Good info. I like that you're taking an unbiased approach. I agree.

My opinion is the best opinion.... for me. lol. If you hate what I've done to my car, I'm sorry that it upsets you, but it's my car. I feel that mine is done rather tastefully. I'm sure that most of you guys love your cars and feel they are done tastefully as well. What wheels and tires ae best is solely up to you. If you race your car, then that will be different from someone that drives their car to concourse shows once a year. haha.

Take the information here for what it is. A guy with resources giving us some awesome data. We already knew that they were heavier, but it seems they might not have the huge difference we thought originally.

2 pounds is a lot.  That's 8 pounds of unsprung weight.  What is it, I don't remember the correlation, but something like equal to 80 pounds of frame weight?

165/55-12                       165/60-12

3.6" sidewall                     3.9" sidewall

9.6" radius                       9.9" radius

19.1 diameter                  19.8" diameter

60.1 circumference           62.2" circumference

Jemal the difference comes in play when you try to propel the Corvette with 335's on it down the road with a stock 60's engine just like Mini tried to do in the 90's. When comparing 10's to 13's did you weigh a SP factory wheel ?

That would be interesting... unfortunately we don't stock any 50 series 12s, but that might be the nice compromise to have big brakes and light weight... and great looks! Someone from Shasta Minis has a beautiful yellow Traveller/Countryman with about 12 x 6" rims and very low profile tires. I thought that had the "perfect" look! 

I'll say again that I am not militant about my OPINION! My intent with anything I do here is to provide information. Maybe I'm a bit different than most Mini fanatics in that I don't quite live and breath them! My stable includes big and small block Chevys, 4 x 4s & musclecars,  a couple of Mazda rotaries, a Yamaha superbike... I do NOT follow the "if that's the way it was designed, then it must be best" path. I may argue in a good natured way even with Cheleker.... In 1960, Corvettes came with G78-14 tires. I'm sure they were MUCH lighter and "disturbed" the air WAY less than 335/35ZR19s, but I'll still take the benefits of the current ZO6 thank you very much!

My info on these tires tells me that there is relatively negligible differences in overall height or circumference, and even the weights are close. The biggest 13 weighs barely 2 pounds more that the most common 10. Yes that's 20-ish percent, but hardly enough to lead to sudden bearing failure!  Now, if you hang some 13 x 7s on 1 inch wheel spacers on the stock hubs, yes, you are distruction-testing! But if you like the look and set up the car properly for "big" wheels, I won't be insulting your taste!

There were 5.3 million +/- Minis made. Get you own, set it up to your taste, and share your experience!

048s are only a 55 section tyre, so are actually quite a lot smaller than the normal 165/60/12.

Ok, my A048Rs on Rover 12" have a circumference on amost exactly 5'.

I will weigh one while off and try and get the overall height as well.

B

Pose Pack... hehehehhehe....
Sportspack cars have a lower top speed and longer 0-60 than 12" wheeled cars according to the Rover brochures of the time.

There is R&D going into sourcing some better budget bearings, but even Timken ones just can't survive the weight of the big wheels and tyres.

Then there is the rolling resistance issue, if that is the proper term, and the passing-through-the air resistance as speeds increase.

Just push a car with Pose Pack 13s and the difference to smaller wheels and tires is obvious.

In addition to the rotating mass discussion, it would be nice to see some good data on wheel bearing life and differential life with the larger heavier wheels.  

This isn't going to be a popular thread for those with the big wheels is it?

Ah the ubiquitous  inny shrader valve.

Mine is about 15.8 lbs, trying to get the circumference now

Great info. How about measuring them all for height or taking there circumference to see how they effect rolling speeds.

I say this as I was looking at FD the other day. I am running the A048R 12" and they are very low profile. Lowest 12"s out there I'd imagine.

Don’t forget to add in the weight of the wheels to see the total added or lesser weight to your "upgrade". Haha. Has anyone weighed a stock Rover 12" and 13" Sportpack with tires. Interested to see the differences.

Image Gallery

This topic started with the question of "upgrading" to 13 x 6 wheels, and of course brought all the opinions out of the woodwork as to wheather that is in fact an upgrade!

Part of the discussion was about how heavy the bigger combinations would be, so when I lined up all the tires, I weighed them all on our shipping scale:

Yokohama  A008 165/70-10:  11.70 Pounds

                 A539 165/60-12:  12.50

                 A539 175/50-13:  13.90

Falken        165/70-10:   11.05 Pounds

                 165/60-12:   12.45

Because I had them out, I weighed the 145/70-12 "Winter Traction" tire at 10.20 lbs... this one is quite a bit taller but not much to it and the lightest of all the tires regardless of size!

Finally, the tiny 145 SR10 "Sprint Classic" which looks like about a 75-series weighed in at 10.75 lbs.

I don't have quite the selction of wheels on hand, but I'll try to get some weights on the common sizes when I have some!