blackdc5

Found a set of Wedsport RS-5 the only problem is that it is a staggered setup. Since the track width of the RSX is the same, with the offset and width of the wheels, it creates a 17.7mm difference in the resulting track width.

Here's the width and offsets in question: (mm hub to the outside / mm hub to inside)

Stock 02-04 DC5 wheels:

16x6.5 +45mm 37.55mm / 127.55mm

Current setup: forged BBS EVO MR wheels:

17x8 +38mm 63.6mm / 139.6mm

Potential staggered wheels:

17x8.5 +40mm 67.95mm / 147.95mm
17x7.5 +45mm 50.25mm / 140.25mm

With the current setup, the wheels are close to the fenders but I wanted a wider track. These wheels came up and I am considering them.

Obviously no need for a wider contact patch in the rear of a FWD so I'd want to run the 17x8.5 +40mm on the front of the RSX.

Problem is, with the 8.5s up front and 7.5s in the rear it creates a 17.7mm difference in track width in the rear. I would potentially run 235/45 (or 40)-17 up front and 225/45-17 in the rear.

I wouldn't have questioned if this would benefit FWD at all (seen the BMI videos w/ DC2Rs running 16s in the front and 15s in the rear to create their front to rear bias) but my friend questioned my wanting to put the 8.5s in the front. I am thus not too sure so I came here.

Would the 17.7mm track difference create any harm to the handling of the FWD? I would think it'd create more traction up front (where most is needed on FWD) to create front bias.

But being that the front will be 17.7mm wider, will that be bad for handling?

I considered running spacers in the rear bringing it down to 12.7mm (max on stock lugs = 5mm and I don't feel the need to run thicker spacers, nor do I really like the idea in the first place).

BTW: WedSport RS-5...does anyone have info on it? Forged? Cast? Very little information on it from my searching on google. But the seller claims they are forged and those sizes are what he claims. I looked on the back of the wheels to find the stamped size but there was none, even the offset was questionable because the "ET 48"...the "8" was blurry and unclear and there was also a "45" on the same wheel.

If you have any information on these wheels please let me know as I'd like to know if those are indeed widths and offsets Wedsports offered for that model wheel.

Reid

Are you using this car for autox or track days?

You can get away with a car that tends to oversteer a lot more at autox than HPDE's, IMHO.

Reid

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by blackdc5 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">trying to set the car up for the track in the future</TD></TR></TABLE>

Don't bother trying to "set up the car" for the track.

If you have no track experience, then you have absolutely no idea how you need to set up the car for track use. Just get out there as soon as possible, and drive.

drivesideways46

You might want to check into Pontiac's new v8 FWD GXP, IIRC it has 255 width tires up front and 225 in the back to aid in quicker rotation.

I'll try and find the Car and Driver that talked about it.

Sliced Beard

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Reid &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Don't bother trying to "set up the car" for the track.

If you have no track experience, then you have absolutely no idea how you need to set up the car for track use. Just get out there as soon as possible, and drive. </TD></TR></TABLE>

best advice to listen to

Sliced Beard

that is the thing, you do not know what best suits YOUR driving style until you actually get out there on track.

I have seen people go out and pull 1:29's at Roebling Road in their bone stock S2000 and then modify the hell out of them with better tires and better suspension and engine mods and only pull less than a second faster lap times. It all comes down to driver skill and seat time.

I suggest you start doing some HPDE's in your vehicle AS IT IS NOW and then decide later on which route you would like to go depending on how your car acts on track with YOU at the helm. Every driver is different, takes the turn-in approach differently and exits differently. It is called driving style and there is no person alike. That is what makes racing so unique, it is all up to driver decisions and skill that makes you fast.....not necessarily the car.

When I was building race cars for a living and doing pitcrew work, I have seen PROFESSIONAL race car drivers turn 1:59 laps at Daytona and then a driver change is done and in the EXACT SAME CAR the next driver is able to push the car on the same track with exact driving conditions to 1:57 laps. Two seconds is an eternity when it comes to professional races (such as Grand Am Rolex Cup as I have mentioned).

I suggest you get some seat time ON TRACK and then ask questions and decide which way you will be going. Don't be stubborn and ignore us, we are saying this for a reason. We have been there and done that........and then realized it is a waste of money to do so.

Sliced Beard

narrower = less ability to transfer weight effectively = understeer (if in front) and oversteer (if in rear) on a FWD vehicle

Wider = better weight transfer but if the front track is too wide it will create oversteer and if the rear is too wide it will creat a bit of understeer on a FWD vehicle.

Stinkycheezmonky

We're saying don't buy them. The possible/probable result is increased oversteer, something you won't be used to dealing with. On the street, it's entirely unnecessary anyway. Also, you won't be able to rotate your tires front to back, which will most likely result in your spending more money on tires than is necessary. Save the money on the wheels and put it towards your first track event, and leave the car as-is No matter what wheels or tires you put on, seat time is the single biggest improvement you can make.

Aquafina

iTrader: (3)

Listen to everyone. Without much track experience, its amazing how you can get a stock'ish Honda to rotate.

Sliced Beard

*sigh*

DON'T WASTE YOUR MONEY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If the wheels were not specifically made for the offset your vehicle requires IN STOCK FORM then DO NOT get them. You are not experienced enough in how your car will react to different changes in track width and geometry to even think of such a modification.

Stinkycheezmonky

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by blackdc5 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">So are you saying that I will oversteer too much since more ofthe bias is up front</TD></TR></TABLE>

Yep.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by blackdc5 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> I have a very good idea of how the car performs as of now </TD></TR></TABLE>

If you have zero track experience, no offense, but you're wrong, and have no idea how the car ACTUALLY performs. There is no amount of street driving that can compare, regardless of how hard you think you're pushing the car.

Sliced Beard

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by blackdc5 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Okay, then how about a discussion of the thread title in general? I've seen many people run this staggered offset not on show cars but in autocross and also in open track events.</TD></TR></TABLE>

those setups are to benefit their driving style, spring rates, tires, tire pressures, vehicle weight bias, camber settings, toe in/out settings and power output.

Those people do staggered tire setups for a reason, not just becasue they have a chance to get a rare wheelset that is not deisgned for their car.

Stinkycheezmonky

It really sounds like you're looking for a reason to justify a decision you've already made. If you're dead-set on getting these wheels despite our advice, more talking won't change your mind. As dirtysol said, a staggered setup can work, but it depends on a schlode of factors, driver ability and style being a very large part of that.

Because there are so many variable factors, we can't say, "staggered setups will do X action," we can only say, "staggered setups will do X action with Z suspension settings, Y driver, track condition S, etc." Even then, the MAJORITY of us do NOT run such a setup, and so have very little real world experience with it. Why? Because there are way more important things to concern oneself with about driving on track. Like tracktime.

BA5

Ahhh....

It's been a while since I've seen one of these threads. I missed them. This one turned out pretty good too.

What I like about all these threads is that you know these guys will never make it out to even an autocross event. They always need X part to make their car better so they can go do it.

Thanks for the great thread!

bad-monkey

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by blackdc5 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Just gets me sometimes. I'm running 8" wide wheels right now w/ 235s all around. Sure it's nice for tire-rotatability (nice word ey) but since when do we know our rear wheels do not do as much work as the fronts do.

True the wheels are being decided on partially for the looks (not of the staggered look, I could care less). If I wanted functional wheels I could stick with the ones I have now. Nothing wrong with them. Forged. Wide. But part of my decision for the new wheels is the look. I dont like how the current wheels look on my car plain and simple. And since it's mainly a daily driver, after 3 sets of wheels, I realize I am not happy with one or the other--form vs function. I'd have to make a compromise.

So what is wrong with that. Maybe I posted in the wrong sub-forum since you guys are all-out track rats right? And you only consider one of the above--function. </TD></TR></TABLE>

a staggered wheel setup is usually a last resort way of getting the car to rotate. if only because it's an expensive way to get the car to rotate (you'll be going through more sets of those wide tires up front, and can't use em on the rear, and need to buy a pair of wider width wheels to boot) and it's sort of what people do when they just can't get the car to stop pushing.

that said, there are a lot of easier ways to get a car to do the same thing, like spring rates, sway bars, tire pressure, etc.

however, on a theoretical level, there's only so much width you can run up front, and only so much grip you can use out of that given width before the price you pay for running a wider heaver tire, outstrips the benefits. it's hard to say whether a honda is faster with 245's in front than it is with 225's, because it depends on a million different things, but the ol saying "wider is better" is true up to a certain point and not in every situation.

Stinkycheezmonky

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by blackdc5 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">but since when do we know our rear wheels do not do as much work as the fronts do.</TD></TR></TABLE>

The front wheels drive and turn. The rear wheels are just along for the ride. This is the physics of FWD cars.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by blackdc5 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">True the wheels are being decided on partially for the looks (not of the staggered look, I could care less). If I wanted functional wheels I could stick with the ones I have now.</TD></TR></TABLE>
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by blackdc5 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Maybe I posted in the wrong sub-forum since you guys are all-out track rats right? And you only consider one of the above--function. </TD></TR></TABLE>

Hit the nail on the head there. From a functional standpoint, it's entirely stupid for you to do this. If you want to know how it'll look, go to the appearance forum. If you actually made it out to the track and SAW our cars, and how beat up and shitty most of them look, you'd start to understand.

Black R

Just go ahead and get them, and then let us know what the before and after effects are.....

WWDTrackRacer

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Black R &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Just go ahead and get them, and then let us know what the before and after effects are..... </TD></TR></TABLE>

Nothing like first hand experience to broaden your knowledge.

Stinkycheezmonky

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by blackdc5 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">That's why I don't understand why everyone's so adamant about making the rears just as wide as the fronts. I know the rear wheels are just there and that fronts do EVERYTHING on FWD...so I didn't see what's wrong w/ having a narrower tire in the rear. </TD></TR></TABLE>

It's about balance for the most part. You realize staggered setup on RWD cars has some odd effects as well. A narrower tire on the rear will most likely tend towards oversteer. That's your answer.

hondatech2000

youre going to get crazy over steer with narrow tires on the rear especially if the car has some over steer in it. even placing r compound in front and street tires in rear gets a lot of oversteer.

so you should stick with what people are telling here and run same wheels up front and rear.

i dont even know anyone that runs skinnier tires in the rear and theres prob a reason for that.

but like the others said go ahead and do it and tell us what happens.

RagingAngel

Just because you don't know anybody who doesn't run a skinnier tire in the rear doesn't mean it doesn't work.

Albeit, the percentage on USDM soil running a setup like this is likely small, the concept is relatively the same as putting bigger tires on the back of an FR car....just reversed.

It works. Even with the same tire size but just a narrower wheel, it is already enough to affect the contact patch. When you switch up with an actually narrower tire and narrower wheel PLUS a numerically higher offset (+50mm) - depending on your track and driving style and setup (regurgitating already) it can prove to be very effective.

hondatech2000

fr you mean rear wheel drive i assume and its not the same.

when you accelerate on wheel drive the weight shifts back where the traction is so it helps on rear wheel drive.

I think youre going to get too much oversteer for your comfort and its going take a lot of car control to be fast. I dont think its going to be a safe setup for the poster

if your doing hpde and the courses have some fast corners you dont want to be testing this setup in my opinion. maybe if you are auto x , but not on the hpde course here where youre going 70-90 around some corners unless you really have good car control.


you will get more traction up front but if you even brake late or trail brake your car is going to over steer hard and i bet you will spin and hopefully your not going to fast when it happens.


Modified by hondatech2000 at 11:29 PM 4/10/2006


Modified by hondatech2000 at 11:33 PM 4/10/2006

RagingAngel

I am replying to your post.... about how you don't know anybody who runs a bigger tire up front and a skinnier set in the rear.

And yes I have experimented with this setup and I mentioned the idea is relatively the same WRT the FR concept. By virtue of how you are stating it is "not the same" if I were to put skinnier tires in the back of an FR car - you're saying I won't experience more oversteer? On or Off the gas in the corner?

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by RagingAngel &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
the concept is relatively the same as putting bigger tires on the back of an FR car....just reversed.
</TD></TR></TABLE>

You make it seem like the car is going to instantly spin out once you enter a corner at any speed. But I guess that is the case when you state stuff like

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by hondatech2000 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">.... even placing r compound in front and street tires in rear gets a lot of oversteer.
</TD></TR></TABLE>

Please use common sense here....it's like some people I know at home who only buy snow tires for a FWD car and wonder WTF happened when they spin and crash going around a corner.... or for the FR guys who only buy snow tires for the back and understeer into a ditch. This - is EXACTLY the same concept.

A staggered setup is not as dangerous as you make it out to be - you can test a relatively similar (not 100% the SAME) by putting spacers in the front and no spacers in the back.

hondatech2000

im not even going to respond to the above post because its a waste of my time.


black just letting you know you will get considerably more oversteer, than you would feel comfortable with. especially if youre doing hpde espec high speed courses.
for auto x it would be ok becuase its slower speed and safer.

i would just work on the spring rates/sway bars/tires adjustment and shock adjustments stick with same width tires and more track time.




Modified by hondatech2000 at 9:20 AM 4/11/2006

White98LS

In general, the JDM-land tuner FWD cars you see on Best Motoring are set up very differently from the way us US people set up our cars. Both seem to work.

Typical JDM:
-Wider front tires than rear
-Tons of camber
-Springs/swaybars stiffer in front and softer in rear

Typical USDM:
-Same tires all around
-Not as much camber
-Springs/swaybars softer in rear and stiffer in front


To me on paper, the JDM setup makes more sense. Spring and bar rates more matched to the weight of the car (plus more resistance to brake dive instead of accel. squat since braking force is much stronger), more rubber where the action is, and more camber. However, I still run the "USDM" setup, mainly for cost issues since mine is also a daily driver (tire rotation, camber I can run on the street w/o replacing tires every 10 minutes).

The front wider than rear system makes complete sense, and if I had more cash to play with, I'd set the chassis up for a little more understeer and run 225s in front and 205s in back just to see what I get out of it. If mid-engined supercars are running 335 rears with 235 fronts successfully, I don't see why it's so hard to believe that FWD, with an even worse distribution of weight and work to do (accel, steering, braking, supporting 60-65% of the weight), wouldn't benefit from this.