It is the rear half of the leaf spring you have to watch.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?
Wheels and tyre sizes Charger
Moderator: Moderators
- Dave-R
- Posts: 24751
- Joined: Sun Apr 18, 04 11:23 pm
- Location: Dave Robson lives in Geordieland
- Contact:
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.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.
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.
-
- Posts: 7309
- Joined: Fri Nov 04, 05 8:40 pm
- Location: Cornwall
It is but with a 5" BS it'll clear.Dave wrote:It is the rear half of the leaf spring you have to watch.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?
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
66 Sting Ray 427
67 Mustang 390GT Man
68 Corvette Stingray Rdstr
08 FGT
-
- Posts: 7309
- Joined: Fri Nov 04, 05 8:40 pm
- Location: Cornwall
...could go even bigger.check the blue Charger halfway down the page..even if only to drool over the steelies
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
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
- Dave-R
- Posts: 24751
- Joined: Sun Apr 18, 04 11:23 pm
- Location: Dave Robson lives in Geordieland
- Contact:
Tape measure and straight edge. Also you may (probably) find that the axle is not centered under the car so measure both sides.vipergts wrote: What nobody can answer for me is does this mean it'll foul the wing lip on a lowered car?
295/50 is 26.61 inches tall.Also how would a 275/60 look....too tall??
275/60 is 28 inches tall.
275/50 is 25.83 inches tall.
-
- Posts: 2029
- Joined: Mon Jul 03, 06 10:56 pm
- Location: Twickenham
-
- Posts: 7309
- Joined: Fri Nov 04, 05 8:40 pm
- Location: Cornwall
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.
For example if I ran 15 x 10s I would need 5.5" backspace to clear, 5" at a minimum.
-
- Posts: 2029
- Joined: Mon Jul 03, 06 10:56 pm
- Location: Twickenham
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
no problem whatsoeverJustinMFox 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
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
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/
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/
-
- Posts: 7309
- Joined: Fri Nov 04, 05 8:40 pm
- Location: Cornwall
- Dave-R
- Posts: 24751
- Joined: Sun Apr 18, 04 11:23 pm
- Location: Dave Robson lives in Geordieland
- Contact:
Maybe. I just remembered they have a narrower axle than the E-Body.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