17s on 340's, too big?

Post by **Johnny A** » 17 Jul 2007 10:36 pm

Don't think so:

Post by **jtbo** » 17 Jul 2007 11:05 pm

Way too big, but I guess I'm alone with my opinion as usual

Do what you think is good, ignore everyone else, that is the best. Well with suspension and some technical stuff maybe better to check tips, but for styling don't listen others and don't do same thing everyone else does, but do what you like and do it well, that is best, imo.

Post by **J340GLT** » 17 Jul 2007 11:18 pm

I liked 17's on mine (hence my lil pic) but no one really agrees on here.

Like what you've done with the lights.

Any more pics?

Cheers

Jay

Post by MJ » 17 Jul 2007 11:44 pm

Hmm, so so. At least it doesn't look like a tractor, way up in the air.

Pay's your money takes your choice

Post by **Chris_C** » 18 Jul 2007 01:03 am

Not my cup of tea either, but my cars arn't too a lot of tastes and I don't give a monkeys, so get involved

Post by **Johnny A** » 18 Jul 2007 11:06 am

Well yeah it's each to their own which is cool, just wondered really.

They look bigger in pictures for some reason and smaller in real life, but I have always been a fan of alloys that fill up the arches (within reason). I have 18's on my Carlton which are 10 inches wide on the rear (see sig).

I know the current trend with 300's is euro style 12s/13s with stretched tyres but that's never been a big thing with me although it does look quite nice.

Most of the bodywork is remaining as it is now bar a little more smoothing (no bump strips, rear wiper or aerial etc...) and with the exception of clear front indicators, clear rear clusters and a nice exhaust it will be standard.

Most of my attention will be going into the engine/drive system and handling, also a little bit of time will be spent on changing the seats and adding a little sound system perhaps.

Also the other advantage of 17s (even with a large drop) is that you can still fly over speedbumps without worrying about catching the exhaust or something on them. I currently have this problem with the Calibra, it's running 16s with very low profile tyres and a 45mm drop, the front downpipe has been known to catch on them annoying speedbumps that sit only in the middle of the lane.

Post by **Nick C** » 18 Jul 2007 11:33 am

Personally I keep the standard size wheels with sensible size tyres and ride height so the car clears speed bumps. But then I appear to be in the minority with that one...

Can't understand how anyone can run less than 55 profile tyres in this country without bending rims on potholes every 5 minutes...

Post by **Chris_C** » 18 Jul 2007 11:39 am

Ahh, but you rally

Those wheels we picked up for Kar last week are 50 profile, and dont look silly (I hope.. havn't tried them on yet)

Johnny, but you saying you like wheels that fill the arch, does this mean you havn't kept rolling radius? I know all the drift guys arn't, but I'd imagine bigger rolling radius would be horribly slow!

Post by **d3k4y0** » 18 Jul 2007 12:50 pm

Johnny A wrote: Also the other advantage of 17s (even with a large drop) is that you can still fly over speedbumps without worrying about catching the exhaust or something on them.

But surely the point of speedbumps is to not fly over them? I've never had a problem round here with speed bumps (and we have some absolute killers) but perhaps that's because they are in roads that you're not supposed to be driving like a prat on. You know, narrow residential streets, roads by playgrounds/schools, 20mph roads and the like?

As for the wheels, the only reason I can see for fitting 17s on any car is if you need to put 14" discs behind them, and you clearly haven't done that (yet) so I'm going to have to say not my kind of thing. We have had a couple of 300s on here with stupidly big wheels, and they tend to just look out of place.

Post by **Ali** » 18 Jul 2007 05:22 pm

The other disadvantage is it makes the brakes look stupidly small, we tried some on mine but the arch clearance was a little close for comfort and no bloody way would the front wheels turn lol

Post by **jtbo** » 18 Jul 2007 05:59 pm

I prefer that brakes fill wheel over wheel fills wheelarc

But as I said earlier, ignore what other say and do what you like as car is for you, not for other

Post by **Johnny A** » 18 Jul 2007 06:45 pm

Oh dear so many questions and comments

Nick C wrote:Can't understand how anyone can run less than 55 profile tyres in this country without bending rims on potholes every 5 minutes...

Answer, decent rims. Cheap wheels = poor/weak metals used that do bend and crack easily. All my cars use expensive rims and they have taken a lot of punishment without any damage caused.

Johnny, but you saying you like wheels that fill the arch, does this mean you havn't kept rolling radius? I know all the drift guys arn't, but I'd imagine bigger rolling radius would be horribly slow!

Rolling radius is slightly larger now yes, this increases gear ratios and also puts the speedo 'out'

But your assuming that the engine isn't large and torquey (you want wider gears for this anyways)
Also it will be the speedo out, but it's out anyways!! (over-reading)

But surely the point of speedbumps is to not fly over them? I've never had a problem round here with speed bumps (and we have some absolute killers) but perhaps that's because they are in roads that you're not supposed to be driving like a prat on. You know, narrow residential streets, roads by playgrounds/schools, 20mph roads and the like?

This is very true, perhaps a poor choice of words on my part. I ment so when doing 20mph I don't have to slow to 2mph to avoid catching the exhaust/floorpan.... I currently have to do this in the Calibra.

As for the wheels, the only reason I can see for fitting 17s on any car is if you need to put 14" discs behind them, and you clearly haven't done that (yet) so I'm going to have to say not my kind of thing. We have had a couple of 300s on here with stupidly big wheels, and they tend to just look out of place.

The key work in the first sentance would be 'yet', I would imagine I will be running something around the 300mm mark for discs and some 4-pots up front.

Post by **classicswede** » 18 Jul 2007 11:16 pm

Johnny A wrote: Rolling radius is slightly larger now yes, this increases gear ratios and also puts the speedo 'out'

The speedos read fast with std rims. When I switch to a slightly bigger rr the spedo was reading correct. Now that I have the 440 spedo its reading 10% slow with 195/50 15

Post by MJ » 19 Jul 2007 11:26 am

Blumin speed bumps. You have to crawl over them at a few miles an hour to avoid the suspension being banged around, then you can accelerate back to 20 or whatever the limit is (if it's safe to do so) only to have to brake to clear the next one and so on. So much for the government being concerned about the environment, causing all the extra fuel and brake usage

Time to get an old Toyota pick-up that can be abused me thinks

Post by **foggyjames** » 19 Jul 2007 10:41 pm

Speed humps are evil, no question.

I like them. I think it depends a lot on the style of the rim, and I think you need to go larger than stock RR to make them look right....but it can be done. 16s might look better, but the right 17s work for me.

Totally right about using decent alloys. That's why I use OEM ones where possible - Volvo usually used BBS to make their wheels, and they're cheap

There was a Sierra Cosworth on BK Racing rims at the Uxbridge show last weekend. Tit...

cheers

James