I've searched past tire threads, and didn't really find an answer to this question (most threads are for 4WD tires)...

Due to the recent Michelin LTX tire recall, it appears that I'll be getting three of my four tires replaced under the recall. Currently I'm running the stock 225/75-16 tires on OEM Ford 16" alloy wheels from a 2012 E250 (my van is a 98 E250). I have a 2WD van, non-lifted, with a 3.73 LS rear axle.

I was thinking of seeing if the dealer would let me upsize to the 245 tires (I'll have to buy one tire on my own dime), which are also stock on some Ford vans and will fit the rims and the body with no issues (or so it seems). Main reason to upsize would be to get the additional 1" of tire "lift" and also because I think they look a bit better in the wheelwells.

Is there any downside to running the 245 size?

Thanks!

My van originally came with 225s. When I bought it the 225s were replaced with 4 new 245s. 245s are the optional factory size and doesn't rub at all. Upside is the greater load capacity because of the 245s. Mine is also a 2WD with 3.73 nonLS. IMHO, I would get the 245s and pay the difference.

(My spare is also a 245 and being a Ford certified used vehicle it says that all tires are matched. The dealership reluctantly swapped out the 225 spare for a new 245 spare.)

My 2 cents,
Ray

Thanks Ray. How do 245s have greater load capacity than 225 (assuming both are the same load range, i.e., "E")?

Forgot about the spare... drat. I'd have to change that, too. I guess I'd have to have the speedo recalibrated as well.

245s are stock on all the wagons. They fit with room to spare.

They carry more weight because they have more contact area. [Area(in square inches) x PSI] = load(in pounds), which is why larger tires with the same load rating (and hence pressure rating) can carry more weight.

__________________
2000 E450 dually V10 wagon

Look at the tire sidewall and 245s show I think a 3054lb rating. 225s I think show about 2600lb. 265s are higher still. All tires I'm referencing are E tires. For the porked up E350s over 10000lbs they would exceed the total load capacity of 4 225 tires. And probably why my E350 van carries a 8600lb rating as shown on the door jamb sticker.

225s look visibly smaller in the wheel well especially at the rear. Overall height compared to a stock 245 van is a little difficult to tell. Here's a pict of my father-in-law's SMB with 225s and my passenger van with 245s.

Ray

Attached Thumbnails

 

.. I didn't bother trying to recalibrate the speedo. The difference from 225 to 245 is about 4% or about 26 less revolutions per mile. 65mph becomes 67.6mph. Difference in height is about .6in.

Ray

Thanks guys!

My van is the same configuration as yours, '98 5.4 3.73 with stock 225/75's.
I upgraded to 235/85R16 General AT2. They fit well without any rubbing at all. Speedo is slightly off by about 4%.

__________________
'98 E-250 5.4 2WD Cargo Van

I too have been running Michelin LTX in the 245 size, now on three different 2WD E250's

At 7,800# as a daily driver there's never been an issue with clearance or rubbing. Suspensions have always been kept or restored to near-new condition which helps but even so generally there are no fitment issues.

I've not yet been contacted of any Michelin recalls, had the tires rotated by the installing shop just last week----might have to check into this.

Anybody else running 235/85R16s? My new-to-me non-lifted 2001 2WD E250's stock 225/75R16s will have to be replaced soon. Seems like converting to 235/85R16s would be an inexpensive way to get a bit of lift. Providing as Karsten says there are no rubbing/clearance issues. I could live with the odometer/speedometer being off a bit.

Would appreciate any advice. Thanks.