EMill

Looking to pick up a set of wheels/tires for my evo9. The car is 99% street car, and will probably only see an autoX or two next season while I get used to it (I'm new here...). This doesn't mean that I don't give her the beans every time I see a twisty on a back road...

My goals:
- 245 or 255 wide tire
- 17 or 18 inch wheel, though I typically like a smaller wheel for moar rubber (sidewall)!
- little/no body modification outside of a moderate roll if necessary
- more aggressive than stock fitment
- MUST be square
- would prefer to not run spacers as that's just more $$$$$$ (studs, etc)

I'm not partial to RPF1's, but that's probably where I'll land (cuz light/cheap/sexy).

Do I go 17x9.5 wheel +15 offset? Do I go 18x9.5 +15?

Do I go 245/40/17 tire? 245/45/17? 255/40/17? 255/35/17 (too 'short'?)?

How about 245/35/18? 255/30/18? Maybe 255/35/18 (this seems too tall...?)?

Also, someone talk me out of Michelin PSS's... I just went through my first set ever, and I loved them too much, but they cost noticeably more than their (more or less) direct competition. Anyway, I'm in the market for a set of summer performance tires that won't burn off in one summer of driving. For reference I've owned Hankook v12 Evo's, Michelin PSS's, Continental Extreme Contact DW's. They were all good (Mich. PSS's being my favorite), but I'm just looking for opinions.

This thread is absolutely awesome by the way... I'm sure I'll be coming back here and stealing knowledge in the future when the evo goes track machine in a few years!

kaj

iTrader: (60)

17x9.5 +38 rpf. Roll the back fenders, perfect fitment for a responsive 255 tire and easy to rotate. +15 will not fit the rear the way you want. Will need 20mm spacer up front. No big deal; many of us road race with spacers.
Light and cheap.
Hankook R-S3 is cheaper than the PSS and grips better. For a step up in responsiveness, I went with RE71rs.
I'm not sure I'd want to daily that sticky of a tire, though a lot of people do.

EMill

Thanks kaj. You're saying 17x9.5 +38 fits on all four corners with no spacers? I'm still confused by the stock evo fenders... Looks like I'll have to go measure a bit once it warms up outside.

/e: my confusion lies with seeing lots of people run four square wheels/tires but spacing the front. I understand this is to clear the front calipers, but I'm surprised to think that this doesn't make the front 'poke' more than the rears...

kaj

iTrader: (60)

Yes, the front wheels sit out 20mm wider than the rear. These are the only two pictures I have of my car with the wheels on it.

EMill

Yikes, aparently I was tired when I first responded this morning...

Anyways, thanks again for the advice, and thanks for the sick action shot!

I am very tempted to put a 'stockish' fitting setup on the car simply because it'd be easier/cheaper (apparently 17x8.5 +30 RPF1s fit under the body no sweat and clear the brakes with no spacers because of their spoke shape), but I really want 255+ wide tires, so I'll wait and save a bit more.

On another note, seems like some of the tire manufacturers don't make 255+ wide tires for a 17 inch wheel (talking about Mich. PSS's specifically....). Maybe I'll splurge and go for 18s just for a wider selection of tires.

Construct

iTrader: (4)

Don't worry too much about the spacers up front. 17x9.5" +38 RPF-1s with a 20mm spacer up front is a very common setup. It's best to roll the fender lips very mildly for clearance, especially if you're not running aggressive camber. Frankly, my setup with 20mm spacers up front looks more "square" than the stock wheels front and rear, which tends to look like the front wheels are tucked inward a bit relative to the rear.

For wide tires, you will want wide wheels. The wider wheel helps stretch the tire out a bit, which results in a marginally wider effective contact patch. The opposite is true if you go to a narrower wheel. Having the wheel very mildly stretched also helps for stability of the tire and general feel of the car, which counts for a lot more than you might expect. Those 8.5" wide wheels will get the job done, but not as well as a 9" or 9.5". Also the spoke pattern looks really ugly on those, IMO.

If you're budget-conscious, steer clear of 18s. 18" wheels and tires are a significant step up in price. But you're right, if you want to go past 255s you need 18s.

codylop

Kaj-In pictures that's 255/40/17 with 17x9.5 rims.They look wide in pictures.

kaj

iTrader: (60)

Yes, sir. 255s on a 9.5" wheel. A super slight stretch. I would have tried a 265, but neither tire I wanted comes in that width in a 17".
I stick with 17s because I like the cost of wheels and tires. I'm not at a place where I can go wider than a 255, so there really is no point for me, anyway.
I do feel a wider track in the front looks better. The front fenders seem to sit wider than the rear. Don't know, though, I've never measured. I've read a wider track in front is a good thing too, but haven't confirmed with any real data. Just info on what Japanese groups run.

killerpenguin21

iTrader: (20)

It's not just Japanese groups, a large majority of the track guys are running wider front track. Simply put it just works. I posted a couple links in the evo x control arm thread about the physics behind it, spacers actually change scrub radius and affect weight transfer and therefore grip. There's an old thread around where someone did the math on the change in weight transfer by a 15mm or so increase in track width, I believe it was around 2% in the beneficial direction.

Stock the front and rear track width are equal, think it was around 61 inches.

A few r comps are available in 275/x/17's but most sticky street rubber we run now days a 255 is damn near a 265 anyway

codylop

Kaj- I'm going with the same set up.You went with apr wheel studs and open end lug nuts?With 255 how's launching the car?With the stock 235 tires it's not to hard on the drivetrain but with 255 tires,I know it will be harder on it.

kaj

iTrader: (60)

no, i didn't like the idea of the torque on the longer studs and spacers. i have Ichiba (or whatever the name is) Ver 2 spacers. i'm sure the other ones are fine, i just like the bolt-on spacers better.
i don't launch my car, so i can't really say how they do.

nollij

iTrader: (21)

I use the V2 Ichiba spacers too... don't really recommend them as the studs/nuts are made of some pretty bull**** "steel"

kaj

iTrader: (60)

possibly. but i've been autox'ing and road racing on mine for two years. no issues for me, nor anyone else i know that races on them.
i guess it depends on how they are taken care of, torqued, etc.

LetsGetThisDone

iTrader: (1)

Bolt on spacers definitely need to be properly torqued, hammering on with an impact is bad juju. Red Loctite is also recommended.

killerpenguin21

iTrader: (20)

i use them as well, although im planning to go to slip ons and extended lugs shortly because my second set of wheels dont fit with them due to not having cut outs on the back of the hub.

i did crack one at one point, however im not sure if it was a result of over torquing or not. current set has been on the car for 2.5 seasons with no issue.

i do come from the camp of believing that they are in fact slightly risky and arp studs are better.