# Wheels - how wide can you go?



## Pash (Jan 2, 2016)

Hi

I'm new to the forum and recently purchased my first TT (225) with some mods:
8x18 on 225/40
Spacers: 20mm front and 30mm rear.
Coil over front and separate spring/shock rear - 50mm

I need to sort out the rear camber with some adjustable tie bars as the tyre wear looks very poor on the inside edge. These seem like a rip off for what they are (especially Forge). What's the cheapest out there?

Also, I want to take off the rear spacers to the point where it allows me to use 9x18 and keep the front as is. Would spacers still be required? Should I go with a 225/40 tyre to be consistent with the front or can I use a 235/40?

Ive seen some talk about the Cupra R top mounts and bump stops. What benefits will this provide?

Thanks again

here's a pic


----------



## Gonzalo1495 (Oct 13, 2014)

So many questions, I'll answer the ones I know for certain or from experience. I'm far from a suspension guru by the way, I consider myself lacking the most in that aspect. So take what I say lightly and not as gospel. lol.

With that said, the widest tire you can fit will depend on the widest wheel you can get your hands on. I can think of a few people who've ran 275, 295, etc. For this at the very least you'd want 9j width on the wheel.

As an example, I've already done the number crunching, and I plan on fitting some 275/40/17 tires onto some Rota wheels that are 17x9j with a +42 offset and retaining my spacer setup. Should be amazing. :twisted:

As far as adjustable control arms/tie arms go, You don't want to cheap out on these imho. With that said, the cheapest I've seen are the megan racing ones @ $180 usd.

With that in mind, many people here swear by running 4 adjustable control arms, which I think isn't necessary unless you are ridiculously low and have a lot of negative camber to pull back in. I'm doing just fine on 2 arms, one on each side of the car and in the bottom position. Every setup is different as well though so keep that in mind.

Hope that helps


----------



## rcarlile23 (Mar 8, 2009)

9's on the front and 11's on the rear.

Ive got 19"x9" all round

I know a couple of guys in the states have had 11's et0

Friend had 10.5 et0 rotiforms vce's


----------



## Manchesturk (Nov 16, 2014)

Pash said:


> Hi
> 
> I'm new to the forum and recently purchased my first TT (225) with some mods:
> 8x18 on 225/40
> ...


Hi and welcome ttforum, check these out for adjustable tie bars, these are much respected tie bars by few forum members and has really good reviews, i will be getting a set once the funds allows me to  
http://www.cbauto-solutions.co.uk/#!sta ... -bars/ch3k


----------



## YELLOW_TT (Feb 25, 2004)

A guy posted not long a go that staged wheels had upset the handling on his TT and had returned to the same size wheels front and rear


----------



## Pash (Jan 2, 2016)

cheers for all the feedback guys, very helpful. I'll let you know i get on.


----------



## 3TT3 (Aug 30, 2014)

The actual track on the rear(standard) is narrower than the front.Hence I guess the wider spacers rear than front.

Me on a 335 mm approx suspension height 245(tyre) on the front.
Im using 245 tyre on the back also .
Actual wheel widths without clown car tyres something like 245 front max with 8-9 in wheel width
Rear maybe 265? tyre on a 9-10 in wheel width, and including excessive camber at the rear so your 10 j wheels dont rub.

Thats around the max Ive seen on here and elsewhere.
Im not saying whats good or bad..285 , 10-11 in rear sticky out beyond the arches , Im sure its possible with a "dune buggy" look and pump up the height.
Not for me thx.


----------



## CollecTTor (Jan 17, 2014)

3TT3 said:


> The actual track on the rear(standard) is narrower than the front.Hence I guess the wider spacers rear than front.
> 
> Me on a 335 mm approx suspension height 245(tyre) on the front.
> Im using 245 tyre on the back also .
> ...


This is 285 on 18x9.5", fits flush in the back, needed a spacer in front to clear standard KW coils spring perch.


----------



## Pash (Jan 2, 2016)

That's some serious width to tackle on the B roads. I reckon I'll go with 18x9 all round with 225 all round. Keeps the Quattro system happy and hopefully stops any major rubbing issues.


----------



## Gonzalo1495 (Oct 13, 2014)

Pash said:


> That's some serious width to tackle on the B roads. I reckon I'll go with 18x9 all round with 225 all round. Keeps the Quattro system happy and hopefully stops any major rubbing issues.


You're gonna have some serious stretched tires if you go 225 on a 9j wheel...

Not to mention the quattro system does not depend on you having 225 wheels... If anything, the more traction and grip with wider tires will make it happier. Along with your cars handling.


----------



## Gonzalo1495 (Oct 13, 2014)

http://www.e90post.com/forums/attachmen ... 1380907681

This is 235 on a 9j wheel off the bimmer forums.


----------



## David C (Apr 15, 2013)

Gonzalo1495 said:


> You're gonna have some serious stretched tires if you go 225 on a 9j wheel...


9" is the upper limit on tyre manufactures specs for a 225/40R18, so I wouldn't describe it as "serious stretch".

How they look will depends on the design of the specific tyre you decide to use.
Some have very narrow tread, which will make them look stretched, some have wider tread, so would look less stretched.


----------



## Gonzalo1495 (Oct 13, 2014)

David C said:


> Gonzalo1495 said:
> 
> 
> > You're gonna have some serious stretched tires if you go 225 on a 9j wheel...
> ...


Post those manufacturer tyre specs, I've never heard of 225 being recommended for a 9" wide wheel...









Not saying this table is gospel, just that it's a very realistic representation and "safe"


----------



## jamman (May 6, 2002)

We live life a bit more on the edge over here Gonz you should try it :wink: :lol: :lol:


----------



## Gonzalo1495 (Oct 13, 2014)

jamman said:


> We live life a bit more on the edge over here Gonz you should try it :wink: :lol: :lol:


 :lol: :lol:

You crazy UK folk and your stretched tires :wink:


----------



## Pash (Jan 2, 2016)

i just bought some new 225's for the front as they were shot and ideally wanted to keep this the same at the rear as heard the Quattro system will get upset. Looking through some various posts, some people have issues and some dont....so not sure if it's worth the risk. I'd gladly go with a staggered set up with F 8x18 on 225's and R 9x18 on 235's, but it seems like a risk.

This is what i'd like the end result to be:


----------



## Pash (Jan 2, 2016)

here it is...


----------



## David C (Apr 15, 2013)

Gonzalo1495 said:


> David C said:
> 
> 
> > Gonzalo1495 said:
> ...


Page 50 of this from Continental: http://www.conti.nl/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Technical-Databook-car-4x4-van-2014-2015-EN.pdf
Also,
Avon: http://www.avon-tyres.co.uk/car/zz5
Toyo: http://www.toyo.co.uk/tire/pattern/proxes-t1-r (click on "specifications" to bring up the size chart)

You'll see that for a 225/40R18 7.5" to 9" is the permitted rim width range.
Dunlop/Goodyear don't have any info on rim width at all on their website that I can find (I've been looking, which is why it has taken a while to reply!).


----------



## David C (Apr 15, 2013)

Pash said:


> i just bought some new 225's for the front as they were shot and ideally wanted to keep this the same at the rear as heard the Quattro system will get upset. Looking through some various posts, some people have issues and some dont....so not sure if it's worth the risk. I'd gladly go with a staggered set up with F 8x18 on 225's and R 9x18 on 235's, but it seems like a risk.


225/40R18 on the front with 235/40R18 on the rear would be different diameters, so not a great idea.

If you really want staggered, then you'd have to go to a 255/35R18 on the rear (ideal on a 9" rim, but will go to a 10").


----------



## Gonzalo1495 (Oct 13, 2014)

David C said:


> Gonzalo1495 said:
> 
> 
> > David C said:
> ...


Okay I see what you mean. I still think they're gonna be noticeably stretched, but looking at OPs car, I think he needs them to be :lol: .
You learn something new everyday eh. Thanks for the info David. I appreciate you taking the time to show me! Cheers.


----------



## David C (Apr 15, 2013)

Gonzalo1495 said:


> Okay I see what you mean. I still think they're gonna be noticeably stretched, but looking at OPs car, I think he needs them to be :lol: .
> You learn something new everyday eh. Thanks for the info David. I appreciate you taking the time to show me! Cheers.


They wouldn't be ideal. "Ideal" for a 225/40R18 is an 8" rim, but as they are within the manufacturers spec, they are legal and not what kids on the street would describe as "stretched"........ they'd be putting a 215/40R18 on a 10" rims..... which is bonkers!!! :lol:


----------



## Gonzalo1495 (Oct 13, 2014)

David C said:


> Gonzalo1495 said:
> 
> 
> > Okay I see what you mean. I still think they're gonna be noticeably stretched, but looking at OPs car, I think he needs them to be :lol: .
> ...


My definition of stretched is when the tire starts bending inwards and isn't flush with the rim. But I get what you mean. :lol:


----------



## Madmax199 (Jun 14, 2015)

What I don't understand is what is the point of using wide wheels, and having to deal with fitment, if you don't plan to fill the wheels with rubber? We can sit here and look at all the manufacturer recommended specs in the world and it is nothing but a set of suggested guidelines with large margin of error/safety accounted for in them.

In the real world that we live in, A typical 225 street tyre does not need more than a 7.5J wheels ... that's with near-perfect square shoulders on the sidewalls and no crown on the contact patch. If you're ponying up for wide wheels, don't do so to run small rubber in them because of "recommended specs". The whole stretching tyre on wide wheels is a joke in terms of functionality. If you run 9j, 10j, or whatever wheels, fit tyres that make sense in real life in them.

The max tyre spec (on the right of the chart posted by Gonzalo) is closer to what is realistically sound to run... and even that is on the conservative side of things (which is not a bad thing). I have used the following wheels/tyres combos personally with close to perfect mechanical support and virtually no stretch or squeeze... real life... with real functionality since I tend to also use them in motorsports as well. Not gospel, but food for thoughts!

315--10.5
295--10
285--9.5
275--9
265--8.5
255--8


----------



## Matt B (Apr 8, 2007)

Madmax199 said:


> What I don't understand is what is the point of using wide wheels, and having to deal with fitment, if you don't plan to fill the wheels with rubber? We can sit here and look at all the manufacturer recommended specs in the world and it is nothing but a set of suggested guidelines with large margin of error/safety accounted for in them.
> 
> In the real world that we live in, A typical 225 street tyre does not need more than a 7.5J wheels ... that's with near-perfect square shoulders on the sidewalls and no crown on the contact patch. If you're ponying up for wide wheels, don't do so to run small rubber in them because of "recommended specs". The whole stretching tyre on wide wheels is a joke in terms of functionality. If you run 9j, 10j, or whatever wheels, fit tyres that make sense in real life in them.
> 
> ...


Ok so this is potentially really good news for me as i have two sets of Oz lightweight alloys (18x8) and 8kg (Alleggerita) and 9kg (Oz Racing) per wheel. Given what they are worth i didnt really want to buy another set.
So - currently running 225/40/18 on both sets. I could reasonably change to 255 tyres and grab a bit more rubber for free.

Is 255 really viable or would 245 sit more squarely?


----------



## Gonzalo1495 (Oct 13, 2014)

Matt B said:


> Is 255 really viable or would 245 sit more squarely?


Just like the case of being able to fit skinnier tires, you can also go a bit over as well.

255's I would imagine would just poke out more, sorta like american muscle car setups (not that much, just a tiny bit). 
You're right on the fact that 245 would be more flush though, I have no idea what differences that would have on performance or grip though.

I've seen people run 245 on 7.5" wheels so I can imagine you can get away with it on 8".


----------



## Matt B (Apr 8, 2007)

Gonzalo1495 said:


> Matt B said:
> 
> 
> > Is 255 really viable or would 245 sit more squarely?
> ...


Only just seen this response. I think you are right about 255 being kind of bulging so I think 245 is the one.
I will try the 245/35/18 I reckon. Federal RSR or similar and it's less than 400 quid for all 4 

May not be a fantastic improvement on grip but every bit of extra rubber has to help


----------



## V6RUL (May 28, 2009)

This is an 8 and 9" staggered setup.
225 X 40 X 18 front and 255 X 35 X 18 rear 
Steve


----------



## Gonzalo1495 (Oct 13, 2014)

Matt B said:


> Gonzalo1495 said:
> 
> 
> > Matt B said:
> ...


Yeah don't forget the quality of the rubber is also a factor! I personally just discovered Sumitmo HTR Z II's which are $80 each!  
And if those don't tickle your fancy, the HTR Z III are just $100 each and while they have less tread life, offer a significant grip increase (.5 ish according to tire rack) over the previous II's. Can't wait to try them out.


----------



## infidel.uk (Feb 21, 2015)

im fixing to buy new wheels really soon and will be using 18x9 at the rear , was going to use 255s , leaves me with 2 brand new spare f1 eagles for the front as well 

pointless post tho, lol


----------



## 3TT3 (Aug 30, 2014)

There are some calculations you can do in relation to wheel widths and stated tread widths.
In relation to smaller wheel widths and larger treadwidths
The first thing is the profile %.

Normal profile tyres for our purposes say 50-65 profile you can go down to approx rim width=75% of the treadwidth.
rim width being the bead seating distance from one side of the wheel to the other.
A low profile tyre, youre not supposed to go below rim width=80% of the treadwidth.

Whats a low profile ? well 30-40 is definitely in, 45 profile,better safe than sorry 

There is also the info out there that as the wheel diameter increases the limits get tighter, this applies to treadwidth as well  
Like a big fat 265+ tyre on a 35 profile for example sure the profile height will increase with the treadwidth but were still getting a bigger width of contact patch on the ground.
Some tyres that are supposed to be a certain size , arent .A lot of you probly know that ,Ive got 4 new tyres right now, 2 pairs from 2 different makers,supposed to be the same but arent.Its only a few mm but you can see it with your eye/the height diff on the 2 wheels.

Anyway the 'sweet spot" for low profile tyres is supposed to be 84%-92% (rim width to treadwidth) with in and around 88% being spot on.
Great stuff lets try that on say a 19 in wheel with a 235/35 tyre.. what rim width will I buy
Ah np I need a 8.15-8.16J wheel..oops.

There are some 8.25 J wheels out there but not that many  so its 8.0 or 8.5 for you matey.

What about the upper limits and stretching.. I dont know .. there is more leeway on fitting narrower tyres on wider rims but personally Id prefer to stick closer to areas where the sidewalls arent stressed in places they shouldnt be etc.

Me .. 235/45/17 on 7.5J rims still over 80% . 245/30/20 on 8J rims still over 80,closer to 83 
255/30/20..that would be under 80%.. not by much but still under and 98% of the time nps yeh?

Still

Oh btw this is all just theory reading, Ive no experience of tracking my TT n so on.


----------



## CollecTTor (Jan 17, 2014)

Double post


----------



## CollecTTor (Jan 17, 2014)

Didn't read all of this, can't believe it took so long for someone to say it (and of course it was Max). What's the point of wide wheels with skinny tires? I run 245/40/17 on OEM 17x7.5" wheels on my daily, and they're very square.










You can run different size tires front to rear as long as the rolling diamaters are within 3-4% of each other. Otherwise, Haldex sees this as slip and will engage/disengage oddly. I've never seen an official spec on that tolerance, but based on what people have used without issues, it's close.


----------



## Madmax199 (Jun 14, 2015)

CollecTTor said:


> Didn't read all of this, can't believe it took so long for someone to say it (and of course it was Max). What's the point of wide wheels with skinny tires? I run 245/40/17 on OEM 17x7.5" wheels on my daily, and they're very square.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yep, that's near-perfect fitment right there Adam with no significant stretch or pinch and very square shoulder. I have used 245s the same way on my 7.5j factory fat fives. The fitment of a 255 tyre on an 8" wide wheel is similar, but if you want to be super conservative (read boring) a 245 will fit very nicely on an 8" wheel. All the spec sheets and theories are nice, but you still have to go and mount the tyres on the wheels and use them in real life -- for those interested in that part of the convo, and functionality, use this as a guide:

315--10.5
295--10
285--9.5
275--9
265--8.5
255--8
245--7.5

245 on stock 7.5j fat five like Adam









255 on 8j on the silver evo









Another example of 255 fitting cleanly and functionally on 8" wide tyres 









Even with race slicks that are much wider than typical street tyres, still a very functional fit. 255 on 8j BBS wheels









And even when tyres are pinched one size too big on the wheels, it's not as bad as doing the opposite. 315s I squeezed on 10j wheels. Good enough functionally to allow the evo to trophy at SCCA Nationals in competition.


----------



## Gonzalo1495 (Oct 13, 2014)

CollecTTor said:


> Didn't read all of this, can't believe it took so long for someone to say it (and of course it was Max). What's the point of wide wheels with skinny tires? I run 245/40/17 on OEM 17x7.5" wheels on my daily, and they're very square.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Like some of them explained, they like the stretch look over there. To each their own, I personally find it ridiculous and a waste.


----------



## Von Twinzig (Feb 10, 2014)

Gonzalo1495 said:


> Like some of them explained, they like the stretch look over there. To each their own, *I personally find it ridiculous* and a waste.


I'm over here and I agree. Daft beyond belief. :?

VT


----------

