile tyres would not have been standard fitment on that model. Its plated overall and axle weights are respectively 3400kg, 1750kg(front) and 1900kg(rear), so a tyre with a 109 Load Index (2060kg axle load maximum) - which a 215/70 R15C tyre can provide - will be adequate.

 

Assuming there were no wheel-arch clearance issues, moving to a 225/70 profile would raise your motorhome's overall gearing by roughly 2% and the tyre's Load Index would increase to 112 (2240kg axle load maximum). There'd also be a slight increase in ground clearance.

 

Increasing overall gearing needs treating with caution. If a vehicle has a highish top gear to begin with, even a relatively small increase in overall gearing may make that gear significantly less accessible (ie. it might, in your case, prove necessary to use 4th gear more often than before). You'd also end up with higher 1st and reverse gear ratios - hardly desirable for a motorhome.

 

Obviously, if you've been using high (80psi, say) pressures for your XC Camping tyres and will necessarily be lowering those pressures for C-marked 'commercial' tyres, you should notice the ride being less harsh. However, if you chose 225/70 profile tyres rather than 215/70 ones and, in each case, matched inflation pressures to measured axle loadings, I doubt you'd notice any difference in ride quality between the two tyre widths.

 

When a new model is introduced, manufacturers of light-commercial vehicles may be forced to opt for a wider tyre to gain a Load Index suitable for an increased axle-loading maximum - hence the increase on heavier Ducatos from 215/75 R16 to 225/75 R16. But I've no idea whether a voluntary increase in tyre width would genuinely benefit you. A wider tyre would probably have a higher rolling resistance (hence higher fuel consumption) and might provide less grip in snow, but that's guesswork.

 

Your motorhome's tyres, having covered 38k miles and being 10 years old, are on borrowed time and, if I were in your shoes, I'd want to replace those tyres ASAP. If I were changing all 5 tyres and I found that I could obtain the 225/70 version of the tyre I wanted cheaper than the 215/70, and I was certain there'd be no clearance issues, I might go for the wider tyre. Otherwise, as I can't see any persuasive technical advantages in opting for a 225/70 profile, I'd opt for the originally-fitted 215/70 size.

 

This really boils down to "Please yourself..."

[Steve928]

Derek Uzzell - 2014-02-27 8:20 AM

However, if you chose 225/70 profile tyres rather than 215/70 ones and, in each case, matched inflation pressures to measured axle loadings, I doubt you'd notice any difference in ride quality between the two tyre widths..

That wasn't my experience, the difference was noticable, but hey-ho.

 

Derek Uzzell - 2014-02-27 8:20 AM

A wider tyre would probably have a higher rolling resistance (hence higher fuel consumption) and might provide less grip in snow, but that's guesswork.

Tyre width, e.g. 215, is often taken as meaning tread width but it does in fact refer to the section width - see diagram attached. In our case the wider 225mm section width tyres that we fitted were 20mm narrower at the tread than the 215s that they replaced. As you say it really is guesswork.

 

 

Out of interest, as we were fitting 225s primarily to lengthen the gearing, we shopped around tape measure in hand and measured a notable difference between circumferences of tyres of the same marked size (off the rim, uninflated, of course). If I remember correctly the Falken R51 225/70s that we fitted measured 6% more in circumference than the 215/70s, while a calculation would suggest 2% as you say.

 

I guess that this goes some way to explain why speedometers have to under-read by such an amount to cover all possible tyre size variations that may legally be fitted.

I think also that it suggests that perhaps the rim diameter is the only precise tyre measurement, the others being nominal at best.

 

 

[Derek Uzzell]

Yes, but you went from VancoCamper CP-marked tyres to Falken C-marked ones, simultaneously changing the profile.

 

It seemed from DAVLINS's postings on the earlier thread I gave a link to that he was settling on Hankook's RA18 tyre. I wasn't suggesting that there'd be no noticable difference in ride quality from going from his present XC Camping tyres to RA18 tyres, but that there'd probably be no noticable difference if he fitted RA18 tyres in 215/70 profile or 225/70 profile and chose pressures for each tyre according to his motorhome's measured axle-loadings. Those pressures might differ for each profile.

 

I used Michelin's rolling-circumference data (because it was handy) for the two profiles and this produced my 2% gearing-increase figure. I don't know if fitting 225/70 profile RA18s would produce a similar or greater percentage-increase over 215/70 RA18s, but there would be an increase. In my view, the greater the hike in the overall gearing, the more likely it would adversely affect DAVLINS's 2004 motorhome. Plainly, if DAVLINS believed his motorhome could benefit from its gearing being 'lengthened' (as you did) opting for the 225/70 size would be advantageous.

[DAVLINS]

Derek Uzzell - 2014-02-27 8:20 AM

 

DAVLINS

 

I thought replacements for your motorhomes's tyres had been thoroughly explored here

 

 

Derek- .I feel like a suitably chastened schoolboy ( I wish) - are you a schoolteacher by any chance!

 

You are correct - I had made up my mind to buy Hankooks RA18's only to be put in doubt again by Camskills tyre outlet who were adamant that they had many instances of that particular tyre ( and indeed other commercial tyres) proving unsuitable for 3400kgs motorhomes.

 

As for the 225x70x15 issue I am the type who likes the safest legal option - particularly on heavy vehicles . I was assuming the 225's would be marginally safer given the wider profile but really didn't know enough about the pros/cons. I have always thought my vehicle to be low at the back end - and I travel very light so.I will heed the potential probs re fitting 225's. Interestingly my handbook states the requirement for 205mm tyres ( winter) and 215mm( summer tyres) .

 

SO after all this I will stick with the 215/70/15 and it is NOW a toss up between the Hankooks RA18's (£72 delivered ) or the Conti Vanco Campers at ( £90 delivered). Local fitting will cost me £7.50 per tyre and I will supply the metal clamp in valves for the fitting. I will most probably go for the Contis ( playing safe is the only reason) and I promise you Derek that I wont raise this issue again ( LOL).

 

Thanks again for your helpful reply.

 

[Derek Uzzell]

DAVLINS - 2014-02-27 10:10 AM

 

...Interestingly my handbook states the requirement for 205mm tyres ( winter) and 215mm( summer tyres)...

 

 

I can't think of a persuasive reason why a narrower-profile 'winter' tyre should be mandated for your vehicle, but it might well be necessary for narrower-profile tyres to be used if snow-chains are to be fitted. That's the case with my FWD Transit-based motorhome, where the Ford handbook advises that the 215/75 R16C tyres normally fitted to the front wheels would need to be replaced by 195/75 R16C (M+S) tyres to allow the use of snow-chains. Presumably this is to gain extra clearance beneath the front wheel-arches.

 

VancoCampers at £90 are well-priced. Before ordering, you might want to confirm with the supplier that the tyres' date of manufacture will be recent-ish (and to confirm this from the date-code when they are delivered), but it would be worthwhile doing this if you chose the Hankooks instead. I've no particular reason to think an on-line supplier would provide 'old' tyres, but it would be as well to check.

 

(I've never been a schoolteacher. I can't imagine how you came up with that idea. ;-) )