Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

hey for those running 19'' on there v, with 19x8.5 fronts do you have spacers on the wheel hub?

Hi mate,

Would you know what offset you getting? It's depends on the offset. Mine is 19x8.5 +5 at front and I don't need spacers as they sit very flush. I will need to roll the guards if I put spacers on and lower it.

One of my friend, xtc, had spacers on his 19 inch rims before he has 20 inch Volk GT-C. I don't know his 19 inch rims spec though.

Basically, 19x8.5 with low and negative offsets wouldn't need spacers, but higher offsets do if you want the rims to sit flush to the guards.

Good luck.

Edited by Victor.T

no idea of my offset but im running 19 x 10 on the back with no issues not sure on the fronts think they are the same or 19 x 9.5 but they come dam close to the suspension whilst allmost filling out the guard

I know that my 18 x 9.5 +20 track rims stick out a the front just a tiny bit

they are tenzo type m specs are 19x8.5 5x112/114.3 offset is +45 all around

any idea on what mm spacer i would need for fronts and rears?

Depends how close to the guards u want to b. R u lowered. My current rims are 8.5 front wid +35 offset. It sat inside the guards as soon as i dumped it on coils it sits way too inside and id need like a 38mm spacer to make it look guud again.

If u running stock height then id say a 20-25 mm spacer for the front.

I assume the rears are 9.5? in that case id say round the same.

stock 17'' size are - Front: 17"x7.5" +30mm offset and Rear: 17"x8" +33mm offset and they sit flush.

does that mean i need 15mm spacer for front and 12mm spacer for rear on the 19'' have now to sit flush?

by tyres on the 19's are 235/35 all round too ( i cant remeber the tyres on the 17's i had)

I wudnt say the stock rims sit flush bro, but to each is his own.

Best thing to do is put the wheels on and then measure and work out wat mm spacers u require based on distance to the guard.

Hope that helps

stock wheels are never flush.

people also have differing opinions on "flushness", width, offset, camber and tyre sizes will play an important part.

if you don't have camber arms, lowering your car will increase its negative camber.

you won't get anywhere near being flush with x8.5 +45, your main concern now is whether it will hit the front suspension arms. if the stock 17s are x7.5 +30, that's equivalent to x8.5 +42. so it should be fine

on a 19*8.5 +45, I'm gonna stick my neck out and say that you will need spacers especially if you have brembo brakes, but more for the aesthetic

i'm currently on 18" with 9.0 +30 fronts and they could use a 10mm spacer to sit flush (but I am running -1 camber)

hi guys just updating this thread for those keen to know what happened, i went to tempe tyres and got 30mm spacer for the front and 35mm for rears, sit perfectly now. they charged 50 a wheel which i was suprised since it was that cheap. also went to ozzy tyres they were charging 150 a wheel which i laughed at. anyways thanks for the help and answers.

hi guys just updating this thread for those keen to know what happened, i went to tempe tyres and got 30mm spacer for the front and 35mm for rears, sit perfectly now. they charged 50 a wheel which i was suprised since it was that cheap. also went to ozzy tyres they were charging 150 a wheel which i laughed at. anyways thanks for the help and answers.

FYI did you get slip on spacers or bolt on ones? The latter are more expensive and safer. Either way they are both illegal. Your insurance will be void if u happen to be involved in an accident and they find out u have spacers.

Food for thought.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
    • When I said "wiring diagram", I meant the car's wiring diagram. You need to understand how and when 12V appears on certain wires/terminals, when 0V is allowed to appear on certain wires/terminals (which is the difference between supply side switching, and earth side switching), for the way that the car is supposed to work without the immobiliser. Then you start looking for those voltages in the appropriate places at the appropriate times (ie, relay terminals, ECU terminals, fuel pump terminals, at different ignition switch positions, and at times such as "immediately after switching to ON" and "say, 5-10s after switching to ON". You will find that you are not getting what you need when and where you need it, and because you understand what you need and when, from working through the wiring diagram, you can then likely work out why you're not getting it. And that will lead you to the mess that has been made of the associated wires around the immobiliser. But seriously, there is no way that we will be able to find or lead you to the fault from here. You will have to do it at the car, because it will be something f**ked up, and there are a near infinite number of ways for it to be f**ked up. The wiring diagram will give you wire colours and pin numbers and so you can do continuity testing and voltage/time probing and start to work out what is right and what is wrong. I can only close my eyes and imagine a rat's nest of wiring under the dash. You can actually see and touch it.
    • So I found this: https://www.efihardware.com/temperature-sensor-voltage-calculator I didn't know what the pullup resistor is. So I thought if I used my table of known values I could estimate it by putting a value into the pullup resistor, and this should line up with the voltages I had measured. Eventually I got this table out of it by using 210ohms as the pullup resistor. 180C 0.232V - Predicted 175C 0.254V - Predicted 170C 0.278V - Predicted 165C 0.305V - Predicted 160C 0.336V - Predicted 155C 0.369V - Predicted 150C 0.407V - Predicted 145C 0.448V - Predicted 140C 0.494V - Predicted 135C 0.545V - Predicted 130C 0.603V - Predicted 125C 0.668V - Predicted 120C 0.740V - Predicted 115C 0.817V - Predicted 110C 0.914V - Predicted 105C 1.023V - Predicted 100C 1.15V 90C 1.42V - Predicted 85C 1.59V 80C 1.74V 75C 1.94V 70C 2.10V 65C 2.33V 60C 2.56V 58C 2.68V 57C 2.70V 56C 2.74V 55C 2.78V 54C 2.80V 50C 2.98V 49C 3.06V 47C 3.18V 45C 3.23V 43C 3.36V 40C 3.51V 37C 3.67V 35C 3.75V 30C 4.00V As before, the formula in HPTuners is here: https://www.hptuners.com/documentation/files/VCM-Scanner/Content/vcm_scanner/defining_a_transform.htm?Highlight=defining a transform Specifically: In my case I used 50C and 150C, given the sensor is supposedly for that. Input 1 = 2.98V Output 1 = 50C Input 2 = 0.407V Output 2 = 150C (0.407-2.98) / (150-50) -2.573/100 = -0.02573 2.98/-0.02573 + 47.045 = 50 So the corresponding formula should be: (Input / -0.02573) + 47.045 = Output.   If someone can confirm my math it'd be great. Supposedly you can pick any two pairs of the data to make this formula.
×
×
  • Create New...