Person's with 22's on Cayenne (preferably 2011)
#1
Nordschleife Master
Thread Starter
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
295/30.22
or 285/35.22
everyone reccomends 285/35.22 but its 2.8% too big,
the 295/30.22 is exactly same as stock but i feel kinda wide if the wheels on truck are only 9.5's?
suggestions? i am getting the pirelli Pzero Scorpions BTW
**Edit** read some not so good reviews on the Pzero's and swapped to "Yokohama Parada Spec X" in 285/35.22 and they were perfect tires, perfect size and work great on the Cayenne's weight.
or 285/35.22
everyone reccomends 285/35.22 but its 2.8% too big,
the 295/30.22 is exactly same as stock but i feel kinda wide if the wheels on truck are only 9.5's?
suggestions? i am getting the pirelli Pzero Scorpions BTW
**Edit** read some not so good reviews on the Pzero's and swapped to "Yokohama Parada Spec X" in 285/35.22 and they were perfect tires, perfect size and work great on the Cayenne's weight.
Last edited by rijowysock; 03-29-2011 at 04:15 PM.
#2
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I also have this question. I will pick up my base Cayenne in April and will upgrade the rims to 22' right away. I can't make up my mind whether the tyre size should be 295/30/22 or 285/35/22. Pirelli has both sizes available. The 295 one has the same diameter than the stock 18' rims, but it looks just slightly wider than the front wheel arch (my friend has the 295/30/22 pirelli scorpion on his 2011 cayenne now). However the 285 one should look better but the diameter is slightly bigger (not sure how it would affect the ride as well as the speedometer). Your views are welcomed.
#3
Nordschleife Master
Thread Starter
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
i bought 285.35.22 yokohama parada spec x.
they were perfect size, the 295's i felt were too wide and thin. looked odd in every pic i saw.
they were perfect size, the 295's i felt were too wide and thin. looked odd in every pic i saw.
#5
Nordschleife Master
Thread Starter
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
tires arent an exact science, 295 means many things to many makers.. the car's i have seen with 295/30 (supposed to be 295*.30=88.5mm sidewall) the sidewall looked thin and if you put a 295 on a 9.5/10" rim it "buldges" slightly off the rim.. hence wide and thin, wide for the rim (causing tire squirm and thin, low profile)
285/35= (285/35=99.75mm sidewall) and the 285 width looks good on 9.5 and flush on a 10" wheel.. also the sidewall is 11.25mm thicker which looks better on the truck... i personally dont feel that super thin sidewalls on trucks look good.. you need some meat to flow..
so the 285.35 was perfect imo.. and the 295/30 looks too wide and thin for the vehicle.
285/35= (285/35=99.75mm sidewall) and the 285 width looks good on 9.5 and flush on a 10" wheel.. also the sidewall is 11.25mm thicker which looks better on the truck... i personally dont feel that super thin sidewalls on trucks look good.. you need some meat to flow..
so the 285.35 was perfect imo.. and the 295/30 looks too wide and thin for the vehicle.
#6
Race Director
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Well I thought maybe that's what you meant; that the section width looked wide with a low (or thin) profile which is normal for performance tires but might look odd on a truck. I was just teasing you a bit about using wide and thin in the same sentence to describe the same tire.
![Wink](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/smilies/wink.gif)
![Cheers](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/smilies/beerchug.gif)
#7
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Thanks for your inputs anyway.
Thanks for your inputs by the way.