What would you suggest?

The other options I have worked out are the following

Fronts: 18.9 + 35 offset "A" disk, which gives 71mm of rim depth
Rears: 18x10 + 30 offset "O" disk, which gives 96mm rim depth

Option 2

Front: 18x9.0 + 22 offset "A" disk, which gives 83mm rim depth
Rear: 18x9.5 + 24 offset "O disk, which gives 96mm rim depth

Option 3

Front: 18x9 +35 offset "A" disk, which gives 71mm rim depth
Rear: 18x10 + 22 offset "A" disk, which gives gives 96mm rim depth.

 

Any of those will fit.

What exactly are you looking for?

But please dont waste your money with this setup

 

^ I wish that the people who advise a "more aggressive offset" would state their own personal opinion on proper fitments, and how the wheels will set before giving someone guidance. The sizes he has picked are already extremely aggressive, and will require a good roll and even possibly some camber to "fit", assuming tire size of 255 fronts and 265-285 in the rear.

 

Sorry I should have explained more thoroughly the sort of look I am after. Have already looked at offset calculators and ****, but wanted more opinions from people with actual experience in wheel fitment on FDs

So basically, Im after a nice flush fitment without having to run to much stretch on the tyres, using the widest wheels I can theoretically go. Of course a good amount of dish front and back if I can. If I can go a 10inch rim on the back that would be good

I dont have any dramas with rolling the guards, however dont want to have to be significantly modifying the guards for them to fit.

If I have to run some sort of camber thats fine aswell, obviously would not like to be to aggressive on the camber though, the car is still street driven. I have a set of rays wheels on it already for track and other duties.

Keeping in mind, the S1 3 piece wheels only come in certain offsets unlike the S1Rs which come in whatever you want. SO I have to pick the right offset, width and disk type which will give the best fitment.

Does that help? Im probably being picky but unfortunately im pretty **** with how I want things.

@Jose, if you have any suggestions that would be good.

 

I honestly don't see option two or option three without some PULLED fenders or increased neg camber.

The other options I have worked out are the following

Fronts: 18.9 + 35 offset "A" disk, which gives 71mm of rim depth (should be okay)
Rears: 18x10 + 30 offset "O" disk, which gives 96mm rim depth (should work will be close max tire is a 285/30-18)

Option 2

Front: 18x9.0 + 22 offset "A" disk, which gives 83mm rim depth (will extend out too far +15mm or so)
Rear: 18x9.5 + 24 offset "O disk, which gives 96mm rim depth (Should work)

Option 3

Front: 18x9 +35 offset "A" disk, which gives 71mm rim depth (should work fine barely)
Rear: 18x10 + 22 offset "A" disk, which gives gives 96mm rim depth. (will stick out too far 7mm or so)

This all assumes normal in spec camber and non stretched tires.

I'd get:
Option one but get a little higher on the offset for both if possible.
18x9 +42 L Disk or +43 O Disk
18x10 +35 A Disk or +30 O Disk for a deeper lip

I don't know how the centers for the works clear the FD calibers or aftermarket ones.

If you were ordering custom that is.

 

You're wasting your time listing to anyone who isn't deesan or jose for wheel fitment. Seriously. and your money with the set up you wanted. Disk set up is for brakes man. Unless you're running a bbk you can go with whatever disk you want.

here is 9.5 +22 hammer rolled fenders cuz...idk 0 camber. it would be perfect with an actual roll...paint was lost from my 8.5 +38 setup so....

 

im lost as to how any of those are even remotely aggressive with stock fenders. ..or even with any fenders. I'm sorry but ...no. neither of those would require much of a roll or a pull.

This is 18x10.5 +15 all around, with 245/40 and 275/35 .. THAT i would say is very aggresive and needs some camber or a good pull. but with doing a 18x10 +38 255/35 F, 295/35 R.

I wish people would do research before stating outrage junk that makes no sense what so ever. seriously.. 8.5/9.5 .. aggressive? if faith wasnt lost before..it sure as hell is now.




HERE is a bit of proof for u
255/35 18x10 +38

295/35 18x10+38

 

I'm with him ^^^ Deesan - Jose and Phillip know there ****.

I'm 18x10.5 +45 all the way around running 265/35r15 tires with no roll or pull.


Lots of miss leading info in this thread.

 

 

17x7 +48 is perfect "fitment" for an FD ..............................

 

Im running 18x10.5 +18 all around with only rolled fronts
tires are 235 and 255 35's

http://www.flickr.com/photos/61564748@N08/8181130206/http://www.flickr.com/photos/61564748@N08/8181130206/ by http://www.flickr.com/people/61564748@N08/, on Flickr
http://www.flickr.com/photos/61564748@N08/8181130364/http://www.flickr.com/photos/61564748@N08/8181130364/ by http://www.flickr.com/people/61564748@N08/, on Flickr
http://www.flickr.com/photos/61564748@N08/8181093991/http://www.flickr.com/photos/61564748@N08/8181093991/ by http://www.flickr.com/people/61564748@N08/, on Flickr

 

ahahahahaha

 

I should have mentioned the car is a Series 8 RS, so unlike all other FDs (except RZ and Spirit R), it has the 314mm brakes on it from factory. So I was little concerned O disk might not clear the fronts, however have been assured A disk will be fine.

These posts must get frustrating for people, but it is better to hear from people with experience in these types of fitment.

So far this is looking the best option? From the work spreadsheet

Fronts: 18.9 + 35 offset "A" disk, which gives 71mm of rim depth
Rears: 18x10 + 30 offset "O" disk, which gives 96mm rim depth

 

All that I am saying is perhaps ask the OP what they are looking for as far as fitment , and tire sizes before suggesting an aggressive fitment. Most people want an upgrade in tire size, and something they can bolt on and drive aggressively with no issues. If they are looking for something more aggressive , or just a street/ show setup and want a different look then by all means do whatever you want. I'm sure you and I have a different view of what you see as aggressive, but with wider tires his original setup is getting to the limit of what you can comfortably run on stock unmodified/small roll fenders.
I don't want to get into a pissing match with you guys, as I'm sure you know what "can be" done. I've been an fd owner for damn near a decade and have run many different wheel setups in that time.. I know which ones rubbed and what needed done. Yes, I like a more "conservative" fitment and wide tires. I don't care for the way your guys cars look, but I'm sure you'd say the same for mine.. Everyone has their thing. In the picture you posted of the 18x10.5 + 15s up front, they are running a 245 tire... Just using this as an example, I would assume the majority of people who ask if a 10.5 wheel will fit up front would want to be using a 285-295 tire. So if someone asked if it would fit with a +15 offset, I would say he'll no. My 18x10 + 50 ccws would rub on hard cornering with a fender pull. Now obviously by your picture, it can be done.. But I don't think it's what most people have in mind.


If I stretch a mountain bike tire on it and ran a 5" spacer, would I gain your approval then?

 

This is why ppl like you and people like me will never get along. it has nothing to do with anything. i stated in the reply as to why that wasn't even close to an aggressive setup for an FD and people telling other people that it is.. are wrong. Then i pointed out "proper" sizes for wheels. 255/35 on a 10j +38 has almost NO stretch and a 295/35 on a 10j +38...if thats not meaty enough ..talk to the guy that has them on his 700+hp FD..hes no "stretched tire, hellaflush, cool kid on the block" the example i used with a 18x10 +15 on the front was to show that , that is something that would require a Stretch and a pull , if not it would need new front fenders and that the rear had a 275/35 on a 18x10 +15 and just needed a very good pull to work properly(slammed) normal height a decent pull .

the FD is perfectly capable of fitting 9.5/10.5 with meaty tires . so hearing 8.5/95 is like.. seriously. no, not aggressive.

my wheel setup lets me achieve whatever goal i am looking to get, i research and try wheels/tire setups. and am completely capable of tracking my car, maintaining traction with my tire sizes and HP. i try and help people understand there are setups that can work for both looks AND function. but if you want to bring up the super stretched wheel tire, hellafush bs and not understand anything.. cool. whatever.

 

I agree with about everything you just said. That post wasn't directed towards you, but the person I quoted who decided to throw in the smart *** jab about the 17x7s. I like an "aggressive" fitment, but when it comes to the point where I have to severely modify the car, stretch a tire, etc.. That's where I draw the line. I understand some people like to push the envelope for whatever reason, and as I mentioned even though its not my thing.. It's your car do whatever makes you happy. I just want to make sure people understand what they will be getting when they ask for opinions on wheel fitment, and for them to be guided accordingly. Sure, not everyone needs/wants massive tires all the way around, but at the same time they may no necissarily want an overly aggressive fitment. I agree, the fd can easily fit 9.5/10.5 setup. I've done it.. My offsets were in the low 40s. I'm sure that makes you chuckle, but even at that and rolled front fenders, there were instances of rubbing sometimes. My current setup , which I consider very aggressive is 18x9.5 + 22 all around with 255/30. Even at this, I'm running 20mm fenders up front because on the track they just don't fit without giving even rolled fenders trouble. Like I said, I'm not trying to start **** with you, but just want to be certain the OP gets what he's looking for.

 

I think that setup would work. The back may be a little close to the outer lip but you should be fine. And the front I'd suggest a higher offset in the 40's.

On another note.

I'm seeing quite a few people talking about misinformation. Most of them are running a 10 or 10.5 rim with a 235-265 tire. This is stretched. Not everyone wants to run that. A tire has a suggested width. Some prefer to run this width to avoid the stretched look.

Just because you can run a crazy offset with stretched tires and lots of negative camber doesn't make other suggestions that are known good setups wrong. I personally like having ground clearance and not having to hit my car with a hammer to make it fit.

Most people know that a disk type refers to the caliper clearance. HOWEVER, the way Work makes their wheels (specifically the wheel in question) causes the different disk types to have different available offsets.

People also have different opinions on what is aggressive. Aggressive with or without compromises like high negative camber or 235 tires on a 10.5 rim. I consider these compromises. Some may not. I'll agree certainly that a 17x7 isn't aggressive when the stock car came with a 16x8 or 16x8.5 but when you get to the limit some folks just don't want to take it as far.

 

I guess some ppl in here do not detect sarcasm....

See guys... those of us running stretched tires have absolutely nothing against conventional setups... I mean we enjoy both type of setups and fully agree to what they are meant to do. However, it seems like this doesn't work both ways, most guys with regular setups hate on stretch for no good reasons and keep talking crap on the style. Of course, I'm not planning on taking my cars to a lemans race, but I can still push 3rd gear hard in curves or throw the car sideway when I feel like it.

Imo if you want to hit the track going fast, you build a full purpose track car. So many on here keep saying they're building their car to be street/track... yet the car will never ever see a track and honestly when you do something you go all out! What I mean is that a car cannot be a track car and a street car at the same time.. it'll only be average at best in doing so. People in today's society settle for average things too often.. I can proudly say it's not my case.

Still... regardless of what you have planned for the car it should be low and flush, stretched or not doesn't change much.

 

I'm seeing quite a few people talking about misinformation. Most of them are running a 10 or 10.5 rim with a 235-265 tire. This is stretched. Not everyone wants to run that. A tire has a suggested width. Some prefer to run this width to avoid the stretched look.

As we don't want to spread misinformation I would just like to correct you on the 265 on 10.5" rim is within the manufacturers recommended rim width range for most all performance tires.

 

It seems like alignment specs are a bit overlooked in this thread. Yes it is possibly to "fit" a 10J +0 up front but that's subjective. Camber will make anything fit, hell I had a 10.5J +15 on the rear of my s14 on stock fenders and it "fit"...with about 6 degrees of camber

 

Did no one read he has a track set up and this is his street set up? You want flush on those works drop get at least a 9.5 +22 front with like 1.5* camber and a roll. hell, go even lower offset, drop the car lower and add a bit more camber. people recommending a 9 +40something is not even remotely aggressive. Rear you can fit anything. 18x10.5 +12 no problem. You dont have to go baller like some of these guys with 10.5 +15 front or anything like that but you can get away with a lot with the car set up properly. Go low, roll the fenders, add neg camber call it a day. You want flush, dont talk to people with +50 wheels.

 

How much camber would I need with a 18x10 +38 wheel with 285/30 tyres at the back (rolled fenders of course)? I'm not sure if I should choose a narrower tyre like 255 or 265.

 

I have 18x10 +45 and a 285/30 tire without rolled fenders and they fit great. -0.5 rear camber. (rear) I am planning to run a 295/30 and a 5-10mm spacer with rolled fenders when I need new tires.

 

Thanks mate, this is correct I have another set of wheels etc for track duties or for long trips also. Thanks for the tip regarding the offset

It appears my posts stirred up quite a bit of controversy haha

 

Shouldn't need any.. thats a fairly common fitment as RPF1s are available in that size/offset.