well i figured out that my wheels are 48+ offset and 7.5 wide.

would some 50+ offset and 8.5 front and 9 rear fit a DC5 ?

i think it was sport compact mag that put 18 inch 8.5 front
9 rear on a fit ! i was going to stick to my sizes. but those
sizes sound sooo much better ! thank guys !


Modified by lif3tak3n at 6:02 PM 1/28/2007

 

bump for wide tires

 

I take it you are doing this only for looks? Because I need no point in putting 9" wide wheels in the back of an RSX.

Why not just go 8" all the way around?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Todd00 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I take it you are doing this only for looks? Because I need no point in putting 9" wide wheels in the back of an RSX.

Why not just go 8" all the way around?</TD></TR></TABLE>

Because for some damn reason all of the people think that staggered setups look good on FWD cars. To me it is the dumbest thing you can do. When I had my '05 TL everyone was doing this. Now I see it's not just them.

I mean it's your car and you can do whatever you want with it. Who am I to try and stop you. If you like it that's all that matters. I just see it as ridiculous.

 

more rubber = more traction

9 inch is excessive but it's not pointless.
and how i would like them set up they wouldn't seem staggered
so looks is out of question. unless your behind me
then you might notice how wide they are.

why is this ridculous ?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by lif3tak3n &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">more rubber = more traction

9 inch is excessive but it's not pointless.
and how i would like them set up they wouldn't seem staggered
so looks is out of question. unless your behind me
then you might notice how wide they are.

why is this ridculous ? </TD></TR></TABLE>

More traction in the rear is the *last* thing you want with a FWD car, especially on an RSX that tends to understeer like crazy.

Think about it. If you run staggered you'd want to do wider in the front and not in the rear. You don't have a RWD car...the rear of a FWD car is basically holding the car up and not doing much else.

 

i've always thought about sticking to one size all around
perferibly 8 or 7.5 but like i said they fit those wheels
on a Fit i was impressed and thinking about the physics
*very* breifly it seemed to make sense. but thanks for
reminding me about the understeer your probably right
it would do more harm than good. but like i said
i was just wondering if that set up would fit. and for the
record im a tuner my investment is performance and
perfection.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Todd00 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Think about it. If you run staggered you'd want to do wider in the front and not in the rear. You don't have a RWD car...the rear of a FWD car is basically holding the car up and not doing much else.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Yup.

High-powered RWD cars have wider tires in the rear because they need it. That end of a RWD car has to deal with cornering loads and engine power at the same time, so of course it needs more available traction (a bigger "traction circle").

High-powered FWD cars should have more rubber up front, and for the same reasons.

 

Oh, and about getting those sizes to fit --

I think that concentrating on wheels first is going backwards. Figure out how wide your tires need to be, then find wheels that are in the correct width and can keep them inside the fenders.

FWIW, I've known of 235's (and maybe 245's at the most) that can fit in front. The rear will fit 225, or 235 if the offset is right.