Wheels and tyre sizes Charger

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
Dave-R
Posts: 24751
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 04 11:23 pm
Location: Dave Robson lives in Geordieland
Contact:

Post by Dave-R »

vipergts wrote:The ideal for mine is 10's with 295/50 and a 5" BS BUT I'm not sure that the tyres wont foul the wing?
It is the rear half of the leaf spring you have to watch.
User avatar
Dave-R
Posts: 24751
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 04 11:23 pm
Location: Dave Robson lives in Geordieland
Contact:

Post by Dave-R »

MilesnMiles wrote:picking up on Dave's point. I was going to fit 295 x 50 series on a 8" rim.
Bad fit? I thought that lower profile tyres can accept narrower rims.
A tyre 3.6 inches wider than the wheel is not a great fit. You can get away with it but if you want to corner hard as I did then you have to let the sidewall do what it is designed to do. You need less than 2 inches wider than the wheel for that and ideally the tyre and wheel should be about the same width so that the sidewall structure is vertical.

Example being the stock Z06 size wheels/tyres on my Corvette. The rears are 295/35/18 and the wheels are 10.5 in wide to suit.
Last edited by Dave-R on Thu May 02, 13 8:47 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Dave-R
Posts: 24751
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 04 11:23 pm
Location: Dave Robson lives in Geordieland
Contact:

Post by Dave-R »

I like Drew's wheel option on his Challenger. 275 low profile tyres on 17 inch wheels on all four corners. :thumbright:
MilesnMiles
Posts: 7309
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 05 8:40 pm
Location: Cornwall

Post by MilesnMiles »

Thanks Davewent onto Moparts and similar views expressed there counteracted by ' I've done it for years, no problems', as ever.
I'll get them mounted and take a closer look, but handling does matter to me.
User avatar
vipergts
Posts: 940
Joined: Sun May 21, 06 4:22 pm
Location: kent

Post by vipergts »

Dave wrote:
vipergts wrote:The ideal for mine is 10's with 295/50 and a 5" BS BUT I'm not sure that the tyres wont foul the wing?
It is the rear half of the leaf spring you have to watch.
It is but with a 5" BS it'll clear.

What nobody can answer for me is does this mean it'll foul the wing lip on a lowered car?

Also how would a 275/60 look....too tall??
68 Charger 440R/T
66 Sting Ray 427
67 Mustang 390GT Man
68 Corvette Stingray Rdstr
08 FGT
MilesnMiles
Posts: 7309
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 05 8:40 pm
Location: Cornwall

Post by MilesnMiles »

...could go even bigger.check the blue Charger halfway down the page..even if only to drool over the steelies :thumbright:

http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index ... ic=54403.0


Plus more on tyre combo sizes by chart

http://www.buicks.net/shop/reference/tires.html#chart
User avatar
Dave-R
Posts: 24751
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 04 11:23 pm
Location: Dave Robson lives in Geordieland
Contact:

Post by Dave-R »

vipergts wrote: What nobody can answer for me is does this mean it'll foul the wing lip on a lowered car?
Tape measure and straight edge. Also you may (probably) find that the axle is not centered under the car so measure both sides.
Also how would a 275/60 look....too tall??
295/50 is 26.61 inches tall.

275/60 is 28 inches tall.

275/50 is 25.83 inches tall.
JustinMFox
Posts: 2029
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 06 10:56 pm
Location: Twickenham

Post by JustinMFox »

Si have you had any problems with that combination ? Wheels i'm thinking of buying have the same 3.75" backspace but I thought 15 x 8's may be too big up front with 225/60/15 or 245/60/15 tyres ? Would 15 x 7 up front be a better option ?

Any issues on the rear ?

Thanks
MilesnMiles
Posts: 7309
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 05 8:40 pm
Location: Cornwall

Post by MilesnMiles »

Justin, you may want a bit more backspace for the rears. I have a couple of 8 x 15s with 4" backspace. Suprsingly even with 295 x 50 x 15 tyres they just about cleared the wheel lip. They would not have done with less than 4" backspace.
For example if I ran 15 x 10s I would need 5.5" backspace to clear, 5" at a minimum.
User avatar
Dave-R
Posts: 24751
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 04 11:23 pm
Location: Dave Robson lives in Geordieland
Contact:

Post by Dave-R »

MilesnMiles wrote:For example if I ran 15 x 10s I would need 5.5" backspace to clear, 5" at a minimum.
You would also need to relocate the springs as the 295 tyre would now be hard up against the spring. ;)
JustinMFox
Posts: 2029
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 06 10:56 pm
Location: Twickenham

Post by JustinMFox »

Thanks, I will be going for a smaller tyre on the rear though, probably 255/60/15 or 275/60/15, would either be ok do you think with that 3.75" backspace on a 15 x 8 on the rear ? Pretty sure my car is stock height too
User avatar
Dave-R
Posts: 24751
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 04 11:23 pm
Location: Dave Robson lives in Geordieland
Contact:

Post by Dave-R »

What is the matter with just getting a tape measure and using it?? :?
User avatar
Charger
Posts: 5138
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 05 11:40 am
Location: Manchester, UK MMA/921

Post by Charger »

Charger wrote:controversial but I’m not mad about the fatty & thiny look, wheels Torq Thrust D 8.5” x 15” backspace 3.75” all round, tyres 275/60 x 15 at the back & 245/60 x 15 up front :thumbright:
JustinMFox wrote:Si have you had any problems with that combination ? Wheels i'm thinking of buying have the same 3.75" backspace but I thought 15 x 8's may be too big up front with 225/60/15 or 245/60/15 tyres ? Would 15 x 7 up front be a better option ?

Any issues on the rear ?

Thanks
no problem whatsoever

fronts don’t rub the frame rails, the gap between the leading edge of the tyre and the front lower corner of the wheel arch is about 3/8in when turning but it don’t touch, driving; no problems, the Charger is all re-bushed up front, got a tiny bit of tram lining at junctions that have ruts made by trucks and buses but no different to any car with wide tyres

I don’t know if this would be the same on a disc brake car, mine is on drums all round, and while I have no evidence, I have a hunch that drum brake cars have a slightly narrower track at the front than a disc brake car, just from other cars I’ve looked at with similar setup

it took me lots of measuring and 3 sets of wheels to get to this point, but it’s the look I wanted, and I blame it on Alan Rush :D

:thumbright:
Si
1970 Charger 500
383 | 4bbl | 727 column | PAS | PAB | buckets/buddy - check out my photos HERE

If you don't want another same old brand-new car ... you could be DODGE MATERIAL

1970 Dodge Charger Registry - https://www.1970chargerregistry.com/
MilesnMiles
Posts: 7309
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 05 8:40 pm
Location: Cornwall

Post by MilesnMiles »

Dave, ref tyres rubbing on springs. I can't vouch for Chargers, but I think on B bodies like my '73 car the recommendation is 5.5" and still wont require spring allocation even with a 12" wide tyre. I have measured, but short of actualy having the wheels in situ it's stil difficult to be sure :?
User avatar
Dave-R
Posts: 24751
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 04 11:23 pm
Location: Dave Robson lives in Geordieland
Contact:

Post by Dave-R »

MilesnMiles wrote:Dave, ref tyres rubbing on springs. I can't vouch for Chargers, but I think on B bodies like my '73 car the recommendation is 5.5" and still wont require spring allocation even with a 12" wide tyre. I have measured, but short of actualy having the wheels in situ it's stil difficult to be sure :?
Maybe. I just remembered they have a narrower axle than the E-Body.
Post Reply