Tire fitment issues in the rear

[slipstream8]

Originally Posted by razgriz12345

hmmmm that's interesting was that for the all around or just front or rear? I got my combo from fitment industries I haven't bought them yet but they said it was within safe margins. What was the reasoning the salesperson gave for the +45mm? Would a 10mm hub centric spacer work on it? would changing it to 40r change that? im not questioning the sales person just trying to understand as i dont know much about wheel fitment.

See my photos of 17x9 ET35. 18x8.5 ET35 is only going to be 0.5" less poke. For me that is still too much at stock ride height. ET45 gets you an additional 10mm (0.39") less poke.

https://www.ft86club.com/forums/show...&postcount=349

[razgriz12345]

Originally Posted by slipstream8

See my photos of 17x9 ET35. 18x8.5 ET35 is only going to be 0.5" less poke. For me that is still too much at stock ride height. ET45 gets you an additional 10mm (0.39") less poke.

https://www.ft86club.com/forums/show...&postcount=349

Is there any chance you could a ruler on how much it pokes I just want to have accurate measurements to base a comparison on visually. I feel like that .5" less poke might be enough for me to see it as acceptable but I'm not sure. I was planning on going to les Schwab's later and seeing if they would be willing to fit a tire on a similar rim if they have one but I really like the set of rims I'm looking at but if it does poke to much it might be a deal breaker.

[slipstream8]

Originally Posted by razgriz12345

Is there any chance you could a ruler on how much it pokes I just want to have accurate measurements to base a comparison on visually. I feel like that .5" less poke might be enough for me to see it as acceptable but I'm not sure. I was planning on going to les Schwab's later and seeing if they would be willing to fit a tire on a similar rim if they have one but I really like the set of rims I'm looking at but if it does poke to much it might be a deal breaker.

I don't have the wheels on the car anymore. From memory, I think the poke in the rear was a little more than a half inch from the outside of the fender. The brand of tires you choose will make a difference, too.

[86league]

Originally Posted by razgriz12345

II feel like that .5" less poke might be enough for me to see it as acceptable but I'm not sure.

8.5" vs 9" wheel at the same ET isn't going to give you 0.5" less poke - it will be 0.25" less poke and 0.25" more inner clearance.

My ARC-8 17x9 ET42 wheels with 245 SX2s on a friends 2022 poked on the rear and looked like it would have rubbed. Fronts looked fine. My wheel spec will be very close vs an 8.5" ET35 for fender clearance.

[razgriz12345]

Originally Posted by 86league

8.5" vs 9" wheel at the same ET isn't going to give you 0.5" less poke - it will be 0.25" less poke and 0.25" more inner clearance.

My ARC-8 17x9 ET42 wheels with 245 SX2s on a friends 2022 poked on the rear and looked like it would have rubbed. Fronts looked fine. My wheel spec will be very close vs an 8.5" ET35 for fender clearance.

oh I didn't realize that. I guess I will go back on the hunt for a different set of wheels then

Originally Posted by slipstream8

I don't have the wheels on the car anymore. From memory, I think the poke in the rear was a little more than a half inch from the outside of the fender. The brand of tires you choose will make a difference, too.

I think that's a little to far on the back then thanks for the help

[86man]

Guys, it's not the wheel/rim that's rubbing the rear fender, it's the tyres

Go with 235 or narrower if you don't want to cut up anything or run massive camber.

For clearance in the rear, as long as the offset is 45 or greater, wheel width (9.5, 9 or 8.5) is irrelevant as long as tyre is under 245.

[PMok]

Originally Posted by slipstream8

Alrighty folks. Time for some photos of bad fitment for the sake of education (and I thought it was worth seeing how this style of wheel looked on the new generation BRZ.)

These are Wedssport TC105N 17x9 ET35 with Yokohama AD08R 245/40R17 at stock ride height. It seems like there wouldn't be any rubbing at maximum compression, but the poke looks terrible.

The last photo is the clearance for the front shock.

Aww man this is disappointing to see... I have the exact same wheels on my gen 1 BRZ, and was hoping they could carry over to the new '22+ model when I got one.

[slipstream8]

Originally Posted by PMok

Aww man this is disappointing to see... I have the exact same wheels on my gen 1 BRZ, and was hoping they could carry over to the new '22+ model when I got one.

Yeah, it's a bummer. They are great wheels!

[TDCFPC]

Originally Posted by slipstream8

See my photos of 17x9 ET35. 18x8.5 ET35 is only going to be 0.5" less poke. For me that is still too much at stock ride height. ET45 gets you an additional 10mm (0.39") less poke.

https://www.ft86club.com/forums/show...&postcount=349

Thanks for the pics and specs.

Your pics are with factory camber, correct?

For a track setup and -2.5 or -3.0 camber should make the top flush with the lip. Do you see any issues with potential rubbing on suspension components in your opinion?

[slipstream8]

Originally Posted by TDCFPC

Thanks for the pics and specs.

Your pics are with factory camber, correct?

For a track setup and -2.5 or -3.0 camber should make the top flush with the lip. Do you see any issues with potential rubbing on suspension components in your opinion?

Correct--factory camber. I just put them on to see what the wheel design would look like on the second generation car, knowing from what others had posted that the offset would not be great.

-3.0 camber would put the wheel 0.445" closer to that shock perch in front, if I have the math right [tan(3°)=x/8.5"]. I measured the clearance there at roughly 0.6" with the factory camber.

Even with camber and a drop, I suspect the biggest potential problem area is still that bump inside the rear fender.

[gcmak]

Originally Posted by slipstream8

Correct--factory camber. I just put them on to see what the wheel design would look like on the second generation car, knowing from what others had posted that the offset would not be great.

-3.0 camber would put the wheel 0.445" closer to that shock perch in front, if I have the math right [tan(3°)=x/8.5"]. I measured the clearance there at roughly 0.6" with the factory camber.

Even with camber and a drop, I suspect the biggest potential problem area is still that bump inside the rear fender.

Would probably use a camber plate instead of camber bolts. Or a combo of both. Camber plate would keep the current distance between the wheel and the perch the same.

[trippinbillies40]

Originally Posted by 86man

Guys, it's not the wheel/rim that's rubbing the rear fender, it's the tyres

Go with 235 or narrower if you don't want to cut up anything or run massive camber.

For clearance in the rear, as long as the offset is 45 or greater, wheel width (9.5, 9 or 8.5) is irrelevant as long as tyre is under 245.

Right, but some people wanting to compete will want as much rubber as possible.

[Scubadriver]

I am very happy with the 17x9 ET48 in the rear. 245 is fine with stock camber. 255.almost fits. Front requires a spacer, but I decided that was inevitable.

I just put a writeup of a bunch of fitment testing of the 17x9 ET48 6ULs in another thread.

[dsc_pat]