My mechanic has 20's on his 78 cutlass calais. he had to put airshocks on the back so they wouldnt scrub. They dont scrub at all in the front though. As far as performance goes, I dont think that they will be too heavy. He is still able to spin his tires with just a stock olds 350 and 350 transmission. I say go for it! 8)
G-body's with 20's
- Thread starter jonnyslick
- Start date
- Status
My car is hacked (see build thread) to fit 16x8's with 245 50 16's. They rubbed something awful with the car stock. I am debating 17's or 18's on my car right now as my wheels will no longer fit with the B car spindle swap (and bump steer mods!) I am planning after the paint is finished (Next Thursday... I hope!). For such a big car, decent wheels and tires are a very tight squeeze.
1985Chevycutlass said:
Unless you are doing a shakedown in bleach .... when is spinning tires a positive performance indicator? Besides the guy is talking pro-touring .... the emphasis is on handling. Is all that mass going to help you get through a corner faster? Or is centrifical force going to be an issue and make it actually HARDER to turn? Low profile tires/slightly larger rims were developped to lessen the sidewall from rolling, but at somepoint .... all that mass has to be counterproductive. Most G-bodies I have seen with 20's and larger have actually raised the center of gravity ... there simply isn't enough wheelwell to tuck the rims and have sufficient travel .... perhaps you can do enough finessing to get them to fit, but honestly I think the appeal (which is extremely relative) of 20" rims is purely cosmetic and would actually hamper a cars ability to corner hard. I could very easily be wrong ... I don't have pro-touring type money (wish I did).
jrm81bu said:
Why would it fit in the Monte and not in the Cutlass? Or has that Monte had some work done to it?
jonnyslick said:
I can't say if it has any work done to it but on my malibu a had 16x8 torgue thrusts with 4.75 backspace. They had 255/60 tires and would not fit without spacers. the sidewall of the tire was pressed against the frame on one side. After that I say max backspace is 4.5.
Oh and I think the rear Iroc rims i ran are around 4.75 to 5 backspace(never measured) and they wouldnt fit without bigger spacers than my torque thrusts.
So that Monte very well could have spacers on it. So you think the problem would be in the inner side rubbing on the frame, not the outside rubbing with the fender?
Also, 17x8 with a 4.5 BS should be fine for the fronts right?
Also, 17x8 with a 4.5 BS should be fine for the fronts right?
17x8 with 4.5 bs should work on the fronts. I think the rears will be against the frame. With spacers to clear the frame you might run into the fender then, lowering it will only make it worse. Its gonna be tight to say the least.
I'll be the first one to say it out loud...
I DON'T GET IT!!
Why do you have to have big wheels to perform well? My firebird is on rails with 16 x 8 wheels and 245/50/ZR16 tires. What more do you get from an 18? I don't go for the big wheels, and I can understand (I guess) if you just like the look. But performance? What possible gain are you getting? I doubt much, if any at all.
I want to see someone show with track times that those big wheels are better at the autocross than 15 or 16's with proper aspect ratio and tread contact. Anyone? Any real racers out there who saw their times get better? If it made a HUMONGOUS difference then I would consider it, otherwise I am putting it into the hood scoop and spoiler catergory. Looks yes, performance, no!
So, is this just about looks or what?
I DON'T GET IT!!
Why do you have to have big wheels to perform well? My firebird is on rails with 16 x 8 wheels and 245/50/ZR16 tires. What more do you get from an 18? I don't go for the big wheels, and I can understand (I guess) if you just like the look. But performance? What possible gain are you getting? I doubt much, if any at all.
I want to see someone show with track times that those big wheels are better at the autocross than 15 or 16's with proper aspect ratio and tread contact. Anyone? Any real racers out there who saw their times get better? If it made a HUMONGOUS difference then I would consider it, otherwise I am putting it into the hood scoop and spoiler catergory. Looks yes, performance, no!
So, is this just about looks or what?
KrisW said:
Well I personally don't consider a 16 x 8 wheels and 245/50/ZR16 tires to be a passenger car combo. At one time this kind of combo was the cutting edge. Imagine how well your car would handle on some 14 x 6 rims with 195-75-14s. 20s as I stated I believe go beyond the point of being a plus and I doubt there is any performace gains because of wheel weight. Maybe if the person is running some mega-dollar carbon fiber wheels, but even then we are still addressing fitment issues with a G-body. There has to be some benefits of a 18" fitment ... otherwise why would so many "super cars" and race classes run them? I doubt the guy running 24 hours around Daytona really cares how much "bling" his car has. A Z-rated fifties series 16" tire probably exceeds MOST cars capacities, it is honestly a lot of tire ... but if there was no need for 30 series and lower profile tires ... why would they spend the millions in research to develop them? I'd bet your 50 series would be an excellent tire choice for the OP. I honestly don't know how setup his car is and would assume his intentions are more cosmetic. I really don't see dropping a G-body AND 20" rims being realistic. I think the whole "Donk" movement pretty much proves how those rims do NOT fit these cars. Personally, I'd be happy with some gummy 16s.
DrRansom442 said:
^ No not cosmetic. I want the car to handle well. For right now the car is stock, all stock. But the first thing I plan on changing will be the suspension, brakes, and wheels/tires first. Right now, I need new tires so I figured while I'm spending the money I might as well take a step in the direction I'm heading anyway. Eventual plans will either be SC&C or HRFH setup for the suspension. Maybe 1 to 2 inchs lower, not exactly sure yet, but no more than 2 inches. But I do like the Pro-Touring look and I know that a lot of those guys are running 17's and 18's. One one hand I DO want the "look", but on the other hand I want something that handles well too.
KrisW said:
What would you think of 17x8's all around? Would that give up too much grip on a G-body you think? I have NO experience yet with G-body's and handling. Although I am quite suprised at how well my 24 year old tank will go through twisties on crappy tires and blown shocks. Not that it's on rails by any means, but I does go better than I thought it would when I first got it.
- Status
Similar threads
