i'll get straight to the point. will a 16x7 +7 offset wheel have more lip depth then a 16x8 +20 offset wheel. the wheel offset calculator says that the inner clearance on the 16x7 +7 wheel will be 26mm more then the 16x8 +20, but will have the same outer position. thanks for reading.

 

16x7 +7

That would equate to about 16x8 +32. So a 16x8 +20 will have a deeper "dish" than that of the 16x7.

 

thanks man.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by toyomatt84 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">16x7 +7

That would equate to about 16x8 +32. So a 16x8 +20 will have a deeper "dish" than that of the 16x7.</TD></TR></TABLE>

you had the right idea but you added the whole extra inch to the outer "lip" side of the wheel. The centerline of the wheel is at 4" on the 8 inch wheel and 3.5" on the 7. so a 16x7 +7 would equate to (7+12.5) offset, so 16x8 +19.5

On the other note. I agree with the wheel calculator.

inner clearance(aka backspacing??) on the 16x7 +7 will be 94.5mm ~3.8"
backspace on the 16x8 +20 will be 120mm ~4.8"

Wheels can be had with +15 offset and no lip so it all depends what wheels you're talking about

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by JDM-EJ2 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

you had the right idea but you added the whole extra inch to the outer "lip" side of the wheel. The centerline of the wheel is at 4" on the 8 inch wheel and 3.5" on the 7. so a 16x7 +7 would equate to (7+12.5) offset, so 16x8 +19.5</TD></TR></TABLE>

That's because he wanted a comparison of "lip depth".

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by F20Cdriver &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">will a 16x7 +7 offset wheel have more lip depth then a 16x8 +20 offset wheel.</TD></TR></TABLE>

To compare "lip depths", one must only measure from the outer lip, thus my equation still stands as the required answer to his request. Your backspacing conversion, albeit correct, is irrelevant to the question asked.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by toyomatt84 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

To compare "lip depths", one must only measure from the outer lip, thus my equation still stands as the required answer to his request. Your backspacing conversion, albeit correct, is irrelevant to the question asked.</TD></TR></TABLE>

your mathematics still do not back up your point completely. Also "lip depth" is not completely reliant to the offset. +35 rpf-1s have the same if not a little less "lip depth" than their +43 brethren

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by JDM-EJ2 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

your mathematics still do not back up your point completely. Also "lip depth" is not completely reliant to the offset. +35 rpf-1s have the same if not a little less "lip depth" than their +43 brethren</TD></TR></TABLE>

Considering the user never offered information about the type of center disc that is on the wheel, I went under the pre-tense that the wheels have the same "style" of center disc. And, my mathematics are still 100% accurate, given the nature of the user's request.


PS. The comparison of +35 to +43 is only 8mm, so the "lip depth" change shouldn't really be noticeable anyways. It's less than a centimeter difference.

 

Pics will follow soon. I think we are both backing up slightly different points and these pictoral representations will help settle our arguement.