| AUTOwrXER | 12-10-2002 09:48 PM |
Ahhhh yes
�
�
That's what I get for speed reading everything. This thread pretty much sums it up, and the link has a good rules summary as well: [url]http://www.sccaforums.com/ubb/Forum22/HTML/000226.html[/url]
I'm still not so sure about the ALK though...
Now what were we talking about?
I'm still not so sure about the ALK though...
Now what were we talking about?
| AUTOwrXER | 12-10-2002 09:54 PM |
More about the ALK
�
�
This is the basis of the pro-ALK argument:
Suspension bushings may be replaced with bushings of any materials (except metal) as long as they fit in the original location. Offset bushings may be used. In a replacement bushing the amount of metal relative to the amount of non-metallic material may not be increased. This does not authorize a change in type of bushing (for example ball and socket replacing a cylindrical bushing), or use of a bushing with an angled hole whose direction differs from that of the original bushing. If the Stock bushing accommodated multi-axis motion via compliance of the component material(s), the replacement bushing may not be changed to accomodate such motion via a change in bushing type, for example to a spherical bearing or similar component involving internal moving parts. Pins or keys may be used to prevent the rotation of alternate bushings, but may serve no other purpose than that of retaining the bushing in the desired position.
Suspension bushings may be replaced with bushings of any materials (except metal) as long as they fit in the original location. Offset bushings may be used. In a replacement bushing the amount of metal relative to the amount of non-metallic material may not be increased. This does not authorize a change in type of bushing (for example ball and socket replacing a cylindrical bushing), or use of a bushing with an angled hole whose direction differs from that of the original bushing. If the Stock bushing accommodated multi-axis motion via compliance of the component material(s), the replacement bushing may not be changed to accomodate such motion via a change in bushing type, for example to a spherical bearing or similar component involving internal moving parts. Pins or keys may be used to prevent the rotation of alternate bushings, but may serve no other purpose than that of retaining the bushing in the desired position.
| AUTOwrXER | 12-10-2002 09:55 PM |
And this allows the Cusco lower arm bar, IMHO:
Addition or replacement of suspension stabilizers (linkage connecting axle or De Dion to the chassis which controls lateral suspension location) is permitted. Traction bars or torque arms may be added or replaced. A Panhard rod may be added or replaced. Methods of attachment and attachment points are unrestricted.
Addition or replacement of suspension stabilizers (linkage connecting axle or De Dion to the chassis which controls lateral suspension location) is permitted. Traction bars or torque arms may be added or replaced. A Panhard rod may be added or replaced. Methods of attachment and attachment points are unrestricted.
| KC | 12-10-2002 10:15 PM |
Re: More about the ALK
�
�
It changes the geometry. Period. Not legal.
| dwx | 12-10-2002 10:16 PM |
The ALK changes the suspension geometry which puts you into C-Prepared class. That's been pretty well established at this point.
The Cusco lower bar is definitely not legal for STX. That rule you quoted has nothing to do with that, it's for cars that specifically use panhard rods or live axles. This is the SM rule that makes it even illegal for SM, so it also would put you into CP as well.
[quote]
Subframe connectors are allowed, but each connector must be attached individually without any lateral components attaching the two longitudinal frame rails. Subframe connectors may be bolted or welded
[/quote]
I'm having a hard time picturing what car that rule is for and what it really means, but it makes that bar not legal. The bar makes the car understeer more anyways so I'm not sure why you'd want one. :D
The Cusco lower bar is definitely not legal for STX. That rule you quoted has nothing to do with that, it's for cars that specifically use panhard rods or live axles. This is the SM rule that makes it even illegal for SM, so it also would put you into CP as well.
[quote]
Subframe connectors are allowed, but each connector must be attached individually without any lateral components attaching the two longitudinal frame rails. Subframe connectors may be bolted or welded
[/quote]
I'm having a hard time picturing what car that rule is for and what it really means, but it makes that bar not legal. The bar makes the car understeer more anyways so I'm not sure why you'd want one. :D
| KC | 12-10-2002 10:17 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by AUTOwrXER [/i]
[B]And this allows the Cusco lower arm bar, IMHO:
Addition or replacement of suspension stabilizers (linkage connecting axle or De Dion to the chassis which controls lateral suspension location) is permitted. Traction bars or torque arms may be added or replaced. A Panhard rod may be added or replaced. Methods of attachment and attachment points are unrestricted. [/B][/QUOTE]Again, another rule quote yet you fail to site HOW. Is an A-Arm a suspension stabilizer?
--kC
[B]And this allows the Cusco lower arm bar, IMHO:
Addition or replacement of suspension stabilizers (linkage connecting axle or De Dion to the chassis which controls lateral suspension location) is permitted. Traction bars or torque arms may be added or replaced. A Panhard rod may be added or replaced. Methods of attachment and attachment points are unrestricted. [/B][/QUOTE]Again, another rule quote yet you fail to site HOW. Is an A-Arm a suspension stabilizer?
--kC
| AUTOwrXER | 12-10-2002 11:44 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by KC [/i]
[B]Again, another rule quote yet you fail to site HOW. Is an A-Arm a suspension stabilizer?
--kC [/B][/QUOTE]
I would have thought the lower arm brace would be considered a suspension stabilizer. Not important though; I was just seeking some closure on local conversations I have had. We need to clean up some things in Atlanta in STX. In my searching I have also found some statements to the effect that blow-off valves are illegal in STX, which would affect one of my regular competitors in a DSM. I'm getting the car ready to compete divisionally and (hopefully) nationally, so I just want to make sure I do everything by the letter of the law. Thanks for the input thus far, and sorry for hijacking the thread.
zoomfactor - Any word from BFG on expanded sizes?
[B]Again, another rule quote yet you fail to site HOW. Is an A-Arm a suspension stabilizer?
--kC [/B][/QUOTE]
I would have thought the lower arm brace would be considered a suspension stabilizer. Not important though; I was just seeking some closure on local conversations I have had. We need to clean up some things in Atlanta in STX. In my searching I have also found some statements to the effect that blow-off valves are illegal in STX, which would affect one of my regular competitors in a DSM. I'm getting the car ready to compete divisionally and (hopefully) nationally, so I just want to make sure I do everything by the letter of the law. Thanks for the input thus far, and sorry for hijacking the thread.
zoomfactor - Any word from BFG on expanded sizes?
| AUTOwrXER | 12-10-2002 11:46 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by dwx [/i]
[B]The bar makes the car understeer more anyways so I'm not sure why you'd want one. :D [/B][/QUOTE]
Interesting. I would have thought it would do the opposite by helping maintain front camber under load...
[B]The bar makes the car understeer more anyways so I'm not sure why you'd want one. :D [/B][/QUOTE]
Interesting. I would have thought it would do the opposite by helping maintain front camber under load...
| dwx | 12-11-2002 12:12 AM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by AUTOwrXER [/i]
[B]
Interesting. I would have thought it would do the opposite by helping maintain front camber under load... [/B][/QUOTE]
It does tighten up the steering a bit and resulted in sharper turn in, but the car pushed more. I did autox's two weekends in a row with that being the only modification difference and I had to readjust other parts of the suspension to compensate for it. I was running in SM at the time and wasn't aware that it wasn't legal.
I got the 16x8 Gram Lights yesterday. They are fairly lightweight. I need to order a V700 in 245/45 now and see if it will fit with the rear suspension. I'm going to be running the 6-spd next year so I need all the diameter I can get, as 2nd gear is really short, about 11mph shorter at redline than the US gearbox with equal sized tires.
[B]
Interesting. I would have thought it would do the opposite by helping maintain front camber under load... [/B][/QUOTE]
It does tighten up the steering a bit and resulted in sharper turn in, but the car pushed more. I did autox's two weekends in a row with that being the only modification difference and I had to readjust other parts of the suspension to compensate for it. I was running in SM at the time and wasn't aware that it wasn't legal.
I got the 16x8 Gram Lights yesterday. They are fairly lightweight. I need to order a V700 in 245/45 now and see if it will fit with the rear suspension. I'm going to be running the 6-spd next year so I need all the diameter I can get, as 2nd gear is really short, about 11mph shorter at redline than the US gearbox with equal sized tires.
| trhoppe | 12-11-2002 12:27 AM |
[QUOTE]Any word from BFG on expanded sizes?[/QUOTE] no, no and a definete no. I had a nice conversation with them today. I might be adding another sticker to the car :devil: hmmmmmmmmm
-Tom
-Tom
| AUTOwrXER | 12-11-2002 12:41 AM |
My guess that BFG isn't as interested in the autocross community as Kuhmo with the MX or Falken with the Azenis. I'm really disappointed to hear that. I would have even paid their ridiculous prices to try a small diameter 245.
| KC | 12-11-2002 08:05 AM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by AUTOwrXER [/i]
[B]
I would have thought the lower arm brace would be considered a suspension stabilizer. Not important though; I was just seeking some closure on local conversations I have had. We need to clean up some things in Atlanta in STX. In my searching I have also found some statements to the effect that blow-off valves are illegal in STX, which would affect one of my regular competitors in a DSM.[/B][/QUOTE]You might want to pay attention to a new rule in 2003 that makes the 1st gen DSM CBV legal to UD/BD on a 2nd gen. :) It came out in a fastrack sometime post-nationals or was going to be effective the 1st of the year or something like that. But if it's aftermarket... then yeah, doens't belong.
--kC
[B]
I would have thought the lower arm brace would be considered a suspension stabilizer. Not important though; I was just seeking some closure on local conversations I have had. We need to clean up some things in Atlanta in STX. In my searching I have also found some statements to the effect that blow-off valves are illegal in STX, which would affect one of my regular competitors in a DSM.[/B][/QUOTE]You might want to pay attention to a new rule in 2003 that makes the 1st gen DSM CBV legal to UD/BD on a 2nd gen. :) It came out in a fastrack sometime post-nationals or was going to be effective the 1st of the year or something like that. But if it's aftermarket... then yeah, doens't belong.
--kC
| AUTOwrXER | 12-11-2002 11:41 AM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by KC [/i]
[B]You might want to pay attention to a new rule in 2003 that makes the 1st gen DSM CBV legal to UD/BD on a 2nd gen. :) It came out in a fastrack sometime post-nationals or was going to be effective the 1st of the year or something like that. But if it's aftermarket... then yeah, doens't belong.
--kC [/B][/QUOTE]
No, it is an update/backdate thing. Thanks for the information. I was under the impression that he would have needed to change out a crapton of stuff to do that backdate. It makes a good pit more power for those cars as the stock BOV cannot hold the boost levels that the turbo is throwing at it. Crappy design if you ask me...
Joel
[B]You might want to pay attention to a new rule in 2003 that makes the 1st gen DSM CBV legal to UD/BD on a 2nd gen. :) It came out in a fastrack sometime post-nationals or was going to be effective the 1st of the year or something like that. But if it's aftermarket... then yeah, doens't belong.
--kC [/B][/QUOTE]
No, it is an update/backdate thing. Thanks for the information. I was under the impression that he would have needed to change out a crapton of stuff to do that backdate. It makes a good pit more power for those cars as the stock BOV cannot hold the boost levels that the turbo is throwing at it. Crappy design if you ask me...
Joel
| KC | 12-11-2002 12:18 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by AUTOwrXER [/i]
[B]
No, it is an update/backdate thing. Thanks for the information. I was under the impression that he would have needed to change out a crapton of stuff to do that backdate. It makes a good pit more power for those cars as the stock BOV cannot hold the boost levels that the turbo is throwing at it. Crappy design if you ask me...
Joel [/B][/QUOTE]*cough* CRANKWALK! *cough* :devil:
What else has he done? A clutch us usually a common mod with those cars... and not legal in STX. Also ask if he's removed the restictor in the wastegate... not legal too? ;) (Free boost right there) Both Tom and I have modded DSM's. We know almost all the tricks. :)
A DSM does respond very well to exhaust tho.. and a 1st Gen CBV definitely helps in that regard...
--kC
[B]
No, it is an update/backdate thing. Thanks for the information. I was under the impression that he would have needed to change out a crapton of stuff to do that backdate. It makes a good pit more power for those cars as the stock BOV cannot hold the boost levels that the turbo is throwing at it. Crappy design if you ask me...
Joel [/B][/QUOTE]*cough* CRANKWALK! *cough* :devil:
What else has he done? A clutch us usually a common mod with those cars... and not legal in STX. Also ask if he's removed the restictor in the wastegate... not legal too? ;) (Free boost right there) Both Tom and I have modded DSM's. We know almost all the tricks. :)
A DSM does respond very well to exhaust tho.. and a 1st Gen CBV definitely helps in that regard...
--kC
| ChrisW | 12-11-2002 05:52 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by KC [/i]
[B]*cough* CRANKWALK! *cough* :devil:
What else has he done? A clutch us usually a common mod with those cars... and not legal in STX. Also ask if he's removed the restictor in the wastegate... not legal too? ;) (Free boost right there) Both Tom and I have modded DSM's. We know almost all the tricks. :)
A DSM does respond very well to exhaust tho.. and a 1st Gen CBV definitely helps in that regard...
--kC [/B][/QUOTE]
also for STX, they would not be able to upgrade any of the intercooler piping, so how is he using a 1st gen BOV in STX? Has he ported the O2 housing?
but yeah, the DSM [i]does[/i] respond well to exhaust mods, enough to fry the stock clutch in short order ( [SIZE=1]been there done that[/SIZE] )
[B]*cough* CRANKWALK! *cough* :devil:
What else has he done? A clutch us usually a common mod with those cars... and not legal in STX. Also ask if he's removed the restictor in the wastegate... not legal too? ;) (Free boost right there) Both Tom and I have modded DSM's. We know almost all the tricks. :)
A DSM does respond very well to exhaust tho.. and a 1st Gen CBV definitely helps in that regard...
--kC [/B][/QUOTE]
also for STX, they would not be able to upgrade any of the intercooler piping, so how is he using a 1st gen BOV in STX? Has he ported the O2 housing?
but yeah, the DSM [i]does[/i] respond well to exhaust mods, enough to fry the stock clutch in short order ( [SIZE=1]been there done that[/SIZE] )
| AUTOwrXER | 12-12-2002 05:16 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by ChrisW [/i]
[B]
also for STX, they would not be able to upgrade any of the intercooler piping, so how is he using a 1st gen BOV in STX? Has he ported the O2 housing?
but yeah, the DSM [i]does[/i] respond well to exhaust mods, enough to fry the stock clutch in short order ( [SIZE=1]been there done that[/SIZE] ) [/B][/QUOTE]
I'm not sue how he's got the BOV done. Interesting to know that he's not legal, however. Honestly, I really don't care if he's legal or not for regional competition. You guys will probably jump down my neck for saying it, but I'd rather he run illegally in STX than be bumped to SM. He's really my only good competition in STX. He's a good driver and fairly knowledgable about the rules, which is interesting because I asked him about the BOV earlier last season. Whatever, I need some good drivers around to push me. My indexed times always slip when the class is light for an event. I guess I just have problems motivating myself :lol:
[B]
also for STX, they would not be able to upgrade any of the intercooler piping, so how is he using a 1st gen BOV in STX? Has he ported the O2 housing?
but yeah, the DSM [i]does[/i] respond well to exhaust mods, enough to fry the stock clutch in short order ( [SIZE=1]been there done that[/SIZE] ) [/B][/QUOTE]
I'm not sue how he's got the BOV done. Interesting to know that he's not legal, however. Honestly, I really don't care if he's legal or not for regional competition. You guys will probably jump down my neck for saying it, but I'd rather he run illegally in STX than be bumped to SM. He's really my only good competition in STX. He's a good driver and fairly knowledgable about the rules, which is interesting because I asked him about the BOV earlier last season. Whatever, I need some good drivers around to push me. My indexed times always slip when the class is light for an event. I guess I just have problems motivating myself :lol:
| trhoppe | 12-12-2002 05:18 PM |
Thats why you need to aim for FTD pax. Then aim for FTD Pax by over a second :lol: That 2nd one I haven't accomplished yet.
-Tom
-Tom
| AUTOwrXER | 12-12-2002 05:19 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by ChrisW [/i]
[B]
also for STX, they would not be able to upgrade any of the intercooler piping, ( [SIZE=1]been there done that[/SIZE] ) [/B][/QUOTE]
That's interesting. I learned something else. I'm still reading and rereading the rules again. I guess that's one of those that fall under the "if it's not mentioned, it's illegal"
[B]
also for STX, they would not be able to upgrade any of the intercooler piping, ( [SIZE=1]been there done that[/SIZE] ) [/B][/QUOTE]
That's interesting. I learned something else. I'm still reading and rereading the rules again. I guess that's one of those that fall under the "if it's not mentioned, it's illegal"
| KC | 12-12-2002 06:07 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by ChrisW [/i]
[B]
also for STX, they would not be able to upgrade any of the intercooler piping, so how is he using a 1st gen BOV in STX? Has he ported the O2 housing[/B][/QUOTE] Ummm... the CBV/BOV is very easy to swap... and doesn't require any porting. It's on a return hose and up front. Unless the 2nd question didn't have to do with the 1st...
[B]
also for STX, they would not be able to upgrade any of the intercooler piping, so how is he using a 1st gen BOV in STX? Has he ported the O2 housing[/B][/QUOTE] Ummm... the CBV/BOV is very easy to swap... and doesn't require any porting. It's on a return hose and up front. Unless the 2nd question didn't have to do with the 1st...
| Dussander | 12-12-2002 06:47 PM |
[QUOTE]Thats why you need to aim for FTD pax. Then aim for FTD Pax by over a second That 2nd one I haven't accomplished yet.[/QUOTE]
[CODE]1 tespt 61 Michael Fiyak '02 Subaru WRX 47.781 *0.801 = 38.272 0.000 0.000
2 es 84 Dennis Sparks '91 Miata Red 48.994 *0.802 = 39.293 1.020 1.020
3 tdspt 42 Tim Brewer '97 Neon ACR Re 49.574 *0.795 = 39.411 0.118 1.138
[/CODE]
Ok, so there was only 16 people running that day. :p
tespt = stx
[CODE]1 tespt 61 Michael Fiyak '02 Subaru WRX 47.781 *0.801 = 38.272 0.000 0.000
2 es 84 Dennis Sparks '91 Miata Red 48.994 *0.802 = 39.293 1.020 1.020
3 tdspt 42 Tim Brewer '97 Neon ACR Re 49.574 *0.795 = 39.411 0.118 1.138
[/CODE]
Ok, so there was only 16 people running that day. :p
tespt = stx
| ChrisW | 12-14-2002 12:41 AM |
Ok,
here is an interesting tire size for ya'll..
[URL=http://www.toyo.com/tires/tire_lines/high_perf/t1s.html]245/[i]35[/i]ZR17[/URL]
here is an interesting tire size for ya'll..
[URL=http://www.toyo.com/tires/tire_lines/high_perf/t1s.html]245/[i]35[/i]ZR17[/URL]
| trhoppe | 12-14-2002 01:43 AM |
wow, that would be a PERFECT tire size for us. Too bad they are POS Toyo T1S though...............
| ChrisW | 12-14-2002 12:32 PM |
damm...
so the toyo's are crap eh? oh well. :rolleyes:
so the toyo's are crap eh? oh well. :rolleyes:
| trhoppe | 12-15-2002 10:46 AM |
Well they arent CRAP per se, but guaranteed the 225 Azenis would take the 245 T1S out.
-Tom
-Tom
| ChrisW | 12-15-2002 12:43 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by trhoppe [/i]
[B]Well they arent CRAP per se, but guaranteed the 225 Azenis would take the 245 T1S out.
-Tom [/B][/QUOTE]
that might be true until you overheat the Azenis:lol:
[B]Well they arent CRAP per se, but guaranteed the 225 Azenis would take the 245 T1S out.
-Tom [/B][/QUOTE]
that might be true until you overheat the Azenis:lol:
| trhoppe | 12-15-2002 02:49 PM |
[QUOTE]that might be true until you overheat the Azenis[/QUOTE] :lol: touche
| Subdued | 12-15-2002 07:41 PM |
Tire comparison
�
�
In the past it seemed as though BFG and Falken were the two tires to run in Street Tire, but how far back is the Kumho Ecsta MX?
| trhoppe | 12-15-2002 07:58 PM |
Well according to an "unofficial" test by GRM, they were like 0.5 secs back of the KD on a 30something second course. The truth though is that no one really knows because no one has run them in STS or STX car straight up against the other 2.
-Tom
-Tom
| AUTOwrXER | 12-16-2002 02:56 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by ChrisW [/i]
[B]Ok,
here is an interesting tire size for ya'll..
[URL=http://www.toyo.com/tires/tire_lines/high_perf/t1s.html]245/[i]35[/i]ZR17[/URL] [/B][/QUOTE]
I can do you one better: 245/35/16!
Too bad it's the Pirelli P7000. 160 treadwear though. Now I just wonder how those might due shaved to 4/32"... Anyone care to try?
[B]Ok,
here is an interesting tire size for ya'll..
[URL=http://www.toyo.com/tires/tire_lines/high_perf/t1s.html]245/[i]35[/i]ZR17[/URL] [/B][/QUOTE]
I can do you one better: 245/35/16!
Too bad it's the Pirelli P7000. 160 treadwear though. Now I just wonder how those might due shaved to 4/32"... Anyone care to try?
| AUTOwrXER | 12-16-2002 03:02 PM |
Hankook
�
�
Anybody tried the Hankook tires that bring so much contingency $ with them? Someone was running them in STS at our event yesterday, but I didn't get a chance to catch up to him in grid. I'd be curious to see if they are any good. 280 treadwear though; I doubt it...
| Subdued | 12-23-2002 09:04 AM |
Tom,
Have the 245's arrived yet? Please post after you have test fitted on the Rota's.
Have the 245's arrived yet? Please post after you have test fitted on the Rota's.
| Tirewarmer | 12-23-2002 05:51 PM |
My thread will never die! :devil:
| trhoppe | 12-23-2002 06:26 PM |
[QUOTE]Have the 245's arrived yet? Please post after you have test fitted on the Rota's[/QUOTE]
[IMG]http://66.57.73.182/evil-pinky1.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://66.57.73.182/evil-pinky1.jpg[/IMG]
| Draken | 12-24-2002 11:47 AM |
>Anybody tried the Hankook tires that bring so much contingency $ with them? Someone was running them in STS at our event yesterday, but I didn't get a chance to catch up to him in grid. I'd be curious to see if they are any good. 280 treadwear though; I doubt it...<
Curtis and Pam Eames ran the Hankook Ventus K104 Sport (or something to that effect) on their STS Audi TT Coupe at Nationals, after running Azenis all year. They didn't like them much compared to the Azenis at the first couple events they ran, including Wendover Pro and Pro Finale. But, Per from GRM gave them a hint that they liked high pressures, so Curtis played with them some. Pam finished 2nd in STSL.
I had an opportunity to run the car at a local Portland event. We played with the pressures, and sure enough, they liked really high pressures, as in 52F, 44R. And these were on 225/40-17 tires.
Chris H.
[url]www.subrew.com[/url]
'99 2.5RS (G-stock)
Curtis and Pam Eames ran the Hankook Ventus K104 Sport (or something to that effect) on their STS Audi TT Coupe at Nationals, after running Azenis all year. They didn't like them much compared to the Azenis at the first couple events they ran, including Wendover Pro and Pro Finale. But, Per from GRM gave them a hint that they liked high pressures, so Curtis played with them some. Pam finished 2nd in STSL.
I had an opportunity to run the car at a local Portland event. We played with the pressures, and sure enough, they liked really high pressures, as in 52F, 44R. And these were on 225/40-17 tires.
Chris H.
[url]www.subrew.com[/url]
'99 2.5RS (G-stock)
| AUTOwrXER | 12-26-2002 01:42 PM |
Interesting. I would have liked to have seen the Hankook tires along with the S03s and the like in that GRM comparison test.
Tom - care to share more about the 245s?
Tom - care to share more about the 245s?
| trhoppe | 12-27-2002 10:37 AM |
Looks like according to the Feb03 Fastrack, the EVO and STi are on the exclusion list for STX :)
"Street Touring: The following cars are added to the STX exclusion list: Subaru WRX Sti Mitsubishi Evo 8"
Nothing on the damn camber bolts though! :mad:
-Tom
"Street Touring: The following cars are added to the STX exclusion list: Subaru WRX Sti Mitsubishi Evo 8"
Nothing on the damn camber bolts though! :mad:
-Tom
| ChrisW | 12-27-2002 11:48 AM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by trhoppe [/i]
[B]
Nothing on the damn camber bolts though! :mad:
-Tom [/B][/QUOTE]
Tom just use rear camber plates.:rolleyes:
[B]
Nothing on the damn camber bolts though! :mad:
-Tom [/B][/QUOTE]
Tom just use rear camber plates.:rolleyes:
| trhoppe | 12-27-2002 12:30 PM |
I don't want to deal with the damn noise issues. My front ones are loud enough, I need to do something about that. I will just slot the shocks if thats what it comes down to.
-Tom
-Tom
| KeithRS | 12-28-2002 09:48 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by trhoppe [/i]
[B]Looks like according to the Feb03 Fastrack, the EVO and STi are on the exclusion list for STX :)
"Street Touring: The following cars are added to the STX exclusion list: Subaru WRX Sti Mitsubishi Evo 8"
Nothing on the damn camber bolts though! :mad:
-Tom [/B][/QUOTE]
So where can I get an Evo 7?
:devil:
Edit: oh yeah, there's that pesky rule about being produciton based and available and stuff...
[B]Looks like according to the Feb03 Fastrack, the EVO and STi are on the exclusion list for STX :)
"Street Touring: The following cars are added to the STX exclusion list: Subaru WRX Sti Mitsubishi Evo 8"
Nothing on the damn camber bolts though! :mad:
-Tom [/B][/QUOTE]
So where can I get an Evo 7?
:devil:
Edit: oh yeah, there's that pesky rule about being produciton based and available and stuff...
| sleepy-scoobie | 12-29-2002 01:42 AM |
Hmm, Tire Rack wants $165 each for T/A KD's in 245/45-17's and a whopping $238 for KD's in 245/40-17's.
I wonder if the slightly smaller diameter, lower sidewall flex (and resulting shorter gear ratios) is worth the extra $280 or so for a set. $165/tire is almost cheap enough as daily drivers.
I wonder if the slightly smaller diameter, lower sidewall flex (and resulting shorter gear ratios) is worth the extra $280 or so for a set. $165/tire is almost cheap enough as daily drivers.
| sleepy-scoobie | 12-29-2002 01:48 AM |
Hmm, Tire Rack wants $165 each for T/A KD's in 245/45-17's and a whopping $238 for KD's in 245/40-17's.
I wonder if the slightly smaller diameter, lower sidewall flex (and resulting shorter gear ratios) is worth the extra $280 or so for a set. $165/tire is almost cheap enough as daily drivers.
I wonder if the slightly smaller diameter, lower sidewall flex (and resulting shorter gear ratios) is worth the extra $280 or so for a set. $165/tire is almost cheap enough as daily drivers.
| KC | 12-29-2002 08:35 AM |
The 245/45-17 will be too tall to run where you'll lose low end gearing.. and on an autox that's not good.
The 245/40-17 is the 'closest to stock diameter' that will not throw off your speedo by a wide margin. Benefit IS a shorter sidewall with less flex.
Example:
Stock Tire: 205/55-16
Sidewall: 4.4 in
Radius: 12.4 in
Diameter: 24.9 in
Circumf: 78.2 in
Revs/mi: 811.0
New Tire: 245/40-17
Sidewall: 3.9 in
Radius: 12.4 in
Diameter: 24.7 in
Circumf: 77.6 in
Revs/mi: 816.0
Speedometer reading with this tire is 0.6% too fast. When your speedo reads 60mph, you are actually travelling 59.6 mph.
New Tire:
Sidewall: 4.3 in
Radius: 12.8 in
Diameter 25.7 in
Circumf: 80.7 in
Revs/mi: 785.0
Speedometer reading with this tire is 3.2% too slow. When your speedo reads 60mph, you are actually travelling 61.9 mph.
The 245/40-17 is the 'closest to stock diameter' that will not throw off your speedo by a wide margin. Benefit IS a shorter sidewall with less flex.
Example:
Stock Tire: 205/55-16
Sidewall: 4.4 in
Radius: 12.4 in
Diameter: 24.9 in
Circumf: 78.2 in
Revs/mi: 811.0
New Tire: 245/40-17
Sidewall: 3.9 in
Radius: 12.4 in
Diameter: 24.7 in
Circumf: 77.6 in
Revs/mi: 816.0
Speedometer reading with this tire is 0.6% too fast. When your speedo reads 60mph, you are actually travelling 59.6 mph.
New Tire:
Sidewall: 4.3 in
Radius: 12.8 in
Diameter 25.7 in
Circumf: 80.7 in
Revs/mi: 785.0
Speedometer reading with this tire is 3.2% too slow. When your speedo reads 60mph, you are actually travelling 61.9 mph.
| sleepy-scoobie | 12-30-2002 01:55 AM |
Agreed, it's quite a bit off (as noted earlier in the thread). i just wonder how much more... It's just that they cost so much more! I suppose the 245R45's would also weigh a bit more than the 40's.
The setup I was wanting was 17x8.5 +44 Volk CE28N's, but apparently 8 inch rims are the max for STX. Bastards! 8 inch wide rims on 245 R40's is not really optimal for a square carcass and maximum turn-in sharpness. The CE28N (fully forged) is about 13.5 lbs for that size, a little lighter for a 17x8.0.
Anyone want to do a mini group-buy on them? :D Best deal I've gotten from a vendor is just under $1700, but i'm sure we can knock that down with more orders. With a 1 month ship time from Japan, it might be here before the SF/Oakland norpac event on Jan 26th... OR, frickin' Rota could make a 17x8 set for $550 :mad:
The setup I was wanting was 17x8.5 +44 Volk CE28N's, but apparently 8 inch rims are the max for STX. Bastards! 8 inch wide rims on 245 R40's is not really optimal for a square carcass and maximum turn-in sharpness. The CE28N (fully forged) is about 13.5 lbs for that size, a little lighter for a 17x8.0.
Anyone want to do a mini group-buy on them? :D Best deal I've gotten from a vendor is just under $1700, but i'm sure we can knock that down with more orders. With a 1 month ship time from Japan, it might be here before the SF/Oakland norpac event on Jan 26th... OR, frickin' Rota could make a 17x8 set for $550 :mad:
| AUTOwrXER | 12-30-2002 11:32 AM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by sleepy-scoobie [/i]
[B]
Anyone want to do a mini group-buy on them? :D Best deal I've gotten from a vendor is just under $1700, but i'm sure we can knock that down with more orders. With a 1 month ship time from Japan, it might be here before the SF/Oakland norpac event on Jan 26th... OR, frickin' Rota could make a 17x8 set for $550 :mad: [/B][/QUOTE]
I may be interested. Would the TE37 not be a better choice though? I think it is cheaper and lighter, but I might be mistaken.
I wonder how much the mags would run...:D
[B]
Anyone want to do a mini group-buy on them? :D Best deal I've gotten from a vendor is just under $1700, but i'm sure we can knock that down with more orders. With a 1 month ship time from Japan, it might be here before the SF/Oakland norpac event on Jan 26th... OR, frickin' Rota could make a 17x8 set for $550 :mad: [/B][/QUOTE]
I may be interested. Would the TE37 not be a better choice though? I think it is cheaper and lighter, but I might be mistaken.
I wonder how much the mags would run...:D
| ellisnc | 12-30-2002 01:12 PM |
I think the mags only come in like 18" sizes...
Also anyone know of an R compound that's available in this country in a 245/40-17? Tire Rack only lists Hoosier and I want something with some kind of tread. I asked about importing some Bridgestone 540S in that size in an S compound but they were around $350 per tire. And Advan A048 were like $320 per. I know you guys can't run them in STX but I thought someone might know. I just checked Toyo last night and they only make a 235/40. Kumho doesn't make them and there's no Michelin or Advan A032 available in that size either.
Also anyone know of an R compound that's available in this country in a 245/40-17? Tire Rack only lists Hoosier and I want something with some kind of tread. I asked about importing some Bridgestone 540S in that size in an S compound but they were around $350 per tire. And Advan A048 were like $320 per. I know you guys can't run them in STX but I thought someone might know. I just checked Toyo last night and they only make a 235/40. Kumho doesn't make them and there's no Michelin or Advan A032 available in that size either.
| sleepy-scoobie | 12-30-2002 04:00 PM |
I started a thread a while ago in anticipation of this new STX rule change regarding big tires on the WRX: [url]http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=282901[/url]
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by AUTOwrXER [/i]
[B]
I may be interested. Would the TE37 not be a better choice though? I think it is cheaper and lighter, but I might be mistaken.
I wonder how much the mags would run...:D [/B][/QUOTE]
The TE37 is a bit heavier and more expensive, about a pound more per rim. It's an older design than the CE28N, and pretty much a classic in the JDM scene; it's also reportedly very strong, but I've also read that the CE28 is also very strong, and have never heard of a single bent or cracked wheel (unlike the Rota Subzero and SSR Comp). Credit both wheels' fully forged construction. The similarly light SSR Comps (of which I have heard MANY stories of bent wheels, like here: [url]http://freepages.autos.rootsweb.com/~jaimev/miata/ssr-comp-problems/[/url] and also see BMW forums) is not fully forged, only semiforged.
Kodiak billet wheels are also an option, and run about $450/wheel in the size we're looking at. Definitely not as large-scale an operation as Volk/Ray's Engineering, but the advantage is that you can pretty much get a totally custom fitment (offset to clear coilovers, width, etc.). No idea how strong they are, though.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by AUTOwrXER [/i]
[B]
I may be interested. Would the TE37 not be a better choice though? I think it is cheaper and lighter, but I might be mistaken.
I wonder how much the mags would run...:D [/B][/QUOTE]
The TE37 is a bit heavier and more expensive, about a pound more per rim. It's an older design than the CE28N, and pretty much a classic in the JDM scene; it's also reportedly very strong, but I've also read that the CE28 is also very strong, and have never heard of a single bent or cracked wheel (unlike the Rota Subzero and SSR Comp). Credit both wheels' fully forged construction. The similarly light SSR Comps (of which I have heard MANY stories of bent wheels, like here: [url]http://freepages.autos.rootsweb.com/~jaimev/miata/ssr-comp-problems/[/url] and also see BMW forums) is not fully forged, only semiforged.
Kodiak billet wheels are also an option, and run about $450/wheel in the size we're looking at. Definitely not as large-scale an operation as Volk/Ray's Engineering, but the advantage is that you can pretty much get a totally custom fitment (offset to clear coilovers, width, etc.). No idea how strong they are, though.
| AUTOwrXER | 12-30-2002 04:39 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by sleepy-scoobie [/i]
[B]I started a thread a while ago in anticipation of this new STX rule change regarding big tires on the WRX: [url]http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=282901[/url]
The TE37 is a bit heavier and more expensive, about a pound more per rim. It's an older design than the CE28N, and pretty much a classic in the JDM scene; it's also reportedly very strong, but I've also read that the CE28 is also very strong, and have never heard of a single bent or cracked wheel (unlike the Rota Subzero and SSR Comp). Credit both wheels' fully forged construction. The similarly light SSR Comps (of which I have heard MANY stories of bent wheels, like here: [url]http://freepages.autos.rootsweb.com/~jaimev/miata/ssr-comp-problems/[/url] and also see BMW forums) is not fully forged, only semiforged.
Kodiak billet wheels are also an option, and run about $450/wheel in the size we're looking at. Definitely not as large-scale an operation as Volk/Ray's Engineering, but the advantage is that you can pretty much get a totally custom fitment (offset to clear coilovers, width, etc.). No idea how strong they are, though. [/B][/QUOTE]
Well in that case I may very well be interested in getting together with a few others for a set of 17x8s. I am friends with a wholesaler who I could contact about pricing (he's a fellow autocrosser and a great supporter of our sport). How would you go about ordering directly from Japan? Anyone else interested in picking up a set of Volks?
Joel
[B]I started a thread a while ago in anticipation of this new STX rule change regarding big tires on the WRX: [url]http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=282901[/url]
The TE37 is a bit heavier and more expensive, about a pound more per rim. It's an older design than the CE28N, and pretty much a classic in the JDM scene; it's also reportedly very strong, but I've also read that the CE28 is also very strong, and have never heard of a single bent or cracked wheel (unlike the Rota Subzero and SSR Comp). Credit both wheels' fully forged construction. The similarly light SSR Comps (of which I have heard MANY stories of bent wheels, like here: [url]http://freepages.autos.rootsweb.com/~jaimev/miata/ssr-comp-problems/[/url] and also see BMW forums) is not fully forged, only semiforged.
Kodiak billet wheels are also an option, and run about $450/wheel in the size we're looking at. Definitely not as large-scale an operation as Volk/Ray's Engineering, but the advantage is that you can pretty much get a totally custom fitment (offset to clear coilovers, width, etc.). No idea how strong they are, though. [/B][/QUOTE]
Well in that case I may very well be interested in getting together with a few others for a set of 17x8s. I am friends with a wholesaler who I could contact about pricing (he's a fellow autocrosser and a great supporter of our sport). How would you go about ordering directly from Japan? Anyone else interested in picking up a set of Volks?
Joel
| zzyzx | 01-01-2003 07:03 PM |
Honestly for STX 245s, you want to run 245/45-16s. What we really need is a 16x8" wheel, not 17x8". However, for other (non-autox) reasons, I'd be in on a set of 17x8" with a good offset.
- Steve
- Steve
| sleepy-scoobie | 01-01-2003 07:15 PM |
agreed... short gearing is good... But like you mentioned, I'd be tempted to use these awesome wheels for daily driving, and 17x8 is more practical. Plus it allows for more brake upgrades (since I take it to road tracks, as well.)
| Subdued | 01-01-2003 08:01 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by trhoppe [/i]
[B]
Well my Rota Attacks weight 15.5lbs for the 17x7.5 and are $400 for the whole set of 4 :lol:
The 245s and rotas should be here just in time for xmas so I can do some test fitting them.
-Tom [/B][/QUOTE]It is a new year and Tom has been somewhat quiet.
[B]
Well my Rota Attacks weight 15.5lbs for the 17x7.5 and are $400 for the whole set of 4 :lol:
The 245s and rotas should be here just in time for xmas so I can do some test fitting them.
-Tom [/B][/QUOTE]It is a new year and Tom has been somewhat quiet.
| sleepy-scoobie | 01-01-2003 10:45 PM |
If you guys are serious, I'll ask my contact what we can get for 3 sets (or more) of the Volk TE37 in 17x8 +46 and/or the Volk CE28N in 17x8 +44. Last time I spoke to him, I could get a set for a little under $1700 for each set of 4 17x8.5's without tires. The 17x8 will be a little cheaper. Not cheap, but the best deal I've gotten on new Volks.
Ugh, if only Rota would step up with a 17x8. Still, I hope forged Volks won't end up like this: [IMG]http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/attachment.php?s=&postid=2136645[/IMG]
Wheel failure is not usually a life or death issue for autocrossing, but if this happened on a track (or I guess a highway), it could be ugly. Anyways, there are ongoing debates as to if these 3 failures were a fluke or not, and [B]I'm not taking sides since I don't know much about wheel construction.[/B]
The CE Volk's 12-15 lbs of total unsprung rotating weight savings couldn't hurt either, I guess.
This is the Volk CE28N in bronze in 17x7.5:
[IMG]http://www.vividracing.com/images/customer/jay3.jpg[/IMG]
:devil: Maybe Rota could make a 16x8 (or 15x8 :O) and I could get those for autox AND the volks for street/track
Ugh, if only Rota would step up with a 17x8. Still, I hope forged Volks won't end up like this: [IMG]http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/attachment.php?s=&postid=2136645[/IMG]
Wheel failure is not usually a life or death issue for autocrossing, but if this happened on a track (or I guess a highway), it could be ugly. Anyways, there are ongoing debates as to if these 3 failures were a fluke or not, and [B]I'm not taking sides since I don't know much about wheel construction.[/B]
The CE Volk's 12-15 lbs of total unsprung rotating weight savings couldn't hurt either, I guess.
This is the Volk CE28N in bronze in 17x7.5:
[IMG]http://www.vividracing.com/images/customer/jay3.jpg[/IMG]
:devil: Maybe Rota could make a 16x8 (or 15x8 :O) and I could get those for autox AND the volks for street/track
| sleepy-scoobie | 01-01-2003 11:35 PM |
Just got some more info...
Turns out the CE28N is available in these sizes in 5x100:
16x8 +35, 42, 49
Turns out the CE28N is available in these sizes in 5x100:
16x8 +35, 42, 49
| dwx | 01-01-2003 11:36 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by zzyzx [/i]
[B]Honestly for STX 245s, you want to run 245/45-16s. What we really need is a 16x8" wheel, not 17x8". However, for other (non-autox) reasons, I'd be in on a set of 17x8" with a good offset.
- Steve [/B][/QUOTE]
You can buy Gram Light 57Cs in 16x8 45 offset. I bought a set of those sized wheels from [email�protected] He had sourced them and had to wait a couple months to get them, and then decided to go another route. I can weigh them tommorrow but I want to say they are maybe 15lbs. I used to have SSR Comps in 17x7.5 and they are not as light as those but they are fairly light. They are also not as expensive as a TE37 or the other forged wheels, since they are not forged. You could probably get a set for ~1200 I'd think.
[B]Honestly for STX 245s, you want to run 245/45-16s. What we really need is a 16x8" wheel, not 17x8". However, for other (non-autox) reasons, I'd be in on a set of 17x8" with a good offset.
- Steve [/B][/QUOTE]
You can buy Gram Light 57Cs in 16x8 45 offset. I bought a set of those sized wheels from [email�protected] He had sourced them and had to wait a couple months to get them, and then decided to go another route. I can weigh them tommorrow but I want to say they are maybe 15lbs. I used to have SSR Comps in 17x7.5 and they are not as light as those but they are fairly light. They are also not as expensive as a TE37 or the other forged wheels, since they are not forged. You could probably get a set for ~1200 I'd think.
| ellisnc | 01-02-2003 12:16 AM |
ummmmmm... Endlessssss.....
must staaay ooonnn tooopppiiccc :)
I have to say just one thing about those brakes. I'm all for getting brakes like that, but the only one's that I trust to get the balance correct are the Stoptech since they're basically the only company who hasn't gotten their hands on an STi with Brembos which is probably what those brakes were designed to go on. The same thing goes for the AP brakes as well. Any brief thoughts?
must staaay ooonnn tooopppiiccc :)
I have to say just one thing about those brakes. I'm all for getting brakes like that, but the only one's that I trust to get the balance correct are the Stoptech since they're basically the only company who hasn't gotten their hands on an STi with Brembos which is probably what those brakes were designed to go on. The same thing goes for the AP brakes as well. Any brief thoughts?
| trhoppe | 01-02-2003 12:22 AM |
[QUOTE]Honestly for STX 245s, you want to run 245/45-16s[/QUOTE] Riiiiiiiiight. And I suppose you will find these magical size tires? No one makes a 245/45/16, have you not read this thread??? :rolleyes:
| zzyzx | 01-02-2003 12:39 AM |
Calm down there, Tommy boy. ;)
Do a search on Tirerack. I see at least a few which I would consider "competitive" in STX, don't you? Right, no Falken Azenis, but that doesn't mean you don't have a chance...
Oh, and regarding rear camber adjustment. The MRT adjustable lateral links are both legal and make camber/toe adjustments simple.
- Steve
Do a search on Tirerack. I see at least a few which I would consider "competitive" in STX, don't you? Right, no Falken Azenis, but that doesn't mean you don't have a chance...
Oh, and regarding rear camber adjustment. The MRT adjustable lateral links are both legal and make camber/toe adjustments simple.
- Steve
| dwx | 01-02-2003 01:17 AM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by zzyzx [/i]
[B]Calm down there, Tommy boy. ;)
Do a search on Tirerack. I see at least a few which I would consider "competitive" in STX, don't you? Right, no Falken Azenis, but that doesn't mean you don't have a chance...
Oh, and regarding rear camber adjustment. The MRT adjustable lateral links are both legal and make camber/toe adjustments simple.
- Steve [/B][/QUOTE]
Actually I don't see anything in that size except Pirelli P7000s, which aren't competitive. The only "competitive" tires are Azenis and BFG KDs. Remember you are preaching to guys who want to win the class at a national level.
Since when were replacing the rear control arms legal? I have a set of them now that I'm going to use but I run SM, not STX. I have an email from Howard Duncan stating the illegality of them. I put the STi pink control arms on my car when in STX, and his statement was that was not a piece that could be replaced in any way. You can change out the bushings, but that's it.
Phil
[B]Calm down there, Tommy boy. ;)
Do a search on Tirerack. I see at least a few which I would consider "competitive" in STX, don't you? Right, no Falken Azenis, but that doesn't mean you don't have a chance...
Oh, and regarding rear camber adjustment. The MRT adjustable lateral links are both legal and make camber/toe adjustments simple.
- Steve [/B][/QUOTE]
Actually I don't see anything in that size except Pirelli P7000s, which aren't competitive. The only "competitive" tires are Azenis and BFG KDs. Remember you are preaching to guys who want to win the class at a national level.
Since when were replacing the rear control arms legal? I have a set of them now that I'm going to use but I run SM, not STX. I have an email from Howard Duncan stating the illegality of them. I put the STi pink control arms on my car when in STX, and his statement was that was not a piece that could be replaced in any way. You can change out the bushings, but that's it.
Phil
| zzyzx | 01-02-2003 02:10 AM |
[quote]17.8.D. Addition or replacement of suspension stabilizers (linkage connecting axle or De Dion to the chassis which controls lateral suspension location) is permitted. Traction bars or torque arms may be added or replaced. A Panhard rod may be added or replaced. Methods of attachment and attachment points are unrestricted. [/quote]
This has been discussed on the streettouring list at length. Your STi parts are not legal because they have spherical bearings. Refer to 17.8.B. BTW, they are [b]lateral links[/b], not [i]control arms[/i]. Refer to Service Manual #6, Section 4.1.
My search on Tire Rack pulls up more than 10 different tire choices for 245/45-16s:
[url]http://www.tirerack.com/tires/Compare1.jsp?startIndex=0&width=245%2F&ratio=45&diameter=16&search=true&pagelen=20&pagenum=1&pagemark=1&do=Search[/url]
[quote]
Remember you are preaching to guys who want to win the class at a national level.
[/quote]
Well now, excuse my ignorance! :lol:
- Steve
This has been discussed on the streettouring list at length. Your STi parts are not legal because they have spherical bearings. Refer to 17.8.B. BTW, they are [b]lateral links[/b], not [i]control arms[/i]. Refer to Service Manual #6, Section 4.1.
My search on Tire Rack pulls up more than 10 different tire choices for 245/45-16s:
[url]http://www.tirerack.com/tires/Compare1.jsp?startIndex=0&width=245%2F&ratio=45&diameter=16&search=true&pagelen=20&pagenum=1&pagemark=1&do=Search[/url]
[quote]
Remember you are preaching to guys who want to win the class at a national level.
[/quote]
Well now, excuse my ignorance! :lol:
- Steve
| KC | 01-02-2003 08:31 AM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by zzyzx [/i]
[B]
My search on Tire Rack pulls up more than 10 different tire choices for 245/45-16s:
[url]http://www.tirerack.com/tires/Compare1.jsp?startIndex=0&width=245%2F&ratio=45&diameter=16&search=true&pagelen=20&pagenum=1&pagemark=1&do=Search[/url][/QUOTE] The only tire on there that could be close to 'competitive on a national level' would be the S0-3s.
[QUOTE]Well now, excuse my ignorance! :lol:[/QUOTE]NEVAR! :p :D
Like Steve's never been to nationals or something. :lol:
--kC
[B]
My search on Tire Rack pulls up more than 10 different tire choices for 245/45-16s:
[url]http://www.tirerack.com/tires/Compare1.jsp?startIndex=0&width=245%2F&ratio=45&diameter=16&search=true&pagelen=20&pagenum=1&pagemark=1&do=Search[/url][/QUOTE] The only tire on there that could be close to 'competitive on a national level' would be the S0-3s.
[QUOTE]Well now, excuse my ignorance! :lol:[/QUOTE]NEVAR! :p :D
Like Steve's never been to nationals or something. :lol:
--kC
| trhoppe | 01-02-2003 09:26 AM |
Okay, well here is a question for you.
What makes a 245/45/16 better then a 245/40/17?
Is it the lighter weight? The smaller circumference?
Its going to be just a little itty bit lighter. It will not be lighter though unless you buy some $2000 wheels. Rota Attacks are 15.5 lbs for a 17x7.5. It will be expensive to find 16x8 that are lighter then that and not super expensive.
Also, it does not have a significantly smaller circumference, only 0.1 inches.
-Tom
What makes a 245/45/16 better then a 245/40/17?
Is it the lighter weight? The smaller circumference?
Its going to be just a little itty bit lighter. It will not be lighter though unless you buy some $2000 wheels. Rota Attacks are 15.5 lbs for a 17x7.5. It will be expensive to find 16x8 that are lighter then that and not super expensive.
Also, it does not have a significantly smaller circumference, only 0.1 inches.
-Tom
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét