I've been reading on here about folks running tires as wide as 275mm on all four corners, but I also see a lot of pictures on here of Camaros and Firebirds with massive wheels and a lot of gap between the tires and the body. I've also read the recommendation of limiting the front tire width to 255mm. How wide can you realistically go on a moderately lowered (i.e. lowered enough to get rid of most of the unsightly tire to body gap) f-body without having steering or clearance issues? For example, would 275mm wide tires of the stock diameter on a 17X9" rim work with the right offset? What would that offset need to be ideally?
Anyones experience with this would be much appreciated. Wheels and tires are expensive, so I don't want to make the mistake of buying ones that won't work on my Camaro. .
I'm running 265/35/19 up front on a 19x9 and am super low. I rub at full lock but oddly its worse when going in reverse. Going down the road its just fine. I still don't know how guys run crazy wide wheels up front.
Just to manage expectations.... Most people with wide tires have some tire rub with tight turns. It comes with the territory. The wider and taller the tire the worse this will get.
17 inch wheels are limited in width to the inboard side by the steering tie rod. 17x9 with 5.0 - 5.25 range backspacing. Any extra width will need to go to the outboard side, and 9.5 width is pretty much the maximum before poking out from the car. Sometimes you'll see wheels with 5.5 inch backspacing but spacers are used to bring the resulting backspacing into the 5.0 - 5.25 range again. The rear doesn't locate quite the same as the front and often needs a little more backspacing and this is the reason for the 5.5 inch backspacing. 275-40-17 tire is common.
18 inch wheels clear the tie rod and can extend further inboard. 10 inch width is probably the max practical on the street. Only track cars are using 10.5 inch as the steering angles become pretty limited and not real-world friendly.
Rear tires are easier to figure out because there are no steering angles to worry about. Just measure up and see what you've got. If you're scratching your head wondering how somebody got such a large tire to fit.... what they do is cut out the bump stops and smash in the inner fender, or they tubbed the fenders. Removing bump stops is a foolish thing to do.
Also, wide tires often will not "tuck" inside the fender. You'll probably need stiff springs to limit suspension travel so the tires don't hit/cut by the fender lip.
My fronts just hit the wheel liner in 1 spot on full lock. As a result I don't cut the wheel all the way. A 3 point turn is a 4 point now. Other than that it works well.
I'm limited to 17" wheels for several reasons, and I'm not interested in going any wider than 275mm for tires, which is about the right width for 9" wheels I'm looking at some 0 offset 17X9 wheels, which would be the right 5" backspacing for the front according to one of the above posts. What happens when you run 5" backspacing 17X9 wheels on the rear? My car is on weightjacks, too, with 175# springs in the rear and 650# in the front, which will probably get swapped out for 750# springs sometime in the future.
Rear tires are easier to figure out because there are no steering angles to worry about. Just measure up and see what you've got. If you're scratching your head wondering how somebody got such a large tire to fit.... what they do is cut out the bump stops and smash in the inner fender, or they tubbed the fenders. Removing bump stops is a foolish thing to do.
I agree with literally everything you just said, but I happened to be in here posting something else and noticed this post so I figured I'd chime in with my experience and load up some pictures for people who are curious after the photobucket implosion years ago probably.
I think these tucked pretty well, I think I may have had a goldilocks zone of tuck, fitment, and ride height (I was limited by my exhaust and couldn't realistically go any lower because they never rubbed on the rear fender lip that I noticed.
That said I DID hammer the inner fender tubs pretty aggressively, but I was not willing to lose the bump stops. If I jacked up the car and let the axle droop, the wheels would "catch" on the bump stops, and so I had to work around that taking the rear wheels off if I expected to have a need to unload the rear suspension. These did rub in autocross situations, but because I had them on and off so much due to the aforementioned bump stop issue I could monitor the rubbing, and it only ever rubbed on the passenger side. I could never quite get the panhard bar perfectly centered. I think if I could I probably could eliminate the rubbing. But when you autocross it really rolls over the tread of the tire and I think there's a certain level of that that makes a little tire rubbing unavoidable. But it never damaged the car or tires significantly so it was pretty minor. I think with normal every day spirited, enthusiastic driving you'd never manage to get them to rub. I could never hear them rub, I'd just see evidence of it later, just to echo your "managing of expectations" sentiment.
I think you can tuck these this well and have the car not rub, but you have no room for error on the suspension adjustments (adjustable LCA's and panhard etc). And I think it's probably arguable to some people that these are "tucked", but I was pretty pleased with it. It definitely doesnt have the 3rd gen wheels on a fourth gen axle look.
Sorry for reuploading these pictures again, but I find searching TGO threads to be invaluable so I odnt want to deprive anyone else of being able to see examples in the future.
And lastly to TA Guy, I just got a set of Hawks 17x9 wheels, which are apparently 5.5" BS, +12 Offset, and this is how they fit. I also think there's no point is going wider that 9" in the front, since 275 is the widest common tire size and 9.5" wheels are just going to be heavier and I think our steering boxes just dont like really wide sticky tires.
Thanks for the input. I looked at those Hawks wheels, too, and thought they would just as good on a Camaro as they do on the Firebird. I'm not a huge fan of the IROC wheels when they made them into 17" wheels. I do like them in 16", though, which is what I have, but I always felt the 245/50-16 tire size was too short and narrow for these cars.
I run 295's on all 4 corners, 18x11 wheels. Using weight jacking springs. Could go lower, but i like to drive wherever I want without scraping. I can almost make it to full lock, but I'm running twin turbos and the oil drain lines run through the front part of the inner fenders and will rub on the tires at full lock. It took a lot of careful measuring, only modification was rolling the rear fender lips.
And lastly to TA Guy, I just got a set of Hawks 17x9 wheels, which are apparently 5.5" BS, +12 Offset, and this is how they fit. I also think there's no point is going wider that 9" in the front, since 275 is the widest common tire size and 9.5" wheels are just going to be heavier and I think our steering boxes just dont like really wide sticky tires.
There is a tiny weight difference in the same wheel from moving up from 9" wide to 9.5". Keep in mind that BMW has been mounting 255 width tires on 9" wheels for well over a decade - so a 275 really needs a 9.5" or even a 10" wheel to have great sidewall stability.
Of course not every 17" wheel that fits a 3rd gen is going to be 9.5" wide - but if you had a choice, 9.5" is better.
I want to also point out again that there can be a huge difference in weight between wheels of the same size - for instance the Ronal Firehawk wheels are over 25lbs each, but the CTW wheels are 20lbs for the same size and are forged (rotary forged) compared to cast for the Ronals and can fit larger brakes too.
I agree with the weight and control of the tire surface through movement. I narrowed the fronts (some guys in MI), and fit 245 front/ 265 rear so not terribly offset. Michelin Pilot Sport 4S all around.
This seems like a good thread to ask a question I've had...
Anyone know the narrowest tire that will work ok with a 10 inch rim?
Each tire manufacturer is different so you have to look at their advertised specs. You'll likely find a range from 275 to 305 for a 10 in wide wheel. Don't go too narrow. It will look terrible and you risk burping the tire as it will be stretched on the bead.
In retrospect, 285s just seem too wide for the front our cars. They track all over the road and the car doesn't feel like it has great control of them.
I think wandering on the road is mostly tire alignment, and possibly the resulting track width front vs. rear depending how the wheels are spec'd out. Also need steering components in good condition.
