Toyota Celica Supra Forum banner

1 - 20 of 69 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,136 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
Calling rsdeo, Billym, seamus, other real wheel experts.

So, haven't exactly decided on one of the two companys yet, but after doing tons and tons of research on wheel fitment and offset. I want to double check with the pro's on what you think would be best. We're ordering custom wheels, from either....wouldn't you like to know. And the sizes both offer are listed below. What would you order?

Going on a basically stock height p-type.

Front 16x8
Offset options
+0
+7
+13

For the rears I can go 16x8, 16x8.5 or 16x9

For 16x8.5 the lowest offset they have is
+7

And for 16x9 lowest offset is
+13

My other thought, was doing a staggered setup, and doing 17's in the back. Jess didn't really want to have to purchase tires, but two tires wouldn't kill her.
So for 17's the options are
17x9
+3
-9
-7
+6

17x9.5
+5
-3
-13
-8
+0


So, what do you think
I was really just thinking and will probably settle on what's below unless someone else can convince me otherwise.
Front 16x8 +13
Rear 16x8.5 +7



I know tire size in the 16's are dwindling, but the tires i use aren't going anywhere according to a high up toyo rep that's a family member.
But, just in case, if they did go away, having 17's in the back, would only mean replacing the front two with 17's later....Just a thought.
All input is appreciated, but I really am only looking for people that actually know what they're talking about.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
509 Posts
The front sizing sounds like it would work well; even +7 prob would be fine or even better. The rears would probably be sunken in, and even-more-so if you were to lower the car.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,136 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Choice one


Doing more research, in the wheel fitment thread, I've read that a +15 offset is pretty much perfect for the front. So I think my choice on +13 for the front will work very well.
Still researching and reading on the back wheel offsets though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,248 Posts
17x9.5 +0 offset in the rear with a 275 tire would be bad ass. For 16s theres no reason to get anything wider than 8" since your only going to find 245 wide tires.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,167 Posts
It's all about the tire size. Let us know what size tires you plan to run.

(superium, 275's on 17x9.5" +0mm offset rubs)
If you like a 275/40-17 (I do I do) rock a +5mm offset at least if you don't want to mod the flares.

--billyM
 

·
Supra since '86
Joined
·
5,472 Posts
I have 245s on a 9" wide rims and always complemented on how well they fit. To each their own though.:thumbsup:

I like your choice, but it usually doesn't cost that much more to go from 16" to 17" diameter when dealing with a custom wheel manufacturer. Not to mention the added under-steer when using different diameters if the suspension is not set up for it. Save your pennies and do it right one time with no regrets. By then hopefully her 16" tyres will need replacing anyway. I'm surprised the company doesn't offer more widths and offsets in 16".

I would go with the following,

Front:17x8.5 +6 235/40-17
Rear:17x9.5 +0 275/40-17

I understand she is not considering a BBK, but still incorporate it in the specs. She might change her mind later and it doesn't cost any more.

Good luck with your decision. I look forward to seeing what choice you make and the posted pics of the car once the wheels are mounted.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,846 Posts
front Z32 and rear FC brake fitmit is a whole other issue. i wonder how close the specs are to the wilwood kit? any ideas? i know front is now +8 more and rear offset should be the same as nothing is changing. just spoke clearance.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,136 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
If i go with 16's tires will be either
245/45 or 245/50 in front
and 245/45 or 255/50

17's will be probably
245/40 if they'll fit in the front
and 275's out back, just for the look.
So I'll need something along a +5

We'll see, it all depends on if I find some used wheels or end up custom ordering them.
I'm gonna give it some time to make sure no one wants some extra cash on their sexy wheels.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
7,186 Posts
AFAIK 17x9.5 0mm 275/40/17 does NOT rub in the back and it fits with rear BBK. I have not run that tire, and wont run that tire...but talk to Rapp to confirm.

If I was to buy a new set of wheels I'd get
17x8.5 +5 245/40/17
17x9.5 +5 265/40/17

> $2k before tires tho....for a top Japanese mfgr
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,846 Posts
AFAIK 17x9.5 0mm 275/40/17 does NOT rub in the back and it fits with rear BBK. I have not run that tire, and wont run that tire...but talk to Rapp to confirm.

If I was to buy a new set of wheels I'd get
17x8.5 +5 245/40/17
17x9.5 +5 265/40/17

> $2k before tires tho....for a top Japanese mfgr
im asuming the 8.5 +5 clears the wilwood kit? so with the +8 Z32 add on im looking at +13 fronts.


-end threadjack
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,122 Posts
im asuming the 8.5 +5 clears the wilwood kit? so with the +8 Z32 add on im looking at +13 fronts.


-end threadjack
Resto: You bring up an interesting point that a lot of people get confused with. Offset on the wheel doesn't really have direct correlation on caliper clearance. Its the pad on the back of the wheel. The pad is the area of the wheel from the back of the spokes to the surface that contacts the hub. The pad allows you to clear the width of the caliper and the internal height of the wheel allows you to clear the height of the caliper. Look at #3 and #4 on this image.

Unless Jim has changed his spec'd calipers from 10 years ago, they do not stick out past the factory rotor hat by that much ~5mm. Most super aggressive pads will fit this. It's when you start going to huge Brembos or Alcons, that you really have to look at large pads. Gallardo rear wheels for example have huge pads on them. This is due to the low rotor hat height and large calipers. Reference #3.



When you're talking offsets and widths of the wheel, you want to make sure you clear struts and fenders. #1 and #2.

I'd run Malloy's fitment....or go with 275/40R17s in the back :naughty:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,122 Posts
Im not an expert so i will just watch the fight!
Dave: You may not consider yourself an expert, but you have experience with the aggressive offsets and pushed the envelope with tires. So your input definitely holds water.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,167 Posts
AFAIK 17x9.5 0mm 275/40/17 does NOT rub in the back and it fits with rear BBK. I have not run that tire, and wont run that tire...but talk to Rapp to confirm.
Mike's car is the vehicle I base my statements on... ...and it rubs with passengers or stuff in the back, even at the height the rear sits. Is it bad? No. But to say it fits without rubbing is not quite true.

Rub-a-dub-dub, 275 on 0mm needs a tub (unless you drive a magical car, like Raj, and only date girls under 90lbs and don't EVER put anything in the back of the car, then you can get away with it)

--billyM
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
10,594 Posts
Perfect fitment.... lols.

We can't answer that untill you define what perfect fitment means to you. Here that often means about 5-15mms clearance between the outer edge of the fender\inner quater skin. On hellaflush.com that drops to about 2-4mm clearance with rolled fenders\quarters, on dorikaze or some forum where drifting is popular, that clearance is about the same but the edge of the lip sticks out 5-15mm and the tire is massively stretched to clear the highly rolled or flared fender.

Also, we need to know suspension specs and plans, and what kind of camber she plans to run on the street.

My advice when trying to attain "perfect fitment" is borrow something close and go at it with varying thickness spacers to get the look and fitment you want, and then make an educated guess about the differences before you order.

However I'm guessing your idea of perfect fitment is a little more relaxed then some of the scenarios I've thrown out there. Theres plenty of advice on that kind of fitment in this thread already.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,136 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
I think I have it covered guys. Thanks for all the help.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,136 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
On the way to you Dave:
SSR Vienna Kries F 18x10 +11 & R 18x11.5 +5 4x114.3
Hope the offset is close enough for your gangsta self.


:zzzzz:
BAAAALLLLLEEEEERRRR
 

·
Supra since '86
Joined
·
5,472 Posts
Mike's car is the vehicle I base my statements on... ...and it rubs with passengers or stuff in the back, even at the height the rear sits. Is it bad? No. But to say it fits without rubbing is not quite true.

Rub-a-dub-dub, 275 on 0mm needs a tub (unless you drive a magical car, like Raj, and only date girls under 90lbs and don't EVER put anything in the back of the car, then you can get away with it)

--billyM
Here we go again, Billy is doing that trick again. He opens his mouth and his face disappears.

Seriously though, have you ever thought that your car Billy may have a problem? I mean you are the one with the issues. Malloy did mention Rapp is running 275/40-17 on a 17x9.5 +0 rim with no rubbing issues. Others too are running 17x9.0 -13 with 245/40-17 tyres with no issues, you said that would rub too.

AFAIK 17x9.5 0mm 275/40/17 does NOT rub in the back and it fits with rear BBK. I have not run that tire, and wont run that tire...but talk to Rapp to confirm.

If I was to buy a new set of wheels I'd get
17x8.5 +5 245/40/17
17x9.5 +5 265/40/17

> $2k before tires tho....for a top Japanese mfgr
My car is original and straight, is yours? Possibly your sub frame bushings are worn or your car is bent.

What I find surprising is that some will cut and replace a harness/power-train, but cutting/bending a flare/fender is blasphemy. I just don't get it. I'm really bored with this stuff. The only one who protests is you and I think you protest too much.
 
1 - 20 of 69 Posts
Top