18X8 F 18X9 R or 18X9 F 18X10 R ?
04-13-2005, 01:53 PM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: East Cost
Posts: 304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
18X8 F 18X9 R or 18X9 F 18X10 R ?
which set up would you go with? Im looking for the best handling possible, for the 18X 8 & 18X9 I was thinking of going with 245/40 F and 275/40 R and for the 18X9 & 18X10 set up I was thinking of going with 275/4018 F and 285/35 R, will I have problems with this set up, by the way I have an 2004 Enthusiast model.
04-14-2005, 07:59 AM
#5
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 677
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by drumma022
19x11 
04-14-2005, 10:03 AM
#6
Registered User
No question, 18x9 front AND rear with non-stagger tire. Grab four of those new Azenis RT-615 255/40/18 and you'll have a sweet setup.
It helps cure a lot of the understeer/balance, offers better braking, and IMO looks better to.
Personally, I'm running four 18x8.5 Rays Track rims with 245/40 all round.
It helps cure a lot of the understeer/balance, offers better braking, and IMO looks better to.
Personally, I'm running four 18x8.5 Rays Track rims with 245/40 all round.
04-14-2005, 07:15 PM
#7
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: central ny
Posts: 1,703
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by FritzMan
No question, 18x9 front AND rear with non-stagger tire. Grab four of those new Azenis RT-615 255/40/18 and you'll have a sweet setup.
It helps cure a lot of the understeer/balance, offers better braking, and IMO looks better to.
Personally, I'm running four 18x8.5 Rays Track rims with 245/40 all round.
It helps cure a lot of the understeer/balance, offers better braking, and IMO looks better to.
Personally, I'm running four 18x8.5 Rays Track rims with 245/40 all round.
I was thiking about getting either 8.5F 9.5 rear or 9F and 10R.
I wonder how much of a handling difference there would be with a non staggered setup?
Trending Topics
04-15-2005, 03:25 AM
#8
Registered User
Originally Posted by phile
I've never seen a 9 inch wide setup all around. Do you have any links?
I was thiking about getting either 8.5F 9.5 rear or 9F and 10R.
I wonder how much of a handling difference there would be with a non staggered setup?
I was thiking about getting either 8.5F 9.5 rear or 9F and 10R.
I wonder how much of a handling difference there would be with a non staggered setup?
To make wheel selection a little easier (because they only offer certain offsets), I suggest a slightly narrower 255 tire so you won't have rubbing issues and won't give up too much performance compared to a 275. Personally, unlike SCC, I'd select 4 equal width & offset wheels with identical tires so you can rotate and have exactly the same amount of rubber front and rear. Depending on your selected offset, I'd also run a 10-15mm rear spacer.
IMO, it's an excellent street/track setup.
Last edited by FritzMan; 04-15-2005 at 03:34 AM.
04-15-2005, 03:54 AM
#9
Chicago Realtor
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: chicago
Posts: 938
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
according to that link..im running 18x9 and 18x10.5 rear on 245/40 and 275/40 fr. and r. 30 offset....if i lower my car at all i will be rubbing the control arm badly?Those pics on the side show him almost touching it at stock height? WTF! I thought i was gonna lower my car an inch!
04-15-2005, 07:41 AM
#10
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: central ny
Posts: 1,703
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by FritzMan
Here's a link from Sport Compact Car mag where they actually address balance, running nonstagger, and how to mount a 18x9 up front.
To make wheel selection a little easier (because they only offer certain offsets), I suggest a slightly narrower 255 tire so you won't have rubbing issues and won't give up too much performance compared to a 275. Personally, unlike SCC, I'd select 4 equal width & offset wheels with identical tires so you can rotate and have exactly the same amount of rubber front and rear. Depending on your selected offset, I'd also run a 10-15mm rear spacer.
IMO, it's an excellent street/track setup.
To make wheel selection a little easier (because they only offer certain offsets), I suggest a slightly narrower 255 tire so you won't have rubbing issues and won't give up too much performance compared to a 275. Personally, unlike SCC, I'd select 4 equal width & offset wheels with identical tires so you can rotate and have exactly the same amount of rubber front and rear. Depending on your selected offset, I'd also run a 10-15mm rear spacer.
IMO, it's an excellent street/track setup.
Be back to report soon, because I know I'll have quesitons :P
04-15-2005, 04:12 PM
#11
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: central ny
Posts: 1,703
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fritz,
Also to note...I have a touring Z which has 8" wide tires all the way around. I hear alot of people say the Z has built-in understeer from the factory. Wouldn't you think my Z wouldn't have as much understeer as a track model considering it has no stagger (besides SLIGHT diameter stagger)?
Also, I like the look of wider tires in the back alot better. So techincally couldn't I just have an 8.5F 9.5R and get the sway bars and just set the front for full soft, while keeping the rear at medium? That would eliminate understeer, correct?
Also to note...I have a touring Z which has 8" wide tires all the way around. I hear alot of people say the Z has built-in understeer from the factory. Wouldn't you think my Z wouldn't have as much understeer as a track model considering it has no stagger (besides SLIGHT diameter stagger)?
Also, I like the look of wider tires in the back alot better. So techincally couldn't I just have an 8.5F 9.5R and get the sway bars and just set the front for full soft, while keeping the rear at medium? That would eliminate understeer, correct?
04-16-2005, 04:30 AM
#12
Registered User
Originally Posted by phile
Fritz,
Also to note...I have a touring Z which has 8" wide tires all the way around. I hear alot of people say the Z has built-in understeer from the factory. Wouldn't you think my Z wouldn't have as much understeer as a track model considering it has no stagger (besides SLIGHT diameter stagger)?
Also, I like the look of wider tires in the back alot better. So techincally couldn't I just have an 8.5F 9.5R and get the sway bars and just set the front for full soft, while keeping the rear at medium? That would eliminate understeer, correct?
Also to note...I have a touring Z which has 8" wide tires all the way around. I hear alot of people say the Z has built-in understeer from the factory. Wouldn't you think my Z wouldn't have as much understeer as a track model considering it has no stagger (besides SLIGHT diameter stagger)?
Also, I like the look of wider tires in the back alot better. So techincally couldn't I just have an 8.5F 9.5R and get the sway bars and just set the front for full soft, while keeping the rear at medium? That would eliminate understeer, correct?
Running the same width front and rear definitely help reduce the understeer. If you like the wider rear look, perhaps a set of spacers in the rear will create that illusion. Despite running the same tires and wheels front and rear, my rear looks really hunkered down compared to the front but it's only because I have 25mm spacers in the rear and nothing in the front (mostly to not screw up the steering geometry or inadvertantly create bump steer).
As for sway bar setting, typical setup would be to soften the front and stiffen the rear to get oversteer. I personally found that the 350 likes a stiff front possibly due to camber/tire rolling issues being a larger limiter than weight transfer characteristics. There's been examples of B Stock Solo2 setups running only a front sway bar upgrade and having it bite better as a result.
Stiffening the rear will definitely help the back come around quicker - but that doesn't mean it's faster. Causing the rear to loose traction sooner so that it balances the front only creates better balance. Causing the front to bite better to match the rear causes better balance AND higher cornering load.
Asthetics have different priorities for different folks. Either way, you'll experience improved performance with 8.5f and 9.5r but possibly not the ultimate cornering capacity as 9" front AND rear.
04-16-2005, 07:36 AM
#13
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: central ny
Posts: 1,703
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by FritzMan
Actually, the Track runs exactly the same sized tires as the touring (which I have as well). The main difference is that the Track has 8.5" rear while the touring has 8" rear (both have 8" wide fronts). If anything the rear on a Track is a little more hooked up due to the wider rim and resulting stronger sidewalls compared to the narrower Touring setup.
Running the same width front and rear definitely help reduce the understeer. If you like the wider rear look, perhaps a set of spacers in the rear will create that illusion. Despite running the same tires and wheels front and rear, my rear looks really hunkered down compared to the front but it's only because I have 25mm spacers in the rear and nothing in the front (mostly to not screw up the steering geometry or inadvertantly create bump steer).
As for sway bar setting, typical setup would be to soften the front and stiffen the rear to get oversteer. I personally found that the 350 likes a stiff front possibly due to camber/tire rolling issues being a larger limiter than weight transfer characteristics. There's been examples of B Stock Solo2 setups running only a front sway bar upgrade and having it bite better as a result.
Stiffening the rear will definitely help the back come around quicker - but that doesn't mean it's faster. Causing the rear to loose traction sooner so that it balances the front only creates better balance. Causing the front to bite better to match the rear causes better balance AND higher cornering load.
Asthetics have different priorities for different folks. Either way, you'll experience improved performance with 8.5f and 9.5r but possibly not the ultimate cornering capacity as 9" front AND rear.
Running the same width front and rear definitely help reduce the understeer. If you like the wider rear look, perhaps a set of spacers in the rear will create that illusion. Despite running the same tires and wheels front and rear, my rear looks really hunkered down compared to the front but it's only because I have 25mm spacers in the rear and nothing in the front (mostly to not screw up the steering geometry or inadvertantly create bump steer).
As for sway bar setting, typical setup would be to soften the front and stiffen the rear to get oversteer. I personally found that the 350 likes a stiff front possibly due to camber/tire rolling issues being a larger limiter than weight transfer characteristics. There's been examples of B Stock Solo2 setups running only a front sway bar upgrade and having it bite better as a result.
Stiffening the rear will definitely help the back come around quicker - but that doesn't mean it's faster. Causing the rear to loose traction sooner so that it balances the front only creates better balance. Causing the front to bite better to match the rear causes better balance AND higher cornering load.
Asthetics have different priorities for different folks. Either way, you'll experience improved performance with 8.5f and 9.5r but possibly not the ultimate cornering capacity as 9" front AND rear.
Can you explain how stiffening the rear will help the back come around quicker, but the car won't necessarily corner faster? I don't doubt that it's true, I just want to understand better.
Do you run a setup with only a front swaybar?
04-17-2005, 04:11 AM
#14
Registered User
I run an adjustable front and rear bar with full stiff front and medium stiffness rear.
From what I understand, stiffening the rear creates a delayed, but eventually a more dramatic weight transfer causing ultimately less grip. In the case of the front sway, it's thought that the camber limited front benefits from a tighter bar (preventing tire roll over) and to a certain extent creates more grip instead of less.
Taking traction as a theroretical numerical function of 10, if the stock front has 6 and rear has 8, you get oversteer. If you tighten the rear bar to break away earlier, at 6, you get better balance but only 6 traction overall. If you stiffen the front bar and get more grip, such as 8, you don't have to play with the rear to get 8 overall and better balance. Not playing with the sway bar and simply adding the same width front compared to the rear would be like have a 7 up front and 8 in the rear.
Keep in mind the logic to the front bar is theroretical and was discussed awhile back on the AutoX forum.
From what I understand, stiffening the rear creates a delayed, but eventually a more dramatic weight transfer causing ultimately less grip. In the case of the front sway, it's thought that the camber limited front benefits from a tighter bar (preventing tire roll over) and to a certain extent creates more grip instead of less.
Taking traction as a theroretical numerical function of 10, if the stock front has 6 and rear has 8, you get oversteer. If you tighten the rear bar to break away earlier, at 6, you get better balance but only 6 traction overall. If you stiffen the front bar and get more grip, such as 8, you don't have to play with the rear to get 8 overall and better balance. Not playing with the sway bar and simply adding the same width front compared to the rear would be like have a 7 up front and 8 in the rear.
Keep in mind the logic to the front bar is theroretical and was discussed awhile back on the AutoX forum.
04-17-2005, 07:08 AM
#15
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: central ny
Posts: 1,703
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Very interesting. Although it is theoretical, how much merit do you find in this theory with your setup? Have you tried it both ways, the way you explain, AND with a softer front (Not so soft that your front number has more grip than your rear though).
04-17-2005, 10:58 AM
#16
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Everywhere
Posts: 202
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice article. Thanks.
Originally Posted by FritzMan
Here's a link from Sport Compact Car mag where they actually address balance, running nonstagger, and how to mount a 18x9 up front.
To make wheel selection a little easier (because they only offer certain offsets), I suggest a slightly narrower 255 tire so you won't have rubbing issues and won't give up too much performance compared to a 275. Personally, unlike SCC, I'd select 4 equal width & offset wheels with identical tires so you can rotate and have exactly the same amount of rubber front and rear. Depending on your selected offset, I'd also run a 10-15mm rear spacer.
IMO, it's an excellent street/track setup.
To make wheel selection a little easier (because they only offer certain offsets), I suggest a slightly narrower 255 tire so you won't have rubbing issues and won't give up too much performance compared to a 275. Personally, unlike SCC, I'd select 4 equal width & offset wheels with identical tires so you can rotate and have exactly the same amount of rubber front and rear. Depending on your selected offset, I'd also run a 10-15mm rear spacer.
IMO, it's an excellent street/track setup.
04-18-2005, 04:43 AM
#17
Registered User
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 532
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I run a set of 18x9's on the track, with 265/35 Toyo T1-S rubber. I also have a set of Hotchkis sway bars. Like FritzMan, I have them set at full stiff front, medium rear. This setup works FANTASTICALLY well at the track. Understeer is essentially gone, and the car is perfectly balanced.
With this setup, even with normal street tires, I am 4 seconds a lap faster at the Firebird main track that a stock 350Z running 17 in wheels and stock sways. And yes, the real beauty is that you can swap front and rear wheels if wear of one or the other becomes an issue. The only real concern is that if you have traction control or VDC it might not like the same size tires (though I have never had the Slip light come on with this wheel/tire comb).
With this setup, even with normal street tires, I am 4 seconds a lap faster at the Firebird main track that a stock 350Z running 17 in wheels and stock sways. And yes, the real beauty is that you can swap front and rear wheels if wear of one or the other becomes an issue. The only real concern is that if you have traction control or VDC it might not like the same size tires (though I have never had the Slip light come on with this wheel/tire comb).
04-18-2005, 05:32 AM
#18
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: central ny
Posts: 1,703
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As far as common knowledge goes, If it weren't for the same size tires all around, the stiffer front bar would probably cause over steer...
However, Fritz mentioned that camber/tirerolling issues are the reason why the Z benefits from a stiffer front. I'm thinking that the stock cars are so close to a neutral stagger already(the track is only .5inches wider) that the generally accepted knowledge on neautrality or oversteer in our cases does not apply. It's almost counter intuitive! The Z needs a stiffer front, rather than softer front unless we buy some camber arms.
I wish we could find out for sure. :P
However, Fritz mentioned that camber/tirerolling issues are the reason why the Z benefits from a stiffer front. I'm thinking that the stock cars are so close to a neutral stagger already(the track is only .5inches wider) that the generally accepted knowledge on neautrality or oversteer in our cases does not apply. It's almost counter intuitive! The Z needs a stiffer front, rather than softer front unless we buy some camber arms.
I wish we could find out for sure. :P
04-18-2005, 10:21 AM
#19
Registered User
Originally Posted by FritzMan
... Taking traction as a theroretical numerical function of 10, if the stock front has 6 and rear has 8, you get oversteer.
Adding a stiffer bar typically creates understeer, but in the 350's case it seems (at least for my driving style and a few others out there) to offer more bite, hence reduced understeer.
Mini rant - I really wish I could edit something older than 10 minutes on this forum. I'm sure this forum has got it's reasons, but it's a PITA and frankly its the only forum I've been to which has this protocol. I could keep ranting now, but I only have so much time to post and will now spend the next 10 minutes re-reading my post knowing I can't correct it later.
04-18-2005, 11:51 AM
#20
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Everywhere
Posts: 202
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FritzMan, thank you for your great contributions to this thread. I'm starting to understand wheels & tires a lot better after reading this thread and the article you linked to a few times.
Would you mind itemizing what would be the widest 18 inch "even wheels" (with offsets) & tire setup that will fit brembo / stoptech big brakes but also give that "perfect neutral" feeling on a Z, along with tires that give superb wet weather performance? (This is assuming adjustable sway bars are automatically going to be part of the set up)
Thanks,
Kos
Would you mind itemizing what would be the widest 18 inch "even wheels" (with offsets) & tire setup that will fit brembo / stoptech big brakes but also give that "perfect neutral" feeling on a Z, along with tires that give superb wet weather performance? (This is assuming adjustable sway bars are automatically going to be part of the set up)
Thanks,
Kos