Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Thursday November 21, 2019
Home Forums WikiNASIOC Products Store Modifications Upgrade Garage
Click here to visit TireRack
Tire & Wheel Forum sponsored by The Tire Rack

Losing traction? Need new tires?
Click here to visit the NASIOC Upgrade Garage...
Go Back   NASIOC > NASIOC Technical > Tire & Wheel

Welcome to NASIOC - The world's largest online community for Subaru enthusiasts!
Welcome to the NASIOC.com Subaru forum.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, free of charge, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.







* As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. 
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads. 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-03-2019, 01:24 PM   #8226
Norm Peterson
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 498642
Join Date: Mar 2019
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: our wrx IS the family sedan
Vehicle:
'19 WRX Limited 6MT
'08 Mustang GT (the toy)

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kaeknows View Post
Going wider or lower offset doesnt necessarily mean its going to be heavier, stock wheels are pretty heavy 24-25lbs for the 18in enkei's. Dropping X lbs per corner helps tremendously, obviously. From personal experience I went with stock 8.5 to a 9 +35 wheels that were 18lbs or less compared to the stocks, also weight of the tires were the same 245/40 vs 265/35 (25lbs), that's 50lbs vs 43lbs.
I realize that there are situations where a small fraction of a second difference in lap times really does mean that much, typically where you're competing for finishing positions and possibly tire or other contingencies. On the street and up to casual track or autocross driving, "tremendous" might be a bit of an overstatement.


Quote:
Also in terms of clearance between tires and struts obviously you have to check that, you'd be an idiot to run stupid offset just for it to rub on struts causing major problems. Also not everyone wants to be vanilla and have regular spec wheels, there's always a happy median between.
Ever since the days of "chrome reverse wheels", running wheels with a much lower offset than necessary for inside clearance has looked like an attempt to deceive; to try to give the car a more impressive look of wide wheels without giving it the substance of having the wider width. I was an engineer by education and nearly 40 years profession, and it's the substance that counts. Guess an engineer's attitude doesn't stay locked up in the desk drawer when you go home for the night . . . or for the rest of your life.


Quote:
And this is the wheel and tire fitment thread
I think I've managed to limit my comments here to wheel & tire fitment . . .


Quote:
And using a miata for comparison to the heavy wrx isnt fair. 2300+- vs 3200+-
So let's think that through a little . . . Suppose 5 lb/wheel on all four corners costs a 2300-lb Miata 0.20 seconds. Doesn't matter what kind of driving it is, only that the difference was 0.20 second. Take that 5 lb/corner change over to your 3294-lb 2019 base WRX and you should only expect to see about an 0.14 second improvement by going with the lighter wheels (0.20 x 2300/3294).


Quote:
post pics of your current car, would love to see your current setup, not your mustang btw
All I've got is this ↓↓↓ - NASIOC at least lets me post video links. I could do a better walk-around, but most anything I'm likely to do will probably be closer to subtle as far as visual is concerned.


Quote:
just examples of fast track cars with "offsets lower than 40 and wheels wider than 255"
Been there, too. The Mustang's "track set" is currently 285/35-18 MPSS on 18x11 Forgestars. Front wheel offset is necessarily a little less than 40 and the outer sidewall and wheel flange still pokes a little. Strut clearance is 0.044" by feeler gauge measurement, and it does not rub. IOW, I am using every bit of the available inside space, not throwing any of it away (I did end up having to make a thin spacer out of aluminum sheet to get that much clearance on one side).

On another car, wheel to tierod end clearance was barely 0.030".


Norm
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Norm Peterson is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Old 08-04-2019, 04:51 AM   #8227
rst.ack
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 500326
Join Date: Apr 2019
Chapter/Region: International
Location: Australia
Vehicle:
2015 WRX Premium 6MT

Default

Derailing this slightly, I'm looking at getting some Enkei RPF-1's for my daily-driven 2015 WRX (original, I know but I really like how the shape of the RPF-1 cross section accentuates a meaty fitment), but can't decide between 18x9.5 +38 or 18x9 +35, running 265/35s.

I'm aware that 265 is on the limit of how wide one might normally go with a 9" wheel, but I'm after a functional, meaty fitment.

It's quite common for me to go ragging the car on some mountain/backroads for a bit of fun, but I don't have any intention of ever taking the car to the track.

I know both of those widths/offsets physically fit the WRX, but my question is more along the lines of which one would be the more logical choice in terms of:

- The look of the fitment - would 265's on a 9" be "too" meaty (I don't even know if it's possible to be too meaty)?
- The weight saved by going for a 9"
- The handling - would 265's on a 9.5" perform better or worse than a 9"?
- The feel - would 265's on a 9.5" tramline less or more than a 9"?

Also, being a big newbie to aftermarket wheels and tyres, will I need to purchase aftermarket valve stems and/or different lug nuts? I know I need hub-centric rings...

Thanks in advance

Last edited by rst.ack; 08-04-2019 at 05:00 AM.
rst.ack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2019, 07:45 PM   #8228
YungBoba
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 450808
Join Date: Jul 2016
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Vehicle:
2017 WRX Premium
WR Blue Pearl

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rst.ack View Post
Derailing this slightly, I'm looking at getting some Enkei RPF-1's for my daily-driven 2015 WRX (original, I know but I really like how the shape of the RPF-1 cross section accentuates a meaty fitment), but can't decide between 18x9.5 +38 or 18x9 +35, running 265/35s.

I'm aware that 265 is on the limit of how wide one might normally go with a 9" wheel, but I'm after a functional, meaty fitment.

It's quite common for me to go ragging the car on some mountain/backroads for a bit of fun, but I don't have any intention of ever taking the car to the track.

I know both of those widths/offsets physically fit the WRX, but my question is more along the lines of which one would be the more logical choice in terms of:

- The look of the fitment - would 265's on a 9" be "too" meaty (I don't even know if it's possible to be too meaty)?
- The weight saved by going for a 9"
- The handling - would 265's on a 9.5" perform better or worse than a 9"?
- The feel - would 265's on a 9.5" tramline less or more than a 9"?

Also, being a big newbie to aftermarket wheels and tyres, will I need to purchase aftermarket valve stems and/or different lug nuts? I know I need hub-centric rings...

Thanks in advance
Around January of this year I replaced the stock 18x8.5, 245/40 wheels/tires with 18x9.5 +35, 265/35 wheels and tires, so almost identical to what your 9.5 setup would be aside from the 3mm difference in offset.

I will say that the steering does feel quite a bit heavier over stock, which was to be expected. I also have a tiny bit of poke. Some stanceb0is might say it's a "perfect" fitment but in my opinion, it sticks out just a tiny bit too much considering my ride height is only about a 1" drop. If I was lower and more cambered it would look okay. Otherwise a +38 or even a +40 would look better at the height I'm at.

If I were to do it all over again I'd go with a 9 wide rather than 9.5 to still retain some of the steering and turn-in sharpness. The issue is that 9.5 seems to be a much more common width than 9, so there aren't as many options in 9 wide.
YungBoba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2019, 09:55 AM   #8229
Norm Peterson
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 498642
Join Date: Mar 2019
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: our wrx IS the family sedan
Vehicle:
'19 WRX Limited 6MT
'08 Mustang GT (the toy)

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rst.ack View Post
Derailing this slightly, I'm looking at getting some Enkei RPF-1's for my daily-driven 2015 WRX (original, I know but I really like how the shape of the RPF-1 cross section accentuates a meaty fitment), but can't decide between 18x9.5 +38 or 18x9 +35, running 265/35s.

I'm aware that 265 is on the limit of how wide one might normally go with a 9" wheel, but I'm after a functional, meaty fitment.

It's quite common for me to go ragging the car on some mountain/backroads for a bit of fun, but I don't have any intention of ever taking the car to the track.

I know both of those widths/offsets physically fit the WRX, but my question is more along the lines of which one would be the more logical choice in terms of:

- The look of the fitment - would 265's on a 9" be "too" meaty (I don't even know if it's possible to be too meaty)?
265/35 will have a slightly more rounded sidewall shape on 9" wheels. But the actual section width (that 265 number) shrinks to about 260. No free lunch.


Quote:
- The weight saved by going for a 9"
Assuming same wheel mfr and wheel model, negligible in any street use.


Quote:
- The handling - would 265's on a 9.5" perform better or worse than a 9"?
Lateral stiffness and other tire stiffnesses go up with increases in rim width. That generally improves turn-in response and steering precision, given the same tire mfr/model/size. The steering may feel heavier, but that's not the same thing.


Quote:
- The feel - would 265's on a 9.5" tramline less or more than a 9"?
Hard to say. Tramlining seems to be something that some tires are worse about than others, and sometimes a toe out condition has as much or more to do with twitchiness as you drive as the tires.

FWIW, 9.5" is the "measuring width" for 265/35's, so it's by no means a 'stretched' fitment where you might expect any tramlining to be more evident.


Quote:
Also, being a big newbie to aftermarket wheels and tyres, will I need to purchase aftermarket valve stems and/or different lug nuts? I know I need hub-centric rings...
Best to check with the wheel supplier. Sometimes a wheel design does not permit the use of sockets for standard lug nuts, and I've seen where some aftermarket wheels used a completely different type of lug nut from OE.

Stay away from aluminum lug nuts, no matter how pretty they might look.


Norm
Norm Peterson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2019, 12:47 AM   #8230
akahenry
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 401922
Join Date: Sep 2014
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Location: NorCal
Vehicle:
2018 STi
WRB

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rst.ack View Post
Derailing this slightly, I'm looking at getting some Enkei RPF-1's for my daily-driven 2015 WRX (original, I know but I really like how the shape of the RPF-1 cross section accentuates a meaty fitment), but can't decide between 18x9.5 +38 or 18x9 +35, running 265/35s.

I'm aware that 265 is on the limit of how wide one might normally go with a 9" wheel, but I'm after a functional, meaty fitment.

It's quite common for me to go ragging the car on some mountain/backroads for a bit of fun, but I don't have any intention of ever taking the car to the track.

I know both of those widths/offsets physically fit the WRX, but my question is more along the lines of which one would be the more logical choice in terms of:

- The look of the fitment - would 265's on a 9" be "too" meaty (I don't even know if it's possible to be too meaty)?
- The weight saved by going for a 9"
- The handling - would 265's on a 9.5" perform better or worse than a 9"?
- The feel - would 265's on a 9.5" tramline less or more than a 9"?

Also, being a big newbie to aftermarket wheels and tyres, will I need to purchase aftermarket valve stems and/or different lug nuts? I know I need hub-centric rings...

Thanks in advance
For a daily driven car, I'd go with the 18x9 +35 sizing, with either your choice of a 245/40r18 or 255/40r18 sized tire. You can alternatively go with a 255/35r18 tire to retain almost stock-like speedometer. Most people run the 2xx/35r18 sized tires to retain stock-like steering response, while other people run 2xx/40r18 sized tires to gain that extra half inch or so comfort. Since you won't be tracking the car, the extra 1/2 width from a 9.5" wide wheel isn't really necessary. Shameless plug, but I have a set of RPF1 in 18x9 +35 for sale (but shipping would likely be a pain since you're in Aus haha). Also if you intend on buying the RPF1s brand new, you should be get getting complementary valve stems too. If not, you'll likely have to buy them then. With regards to lug nuts, you should be fine with most aftermarket lug nuts. The OEM lug nuts work just fine from my experience. Lastly, you'll need 56.1mm inner diameter to 73mm outer diameter hub centric rings too.

Cheers
akahenry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2019, 08:47 AM   #8231
rst.ack
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 500326
Join Date: Apr 2019
Chapter/Region: International
Location: Australia
Vehicle:
2015 WRX Premium 6MT

Default

Thanks for the info guys -- couple of questions if you can bear with me.

I could well be overthinking this given they would be going on a daily, but I figured I might as well do my homework if I'm spending close to $3k.

Quote:
Originally Posted by YungBoba View Post
Otherwise a +38 or even a +40 would look better at the height I'm at.
Good to know, thanks. I'd prefer to avoid having to roll my fenders for now so this is comforting.


Quote:
Originally Posted by YungBoba View Post
I will say that the steering does feel quite a bit heavier over stock, which was to be expected.

[...]

If I were to do it all over again I'd go with a 9 wide rather than 9.5 to still retain some of the steering and turn-in sharpness.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Norm Peterson View Post
Lateral stiffness and other tire stiffnesses go up with increases in rim width. That generally improves turn-in response and steering precision, given the same tire mfr/model/size. The steering may feel heavier, but that's not the same thing.
Is it me not reading right or am I getting conflicting information here? Seems like YungBoba is saying the narrower wheel gives better turn-in response and Norm is saying the opposite. Which one is it, and can you back it up with anything?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Norm Peterson View Post
265/35 will have a slightly more rounded sidewall shape on 9" wheels. But the actual section width (that 265 number) shrinks to about 260. No free lunch.
With that in mind would it be more worth my while going for a 255/35 which would retain a squarer sidewall and (I'm assuming) a more true-to-form section width? The other obvious benefit of doing this is narrower tyres are often cheaper.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Norm Peterson View Post
Best to check with the wheel supplier. Sometimes a wheel design does not permit the use of sockets for standard lug nuts, and I've seen where some aftermarket wheels used a completely different type of lug nut from OE.

Stay away from aluminum lug nuts, no matter how pretty they might look.

Norm
I've seen Muteki lugs get recommended in a few places - can anyone corroborate the recommendation?


Quote:
Originally Posted by akahenry View Post
For a daily driven car, I'd go with the 18x9 +35 sizing, with either your choice of a 245/40r18 or 255/40r18 sized tire. You can alternatively go with a 255/35r18 tire to retain almost stock-like speedometer.
Wouldn't 265/35 be closer to stock diameter?

If my maths is correct, 235/45r17 (stock) have an overall diameter of ~643.3mm ((235*0.45)*2+457.2 where 431.8=17 inches) and 265/35r18 have an overall diameter of ~642.7mm ((265*0.35)*2+457.2 where 457.2=18 inches), whereas 255/35r18 have an overall diameter ~10mm less, sitting at ~635.7mm ((255*0.35)*2+457.2 where 457.2=18 inches).

This is all assuming the mounted tyre doesn't change diameter compared to when it's unmounted.
rst.ack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2019, 11:46 AM   #8232
MountainMan10
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 501522
Join Date: May 2019
Location: Front Range, Colorado
Vehicle:
2019 WRX STI
Pearl White

Default

Check out https://tiresize.com/calculator/ to compare different tire sizes. 265/35 is a bit small. 255/40 is closer to stock.

The vendor where you buy the wheels will probably recommend lug nuts.

I have seen You Tubes on +38 being the "perfect" fit where "perfect" means flush with the fenders. However I have seen posts on this forum from people who were surprised at how +38 actually fit when they got them. Personally if "perfect" mean flush look and that's what you are going for I would go with +45. I think you will find that flush enough. If "perfect" means keeping OEM handling stick with +50 or above.

Going below +45 might require rolling the fenders. Fit is going to vary depending on the actual wheel and the actual tire selected. Tire and wheels are a bit like shoes. One brand size 10 is a 10.5 in another brand.
MountainMan10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2019, 02:38 PM   #8233
Norm Peterson
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 498642
Join Date: Mar 2019
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: our wrx IS the family sedan
Vehicle:
'19 WRX Limited 6MT
'08 Mustang GT (the toy)

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rst.ack View Post
Is it me not reading right or am I getting conflicting information here? Seems like YungBoba is saying the narrower wheel gives better turn-in response and Norm is saying the opposite. Which one is it, and can you back it up with anything?
Ultimately, steering response is a matter of how quickly/precisely your inputs at the steering wheel become vehicle turning, or yaw. Time is involved here, and stiffer components get to their new-required state more quickly than otherwise identical but softer ones. We're not talking about lots of time here, not even a whole second, but little time lags are something that you can pick up on at least on a near-subliminal level. Think in tens to hundreds of milliseconds terms here.

As for something a little more concrete, I actually have some datalogged comparative data where the only differences in car setup were the wheels & tires. Same stretch of road, similar weather conditions, same make and model tires (MPSS), with the same tread widths (10.2"). One set was mounted on "measuring width" wheels (9.5"), and the other was mounted on "max-recommended width" wheels (11"). There was a small diameter difference, but only about 0.4" (0.2" on sidewall height). The max-width setup turned in a little better, and had a noticeably more stuck-down "feel" at a little over 0.9g than the measuring-width setup had at a little over 0.8g. The "measuring width" setup wasn't bad, just that it felt a little "soft" in comparison to the wider wheel arrangement.

The max-width setup has datalogged beyond 1.3g once fully warmed up in road course track driving.


Norm

Last edited by Norm Peterson; 08-06-2019 at 02:45 PM.
Norm Peterson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2019, 03:23 PM   #8234
WRBloo
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 458914
Join Date: Nov 2016
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: SoCal
Vehicle:
2017 WRX Premium
WRB

Default

Moved up from 255 to 265.

18x9.5 +35
265/35/18 Falken RT615K+
-2 camber front, -2.5 camber rear
Rear fenders shaved
Front fenders stock
Very slight rubbing in the fronts on big dips
Very slight rubbing in rear with 2+ passengers and big dips





Compressed
WRBloo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2019, 04:34 PM   #8235
MountainMan10
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 501522
Join Date: May 2019
Location: Front Range, Colorado
Vehicle:
2019 WRX STI
Pearl White

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WRBloo View Post
Moved up from 255 to 265.

18x9.5 +35
265/35/18 Falken RT615K+
-2 camber front, -2.5 camber rear
Rear fenders shaved
Front fenders stock
Very slight rubbing in the fronts on big dips
Very slight rubbing in rear with 2+ passengers and big dips
Doesn't that prove my point that 35 offset is pushing the limit?

With higher than recommended camber you are still getting some rubbing with the rear fenders shaved.
MountainMan10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2019, 06:19 PM   #8236
Norm Peterson
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 498642
Join Date: Mar 2019
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: our wrx IS the family sedan
Vehicle:
'19 WRX Limited 6MT
'08 Mustang GT (the toy)

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rst.ack View Post
With that in mind would it be more worth my while going for a 255/35 which would retain a squarer sidewall and (I'm assuming) a more true-to-form section width? The other obvious benefit of doing this is narrower tyres are often cheaper.
Visually, you'd be kind of hard-pressed to see the difference. Measuring width is just that - it's the width that's been established within the tire industry on which the tire is measured. You can probably take from that that it's a "middle of the road" width where neither handling crispness nor softer ride quality is particularly emphasized over the other attribute.


One thing I should have mentioned in the earlier post is that there can be considerable differences in ride quality and handling crispness/turn-in response among tires of the same nominal size. Even when the tires are claimed to be within the same general performance category (i.e. performance all-season). Some years ago, Falken brought out their Ziex ZE-512 tire model, and to say it was a "soft-responding tire" and "disappointing" from a cornering/handling point of view would be putting it mildly. Bridgestone's RE-92 (not a great tire in other respects) was far better in the corners.


Norm
Norm Peterson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2019, 08:12 PM   #8237
WRBloo
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 458914
Join Date: Nov 2016
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: SoCal
Vehicle:
2017 WRX Premium
WRB

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MountainMan10 View Post
Doesn't that prove my point that 35 offset is pushing the limit?

With higher than recommended camber you are still getting some rubbing with the rear fenders shaved.
I did not post my setup in response to anyone's comment or to "prove any points". Merely posting my wheel and tire combo to help other make informed decisions about their future setups.

For anyone wondering, I experienced zero rubbing with 255s.
WRBloo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2019, 04:31 AM   #8238
rst.ack
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 500326
Join Date: Apr 2019
Chapter/Region: International
Location: Australia
Vehicle:
2015 WRX Premium 6MT

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MountainMan10 View Post
Check out https://tiresize.com/calculator/ to compare different tire sizes. 265/35 is a bit small. 255/40 is closer to stock.

The vendor where you buy the wheels will probably recommend lug nuts.

I have seen You Tubes on +38 being the "perfect" fit where "perfect" means flush with the fenders. However I have seen posts on this forum from people who were surprised at how +38 actually fit when they got them. Personally if "perfect" mean flush look and that's what you are going for I would go with +45. I think you will find that flush enough. If "perfect" means keeping OEM handling stick with +50 or above.

Going below +45 might require rolling the fenders. Fit is going to vary depending on the actual wheel and the actual tire selected. Tire and wheels are a bit like shoes. One brand size 10 is a 10.5 in another brand.
Either we're looking at different measurements or we're thinking of different stock tyre sizes -- the stock wheel size on the 15 WRX is 235/45r17.

That calculator you linked to confirms my statement that 265/35r18 is closest to the diameter of the stock 235/45r17:



Additionally, it has been said time and time again in this very thread that 18x9.5 +38 fits without fender modifications -- no mention of flush fitment, merely that they fit the car without mods. That is of course dependent on tyre size, but from memory the majority of those posts quoted tyre sizes around the 255/40 - 265/35 ballpark.

The same assertion has been made when using coilovers, which, without increasing camber, would exacerbate rubbing issues if that wheel spec didn't fit properly without mods.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Norm Peterson View Post
Ultimately, steering response is a matter of how quickly/precisely your inputs at the steering wheel become vehicle turning, or yaw. Time is involved here, and stiffer components get to their new-required state more quickly than otherwise identical but softer ones. We're not talking about lots of time here, not even a whole second, but little time lags are something that you can pick up on at least on a near-subliminal level. Think in tens to hundreds of milliseconds terms here.

As for something a little more concrete, I actually have some datalogged comparative data where the only differences in car setup were the wheels & tires. Same stretch of road, similar weather conditions, same make and model tires (MPSS), with the same tread widths (10.2"). One set was mounted on "measuring width" wheels (9.5"), and the other was mounted on "max-recommended width" wheels (11"). There was a small diameter difference, but only about 0.4" (0.2" on sidewall height). The max-width setup turned in a little better, and had a noticeably more stuck-down "feel" at a little over 0.9g than the measuring-width setup had at a little over 0.8g. The "measuring width" setup wasn't bad, just that it felt a little "soft" in comparison to the wider wheel arrangement.

The max-width setup has datalogged beyond 1.3g once fully warmed up in road course track driving.

Norm
So in terms of performance I'm better off going with a slight stretch to "stiffen up" the sidewall characteristics? If that's the case I'm curious why meaty fitments are touted as the "more functional" fitments when compared with stretched fitments (barring ridiculous stretches purely for stance).

Quote:
Originally Posted by MountainMan10 View Post
Doesn't that prove my point that 35 offset is pushing the limit?

With higher than recommended camber you are still getting some rubbing with the rear fenders shaved.
You might be getting confused because in my OP I said I was tossing up between 18x9.5 +38 VS 18x9 +35. Despite the higher offset, the 18x9.5 +38 will actually "poke" out roughly 3.5mm further than the 18x9 +35.

18x9 +35 is a more conservative offset as far as wheel poke is concerned. Remember offset means nothing without width, and vice versa.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Norm Peterson View Post
Visually, you'd be kind of hard-pressed to see the difference. Measuring width is just that - it's the width that's been established within the tire industry on which the tire is measured. You can probably take from that that it's a "middle of the road" width where neither handling crispness nor softer ride quality is particularly emphasized over the other attribute.

One thing I should have mentioned in the earlier post is that there can be considerable differences in ride quality and handling crispness/turn-in response among tires of the same nominal size. Even when the tires are claimed to be within the same general performance category (i.e. performance all-season). Some years ago, Falken brought out their Ziex ZE-512 tire model, and to say it was a "soft-responding tire" and "disappointing" from a cornering/handling point of view would be putting it mildly. Bridgestone's RE-92 (not a great tire in other respects) was far better in the corners.

Norm
For reference I'm gravitating towards mounting Bridgestone RE003s (Firehawk Indy 500s in the USA) or Federal RS-RRs on these wheels if that helps in any way.
rst.ack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2019, 11:56 AM   #8239
Norm Peterson
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 498642
Join Date: Mar 2019
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: our wrx IS the family sedan
Vehicle:
'19 WRX Limited 6MT
'08 Mustang GT (the toy)

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rst.ack View Post
So in terms of performance I'm better off going with a slight stretch to "stiffen up" the sidewall characteristics? If that's the case I'm curious why meaty fitments are touted as the "more functional" fitments when compared with stretched fitments (barring ridiculous stretches purely for stance).
So-called "meaty fitments" are trading on traditional drag-racing and old-time muscle car images for their appeal. Much of that is rooted in a time when you just couldn't get wide wheels (there was a time when 7" wide wheels were almost as scarce as hen's teeth, not available even on Corvettes), and when 70-series tires were the "low profile tires" and had plenty of sidewall.

Ends up with both conventional (for the time) appearance reasons and for the Tire & Rim Association rim width ranges for 70 and 60 series tires forcing sidewalls to be tall and visibly "bulge-y". This association seems to have stuck, perhaps past its "best sold by" date.

On appearances, once a car starts picking up stereotypical drag race car or traditional muscle car visual cues, the car's got to be powerful and fast, right? And wheels do tend to be the things that first stand out from and hint at the rest . . . [/sarcasm]


I do give the serious drag racers a partial pass in that the slightly softer "meaty" fitment would cushion the shock of sudden clutch engagement in dragstrip-style starts a little. Though with AWD, this is perhaps of less value than with 2WD (either end).


Norm

Last edited by Norm Peterson; 08-07-2019 at 12:01 PM.
Norm Peterson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2019, 12:52 PM   #8240
MountainMan10
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 501522
Join Date: May 2019
Location: Front Range, Colorado
Vehicle:
2019 WRX STI
Pearl White

Default

My opinions are based on my experience in the alignment industry.

I worked with BMW designing a machine to measure ride height at their Dingolfing assembly plant. For final sign off of our machine we had to read ride height on a BMW 3 under different conditions and match their charts. We read it empty, with a driver, with a driver and a passenger, with 3 total passengers, with 4 and with 4 and a load in the trunk.

The difference in ride height from empty to full load was over 15mm. Variation from one car to another was about 2mm.

Just because one person does not have a rubbing issue they care about does not mean that you will not have a rubbing issue.

I went to Les Schwabb to see if they had wheels that were close to +55. They did not. The salesman told me, if you put wheels on the car that are +40 it WILL change the driving characteristics of the car. If you don't like the change, I don't care, because it was your choice to put aftermarket wheels on your car.

If you want to go with a wide stance and change the driving characteristics of your car, and you want to risk serious rubbing when you take your wife, friends and a full load in your trunk, that is your problem, not mine. Definitely do what you want.

Whatever you choose, it is your choice. If you don't like the results, it is your problem and your $3000 spent. Choose wisely.

I am done with this thread.
MountainMan10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2019, 01:18 PM   #8241
kaeknows
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 357191
Join Date: May 2013
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: Socal
Vehicle:
2016 WRX
ISM

Default

^^
not sure what youre talking about, you're all talk with no first hand experience on putting wheels on the specific va chassis, 20 years experience blah blah. Also not sure why youre in this thread, are you having trouble fitting 245 on your 8.5 +55 wheels or what?

old setup, 265/35 ad, 18x9 35 ze40, ohlins and stance lca, -2.5f and -2r, untouched fenders, no rubbing.




Last edited by kaeknows; 08-07-2019 at 01:32 PM.
kaeknows is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2019, 01:41 PM   #8242
Stoleyourboard
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 483007
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Vehicle:
2018 Subaru
ISM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kaeknows View Post
^^
not sure what youre talking about, you're all talk with no first hand experience on putting wheels on the specific va chassis, 20 years experience blah blah. Also not sure why youre in this thread, are you having trouble fitting 245 on your 8.5 +55 wheels or what?

old setup, 265/35 ad, 18x9 35 ze40, ohlins and stance lca, -2.5f and -2r, untouched fenders, no rubbing.





Tuffff
Stoleyourboard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2019, 01:45 PM   #8243
kaeknows
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 357191
Join Date: May 2013
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: Socal
Vehicle:
2016 WRX
ISM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MountainMan10 View Post
So track cars have wide wheels with low offsets... This applies to street cars used for commuting how?
or dual purpose car, grocery getter, canyon car, track car, etc, im sure the car can do all.


Last edited by kaeknows; 08-07-2019 at 01:50 PM.
kaeknows is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-08-2019, 05:41 AM   #8244
rst.ack
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 500326
Join Date: Apr 2019
Chapter/Region: International
Location: Australia
Vehicle:
2015 WRX Premium 6MT

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kaeknows View Post
old setup, 265/35 ad, 18x9 35 ze40, ohlins and stance lca, -2.5f and -2r, untouched fenders, no rubbing.



Thanks for posting, pretty much confirms that the setup I proposed will work great. Clean ride!

You said old setup -- what's your new/current setup?
rst.ack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2019, 01:11 AM   #8245
rymaggi
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 253442
Join Date: Jul 2010
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Location: Sacramento, Ca
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rst.ack View Post
Derailing this slightly, I'm looking at getting some Enkei RPF-1's for my daily-driven 2015 WRX (original, I know but I really like how the shape of the RPF-1 cross section accentuates a meaty fitment), but can't decide between 18x9.5 +38 or 18x9 +35, running 265/35s.

I'm aware that 265 is on the limit of how wide one might normally go with a 9" wheel, but I'm after a functional, meaty fitment.

It's quite common for me to go ragging the car on some mountain/backroads for a bit of fun, but I don't have any intention of ever taking the car to the track.

I know both of those widths/offsets physically fit the WRX, but my question is more along the lines of which one would be the more logical choice in terms of:

- The look of the fitment - would 265's on a 9" be "too" meaty (I don't even know if it's possible to be too meaty)?
- The weight saved by going for a 9"
- The handling - would 265's on a 9.5" perform better or worse than a 9"?
- The feel - would 265's on a 9.5" tramline less or more than a 9"?

Also, being a big newbie to aftermarket wheels and tyres, will I need to purchase aftermarket valve stems and/or different lug nuts? I know I need hub-centric rings...

Thanks in advance
I did this setup with a +38, 10mm spacer upfront to clear the brembos on 265/35 RE71's. Fitment is good i'm running natural camber in the back and right around 2.5 up front. I have a finger gap around all 4 pretty much and barely rub. My fenders aren't rolled, but will be Sunday.

If i had a chance to do it all over again, i would keep these.


Last edited by rymaggi; 08-11-2019 at 12:47 AM.
rymaggi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2019, 06:46 AM   #8246
rst.ack
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 500326
Join Date: Apr 2019
Chapter/Region: International
Location: Australia
Vehicle:
2015 WRX Premium 6MT

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rymaggi View Post
I did this setup with a +35, 10mm spacer upfront to clear the brembos on 265/35 RE71's. Fitment is good i'm running natural camber in the back and right around 2.5 up front. I have a finger gap around all 4 pretty much and barely rub. My fenders aren't rolled, but will be Sunday.

If i had a chance to do it all over again, i would keep these.

Aren't you running 18x9.5 +38 in that photo?
rst.ack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2019, 03:00 PM   #8247
YungBoba
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 450808
Join Date: Jul 2016
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Vehicle:
2017 WRX Premium
WR Blue Pearl

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rst.ack View Post
Is it me not reading right or am I getting conflicting information here? Seems like YungBoba is saying the narrower wheel gives better turn-in response and Norm is saying the opposite. Which one is it, and can you back it up with anything?
Judging from his posts, Norm seems to know more than I do regarding the technical aspects of this stuff, as I'm just some schmuck who only drives his car to and from work. I would venture to say that he is probably right as far as the turn-in response being better. The steering does definitely feel heavier though which is probably the more appropriate word to use and also how Norm described it.
YungBoba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2019, 12:47 AM   #8248
rymaggi
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 253442
Join Date: Jul 2010
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Location: Sacramento, Ca
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rst.ack View Post
Aren't you running 18x9.5 +38 in that photo?
correct. not sure why i typed +35
rymaggi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2019, 09:16 AM   #8249
wilson59
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 372088
Join Date: Oct 2013
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Chicago, IL (NW 'burbs)
Vehicle:
2015 WRX Premium
WRB

Default

Enkei RS05RR 18x9.5 +35
Michelin PilotSport 4S 265/35R18
RaceComp GTWorx/Bilstein Trophy Cup Coilovers
Rear slightly rolled, but rubs with passengers on bumps. Will roll flat eventually





before Brembo's:

wilson59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-14-2019, 11:42 PM   #8250
SquatchHunter
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 482173
Join Date: Feb 2018
Default

Titan 7 T-S5's 18x9.5 +40
Firestone Firehawk Indy 500's 255/35r18
Fortune Auto 500 coilovers and Whiteline LCA's
Car not aligned yet, but there's no rubbing so far.
Tires are stretched more than I'd like but 265's will require fender work.








Last edited by SquatchHunter; 08-15-2019 at 01:04 AM. Reason: Photos not showing up
SquatchHunter is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:38 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2019 Axivo Inc.
Copyright ©1999 - 2019, North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club, Inc.

As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.