I have Volk CE28N's (16 x 7), with a +42 offset. I'm running 205 45's, which is a pretty small diameter at 23.3"...

If I go with 5mm spacers up front, that will put me at a 37 offset. With my width tire, I'm not worried about rubbing, but I realize that it's not good for the wheel bearings to go to far out though. From reading a few threads here, I saw where a few would not go further out than 38.

Any thoughts?

 

Would love to have those wheels, although I do like my
SSR GT1's (also 16x7 ET +42).
37 sounds like the limit of how far out you'd want to go, but
I'd stick with the 42 offset you have.
Less weight, better on the bearings, better connection to the hub,
shorter wheel bolts, probably better scrub radius geometry,
and what I think is about the optimum offset anyway.

 

I have 15mm spacers on 38mm offset BBS wheels Tony along with 5mm in the rear. Bearing wear is a concern, especially considering the miles I put on this car. So far though, no bearing problems.

Increasing the track up front spread the work load more evenly between the inside and outside tires. Increasing track will also help the front to resist roll, so more understeer will factor in...but! the tires can perform more work!!! So the big picture is all good.

EDIT So 15mm spacers on 38mm offset = 25mm offset up front and 33mm offset in the rear with 5mm spacers.

BE SURE TO USE LONGER STUDS - EACH SPACER HAS A REQUIRED STUD LENGTH. H&R MAKE THE BEST SPACERS IN MY OPINION.

 

I do indeed like these wheels at 10.75 lbs. The price was quite fair actually...

I chose the 42 offset as I felt it to be, as you (cristo) said, ideal or optimum. I already have studs (the shortest I could find, but long enough), so I won't need those. I do put an emphasis on weight, but a 5mm piece of aluminum is minimal, and since it's right around the hub, the impact of weight is less there than further outward. I agree that there is better attachment to the hub with less stuff in between.

First, I realize that some use spacers out of need - ie, for clearance purposes. That is not an issue here. I also understand that others use them for aesthetic reasons, which doesn't concern me, at least not that much. If I do this, it would be strictly for improved performance.

How about some pros/cons? From what was already shared...

Pros:

- Improved turn-in
- Better load distribution between inside/outside tires, so more work can be performed
- Improved roll resistance

Cons:

- Added wear on bearings (and other components?)
- Additional weight, albeit with minimal impact for 5mm and centralized location
- Slightly compromised hub mating, again minimal with only 5mm
- Longer wheel bolts/studs needed (already have)
- Increased understear, but easily addressed by other means
- Lessened effective spring rates (with 350 lb linear springs, and only 5mm, this should be a non-issue)
- About 60 bucks (with shipping) and 30 minutes of my time

 

Spring rate reduction Tony is 7.8%, if I rmember.

The performance advantage is sobering if 15mm spacers are used as part of a package. Using a 5mm spacer up front still produces noticable changes in handling - all good! I think the weight of a 5mm spacer is inconsequential...a 15mm spacer a little less so.

Improved roll resistance???

 

Yes, I could of worded it different I suppose. Got this from your post above where you said that it would help the front resist roll.

So, it sounds like you feel that going with a 5mm spacer with a 42 offset is fine then...

 

About to pull the trigger on an order for H&R 5mm hubcentric spacers... I just double-checked my available threads, and I have a little over 9mm, close to 9.5mm beyond the lug nuts. This is of course would leave me with 4+ mm of threads sticking through the nuts after the spacer install. I realize that no threads sticking-out is not exactly desirable, but 4mm is not exactly a lot for these course threads either. Any concerns? Thanks.

 

The threads sticking out past the top of the lug nut aren't doing anything but going along for the ride. No worries with 4mm sticking out.

Scott
90SM

 

No, no. you're good Tony! I re-read what I wrote and dunno why Sorry!

Go for it!!!

 

Michael, I just placed an order, thank you.

For the record though, to make sure I'm clear, will a wider track resist roll?

 

I have the H&R 5mms Tony and they are not hubcentric. I don't think there are any. 15 and up yes but not 5s.

FWIW I run 225 50 15s on a 36ET with the 5mm in auto-x. Losing some plastic in the back on hard corners.
Street I have 42 offset SSRs running 215 50 16s in a non lowered car and have no rubbing unless the car is packed for trips. aka waaaaay loaded up

 

obe, thanks for clearing-up that misinformation. I just checked, and you are correct. I was told to get hubcentric, but I guess with 5's, it's not a concern... Glad to hear that you've been running with spacers with no issues, minus some plastic loss... Welcome back, wherever you've been!

 

Michael, I was wanting to ask you more about this, but forgot. I would assume that a factor in calculating the reduction in spring rate is the distance outward. So, a 15mm spacer would have a lower effective spring rate than a 5mm, correct? Sort of curious on that 7.8%. When time permits, please share... Thanks.

 

I have the 5mm from Mini Mania.

They are hubcentric.

I auto-x'd yesterday.

225/45-15 Hoosiers on Kosei K1-TS 15 x 7 wheels.

Offset for Kosei is 38.

So total effective offset was 33.

Also of note, the Hoosiers are especially wide for for 225/45s.

Previously, car was set up with Koni Yellows, H-Sport springs and it didn't rub.

Ran yesterday with the new m7s, no rubbing, but I've only dropped the car to about where it was before.

Camber was 2.3 in front, 1.4 rear.

I used to run the TCE 3mm spacers (not hubcentric), effective 35 et, and I had no rubbing. But without them (38 et), the tires rubbed on the inside.

In my experience over the past three years, I know that anywhere from 35-33 is a safe window with 225/45-15 Hoosiers. 38 slightly rubs.

So it may be that an effective 37 (42 + 5) would just make it.

 

Tony,

5mm spacers barely affect motion ratio. I wouldn't lose a wink over it, but it will be 1/3 of 7.8% since leverage ratios are always linear.

Re hubcentric...The H&R spacers fit very well. The flange on the stock hub will still be used as part of the wheel's mating surface. As long as your wheels are hubcentric you have nothing to worry about. There is not 10mm spacer be case the stock flange becomes covered, and, there is not room for a flange...you have to see both the 5mm and the 15mm spacer to understand completely. The 10mm presents us with an engineering problem.

 

hornguys, thanks for sharing your experiences. That info is helpful in knowing where rubbing might occur. It certainly appears that I'll be fine with my 205's, and have room to go larger, if ever desired...

Ah, motion ratios, thanks Michael. Sounds like it would be 2.6% then (7.8/3). I sort of thought that lugcentric wheels had disappeared. My wheels (Volk CE28Ns) have centering rings... and I actually might get some new ones. Thanks for the confirmation!