The idea of wider tires having better grip always seems so obvious to me. So simple: A wider tire has a larger footprint (what the pros call contact area), therefore it has better grip. Intuitively this makes so much sense.

However, I recently saw on a forum a post that seems to prove me dead wrong. Two arguments were put forth:

1. Wider tires do NOT have larger contact area. "The narrower tyre has a longer, thinner contact patch. The fatter tyre has a shorter, wider contact patch, but the area is the same on both." (Reference URL to come.)

2. If Frictional Force = Coefficient of Friction x Vertical Force, then why does contact area matter at all? ("Contact area" is not in the equation to determine friction, aka grip.)

1 is fact, so no question there. 2 proves to be problematic. It sort of pushes me "over the edge" into the abyss of confusion. Smiley So if contact area doesn't matter, as so obviously shown in the equation, then a Turbo with skinny tire has as much grip as my big, fat, expensive Pilot Sport?

So these are 2 questions I thought the amateurs among us might want to ponder. And the pros might feel free to explain.
I found an article that I think provides some sort of answer. But before I post it, let me make sure I understand what hysteresis is. Smiley

(BTW, mod please consider unlocking the thread below. Same pictures but topic has nothing to do with the GT3 per se; more about a recent thread on wings of various 911's, and MMD's extreme distaste for wings. You wouldn't lock all threads that have the some pics of, say, the new Turbo, right? Smiley)
--

Regards,
Can
997 Turbo + Bilstein Damptronic ( Review ) + GIAC ECU Tune ( Fast as a torpedo & reversible to stock - Review ) + Cargraphic Exhaust ( Oh heavenly noise! )