Dang,
The tires are 245/45ZR17 KDWS. I remember somewhere in one of this forums some one posted that other stuff. They will come by and answer eventually or you can look through all the posts.
All that stuff was tire size I believe. I don't know any of the specs on the wheels. I wouldn't bet the house on it, but my guess is that they aren't too far off the 18's used on Vette's and on a standard Chevy 4.5" (or is it 4.25") bolt pattern. I can never remember.
__________________
Have lift, will rent out...
04 IBM M6 GTO 04 BLACK Bonneville GXP 99 Dark Forest Green Metallic Grand Prix GTP - RIP SOLD 98 Cayenne Red M6 Z28 403rwhp
All that stuff was tire size I believe. I don't know any of the specs on the wheels. I wouldn't bet the house on it, but my guess is that they aren't too far off the 18's used on Vette's and on a standard Chevy 4.5" (or is it 4.25") bolt pattern. I can never remember.
If you go over to the wheels/tires section or do a search there's a ton of info.
5x120 does not equal 5x4 3/4...yes some have bolted them up, but it's not advisable to run them all the time...in other words, don't use fbody wheels
make sure the wheel is hub-centric and not just lug-centric...the weight of the car should be resting in the hub, if it's on the lugs, you're in for an accident
If you go over to the wheels/tires section or do a search there's a ton of info.
5x120 does not equal 5x4 3/4...yes some have bolted them up, but it's not advisable to run them all the time...in other words, don't use fbody wheels
make sure the wheel is hub-centric and not just lug-centric...the weight of the car should be resting in the hub, if it's on the lugs, you're in for an accident
Is there any reason not to remachine the taper for the nuts to an actual 120mm bolt pattern so people don't have to throw out f-body rims or not have the option of buying other new 120.65 rims? Christ, you only have to move the bolt pattern in about .013 radially. I figure you would have to drop the taper down about another .030 at the new location to ensure full engagement on the 120mm pattern. Yes, I are a machinist with a PHD (push here dummy).
5x120 bolt spacing, 48mm offset (stock 17x8's), 69.5mm center bore
Do a search in this forum for info on what you should use for wheel offsets for different size/width wheels and tires without having rubbing issues or a froggy looking retard car.
5x120 bolt spacing, 48mm offset (stock 17x8's), 69.5mm center bore
Do a search in this forum for info on what you should use for wheel offsets for different size/width wheels and tires without having rubbing issues or a froggy looking retard car.
I certainly can’t list all the ones we’ve found to fit – but the answer is not as many as you think. The offset is European. The GTO hub has a 5x120.00mm bolt circle diameter. The offset is 48 mm for both 17-inch and 18-inch wheels. The GTO wheels have 8.0 inch wide rims.
WIDTH..........OFFSET............WIDTH OF TIRE
7.0...............+26/+65.............215/225/235
7.5...............+33/+61.............215/225/235/ 245
8.0...............+39/+55..............225/235/245
8.5..............+45/+48..............235/245/255
9.0.(MAX).........+48................245/255
REAR ONLY
8.0................+36/+65.............245/255
8.5................+42/+65...............245/255
9.0.................+48/+65...............255/265/ 275
9.5................+55/+64...............265/275/2 85
OFFSETS GREATER THAN SHOWN ABOVE WILL RUB ON REAR
FENDER LIP. (25MM FENDER LIP)
Do these numbers apply to stock or rolled fender lips?
I'm wondering how much could be fit up front with a heavily rolled fender lip, custom coilovers to get the perch out of the way on the inside, and maybe camber plates if anybody ends up making some.
Right now I think a wide 265 on an 18x10 rear looks doable, and the same 265 pinched on an 18x9 could perhaps be made to work up front, with enough negative camber...??
__________________
--Jason Rhoades
'99 Ford F150
'01 Honda S2000
'89 Honda Civic Si
'68 Datsun 510
Damn, JZR, don't be greedy on the tire size. 18"x10" in the rear may still require notching the control arm in the rear. an 18x9 in the rear with a 265 tire will work fine. A 265 on a 10" wide rim will make the tire look too small for that rim. A 265 on front may be out of the question. Some people are having problems fitting 245s on front. I'd say a 245 for the front would be the limit.
Rampage, PM CSiJason. He has or can have made some of the hubcentric rings for that combo.
Damn, JZR, don't be greedy on the tire size. 18"x10" in the rear may still require notching the control arm in the rear. an 18x9 in the rear with a 265 tire will work fine. A 265 on a 10" wide rim will make the tire look too small for that rim. A 265 on front may be out of the question. Some people are having problems fitting 245s on front. I'd say a 245 for the front would be the limit.
Doesn't it come with 245's stock? Surely there's room for improvement there. With a 25" tall tire, each degree of negative camber we get moves the top of the tire inboard about .2". So if we could get some camber plates in there with 3* or more of negative camber, we could theoretically gain .6" or more of outboard clearance. Combined with an aggressive fender roll, I think a 265 on a 9" rim would work.
The 265s I run (Yokohama Advan Neova AD07) are pretty wide though, wider and with a squarer shoulder than the 275 Falken RT-615. They fit pretty well on a 10" rim though:
If there was room, would work even better on a 10.5". I'll have to look at the rear control arms, see how bad an interference issue they might be.
Oh, and I'm just contemplating building a GTO for the SCCA's Solo2 STU class. Presently I'm campaigning a Lexus IS300 there (the car in the pic) - it handles well, but is lacking in power. The GTO should be able to make 200 more hp, but it'll also be about 500lbs. heavier after lightening to the limit of the rules. The Lexus can only fit 235s up front, so I figure if I can get 265s on the front of the GTO, it might have a chance.
Ah, but with negative camber comes inner fender clearance problems & accelerated tire wear. You would have better results notching those rear control arms. Most of us that are running 9"s in the rear feel that they are enough for moderate acceleration. On the front tires, 245s come stock, but the 18" factory wheels come with 235s on front. I even run a 275 in the rear. Now, with Koni shocks, I don't have fender rub.
Notice your picture? The rim guard is supposed to go out farther than the rim, not even with it. That's why a 275 is a better fit for a 9" rim instead of a 10" rim.
Doesn't it come with 245's stock? Surely there's room for improvement there. With a 25" tall tire, each degree of negative camber we get moves the top of the tire inboard about .2". So if we could get some camber plates in there with 3* or more of negative camber, we could theoretically gain .6" or more of outboard clearance. Combined with an aggressive fender roll, I think a 265 on a 9" rim would work.
The 265s I run (Yokohama Advan Neova AD07) are pretty wide though, wider and with a squarer shoulder than the 275 Falken RT-615. They fit pretty well on a 10" rim though:
If there was room, would work even better on a 10.5". I'll have to look at the rear control arms, see how bad an interference issue they might be.
Oh, and I'm just contemplating building a GTO for the SCCA's Solo2 STU class. Presently I'm campaigning a Lexus IS300 there (the car in the pic) - it handles well, but is lacking in power. The GTO should be able to make 200 more hp, but it'll also be about 500lbs. heavier after lightening to the limit of the rules. The Lexus can only fit 235s up front, so I figure if I can get 265s on the front of the GTO, it might have a chance.
1) You can't roll the front fenders much more than they are already rolled up. That's not the issue anyway.
2) You can't go more than about -1.8 to -2.0 negative camber, or you hit the strut BODY. Coil overs won't help they actually hurt because the stock strut body is only about 2 1/2"-3" in diameter, and even the factory 245/45 in stock offset hits the strut. Most coil overs, even the smaller ones, are larger in D than that.
3) You're tire above can't possibly be giving you the best performance. The side wall reinforcements are not perpidicular to the ground. IMHO, if you put those 265s on a 9" rim, you'd get better roll resistance and rear end control. You can almost SEE the bead on those things, and as stated above the rim protector which is designed to protect the rim, is not protecting the rim Putting a 265 on a 10" rim is way overkill, and thinking 10.5" is rediculous.
[An aside : What's with everyone lately wanting to put too small of a tire on too wide of a rim?????]
You don't need more than 245 in the front. Because of the power in the GTO, your most important factor is balancing the rear. In fact, you'd want a little smaller meat in the front. If you rolled the fenders in the rear, got a nice aggressive 9.5" wheel with 275s in the rear, put 245s up front, and installed a good adjustable sway kit, you could dial in a completely neutral car very easily, even with all the HP and TQ going to the ground. Use the adjustments of the sways to bring the car into balance, and keep the smaller meat up front for turn in and response.
__________________
2006 Pontiac G6 GTP Coupe 2005 Saab 9-2X Aero 5MT - sold 1976 MG Midget - project car
---------------------------------- Real men wear Pink? No - real men (and women) wear camoflage, sleep in ditches dug in the sand, eat MREs, and carry US issued weapons...
Last edited by miscreant : 05-10-2005 at 06:51 PM.
Guess I should say I'd only run the big wheels/tires for "big time" autocross competition, and run around on the stockers on the street. The CCW in the pic is the present car's race wheel. For the GTO I'm looking at designing a package that maximizes performance on a typical tight and twisty autocross course.
Seems like with a 2.5" (or even better, 2.25") sprung coilover, you could move the top of the strut inboard a good ways, with a camber plate or offset strut top hat or whatever. Being a strut car, I'm guessing the GTO will need at least 3-3.5 degrees static negative camber up front to work best. I think with a nice stiff and short 6" spring, the lower spring perch would be up and out of the way of the tire. Haven't seen a good coilover setup for the car yet, anybody in the 'States producing one?
In my experience negative camber only wears tires when combined with a large toe setting. I have/would run 0 toe up front - even with the large camber setting, tire wear isn't really any greater.
The car would probably put power down better with a 9" rear wheel, but the main goal (for me) would be getting around corners as fast as possible.
miscreant, putting a given tire on a wider wheel will tend to "stretch" more rubber onto on the ground over a wider area, providing a better contact patch for cornering. Generally, putting a tire on the widest wheel it can accomodate will net the most cornering performance from that tire. The tire I run specifies a 9-10.5" rim width range.
Of course you're free to not agree. If you'd like to research further, I can recommend a couple good books on the subject of tires and their performance:
Paul Haney's Racing & High Performance Tire: Using Tires to Tune for Grip and Balance
and the ubiquitous Race Car Vehicle Dynamics by Milliken & Milliken.
A 245 is not much tire to turn a 3500+lb. 55/45 car, I'd say it's about right for a car 1000 pounds lighter than a GTO. Still, I'm limited to a 275 in the class I want to race in, want as much of that as I can get at each corner to get the pig through the slaloms and tight stuff. Gotta keep up with the E36 M3s and the Evos!
Are people having inner fender clearance issues stock? And is it the fender liner or the fenderwell itself that rubs?
Remember, running a 265/275 on the front is also gonna take more effort by the steering rack to turn. In heavy switchbacks on the auto-x, the fluid may get hot enough not to turn as quickly as you want. Also, each tire has a recommended width & an approved range of widths. Running the widest tire on the widest rim available is not always the best answer.
I saw one guy boiled his fluid at the track, C4s used to do that all the time. Fortunately autocross runs are generally short with plenty of cool-down time between.
I don't think the effort will be a problem with street tires, with R-compounds or slicks, maybe.
sccaGTO, do you do SCCA autocross events with your car?
I haven't yet, but the thought has crossed my mind many times. I auto-xed my '97 S10 2wd before & the steering gear & fluid got hot on one of the runs & it delayed the actual moment of turning. Turn wheel, kill cones, truck turns.
If you are allowed to run R-compound tires in your class, get info on experiences from other drivers running F-bodies. Those drivers are pushing ill handling cars through the cones & they have had many years to figure out how to run them & what tires to use. I used Kumho Ecsta V700 tires when I auto-xed my Miata. I like those. The Kumho Ecsta V710 looks like a race slick with 2 grooves going around the tire. I'd think those would work better than the V700.
The Kumho Ecsta V710 looks like a race slick with 2 grooves going around the tire. I'd think those would work better than the V700.
Yup, the V710 is a fantastic tire, I have a little experience on them:
They really start to blur the line between a DOT-R and a slick.
I think the GTO would be fun in F-Stock on 710's, but with its heft and 245 tire size limitation I don't think it'll keep up with the Mach 1 on 275s, which I have driven a bunch also.
GTO Wheels
2004 GTO Owner
Have lift, will rent out...
You're right. That is handier. Are all of these measurements that have been tested? If they are, you saved me a sh*tload of work & calculation.
need some soon.Here some pic's
Putting a 265 on a 10" rim is way overkill, and thinking 10.5" is rediculous.
