I’ve recently purchased new 2007 Mazda3 GT and I have an option of replacing the original 17 inch tires (205/50R17) with 16 inch ones (205/55R16), that expires soon. I know that at first it doesn’t make very much sense to downgrade from 17'' to 16'' but this is my reasoning: I’ve test drove a GS with standard 15'' and it handled surprisingly well. Seventeens on a GT handle even better but being wider and low profile are quite a bit noisier and the ride is noticeably firmer, especially around the town with plenty of potholes.

I'm not into sport driving so a more comfortable ride, lower tire noise and a slightly better mileage would win over curve hugging 17'', but I didn‘t have a chance to actually drive a GT with 16''. I would appreciate any advice, opinion or personal experience. Hi to Makaveli, a fellow Belgrader (Beograđanin).

Thanks!

(There's been some shifting and deleting of this post from different forums here and I really hope it’ll remain where it is now, providing the moderator doesn’t disapprove).

 

why spend the extra money on a GT if your not looking for a sports car?

 

Because of the advantages over a GS, like a larger engine (and more torque), nicer interior, 6 speakers audio, electrominescent gauges, front heated seats, anti-theft system and fog lights (all standard with a GT trim) - and because of the $2K price break we were able to get. I don’t see a GT as a sporty car anyway, I think a Mazda3 Sport or MazdaSpeed would be better suited for that kind of driving.

 

My bad! Apparently I was having a bad day.

 

I had the same thoughts about the 17" 'snowflake' wheels on my new hatchback. 16's would be fine for me. I think the standard 16" tire is the same width as the 17", but with a bigger profile. I'm in the process of buying some 16" wheels to put snow tires on. Snow tires in 17" are like 50 bucks more a tire, or something.

 

Just a quick update to my original post: I went to dealership and had them change my 17s to 16’’ tires. The ride is positively more comfortable and the handling is slightly more vague (as expected), but the car still handles very well. I feel it’s an acceptable trade-off.

I was wrong to assume a little better mileage with smaller (16’’) wheels, based on narrower tires, where in fact both 16s and 17s are 205 mm wide. So stability doesn’t suffer much and I think there’s less road noise too. I’m not sure if that’s due to a better cushioning from more air between the rim and the road or from the different thread pattern on the new 16s.

Thanks to VelvetFoot and another guy (whos post is not here anymore) for a good point about 16s being cheaper to replace when the time comes. Also, it seems there is an issue with 17’’ wheels being more difficult to remove, due to a small clearance between a hub and a wheel - according to people posting in thread Best Tires for Mazda 3.