I know all of the previously posted opinions, so there is no discouraging me (LOL). Having said that, is it possible to install a 235/35/20 on an 8.5 (5.0 BS?)inch wheel under a 3 inch lowered 69 Camaro without tubbing. Thanks in advance.

There are 2 '69s over on www.pro-touring.com. (http://www.pro-touring.com.) belonging to screen name datsbad. One has 8.5" rears with 5.25" of backspace. The other is 8" with 5" of backspace. They both have 255/35-20s on them. They are both at least 3" of drop if not more. I have seen both in person - no rubbing issues. Keep in mind when it's that low and and the tires are 27" tall a 9.5" wheel and a 275/35-20 will not work - too tall of a tire too high in the wheelhouse.

Here's mine with an 20"/18" combo, both 245/40's.

The fitment is very good, but they just did not float my boat.

This should clear easily with a 5" BS.

Sorry for the large image size.

http://img74.exs.cx/img74/2423/DSCN0297.jpg

Thanks guys.

Carl, Looks like 18's all around might have worked. 20's are too big in my opinion.

Not a '69, but rather a '67!!

I ran tall, skinny Firestone, Town&Country Mud&Snow tires on my STOCK, 14" x 6" steel, painted rims on the back of my car back in the winter of '66/'67 by installing coil-overs and setting them so my car was about 4" taller in the back then stock.

These tires measured about 29" to 29.5" tall AND there was just enough room to put a finger between the front and back wheelwell sheetmetal!!

They would fit at stock height but they filled the top of the inner well so much, there was no suspension travel at all so I had to raise her!!

My mph went from 70 to 82 at the same rpm!!

pdq67

245/35/20's are about 26.5" tall and have a 9.6" section width. The 255/45/17's I run are 26" tall and a 10" section width and 275/40/17's are 25.7" tall and 11" section width for comparison. I couldn't find any 235/35/20's on tire racks site...

here is a few pics of Datsbad's Camaros
18's front and 20's rear on both cars.
http://memimage.cardomain.net/member_images/11/web/551000-551999/551324_209_full.jpg

http://memimage.cardomain.net/member_images/12/web/324000-324999/324787_131_full.jpg

And another...

http://www.lateral-g.net/sema/johnson.jpg

Someone that's had some experience on this topic...PLEASE tell me why I should go 18's front and 20's rear or maybe go smaller 17's front and 18's rear.

I run 18" and 20" Budnik's, and if the car is a show car, weekend warrior kind of build, they look great. No reason not to go with the 20" then. If you road race your car, and weight and handling are a BIG concern, then I wouldn't go this route. I personally like the looks, and since WHEELS are my business, I wanted a nice looking big wheel combination. My suggestion is to take a good long look at what YOU expect out to the car.

Call me at Budnik if you want to talk more about it.

Jon

Omaha,

One thing to keep in mind when increasing the rim size is weight, like Jon said. One reason is the increased rotational mass of the larger rims. It will take more energy to change the relative motion of the wheel. Think more engine power needed to accelerate and more braking power to slow.

IMO, rims larger than 18s do not look right on a first gen. However, it is your car and build it like you want to. If you decide on larger rims, at least upgrade you brakes to discs.

Brian

anybody know the backspacing of the wheels on the black 69 in the above pic?

The black '69 above belongs to Bob Johnson of Barrett Jackson Car Search fame. It was built by Alan Johnson's Rod Shop (no relation). The rear wheels are 20x10s with 295/40s. The car is mini tubbed and the rear is custom built with I believe an aluminum housing. I don't believe the back spacing was ever disclosed. Maybe someone here has more info. PHR did a feature on the car and I believe it's still on their website - they called it "Battle Axe". Hope this helps. Jack

Well, I'm looking at using 17 x7 (or 8") in the front and 18 x 8 (or 9.5") in the rear but would like to know what backset allows them to be tucked in like on the above camaro's....

omg that orange z is gorgeous