Just picked up a set of these for the front of my 3rd gen. I do have some minor rubbing issues (slightly) with these. I could have swore that these would fit, but apparently not as well as I thought. Anyone else have this problem? Maybe I should go with 235/40/17 instead. The 255/35/18" on the rear (38mm offset) don't seem to be any problem however. On a side note, anybody out there interested in trading a pair of their 18" SSR Integral A2's (38mm offset +/-) for a pair of 17" immaculate condition A2's w/Dunlop Sports?

Regards,
Frank

 

Dude,
My 17x8" SSRs w/ that size tires are +38 in front, and 17x9" +45 in rear, and I had to roll my front fenders... why did you get so little offset?

I wish i had +45's on the front!

 

C'mon Pete tell him the whole truth! You pulled your fenders cause your car was so low it was almost on the bump stops, that and you were running 245s on the front vs his 235's.
In my case I ran 235's on the 17x8 SSR w/38mm offset with no rubbing issues at all.
FWIW I now run the 17x9 w/45mm offset 255 tires and *DID* roll my front fender lips.
Regards,
Crispy

 

Actually,
i only pulled them once while the car was "over-lowered" and had 245/40's, and they bent back perfectly.

I raised the car up and changed to 235/45's (taller), and it happened a few more times until the paint chipped while attempting another bend back...

Chris... your "235s" were 235/40's (smaller diameter than stock)

Since the stockers were 8" +50's, i wouldn't mind having +45 even on my 8" fronts, instead of +38.

 

I had some "not so good" information from a person that these should work on my car, that, and I got a killer deal on the whole package so I couldn't pass em' up. I'm thinking that I may need to go to the 235/40/17's on the front until I can "trade" for some 38mm or more offsets. Thanks for the info guys, anyone else?

Regards,
Frank

 

So, what did you do with the old 38mm's?

Frank

 

I think I remember. These wheels for sale in the parts for sale section. The guy was from Canada? I thought the offsets were a little low, but, the seller swears the setup worked on his car? Odd... 235/40-17s might help you...

 

I have the same wheels in 9 x 17 with 45-mm offsets all around with 255/40-17, and did NOT roll my front fender lips Have had no rubbing issues road and track.

 

SleepR1,

I am "the guy from Canada"...

The wheels that Flyrx7 picked up are not mine, however it seems that they are the same offset (32mm front with 8" width).

I ran both 225/45/17 and 245/40/17 with the car lowered by 3/4" (RB springs and then GC) and indeed never snagged a fender lip.

Cheers.
David

 

Finally... a little credible testimony to substantiate my no rubbing situation.

A quick calculation reveals that the 9"x17x45mm and the 8"x17x32mm wheels BOTH have a +/- 70mm "front" spacing dimension.

I'm glad SleepR1's indicates no rubbing problems because I have not either.

Seems like it all boils down to tire sizing in this case.

Cheers.
David

 

That and ride height which I would consider the more critical factor when determining if you will get any rubbing.

Manny, what's your ride height like? I run about 3/4" lower than stock and only rolled my front fender lips as a precaution for the 255's. Now with the 275 Hoosiers I'm about to try it's going to get interesting.

Regards,
Crispy

 

You're absolutely right. The 8 x 17, 32 mm offset SSR IA2s have the same front space dimension as the 9 x 17, 45 mm offset, 3.24 - 3.23 inches. My guess is the 235/45-17 is a bit too tall up front, the FD is lowered a bit too much, and there's not enough negative camber dialed in?

 

I have H&R Sport Springs which apparently lower the FD by 1.25 inches? I also run -1.5 degrees of camber fr/rr. FWIW, I've tried the 275/40-17 Hoosier R3S03 on 9.5 x 17 SSR Comps in 42 mm offset up front with no rubbing. It's a tight fit though. I'd recommend using 245/40-17 R3S03s on 9.5 x 17 SSR Comp 42 mm offset all around just to be safe. Surprisingly the 245/40-17 is very wide for that size. It's more like a 255/40-17??!!

 

Actually I was the one who picked up Brads old CCWs. Front rim is a 17x10.5 with what I measured as about a 55mm offset (7 7/16 backspacing).
There will be some fender rubbing on the frontside but clearences elsewhere look to be fine
http://www.negative-camber.org/crispyrx7/ccw.htm

Regards,
Crispy

 

Chris,

You MUST be the most detail-oriented FD owner on the planet...well maybe BATMAN comes close with his FD's paint job

Nice job on Brad's old CCWs. They looked awful. 35 hours of labor, and they really do look brand new.

The 17-inch version look better than the 18s for some reason. I think CCW uses the same wheel center for both 17 and 18, but the 18s use different rim halves?

Anyhow, 10.5 x 17 for 275/40-17 is HUGE. 11 x 17 is even HUGER

I wonder if a set of 10 x 17 with 255/40-17 will fit on my car...you know in street-only version with the bolt heads facing outside, and the hubcentric center cap

 

Even with a tire that's tread does not go all the way to the edge, I don't think it will work.

I just installed 225/45-17 Falcon's on my Volk's with a +35 front offset and there is only a MM or two gap when turned all the way (lock to lock).

 

GoRacer,
And your ride height would be?

Crispy

 

uhm, ok I have to raise the front.
Their is more turn clearance now, but it looks like i'll prolly have to roll the fenders though. Tri-Point can do it, but after their alignment, my wallet only had moths when I opened it.

 

I was only a one finger gap. I didn't realize I had 40 series on the front before. Now running 45's in front I had to raise the front end. The current gap is 2&1/2 fingers for F/R. I would go down to two fingers, only after I roll the fenders. Three fingers looks too stock for me. Oh and I double checked the offsets and I have +33 in front (The +35 was in the rear).

 

I finally went to the 40 series tires in the front (235/40/17), no rubbing issues at all anymore. Just to clear things up a little, the only rubbing I had was on the fender liner, not the fender lips, and this would only happen on the passenger side when I hit a bump. I have to say I like the looks of the 40's much better than the 45's, it matches better with the 255/35/18 in the back, IMHO. The 45's were like 25.3 inches in diameter, whereas stock is 24.85, thats about 7/16" bigger in diameter, which looked pretty funky to me. Of course now with the 40's they look a little smaller but that's ok with me. FYI, the 40's are 24.4 inches in diamter, nearly an inch less than the 45's and about 7/16" less than stock.
The 45's would probably be fine if the proper offset were used, but this does confirm that 32mm offset can be used on a stock front suspension, if the correct tire is used. Thanks for everyones input on this too.

Regards,
Frank

 

235/40-17 has lower load index than stock 225/50-16. Load index should be at least 92 or better. 92 supports about 1400 lbs at a specified tire pressure. Upon full braking each front tire should support the full weight of the Rx7 on each tire, 2800 lbs/2 = 1400 lbs each front tire (due to load transfer upon heavy braking). Any less than this load index is dangerous to run, IMO. This is why the manufacturer put 235/45-17s as the stock 17-inch tire size up front. Load index for for 235/45-17 is >1400 lbs.

 

Damn, now you tell me. Above is a partial quote from yourself that states this may be ok, and now there may be an issue with load index? What is the load index then for the 235/40/17, and would that be any different than 245/40/17?

Regards,
Frank

 

Well, it's good and bad. 235/40-17 allows the clearance you need, but has a lower weight index than stock 225/50-16. 245/40-17 also has lower index, 91 I think. 235/40-17 is 90? Check Tire Rack's specs for each tire size.

If you don't ever plan to brake full on, then fine, but if you're like me, and do open track, better to just get proper wheel offsets and tire sizes with proper load indexes for the tires, lest I get a blowout.

 

First off, obviously the most important factor is the width of your front wheels- and I don't see that anywhere. As it has already been mentioned, SleepR1 has 17x9 with a 45 offset. A 17x8 with a 32 offset would sit exactly the same in relation to the fender. So the 32 offset you have could be fine- depends on what width the wheels are.

In any case, I'm really starting to think that no 2 FD's are the same. I'll see one guys car with the same exact offset as me and his wheel will be almost perfectly even (or flush) with the fender while mine will be about 12mm further in. And our ride heights are pretty much the same.

As a side note, I do know that as the car gets lower, the wheel starts to go inward (at least for the rear that is- I didn't test the front); when I was installing my H&R springs, I mounted the wheel and with no spring in there, I raised/lowered the wheel to see the travel arc and as it went up in to the wheel well, the top of the wheel tilted inward. So the lower the car, the further in the wheel would be.

Anyhow, I just can't understand why my wheels are so far in compared to the numerous other guys that have the same offset and ride height as me. So for the guy who sold those wheels to you, maybe that offset did work perfectly fine on his car.

For everyone else: if you're as **** as me and want to maximize your specs and/or setup, the only way is to mount a sample set, make your measurements, and then order your wheels in your own custom size (or as close as your mfg offers them). But if you're going for conservative specs, + or - a bit won't make a difference- just get the recommended specs.

-Tom

 

Tom, FWIW, negative camber does increase as the care is lowered with springs. My H&Rs allowed me to dial in -1.5 degrees negative camber. I could have dialed in -2 if I wanted. -1.5 degrees has been ideal for tire wear and handling. Good luck with your wheel quest. It's a shame you're selling your wheels, they're gorgeous! It's amazing how you transformed your car from a charred red R1 to a silver R1. You did this work yourself? That's amazing?