wow, nice fitment. my guards look like the same amount of flare, but im running more camber.. 18x12 in what offset +30? would make sense then, i get +1642 internet points for have a near 0 offset
lol, yeah not my cuppa tea. imho, a little too much. I think the low offset, camber look is quite nice up to a certain magical point. As soon as it goes past that point, i think it just starts looking worse and worse. Like this example. :sorry:
I'm with you benny. I think the gravel rash on that beautiful paint work would be a problem. Maybe he's realy lucky and has no loose stuff where he lives. A lot of exposed tread to throw stones. Having said that, that car must have some serious grip and stopping power..wow ! It would be like mashing your brain to the front of your skull
Too much! The problem with going ever wider is that you reach a point at which the increased tyre 'footprint' reduces the overall grip(downforce)and increases the likelihood of aquaplaning due to the much larger tyre contact area. Bigger is not necessarily better in many things(including tyres).
Sorry but that just looks crap...good on him for fitting them under as that's a feat in itself but cosmetically its a huge FAIL. The washers under the rear bonnet mounts is fail as well, looks crap and I believe it doesn't help with cooling as it stuffs up the way air moves through the engine bay, making air cooling LESS efficient...basically he's gone for the wank factor Correct me if I'm wrong about the bonnet but I think I'm right from what I've read in the past. Cheers, Craig
no allowing air to come out at the back of bonnet removes heat from engine bay . and air flows better through radiator when there is low pressure behind it . .lifting the bonnet is not neccessary.. I removed the rubber seal from the back of mine.. what ever heat my bonnet vents miss the rest comes out the back
Fair enough, I just remember reading that somewhere as the subject has come up numerous times...still im pretty sure hes going for the look rather performance, hence the stupid wheels ...bit like the car bras and rear window slip on shades and the driving lights, bit of a ricer fad...and like a yoyo, the fad will go, then come back, go, come back, etc.... Cheers, Craig
Interesting to know. thanks Lloyd what would be a good max grip size? Please don't say a bob jane all-rounder I had not considered the downforce issue. Had 245 rear and 235 fronts on my ZJ fairlane and it worked well. Wet and Dry
*fun police walks in* In canberra (not sure about the rest of the states) you cant run anymore than 10" wide. even an engineer wont pass it!
on the fronts, you wouldn't really want to go over a 235. They're the MAIN tyre that you want to "cut" through water rather than aquaplane. Rears will progressively be more prone to aquaplaning the wider you get from there really. Put it this way, i'm running a 235 on fronts, and 275 on rears, without any concerning traction issues in wet weather (within reason). Whenever i get my tyres, i make sure that i get ones with at least 1 deep groove channel in the tread. This is a big help for dispersing water and less risk of aquaplaning. These type tread patterns with the grooves are generally better for wet weather... These type tread patterns are generally less effective at dispersing water... ...but back to the original post as an example. As soon as you put more than about -1 & a half degree camber, you're sacrificing traction, and wet weather safety BIG TIME!
Thanks Benny I thought I was on track. "275 Rear" bloody hell thats a set of meat mallets ! Had another look at the original photo, Its a RHD Yank Tank?? Do they have road rules over there?? Is that the car owned by wa300z?? or just posted to get a bite?
Yeah ages back! I got featured on stanceworks.com 's Facebook page but No new pics so can't update too much!
