Aggressive Wheel Fitment Thread
07-26-2011, 08:17 PM
#5852
悪魔のR
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 1,528
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wanted to get some opinions from all you crazy guys running insane fitments.. lol I'm looking to run some new R comps and wheels next year. Right now I'm running RPF1 18x9 +35 with 255/35 Hoosiers.. Next year, I'm debating on running 18x10.5 +15 with 295/30... I'm not slammed like a house hit by a tornado, but I'm relatively low. Picture below to give ideas. (it seems that's as low as the Ohlin coilovers want to go...?)
Think it'll be possible, or should I try for the 18x10 +38 instead with the 295/30? I prefer the 295/30 over the 285/30 because the 295 is only .1" wider, but it's slightly taller, which appeals to me for the gearing advantage...Not much, but it's something. Camber is -2.8 in the front and -2 in the rear. Anyways, thanks for the help!
Think it'll be possible, or should I try for the 18x10 +38 instead with the 295/30? I prefer the 295/30 over the 285/30 because the 295 is only .1" wider, but it's slightly taller, which appeals to me for the gearing advantage...Not much, but it's something. Camber is -2.8 in the front and -2 in the rear. Anyways, thanks for the help!
07-26-2011, 08:57 PM
#5853
lol, it doesn't look that low
the 295 is what I'd use, but you will need to flare or cut the fenders for +15 for sure and then still have issues.
I wouldn't go any further out than +38 because you won't want to run that much more rear camber ... even with
those goofy spring rates
Remember I ran 10.5+ 45 with 265s in STU and the wheel lips just cleared in and
out without any fender changes. As you go further out and taller the tire will hit the back of the front wheel well
before full lock and also have interference issues with the rear bumper locating tab in the back.
the 295 is what I'd use, but you will need to flare or cut the fenders for +15 for sure and then still have issues.
I wouldn't go any further out than +38 because you won't want to run that much more rear camber ... even with
those goofy spring rates
Remember I ran 10.5+ 45 with 265s in STU and the wheel lips just cleared in and out without any fender changes. As you go further out and taller the tire will hit the back of the front wheel well
before full lock and also have interference issues with the rear bumper locating tab in the back.
07-26-2011, 10:30 PM
#5855
悪魔のR
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 1,528
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
lol, it doesn't look that low
the 295 is what I'd use, but you will need to flare or cut the fenders for +15 for sure and then still have issues.
I wouldn't go any further out than +38 because you won't want to run that much more rear camber ... even with
those goofy spring rates Remember I ran 10.5+ 45 with 265s in STU and the wheel lips just cleared in and
out without any fender changes. As you go further out and taller the tire will hit the back of the front wheel well
before full lock and also have interference issues with the rear bumper locating tab in the back.
the 295 is what I'd use, but you will need to flare or cut the fenders for +15 for sure and then still have issues.
I wouldn't go any further out than +38 because you won't want to run that much more rear camber ... even with
those goofy spring rates
Remember I ran 10.5+ 45 with 265s in STU and the wheel lips just cleared in and out without any fender changes. As you go further out and taller the tire will hit the back of the front wheel well
before full lock and also have interference issues with the rear bumper locating tab in the back.
heh
07-27-2011, 08:32 AM
#5860
悪魔のR
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 1,528
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah, as baller/gangsta the 18x10.5 +15 would look, while being HELLA FUNCTIONAL... I'll just probably play it safe with the 18x10 +38. Thanks for the help guys. :D
