When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Hi,
I bought my 2005 Nissan 350z Base model (Color code : KY0) and I was looking for new tires and wheels and I don't really know much about staggered rims.
I was wondering if I can get anyone's help in seeing if I bought these would they fit and be correct for my car?
They aren't very expensive, speaking how I do have a budget.
Hi,
I bought my 2005 Nissan 350z Base model (Color code : KY0) and I was looking for new tires and wheels and I don't really know much about staggered rims.
I was wondering if I can get anyone's help in seeing if I bought these would they fit and be correct for my car?
They aren't very expensive, speaking how I do have a budget.
Thanks for the help
Tires are fine for stock size applications. 18x8/8.5
If you go with wider wheels (you should or else not worth buying new wheels same or smaller than stock), you need larger tires as well to make it worthwhile.
Offsets on those wheels are too high. You want to go 30mm or less. These will probably fit.... but look and perform like garbage can lids. Tire Rack is great for tires, but IMO, their wheel suggestions and selection isn't that great.
+1. OEM wheels are probably better (stronger and lighter) than those shown. 18x9.5 and 18x10.5 is probably most popular aftermarket staggered fitment. But if your main concern is looks then size, strength, weight don't matter - just get what you want.
The hypergram is "flow formed" (a far cry from forged, but I think most agree it's a major step up from cast), less than 19.8 LBS (curiously only .1LB less than 10.5") , and priced about the same. It's available in +25 (and +35 which is lighter still).
I'd much rather have +25 than +15 as it allows you ro run wider rubber. Which has more benefit to grip- slightly wider track or rubber?
+15 will widen track by 10mm (5mm per side) vs +25. Why not go with +25 and use 10mm wider rubber?? win win.
If flush look is main priority and one is unwilling/unable to use wider tire to get it then I understand the trend towards lower offsets. Otherwise I just don't get it.
The hypergram is "flow formed" (a far cry from forged, but I think most agree it's a major step up from cast), less than 19.8 LBS (curiously only .1LB less than 10.5") , and priced about the same. It's available in +25 (and +35 which is lighter still).
I'd much rather have +25 than +15 as it allows you ro run wider rubber. Which has more benefit to grip- slightly wider track or rubber?
+15 will widen track by 10mm (5mm per side) vs +25. Why not go with +25 and use 10mm wider rubber?? win win.
If flush look is main priority and one is unwilling/unable to use wider tire to get it then I understand the trend towards lower offsets. Otherwise I just don't get it.
Please explain how a difference in offset allows for wider tires.
And, please tell us where those track width numbers come from. 30 down to 15 is an absolute gain of 15mm PER SIDE for a net track width gain of 30mm.
Please explain how a difference in offset allows for wider tires.
Tire width is limited by steering knuckle inboard and fender outboard (assuming suspension is setup in manner that allows sufficient compression). Where a tire sits relative to these limiting factors is all about offset. Keeping tire/wheel centered where (inboard clearance) = (outboard clearance) would naturally allow the widest tire. My experience has shown 18x9.5 +15 has more inboard clearance than outboard.
Originally Posted by MicVelo
And, please tell us where those track width numbers come from. 30 down to 15 is an absolute gain of 15mm PER SIDE for a net track width gain of 30mm.
Oops. I was thinking about tire width, where increase does only yield half as much per side. But my point remains the same. Restated:
+15 will widen track by 20mm vs +25. Why not go with +25 and use 20mm wider rubber?? win win.
Tire width is limited by steering knuckle inboard and fender outboard (assuming suspension is setup in manner that allows sufficient compression). Where a tire sits relative to these limiting factors is all about offset. Keeping tire/wheel centered where (inboard clearance) = (outboard clearance) would naturally allow the widest tire. My experience has shown 18x9.5 +15 has more inboard clearance than outboard.
OK, I see where you're coming from.... equalizing space between fender/tire and suspension/tire.
My only point would be that I've 9.5, 10, and 10.5 up front and they all fit with up to a 275 section width so, I'd prefer to go with lowest offset given the Z's suspension and gain as much track width while running the largest tire that's practical for the application - and in my opinion, a 255 is the most I'd want up front due to scrub radius issues, inability to achieve proper tire temp, and deadening of steering response. But others might be OK with trading some response for ultimate grip. I totally get that.
Oops. I was thinking about tire width, where increase does only yield half as much per side. But my point remains the same. Restated:
+15 will widen track by 20mm vs +25. Why not go with +25 and use 20mm wider rubber?? win win.
Totally not following this thinking... stock offset is 30. You take out 15mm of each wheel and the net outboard movement is 30-15 = 15mm at EACH wheel. Then times 2 for both fronts and both rears = 30mm. Not really getting where all these numbers are coming from.... howz a +15 wheel widen track by 20mm?? Just like +25 wheels net a 5mm track increase at each corner.... And so on.... where are these figures coming from?
I wasn't making any reference to stock offsets or track width. Someone suggested the OP buy some wheels in a "proper" size. They were 18x9.5 +15 - a size considered proper by many I think. I suggested different wheel (available in +25), was making my argument for why I think +25 is better than +15, compared their track width relative to each other only.
And yeah, currently running 285s in front. I'm an ultimate grip kind of guy...
My only point would be that I've 9.5, 10, and 10.5 up front and they all fit with up to a 275 section width so, I'd prefer to go with lowest offset given the Z's suspension and gain as much track width while running the largest tire that's practical for the application - and in my opinion, a 255 is the most I'd want up front due to scrub radius issues, inability to achieve proper tire temp, and deadening of steering response. But others might be OK with trading some response for ultimate grip. I totally get that.[/COLOR][/B]
[/B]
Why go with "lowest offset"? Sure, increases track width, makes scrub radius issues worse.
I did search hereabouts for scrub radius and offset. Did find recommendations for 10.5s being +15. Wait, one of those hearty recommendations is from you:
Where you say recommend +15 and say, "I would NOT recommend going to a higher offset wheel (>+30mm)"
I don't understand. If ones goal were to maintain OEM scrub radius, offset should remain OEM, regardless of wheel width (assuming OEM tire diameter). Right? +30 would be perfect. +15 way off. Or are you saying you want to alter OEM scrub radius?
The hypergram is "flow formed" (a far cry from forged, but I think most agree it's a major step up from cast), less than 19.8 LBS (curiously only .1LB less than 10.5") , and priced about the same. It's available in +25 (and +35 which is lighter still).
I'd much rather have +25 than +15 as it allows you ro run wider rubber. Which has more benefit to grip- slightly wider track or rubber?
+15 will widen track by 10mm (5mm per side) vs +25. Why not go with +25 and use 10mm wider rubber?? win win.
If flush look is main priority and one is unwilling/unable to use wider tire to get it then I understand the trend towards lower offsets. Otherwise I just don't get it.
When running a narrow wheel like a 9.5 up front I would take +15 as it doesn’t really matter for clearance. Running a 10.5 up front, +25is really close on the inside but gives you the most outer clearance for wide tires. I run 10.5 +20 after a spacer with a 285/35-18 up front.
Why go with "lowest offset"? Sure, increases track width, makes scrub radius issues worse.
I did search hereabouts for scrub radius and offset. Did find recommendations for 10.5s being +15. Wait, one of those hearty recommendations is from you:
Where you say recommend +15 and say, "I would NOT recommend going to a higher offset wheel (>+30mm)"
I don't understand. If ones goal were to maintain OEM scrub radius, offset should remain OEM, regardless of wheel width (assuming OEM tire diameter). Right? +30 would be perfect. +15 way off. Or are you saying you want to alter OEM scrub radius?
Let me clear something up here. I am NOT arguing with you or your preference for a +25mm offset wheel. Not at all. Z'matter of fact, my preferred setup is 9.5/10.5 +22 F&R.
Scrub radius - without getting into the whole science of stuff (cuz I'm on vacation ) - WORKS very well on a Z with said radius moved a tiny bit further positive from its already positive scrub position. HOWEVER, so many other factors come into play, namely every alignment parameter.
So, to simplify it, all I'm saying is that a bit more positive scrub is good for overall handling, steering response, and relative ease at the steering wheel GIVEN a "normal", within-range alignment.
Originally Posted by arficus
I wasn't making any reference to stock offsets or track width. Someone suggested the OP buy some wheels in a "proper" size. They were 18x9.5 +15 - a size considered proper by many I think. I suggested different wheel (available in +25), was making my argument for why I think +25 is better than +15, compared their track width relative to each other only.
And yeah, currently running 285s in front. I'm an ultimate grip kind of guy...
Again, your preference and perhaps with 285s, your need to run those offsets to keep the alignment and suspension happy with clearances and such makes the +25 the hot ticket for you. But all I'm saying regarding track width is it is at "X-value" at OE/stock settings/wheels and when you subtract from it, e.g., "X-15mm", your net track increase is 15mm wider THAN STOCK, the point its always going to be measured against. I mean, what other baseline point do you measure the width increase against?
Again, am NOT challenging that your setup is what you like. ONLY stating the black and white. Or, as its been pointed out here hundreds of times, "what works".
07-01-2018, 02:07 PM
Question about Rims and Wheels.
) - WORKS very well on a Z with said radius moved a tiny bit further positive from its already positive scrub position. HOWEVER, so many other factors come into play, namely every alignment parameter.