Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Heck yeah. as long as above isn't sarcasm.

Affordable means they can live on a daily.

How much poke if any are people gettiing on 19x9.5 +15s on manual C34s.

I want as little as possible, as mentioned its a daily.

Also how much scrubbing, and guard work is needed.

By my dodgey maths, it seems like as long as i dont go too low should be sweet.

I run 19x9.5 +12 with 245's

The rear clear bilstein struts by 7-9mm and no guard rolling at all with a low ride height of 320mm (too low and chews tyres every 6-8000 km)

You should be right with 9.5 +15....pretty common on R4s....if tyres hit struts, just use a 3mm spacer to get to +12

Cheers guys, looks like its go once the guy I sold my pupra to comes to picks it up...

My V35 17" (I think 8" +30) rears rub my coilover collars without spacers (it came with massive 1" bolt ons), I really dont want to have to put different ones back for new rims.

I also dont want to over tyre with anything bigger than a 245 so should be win.

My car is stock barring exhaust so any wider is just a fun canceller.

  • 2 weeks later...

guys, i need someone to confirm if these will fit my car.

Fronts are 19x8.5 and rears are 19x9.5 +22 offset.

buy some posts in here, there were some confirmation that the rears would be ok. Just not 100% about the front.

cheers

guys, i need someone to confirm if these will fit my car.

Fronts are 19x8.5 and rears are 19x9.5 +22 offset.

buy some posts in here, there were some confirmation that the rears would be ok. Just not 100% about the front.

cheers

If you plan on running it with the Attesa system, then no, they won't work. They need to be the same width (different offset is fine) on all four corners.

If you plan on running it with the Attesa system, then no, they won't work. They need to be the same width (different offset is fine) on all four corners.

Ahhhh... ok ok.. why do they need to be same width?

I had 17x7 front and 17x8 rear with same size tyres with no problems. I believe as long as the tyre circumference is close it should be fine.

I tried the same on my S1 and it hated life. Haven't tried it on the M35's but apparently they are more pedantic about it again than the C34's.

MY+MIND+IS+FULL+OF+f**k+_94d9eb6eea3608124a1e9fe6b0e64f0e.jpg

That was a good read(s). Had to go over it a few times! lol

Its still 50/50 on whether or not the wheels im looking for is still safe to purchase. By what I gathered from reading the above mentioned thread, it SHOULD be ok just aslong as the circumference is within a tolerable range.

My honest opinion is the age old, if in doubt, don't. It is something I have considered while looking for rims but undecided yet, best talk with a workshop that deals with this type of thing for best advice. My other thought is if it were such a problem, why the space saver tyre? All of its dimensions are different to stock size.

The important thing is to keep the same rolling diameter/circumference on the front and rear. Otherwise, it creates variations because the front and rear wheels are rolling at different speeds, then the ATTESA computer tries to constantly correct it, and it creates extra (and unnecessary) wear on the transfer case, leading to expensive repairs.

Cool. So pretty much, all I need to ensure is that the rubber is all the same? the fact that front and rears widths are different shouldnt impact the ATTESA.

If widths DID impact it, then staggered sets would be obsolete. right?

Can I please get some help here, as mentioned previously I am looking at getting some 19 x 9.5 +12s for my rs4s.

So I did a trial muck around with a mates set or vskfs which are 9.5 +28.

I took some measurements with my 26 mm wheel spacers for total offset of +2 and I was around 10mm poked at the back which will end up fine with +12s.

Up front though there was like 30 mm of poke.

How poked out are people running 9.5 +12 or +15s up front.

Photo proof with spacer.

2012-03-09210616.jpg

This ones upside down so imagine I can take a photo properly....

2012-03-09210639.jpg

I don't know how your 2wd differs from my awd formerly auto but if I were you I would bolt them on and modify the guards to suit (not put too small tyres on). I started off with a guard roller but found a length of iron pipe worked best. You will lose paint in the process - I don't think the heat gun approach prevents that. Mine are 17 x 9 +30 with a 20mm spacer on the front.

002-4.jpg

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

    • Input shaft bearing. They all do it. There is always rollover noise in Nissan boxes - particularly the big box. Don't worry about it unless it gets really growly.
    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
×
×
  • Create New...