Looking at 15 x 295s on different rims

[Fred Douglass]

I had an interesting opportunity today. I saw a brand-new SPF parked at the Marina in Falmouth (Mass.). I squatted down and took a look at his BFG 15 x 295's--they appeared wider that they do in photos, including the brochure. Within an hour of this eyeball observation, my friend from Rhode Island had his peerless black Butler parked just down the street. Same tires: BFG 15 x 295's, but the looked HUGELY wider under the Butler's stern. Now I do understand that SPF puts 10" Trigos back there and Butler put 12" wide Trigos (?). Both look to be identical pin-drive types. Does the simple rim-width difference yield the tremendous width difference? I know it's not optical...I used the old standard "handspan plus fist" method of bridging the gaps. I would have thought that there were entirely different tires mounted, from the appearence of things. It just seemed that the extra two inches at the bead part of the tire didn't seem capable of creating that size of differential. Was I missing something about the tires?--I do know, for instance, that the third number refers to the aspect ratio (a "65" section tire being much "taller" that a "45", for instance. Any info on this?

[decooney]

Yes, I recently encountered the same observation. My friend has 12" wide rims on the back of his Butler Cobra. He previously had 265"/50s mounted on his 12" rim, and we compared it tread to tread with his 295s and the 265s on the 12" rim mounted "appeared" to be the same width as his new 295/50 unmounted tires; where the 295 tire was in a relaxed state. The extra rim width between a 9.5" wide Trigo and his 12" wide BBS rim really make a signifigant difference (and illusion) in overall tire width with his BFG 295x50. The sidewalls really bowed out more on the wider 12" rim. I had 9.5" Trigos on the back of my previous car with 295/50s, and the sidewalls were flatter, and the tire appeared much more square than my friends Butler with his new 295/50s on his 12" rim. Good Luck. Duane