Suspension/Wheels/Tires/Brakes

RPF1 17x9.5 +38 offset all around?

Old Nov 30, 2014 | 04:35 PM
  #26  
lOOkatme's Avatar
Rotary Enthusiast
Tenured Member: 20 Years
iTrader: (19)
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,171
Likes: 11
From: Colorado Springs, CO
Originally Posted by gsx-lex
Does anyone have 17x10 +38 in the front, without rolling the fenders? There is a set available in my area with a 235 tire, and I'd like to it get it, if it will clear the front fender.
you are going to want to roll them, even with that tire size. the chance of catching the lip is high and disasterous.


looks like the cyberevo is on the stretch bandwagon due to higher grip and more predictable traction/breakaway/steering input.
Attached Thumbnails RPF1 17x9.5 +38 offset all around?-stretched-tires.jpg  
Reply
Old Mar 14, 2015 | 08:17 AM
  #27  
msilvia's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Tenured Member 15 Years
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 252
Likes: 9
From: DC Metro
Bump - could I run a 17x10 38 in back with 275s and stock, unrolled fenders? Sounds like it works with the 9.5 38s but I'm wondering if the 10s would be too much.
Reply
Old Mar 14, 2015 | 09:20 AM
  #28  
lOOkatme's Avatar
Rotary Enthusiast
Tenured Member: 20 Years
iTrader: (19)
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,171
Likes: 11
From: Colorado Springs, CO
Originally Posted by msilvia
Bump - could I run a 17x10 38 in back with 275s and stock, unrolled fenders? Sounds like it works with the 9.5 38s but I'm wondering if the 10s would be too much.


Offset is what matters when fitting a tire. the width of the wheel doesn't matter. Since they have the same offset the tire will be located in the same exact spot.
Reply
Old Mar 14, 2015 | 02:16 PM
  #29  
msilvia's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Tenured Member 15 Years
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 252
Likes: 9
From: DC Metro
Thanks. For some reason I was thinking offset was determined relative to one edge of the wheel or another but now I'm remembering it's from the centerline. So why is the standard rec to do the 9.5s in back? Jist being conservative or are the 17x10 RPF1s fairly new?
Reply
Old Mar 15, 2015 | 01:31 PM
  #30  
lOOkatme's Avatar
Rotary Enthusiast
Tenured Member: 20 Years
iTrader: (19)
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,171
Likes: 11
From: Colorado Springs, CO
Originally Posted by msilvia
Thanks. For some reason I was thinking offset was determined relative to one edge of the wheel or another but now I'm remembering it's from the centerline. So why is the standard rec to do the 9.5s in back? Jist being conservative or are the 17x10 RPF1s fairly new?
You have me confused. I would go with the 10's and 255/40/17 tire. that is just me. I don't see any problems with fitting that wheel either, plenty of room for it.

I fit a 18x11.5" +41.7mm offset and have just a little bit of room between the trailing arm and wheel. I wouldn't run more than an 11.5" tire though.
Reply
Old Mar 16, 2015 | 07:16 AM
  #31  
h_turbo's Avatar
Full Member
Tenured Member: 15 Years
Liked
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 167
Likes: 2
From: New Jersey
Originally Posted by lOOkatme
You have me confused. I would go with the 10's and 255/40/17 tire. that is just me. I don't see any problems with fitting that wheel either, plenty of room for it.

I fit a 18x11.5" +41.7mm offset and have just a little bit of room between the trailing arm and wheel. I wouldn't run more than an 11.5" tire though.
Would love to see this fitment, should look so aggressive.
Reply


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:11 AM.