Tire Rack is running a special on the SSR Integrals and I've been considering an upgrade. But I don't really like Tire Rack's recommended set up for 17' wheels (17x8F, 17x9R) because it does not seem very balanced. I'm considering either 17x9 on all four corners or even 8.5 all the way around which is closer to '99 J-spec. A good compromise might be 17x8.5F and 17x9R so I can avoid any of the rubbing problems in the front which might occur if I ever lower the car. Has anyone else tried the 17x8.5F and 17x9R setup with SSR Integrals and what would the correct offsets be?

 

I run 17X8 in the front and 17X9 in the rear, they work good for me.
http://geocities.com/OneBadFD3S/theglassmans?

 

Mr. 7:

I've been considering these myself. The 9 x 17 SSR Integrals in 45 mm offset should work all the way around. The 9 x 17, 45 mm is Tire Rack's rear fitment. They'll discourage you from using the 9 x 17, 45 mm Integrals up front. Remember that Tire Rack guarantees proper fitment, which means they only sell conservative fitments. It's generally accepted by most FD enthusiasts that the maximum front position clearances are 3.5 inches front space and 7 inches back space (assuming stock diameter coil springs).

Proper clearance will be determined by tire size choice. I like the new Potenza S-03 Pole Position, and Tire Rack provides complete tire specs for this tire:

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/Spec.j...+Pole+Position

For a 245/40-17 S-03, section width on a 9-inch wide rim is is 10.2 inches, tread width is 9.2 inches, overall tire diameter is 24.8 inches. The tire shoulder, NOT the tire sidewall, will be the part of the tire that contacts the fender lip, let's base our width dimensions on the tread width:

9.2/2 - 1.77 = 2.83 inches front space

For the back space clearance let's use the overall tire section width since the inboard tire sidewall may contact the coil spring:

10.2/2 + 1.77 = 6.87 inches back space

For a 255/40-17 S-03, section width on a 9-inch wide rim (which is the spec rim) is 10.4 inches, the tread width is 9.4 inches, and the overall diameter is 25.1 inches. Note that the 0.2 inches increase in tire tread and section widths, for every 0.5 inches of increase in wheel width rule-of-thumb is beautifully illustrated in the above examples

Again we're using the tread width tire measurement for front space clearance:

9.4/2 - 1.77 = 2.93 inches front space

Note we're using the overall tire section width for back space clearance measurement:

10.4/2 + 1.77 = 6.97 inches back space

According to these calculations, 9 x 17 SSR Integrals with either, 245/40-17 OR 255/40-17 Bridgestone Potenza S-03s will fit beautifully. Personally, I'd choose the 255/40-17s, since you're still within the back space clearance maximum of 7 inches. You'll maintain the FD's stellar neutral handling, you'll be able to rotate tires. You'll have enough meat on the wheels to look cool, and perform outstandingly on both road and track, wet or dry!

Let me know how this goes!

I just bought a set of SSR Comps in 8.5 and 9.5 x 17 with 245/45- and 275/40- 17 Hoosier R3S03s. Excellent track setup with a slight increase in understeer. Downside, is I need to trailer the car to the track since Hoosiers cannot be used on the public roads.

With the 9 x 17 SSR Int A2s in 45 mm offset, with 255/40-17 S-03s, I'd be able to drive to the track, change to track pads, turn hotlaps, change back to street pads, and drive home. Very sweet!

The best part of this whole deal is the price! $289 each for the 9 x 17 SSR Int A2s, $210 each for the 255/40-17 S-03, that's less than $2000 for the whole deal. Add shipping, and it's still a bargain.

Note too that the SSR Int A2s in 9 x 17, 45 mm offsets are semi-solid forged 1-pc wheels, strong and lightweight. I've been quoted between 18 and 19 lbs each for the 9 x 17s. Not quite as light as the 9.5 x 17 SSR Comps (at 16 lbs), but you need a little more strength for a public-road application anyway!

Best of luck!

 

Nice writeup Manny.
FWIW I run 17x9 Int A2's w/45mm offset using Yokohama A032R 255/40x17's on all 4 corners.
Beware with this combo though. I did as a precaution roll my front fender lips as I do run lower than stock (by about an inch) ride height.
Also have coil-overs.
I did use the 17x8 fronts for a long time and, like Manny mentioned experienced a bit more understeer than I woudl have cared for but since switching to the 17x9's in the frotn have been very happy...now it's oversteer that I have to deal with
Regards
Crispy
"If you have no fear, your car isn't fast enough."

 

THANKS!

Yes, the 255/40-17 Yoko A032R is a tad taller than stock at 25.2 inches overall diameter. I don't know that 0.1 (~2/16) inches is enough to make contact with fender lips. I've read similar comments from others who've used the SSR/Yoko setup...It's probably worth the money to roll front fenderlips, as you suggest

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/Spec.j...ma&model=A032R

It's actually refreshing not having to worry about leaving the track tail first. That's the bane of having a neutral-handling FD. Power oversteer is easy, especially if you have higher-than-stock power levels. With my new setup, I have to be more patient, and not rush the turn-in, otherwise the front tires start to lose stick (understeer). Once the car is turned into the corner, I mash the gas pedal without fear--perhaps my car isn't fast enough!

FWIW, the 1-inch wider Hoosier setup (10 inches front and 11.1 inches rear), has helped me turn consistently fastest laptimes at Putnam Park--1.21.0XX--for anyone familiar with the Park, and that's with freezing ambient temps and tire temps no higher than 118 F--optimum Hoosier R3S03 temps are 180 to 200 F! With warmer weather and optimum tire temps, I'll be in the teens at Putnam Park, no question!

Best of luck in the new year!

 

If you want to maintain front wheel/tire clearance and neutral handling balance, you could try 225/50-16s on 8 x 16 for the front positions and 255/40-17s on 9 x 17 for the rear positions.

The taller sidewall of the 225/50-16s will dial in more stick on that end of the car, while the shorter sidewalls of the rear 255s will dial in more oversteer. The increased oversteer from a shorter sidewall comes from an increase in spring rate from the shorter tire sidewall--vice versa with the front 225/50-16s--increase in sidewall height, decreases spring rate, and increases stick at that end of the car.

8 x 16, in 38 mm offset with 225/50-ZR16 Pirelli P-Zeros mounted on 8-inch wide rims yield the following specs, 9.4-in section width, 8.4-in tread width, overall diameter of 25.1 inches.

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/Spec.j...em+Asimmetrico

Clearance specs for the front positions with 225/50ZR16 Pirellis mounted on 8 x 16, 38 mm SSR Integral A2s yields:

8.4/2 - 1.5 = 2.7 inches front space

9.4/2 + 1.5 = 6.2 inches of back space

9 x 17, in 45 mm offset with 255/40ZR17 Pirelli-Zeros mounted on 9-inch wide rims (spec rim) yield the following specs, 10.3-in section width, 9.3 tread width, overall diameter of 25.2 inches.

Clearance specs for the rear positions with 255/40YR17 Pirellis mounted on 9 x 17, 45 mm SSR Integral A2s yields:

9.3/2 - 1.5 = 3.15 inches front space

10.3/2 + 1.5 = 6.65 inches back space

With this setup clearance is guaranteed, and the handling balance should remain intact. The rear track width will be 0.9 inches wider than the front track width. That might dial in a very small amount of understeer, but should be subtle at best!

I posted this setup, because, I may go this route, since I already have the 8 x 16, 38 mm offset SSR Integral A2s with 225/50YR16 Pirelli P-Zeros. I'd just need to get the rear 9 x 17s and 255/40ZR17 Pirellis. This would make a good drivers ed setup, as well as having that cool staggered setup while maintaining the handling balance.

The big plus is that my wife probably WON'T even notice the difference--I won't get into trouble buying yet another set of wheels and tires!

 

How about 17x8.5 F offset 40mm and 17x9 R offset 45mm?
Would that provide good balance while avoiding any of the
clearance problems in the front which might occur if I ever
lower the car?

Next question is if Tire Rack even offers the SSR Integrals
in 17x8.5 with 40mm offset. Any other good tire shops?

 

Yes 8.5 and 9.0 x 17, 40 mm offset will work. SSR Int A2s are not offered in 8.5 x 17, 40 mm offset, at least Tire Rack does not offer that size. Don't know of anyone else offers 8.5 x 17 SSR Int A2s.

You could go with the SSR Competitions in 8.5 x 17, 42 mm offset. That will work all the way around with 245/40-17s. I know these will work because I have the SSR Comps in 8.5 x 17 with 245/45-17 front, and 9.5 x 17 with 275/40-17 rear, Hoosier R3S03 tires. The 8.5 x 17 is extremely light at ~15 lbs. At $389 each from the Tire Rack, the 8.5 x 17 SSR Comps are still a bargain considering they're a lightweight Semi Solid Forged 1-piece wheel, that's strong enough to be used on the public roads!

 

I have 17x8 on all fours. All tires are 235-45-17. Will it be any problem for the handling.

 

Manny,

Not saying I doubt you will be in the teens in the warmer weather, but don't you think that the freezing ambient temps (and the extra 30-50 rwhp it gives you) might have something to do with the improvement in lap times? I would think that would have more of an impact than 1" wider tires, obviously this is just speculation though.

Wade

 

Oh, I dunno. I've got a set of tired turbos barely making 9 psi (original set with 92,000 miles). The tail pipe was shooting whitish smoke under hard acceleration (from burning oil-contiminated charge air blown into the intake from the leaking turbo sleeve bearings).

The motor was cutting out from running below half-tank levels. Also had a sputtering problem with Elf 114 octane (unleaded). I ended up cutting that with 1/2 tank of 94 octane to yield 104 octane. That and running full tanks seemed to cure the sputtering motor. Perhaps I'll just tank up with Sunoco 104 unleaded next time?

Anyhow, I'll let you know after my March 23 Putnam Park event. I hope to have Japan Spec twin turbos installed by then (if all goes well). I'm hoping to crack the glass ceiling and get that elusive 1:19 at Putnam Park! We have room for more FD Rx7s if you'd like to see me crack 1:19 for yourself (hee, hee)

Off-topic question--I'm not all that clear with the spool-up time procedures you emailed me? Are those elapsed times from zero rpm to 2500 rpm, etc.? What gears were they conducted 1st? 2nd? 3rd? 4th? PM me or send me email

 

Hey Sleep,

A few more questions before I pull the trigger on this purchase. The roads here in SF are crap, especially after the recent rains. Will this make problems such as front-end rubbing more likely if I go with the 9x17 all around setup (car has stock touring suspension)? Also, it seems like the calculated sizes come awfully close to the max front and back space. What is the tolerance on tire sizes? Could even slight variations in tire sizes cause fitment problems by pushing these limits? It's kind of a shame that tire rack does not offer the integrals in 9x18.5 - or perhaps SSR just does not offer that size - snce that would seem to be a safer bet in the front while maintaining more balance.

Thanks,
Seven

 

Mr. 7,

Hmmm. I was in SF in 1998 for a Pharma convention. I don't remember experiencing any bad roads. Too bad I couldn't find any FD 7s to rent. I had to make do with a BMW Z3 2.8 to make my run up and down the Pacific Coast Highway (to Big Sir and back). Had a blast. Highway 1 had no traffic, and what little there was, pulled over to let me by (what polite drivers!).

If you have a stock Touring suspension, ie, no lowering springs, then you'll be in good shape to run either 245/40-17 or 255/40-17 on the 9 x 17s all around. If you're in the least bit worried about the front clearances, you could use 245/40-17 up front and 255/40-17 in back, but you won't be able to rotate tires.

If I were doing this, I'd order up two, 9 x 17s with 255/40-17s first. Mount them up front and drive around for awhile to see if you get rubbing. If you're clear, then order up the second set of two 9 x 17s with 255/40-17s and slap them on in back, and you're good. If the first set of two, 255/40-17s with 9 x 17s, DO RUB up front, then order up a set of two 9 x 17s with 245/40-17s to mount up front, and move the rubbing 255/40-17s in back.

In this way, you won't be stuck with a bad purchase!

The section width specs for the 245/ or 255/ -40-17s, mounted on their respective spec rim widths, vary within ~0.3 inches. Yokohama AVS Sports being the narrowest, and Bridgestone Potenza S-03s being the widest. The Pirelli P-Zero Asimmetrics lie in between the Yoko and Bridgestones.

The SSR Integrals don't seem to come in 1/2-inch rim widths like the SSR Comps do.

Let me know how this works out for you!