jsnyng
Senior Member
Those on backwards?
LOL, yes they were in that picture. I wasn't paying attention because I was dog tired when I first got them and put them on backwards.
Those on backwards?
I've heard tires over 255 on the front want to track some what.
http://www.s197forum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=24879&page=3
^^I ran 295/30/19's on all 4 corners with Sportlines then switched over to Saleen Speedlab Coilovers. No rubbing or problems here...
I can't even tell my 295's are up there. They don't track at all. Fox/SN different story.
My god. I still think thats my favorite looking car on this board. Simple, yet so fucking amazing.
Here's a slightly different spreadsheet plot, showing the 295/40 on 9.5" overlaid with the same size tire on its "measuring width" rim (10.5"). I gave up trying to make the shoulder area a curve, but the general shapes of the sidewall bulges should be close enough once you get half an inch or so above the ground. The thin vertical lines are at the point of maximum section width for comparison against the rim flange, though the tighter curvature of this tire on the 9.5" rim should be evident.I see they do bulge on that graph you posted. A little bulge won't bother me as long as its not sticking out the fender line. The pics posted above with the gt500 looks great to me..
If anything, that 10.5" wheel looks too wide for a 295. Trust me, the 295 fit's really well on a 9.5" wheel, and absolutely perfect on a 10" wheel.
I'm running 295-40-18 Falken Azenis on all four corners. They're mounted on 18x10 Roush's.
No rubbing at all. It's not even really close.Do you have any rubbing at all!? I want to do the same with AM bullitts (same offset) and nittos in the same size. Looks killer btw
No rubbing at all. It's not even really close.
What lowering springs?
The mfr and TRA approved rim widths for this size range from 10" through 11.5", inclusive. That tire size is measured on (and almost certainly its design is based on) a 10.5" wide rim. I suppose I should say "generally range", because you might find a tire that lists a slightly different range.
That said, I think somewhere I've seen "85% of section width" used for tires below 50 profile, but I don't know if that applies all the way down to and below 40 profile. If so, that might give you just enough slack if you look hard enough to find somebody's 295/40 that specifically includes 9.5". That does not mean that all other 295/40's are accepted on 9.5" though. Just that one.
For short durations, which includes dragstrip and autocross runs, you can usually get away with crowding or cheating the limits a bit.
It's road-racing, open-tracking - and your extended trips and other situations that occur in normal driving - that are more heavily influenced, due to the accumulation of sidewall flexing heat happening over extended time spans.
45 seconds or less at the dragstrip (counting your deceleration time) and maybe a minute at autocross between tire cooldown periods is not nearly as severe from a heat buildup perspective as, say, three four-hour stints a day driving across Texas this past summer with the car loaded up near its listed capacity would have been.
I fixed it in my above post, but here it is.
http://www.lowered.eu/misc/files/Tyre_Calculator_English.xls
Copy and paste error by me I guess. Sorry about that!