I am here again with a rim question. I have an 89 Formula 350 that from what I have learned, came from the factory with different rim widths. 8's on the front and 7's on the rear. (I have the identical size tires on all rims). Can someone please tell me why this was done? I understand that the wider rim fits all the way around and I cant for the life of me figure out why Pontiac didnt use that one size.. Thanks in advance!

 

I've seen 15x7 all the way around & 16x8 all the way around. But never different widths from the factory.

I know the 16s have different offsets between the front & rear, but still the same width.

Why do you think they are different widths?

 

you either have 15x7's on all 4, or 16x8's on all for, never a combo front the factory.

the 16x8's however, have different offsets from the factory, with the larger offset in the rear, and less in the front. So the front wheels stick out further than the rears do. that may be what you are confusing as a difference in width.

 

ALL the 16" wheels have either FRONT or REAR stamped on them - fronts HAVE to be on the front and rears HAVE to be on the rears. You can put fronts on the rears (might look slightly off but won't affect handling), but you cannot put rears on the front (they scrub the tie rod ends).

There's no 16x7 factory wheel. There's no 15x8 factory wheel. Just 15x7 and 16x8.

 

Actually, the rears will fit the fronts, with a slip on spacer. Not very uncommon for people to do that. Just use the factory slip-on spacers from the early aluminum drum braked cars. Then you'll get the narrow wheel look up front & wide wheel look out back.

 

How is a 8in wheel goinng to look "skinnier" up front when it's the same 8in wheel that was on the rear?

 

The same way some people think the rear wheels are skinnier. Because of the shallower face. On the rear, them sitting further in also contributes to that look. From the side, the shallower face gives the appearance that the wheels are narrower than the rears.

 

To me, 8in wheel looks like an 8in wheel, no matter where you mount in or what kind of spacer is behind it. IMO skinny wheels look skinny because they are .... well, skinny.

 

he is talking about the wheels lip, the "rear" wheels have a larger lip than the fronts, so they look deeper, not wider.

rear wheels will fit on the front with the 1le brakes, and with any floating rotor brake upgrade, without a spacer.

 

I don't know about the newer 16 inch rims, but my single-groove IROC stock rims front and rear have the same lip, same spoke angle, same "dish", but the lug-nut recesses are alot deeper for the fronts. My guess is the mounting pads on the fronts are thicker to make the offset difference.

 

crosslaces have different lips, that what i was talking about. OP it talking about birds, so i went with the bird wheels. I know nothing about the design of the camaro wheels, because i dont have a camaro, and never looked into it that much

 

I have a retoracal question, I got the 1" drop springs on my 88 T/A I have 16 on it now but I want to go with 19" rims in the rear and 18" up front. the question I have is what size can I go with without hitting the fender wells, and still be able to turn with out hitting the inner wall? and what off-set should I have for the front? I know some one on here has posted this before...but I am having a hard time finding it again.

 

"rear wheels will fit on the front with the 1le brakes, and with any floating rotor brake upgrade, without a spacer."[/quote]


Not true.. I have 2001 12" brakes on the front of my 1990 IROC and the rear wheel will still hit the caliper without a 1/4" spacer.