Which would you Choose 16x7 or 16x8 for itr application with 215/45/16 tires
Thread Starter
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,470
Likes: 0
From: shibby, IL, U.S.A.
Which would you Choose 16x7 or 16x8 for itr application with 215/45/16 tires
thought i'd get some opinions on here on either which would be better and if 16x8 is possible. Also what the heck is the difference between an acorn lug nut and tapered lug nut? Websites have indicated that tapered lug nuts are required with the spoonies, is this true?
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 10,399
Likes: 3
From: Chicagoland, IL
Re: Which would you Choose 16x7 or 16x8 for itr application with 215/45/16 tires (Kicker773)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Kicker773 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">thought i'd get some opinions on here on either which would be better and if 16x8 is possible. Also what the heck is the difference between an acorn lug nut and tapered lug nut? Websites have indicated that tapered lug nuts are required with the spoonies, is this true?</TD></TR></TABLE>
OEM honda is acorn. Most every tuner wheel is taper.
Also Curt941 was just asking abotu 16x8's with no luck.
https://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=1218729
OEM honda is acorn. Most every tuner wheel is taper.
Also Curt941 was just asking abotu 16x8's with no luck.
https://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=1218729
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6,929
Likes: 2
From: Kelowna Canada
Re: Which would you Choose 16x7 or 16x8 for itr application with 215/45/16 tires (Kicker773)
To run an 8" rim - you are going to run an offset that is sufficient to clear the rear lower control arm (i.e. +35 or less). The rears are the bigger headache
Then the issue becomes the inner fender - which will likely rub unless you roll the fenders or cut them out entirely.
215/45 only needs a 7" rim. On an 8" it will be overstretched and look like those VW guys.
7" rim is like 7.5" at the flange
8" rim is like 8.5" at the flange
FYI 225/40-16 fit very nicely on a 7" rim with +50mm offset
Then the issue becomes the inner fender - which will likely rub unless you roll the fenders or cut them out entirely.
215/45 only needs a 7" rim. On an 8" it will be overstretched and look like those VW guys.
7" rim is like 7.5" at the flange
8" rim is like 8.5" at the flange
FYI 225/40-16 fit very nicely on a 7" rim with +50mm offset
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 1,496
Likes: 0
From: Cincinnati, Ohio
Re: Which would you Choose 16x7 or 16x8 for itr application with 215/45/16 tires (Big Phat R)
I'll respectfully disagree. With certain tires it's beneficial to run an 8".
For example, the treadwidth on a Falken Azenis 215/45/16 is 8.0 inches wide. The section width is 8.7. You're actually sub-optimal is you don't match your wheel width to the tire width (pulls the sidewalls, comprimises the contact patch). Why else do you think all the STS guys run 7.5 wide wheels with the 205's? It's definitely not stretched looking in this case either. I've seen it done in person (Todd00's ITR).
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Big Phat R »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">To run an 8" rim - you are going to run an offset that is sufficient to clear the rear lower control arm (i.e. +35 or less). The rears are the bigger headache
Then the issue becomes the inner fender - which will likely rub unless you roll the fenders or cut them out entirely.
215/45 only needs a 7" rim. On an 8" it will be overstretched and look like those VW guys.
7" rim is like 7.5" at the flange
8" rim is like 8.5" at the flange
FYI 225/40-16 fit very nicely on a 7" rim with +50mm offset</TD></TR></TABLE>
For example, the treadwidth on a Falken Azenis 215/45/16 is 8.0 inches wide. The section width is 8.7. You're actually sub-optimal is you don't match your wheel width to the tire width (pulls the sidewalls, comprimises the contact patch). Why else do you think all the STS guys run 7.5 wide wheels with the 205's? It's definitely not stretched looking in this case either. I've seen it done in person (Todd00's ITR).
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Big Phat R »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">To run an 8" rim - you are going to run an offset that is sufficient to clear the rear lower control arm (i.e. +35 or less). The rears are the bigger headache
Then the issue becomes the inner fender - which will likely rub unless you roll the fenders or cut them out entirely.
215/45 only needs a 7" rim. On an 8" it will be overstretched and look like those VW guys.
7" rim is like 7.5" at the flange
8" rim is like 8.5" at the flange
FYI 225/40-16 fit very nicely on a 7" rim with +50mm offset</TD></TR></TABLE>
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6,929
Likes: 2
From: Kelowna Canada
Re: Which would you Choose 16x7 or 16x8 for itr application with 215/45/16 tires (typer_801)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by typer_801 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I'll respectfully disagree. With certain tires it's beneficial to run an 8".
For example, the treadwidth on a Falken Azenis 215/45/16 is 8.0 inches wide. The section width is 8.7. You're actually sub-optimal is you don't match your wheel width to the tire width (pulls the sidewalls, comprimises the contact patch). Why else do you think all the STS guys run 7.5 wide wheels with the 205's? It's definitely not stretched looking in this case either. I've seen it done in person (Todd00's ITR).
</TD></TR></TABLE>
You should go with the manufacturer's recommendations.
http://www.falkentire.com/tires_rt215_sizes.htm
Azenis are a bad example because they are wider than normal street tires.
Their 205 is like a 225 on most other tires
Most 215/45-16 recommend 7" - but allow a range.
The measuring width of the RT-215 is 7"
215/45ZR16 86‡ 28-353-693 <FONT COLOR="red">7.0</FONT> 7.0 -8.0 23.5 8.5 8.0 8/32 51 1168
For example, the treadwidth on a Falken Azenis 215/45/16 is 8.0 inches wide. The section width is 8.7. You're actually sub-optimal is you don't match your wheel width to the tire width (pulls the sidewalls, comprimises the contact patch). Why else do you think all the STS guys run 7.5 wide wheels with the 205's? It's definitely not stretched looking in this case either. I've seen it done in person (Todd00's ITR).
</TD></TR></TABLE>
You should go with the manufacturer's recommendations.
http://www.falkentire.com/tires_rt215_sizes.htm
Azenis are a bad example because they are wider than normal street tires.
Their 205 is like a 225 on most other tires
Most 215/45-16 recommend 7" - but allow a range.
The measuring width of the RT-215 is 7"
215/45ZR16 86‡ 28-353-693 <FONT COLOR="red">7.0</FONT> 7.0 -8.0 23.5 8.5 8.0 8/32 51 1168
Trending Topics
I said I don't want a title!
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 11,506
Likes: 2
From: OH
Re: Which would you Choose 16x7 or 16x8 for itr application with 215/45/16 tires (Kicker773)
16x8 +38 offset, 215/45/16 Azenis. Tires are not German ricer stretched either.
Minor rolling of the fenderlips, but nothing major. And yes, I am lowered.
Minor rolling of the fenderlips, but nothing major. And yes, I am lowered.
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 2,507
Likes: 0
From: DFdubs, TX
Re: Which would you Choose 16x7 or 16x8 for itr application with 215/45/16 tires (Todd00)
kicker, a baller like you doesn't know the difference between acorn and tapered lug nuts??? omg.....haha, j/p
ProFunction/GT Motoring
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 4,930
Likes: 0
From: IL
Besides width, sidewall height also plays a big role in determining what rim width to use.
IMO 7" is suffice for our cars with all the common sizes. For those who tried 7.5" or 8", I don't doubt that it could be done, but I really can't see the benefits outweigh the potential clearance issues or even weight penalty.
IMO 7" is suffice for our cars with all the common sizes. For those who tried 7.5" or 8", I don't doubt that it could be done, but I really can't see the benefits outweigh the potential clearance issues or even weight penalty.
I said I don't want a title!
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 11,506
Likes: 2
From: OH
Re: (Wai)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Wai »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Besides width, sidewall height also plays a big role in determining what rim width to use.
IMO 7" is suffice for our cars with all the common sizes. For those who tried 7.5" or 8", I don't doubt that it could be done, but I really can't see the benefits outweigh the potential clearance issues or even weight penalty.</TD></TR></TABLE>
When you are running in SCCA classes that require 140+ DOT rated street tires, the extra width plays a huge role in crispness of turn-in and tire reaction. Also, it throws down the largest contact patch possible given the tires construction.
Drive a 205/50/15 Kumho MX on a 6.5" rim then on a 7.5" rim, and you'll definitely be able to notice a difference in the way the car handles and responds to inputs.
IMO 7" is suffice for our cars with all the common sizes. For those who tried 7.5" or 8", I don't doubt that it could be done, but I really can't see the benefits outweigh the potential clearance issues or even weight penalty.</TD></TR></TABLE>
When you are running in SCCA classes that require 140+ DOT rated street tires, the extra width plays a huge role in crispness of turn-in and tire reaction. Also, it throws down the largest contact patch possible given the tires construction.
Drive a 205/50/15 Kumho MX on a 6.5" rim then on a 7.5" rim, and you'll definitely be able to notice a difference in the way the car handles and responds to inputs.
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 440
Likes: 1
From: Malta, Europe, BBG02
Re: (Todd00)
16x8 with the correct offset will work but you have to make the profile of the tire 45 , because 50 or highr then they will rub with the fender.
I am running 16x8 spoon SW388 wheels and when I had Bridgstone tires they were 50 profiled and I was scared that one day I will bend a fender or something . then I got fed up and I changed to Toyo Tires with 45 profile , now every thing works fine , no rubbing at all and mine is lowerd . Also I made the tires 205 wide because 205 on an 8 inch rim the side walls will be a bit tapared and that will help you so they wont rub with the fenders.
I am running 16x8 spoon SW388 wheels and when I had Bridgstone tires they were 50 profiled and I was scared that one day I will bend a fender or something . then I got fed up and I changed to Toyo Tires with 45 profile , now every thing works fine , no rubbing at all and mine is lowerd . Also I made the tires 205 wide because 205 on an 8 inch rim the side walls will be a bit tapared and that will help you so they wont rub with the fenders.
ProFunction/GT Motoring
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 4,930
Likes: 0
From: IL
Re: (Todd00)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Todd00 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">When you are running in SCCA classes that require 140+ DOT rated street tires, the extra width plays a huge role in crispness of turn-in and tire reaction. Also, it throws down the largest contact patch possible given the tires construction.
Drive a 205/50/15 Kumho MX on a 6.5" rim then on a 7.5" rim, and you'll definitely be able to notice a difference in the way the car handles and responds to inputs. </TD></TR></TABLE>
I agree that class rule is a major consideration. For my car, I'm running front 225/45-15 and 7.5" rim should be most ideal. But because of class rule restriction, I need to stay with 7".
For Kicker773 particular application (mostly street, 215/45-16, no 140+ tread rating requirement), he is really risking a lot of clearance issues if he runs 8" rim. Let's say in the future, he decides to widen the track for better grip by adding spacers, or run 225 tires, using an 8" rim would give him clearance problem.
Drive a 205/50/15 Kumho MX on a 6.5" rim then on a 7.5" rim, and you'll definitely be able to notice a difference in the way the car handles and responds to inputs. </TD></TR></TABLE>
I agree that class rule is a major consideration. For my car, I'm running front 225/45-15 and 7.5" rim should be most ideal. But because of class rule restriction, I need to stay with 7".
For Kicker773 particular application (mostly street, 215/45-16, no 140+ tread rating requirement), he is really risking a lot of clearance issues if he runs 8" rim. Let's say in the future, he decides to widen the track for better grip by adding spacers, or run 225 tires, using an 8" rim would give him clearance problem.
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 12,949
Likes: 8
From: Atlantis
Re: (Wai)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Wai »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Besides width, sidewall height also plays a big role in determining what rim width to use.
IMO 7" is suffice for our cars with all the common sizes. For those who tried 7.5" or 8", I don't doubt that it could be done, but I really can't see the benefits outweigh the potential clearance issues or even weight penalty.</TD></TR></TABLE>
I also run 205 azenis on 15x7.5 +40 wheels..... No rubbing, and I'm slammed y0!
I like the way they fit as well. A little oversquare, but quite responsive. 7" wide wheels are perfect for 205 azenis (imho).
I say wider is better, and if you can get an 8" wide wheel in there - do it!
-the r0cker, who is still dreaming of 15x10's.......
IMO 7" is suffice for our cars with all the common sizes. For those who tried 7.5" or 8", I don't doubt that it could be done, but I really can't see the benefits outweigh the potential clearance issues or even weight penalty.</TD></TR></TABLE>
I also run 205 azenis on 15x7.5 +40 wheels..... No rubbing, and I'm slammed y0!
I like the way they fit as well. A little oversquare, but quite responsive. 7" wide wheels are perfect for 205 azenis (imho). I say wider is better, and if you can get an 8" wide wheel in there - do it!
-the r0cker, who is still dreaming of 15x10's.......
Thread Starter
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,470
Likes: 0
From: shibby, IL, U.S.A.
Re: (Edward)
awesome responses guys i appreciate the help. So its possible to run the with 16x8 but it has to be with the right offset. I dont think spoonies can come with +35 or less offset.
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6,929
Likes: 2
From: Kelowna Canada
Re: (Todd00)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Todd00 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Also, it throws down the largest contact patch possible given the tires construction.</TD></TR></TABLE>
That is incorrect and a common misconception (just ask NSXtasy or George Knighton - this topic has been beaten to death before)
Contact patch SHAPE is somewhat affected but total area remains the same
Contact patch area is independent of tire size, rim width or tire.
It is directly proportional to the weight of the car.
Read here:
http://auto.howstuffworks.com/question506.htm
That is incorrect and a common misconception (just ask NSXtasy or George Knighton - this topic has been beaten to death before)
Contact patch SHAPE is somewhat affected but total area remains the same
Contact patch area is independent of tire size, rim width or tire.
It is directly proportional to the weight of the car.
Read here:
http://auto.howstuffworks.com/question506.htm
I said I don't want a title!
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 11,506
Likes: 2
From: OH
Re: (Big Phat R)
Contact patch in that it is optmized for handling. True that the patch remains the same area regardless of rim size, but the width of a wheel will determine how that area contacts the ground.
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6,929
Likes: 2
From: Kelowna Canada
Re: (Todd00)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Todd00 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Contact patch in that it is optmized for handling. True that the patch remains the same area regardless of rim size, but the width of a wheel will determine how that area contacts the ground.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Wrong again sorry.
It is the dynamics of weight transfer that determine that. Contact patches are not static - they are dynamic and constantly changing in area and shape.
Wheel width only determines the static shape of the contact patch - having a short and wide contact patch is helpful - but is not the be all and end all of why a car handles better.
Other things like the tire design/shape, tread, sidewall stiffness, weight distribution of the car and road surface determine "how that area contacts the ground"
Modified by Big Phat R at 10:35 AM 4/21/2005
Wrong again sorry.
It is the dynamics of weight transfer that determine that. Contact patches are not static - they are dynamic and constantly changing in area and shape.
Wheel width only determines the static shape of the contact patch - having a short and wide contact patch is helpful - but is not the be all and end all of why a car handles better.
Other things like the tire design/shape, tread, sidewall stiffness, weight distribution of the car and road surface determine "how that area contacts the ground"
Modified by Big Phat R at 10:35 AM 4/21/2005
I said I don't want a title!
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 11,506
Likes: 2
From: OH
Re: (Big Phat R)
You are reading too far into my post trying to find fault with it. I am basing my assumptions on the fact that someone:
1) Made a correct tire choice for the application they are using it for.
2) Wants to make the tire handle 100% of what it is capable of (optimized).
With that said, a short and wide contact patch with equal tires will make a better handling car. Thus, you want a wider rim that isn't 'too' wide.
Why you are going into weight distribution and such is beyond me. This is a thread about rim widths and how that affects the way a car will handle.
1) Made a correct tire choice for the application they are using it for.
2) Wants to make the tire handle 100% of what it is capable of (optimized).
With that said, a short and wide contact patch with equal tires will make a better handling car. Thus, you want a wider rim that isn't 'too' wide.
Why you are going into weight distribution and such is beyond me. This is a thread about rim widths and how that affects the way a car will handle.
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 10,399
Likes: 3
From: Chicagoland, IL
Re: (Todd00)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Big Phat R »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Wrong again sorry.</TD></TR></TABLE>
I think you're beating up Todd00 over semantics.
I think you're beating up Todd00 over semantics.
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6,929
Likes: 2
From: Kelowna Canada
Re: (Chris F)
No i'm just trying to clarify statements that are being said that are untrue.
Todd00 said:
"the extra width plays a <u>huge role</u> in crispness of turn-in and tire reaction. Also, it <u>throws down the largest contact patch possible</u> given the tires construction."
"Drive a 205/50/15 Kumho MX on a 6.5" rim then on a 7.5" rim, and you'll definitely be able to notice a difference in the way the car handles and responds to inputs. "
My car "handles" better with 205/50-15 R compounds on 6.5" wide rims than it does with 225/40-16 street tires on 7" rims. This has nothing to do with contact patches or rim width and everything to do with sidewall stiffness, tire compound, sidewall height/aspect ratio and tire pressure.
The "ride" is better because the tire is taller (higher aspect ratio), turn-in is better because of the sidewall stiffness (not rim width) and the "handling" is better because of the tire compound"
According to Todd00 it should be the opposite.
And that's why I'm saying what he is saying is untrue. Using a wider rim on a tire with a soft sidewall only reduces rollover tendency and gives a harsher ride - which "feels" like higher performance. Increasing tire pressure will likely give the same result for zero cost (compared to buying wider rims)
All I'm saying is how a car "feels" and "handles" is not related to contact patch (which is constant for a given weight of vehicle) or rim width - but a huge number of factors.
Sorry for being a hardass - I'm done now
Modified by Big Phat R at 2:04 PM 4/21/2005
Todd00 said:
"the extra width plays a <u>huge role</u> in crispness of turn-in and tire reaction. Also, it <u>throws down the largest contact patch possible</u> given the tires construction."
"Drive a 205/50/15 Kumho MX on a 6.5" rim then on a 7.5" rim, and you'll definitely be able to notice a difference in the way the car handles and responds to inputs. "
My car "handles" better with 205/50-15 R compounds on 6.5" wide rims than it does with 225/40-16 street tires on 7" rims. This has nothing to do with contact patches or rim width and everything to do with sidewall stiffness, tire compound, sidewall height/aspect ratio and tire pressure.
The "ride" is better because the tire is taller (higher aspect ratio), turn-in is better because of the sidewall stiffness (not rim width) and the "handling" is better because of the tire compound"
According to Todd00 it should be the opposite.
And that's why I'm saying what he is saying is untrue. Using a wider rim on a tire with a soft sidewall only reduces rollover tendency and gives a harsher ride - which "feels" like higher performance. Increasing tire pressure will likely give the same result for zero cost (compared to buying wider rims)
All I'm saying is how a car "feels" and "handles" is not related to contact patch (which is constant for a given weight of vehicle) or rim width - but a huge number of factors.
Sorry for being a hardass - I'm done now
Modified by Big Phat R at 2:04 PM 4/21/2005