hello, i will be getting wheels soon for my 69 camaro but would like to know what do most owners have 18" or 19" wheels? Also whats the widest offset i can have in the front and rear with stock suspension and no mods to fenders? I really love that step lip look but would like for it to be as wide as possible.
Hcervant
You are in the right forum, take a look at the sticky threads for lots of good info on wheels and tires. There are far more 1st gen owners running 14" or 15" wheels than any other size, they make up the purists and the day two hotrodders. The resto mod guys are running 15" or 17" and pro touring guys are running 18" or taller. That's a generalization across the 1st gen spectrum and most of the vintage muscle car/pony car collectors and hobbyists.
Offset is the distance from the hub to the centerline of the wheel. So to get that deep dish look, best way to get it, is using the ideal offset and the widest wheel. Most find that +6 to +9mm offset works best front and rear. But there are factors to consider such as disc brakes, camber settings, suspension camber gain, etc. And there are still differences from car to car. So that's a good starting point but measure, measure measure.
For the front, that'd be a 8.5-9" advertised width (remember advertised it based on inside lip to lip, overall outside to outside will measure 1" wider). With proper offset a 245 usually works. A 255 may fit on a '69.
The rear would be 9.5-10" advertised width. Again, you really need to measure as 10" advertised is 11" total, which is tight so getting the right offset for your car is crucial. On that you can fit a 275, possibly a 285.
On to wheel diameter. Most in the pro-touring run 18s. The 18s are the best compromise for clearing big brakes and sidewall stiffness. It can also help clear the lower tie-rod if using wide rims. The 19s tend to have less tire selection since they are not as popular with OEMs as 18s and 20s. Plus once you go below 3.7" sidewall section, you start to loose some feedback when the tires are on the edge of cornering traction, and forward bite on the rear is significantly diminished. Of course, there's overall weight and moment of inertia to consider too. Usually the ones running 19s or 20s are sacrificing a little performance for aesthetics. Or running some exceptionally large brakes.
For the front, that'd be a 8.5-9" advertised width (remember advertised it based on inside lip to lip, overall outside to outside will measure 1" wider). With proper offset a 245 usually works. A 255 may fit on a '69.
The rear would be 9.5-10" advertised width. Again, you really need to measure as 10" advertised is 11" total, which is tight so getting the right offset for your car is crucial. On that you can fit a 275, possibly a 285.
On to wheel diameter. Most in the pro-touring run 18s. The 18s are the best compromise for clearing big brakes and sidewall stiffness. It can also help clear the lower tie-rod if using wide rims. The 19s tend to have less tire selection since they are not as popular with OEMs as 18s and 20s. Plus once you go below 3.7" sidewall section, you start to loose some feedback when the tires are on the edge of cornering traction, and forward bite on the rear is significantly diminished. Of course, there's overall weight and moment of inertia to consider too. Usually the ones running 19s or 20s are sacrificing a little performance for aesthetics. Or running some exceptionally large brakes.
Go with 17's and you won't have issues like a lot of guys have, more sidewall give a better ride as well. JMO
The design of the wheel should not detract from the design of the car, your comments are correct. Our Camaro club of 79 members had this discussion at a meeting and the general consensus was wheels keeping in harmony of the design of the car. Larger wheels with smaller, generally, side wall is not the best look on these cars and gives a rougher ride as well. For the most part the overall circumference of the wheel/tire combo is within an inch. That is comparing my own fleet of cars from 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20 inch wheels. The 19 & 20 is on my Vette, handles well but a terrible ride on mediocre roads.
My daughters Mazda runs smooth and comfortably on 215/45s Contis with the same section height as the 245/40R18 & 275/35R18 combos many run on early Camaros. Corvette on the other hand has even shorter section heights, are lighter and coupled with pretty stiff spring rates (just under 600lbs/in). Not only that, but they use run-flat tires which will definitely affect harshness.
As to the aesthetics, that's completely personal preference. Personally I like 18s, but that is the max I would go. Nice part about them is a larger tire selection than 17s.
Many probably don't realize that the bias plys originally used with the smaller wheels when these cars were new, ride much stiffer than today's radial tires (with maybe the exception of run-flats).
As to the aesthetics, that's completely personal preference. Personally I like 18s, but that is the max I would go. Nice part about them is a larger tire selection than 17s.
Many probably don't realize that the bias plys originally used with the smaller wheels when these cars were new, ride much stiffer than today's radial tires (with maybe the exception of run-flats).
running 18 no difference in ride, handles better
if looking for comfortable ride then get a luxury car not a Camaro
if looking for comfortable ride then get a luxury car not a Camaro
I have a Cadillac XTS. . . . .does that count! Not the wheel the less sidewall. Next set will not be the run flats. All my cars ride a little different, each of my current 5 Camaros, or the 32 that I have had for the last 40 years.
One of our own members (CarlC) did a test using his '68 for a magazine. He ran (if i recall correctly) 15's with 60 series, 17's with 40 or 45 series, and 18's with 35 series. All basically the same overall height and width, just different sidewalls. The 17's came out on top in the test course with fastest times. There is a point of diminishing return when going smaller sidewalls unless your wheels are higher end and you have real modern "new car" suspensions. Carl's car at the time was nicely setup but not over the top so his test results fair well with the average TCer's resto mod...
From more personal experiences, I have run 15" FW rally's with 10+ year old BFG's that rode like they were made of concrete. The rubber was just old and hard. Switched to new tires and the ride greatly improved! Switched to 17" Budnik wheels with 45 series tires and the ride greatly improved again. Would have expected the ride quality to suffer with less sidewall but I believe the wheel quality and material used has a lot to do with it. Steel wheels are very stiff and ridged. The Budnik's are less ridged and help a 45 series tire provide a better ride.
I don't think it's a fair comparison to bring up modern cars with chassies and suspensions that are so far beyond that of a 1st gen. I know there are folks building far beyond leaf springs and shocks that might benefit but we should be careful the advice given fits the car the owner is asking about.
From more personal experiences, I have run 15" FW rally's with 10+ year old BFG's that rode like they were made of concrete. The rubber was just old and hard. Switched to new tires and the ride greatly improved! Switched to 17" Budnik wheels with 45 series tires and the ride greatly improved again. Would have expected the ride quality to suffer with less sidewall but I believe the wheel quality and material used has a lot to do with it. Steel wheels are very stiff and ridged. The Budnik's are less ridged and help a 45 series tire provide a better ride.
I don't think it's a fair comparison to bring up modern cars with chassies and suspensions that are so far beyond that of a 1st gen. I know there are folks building far beyond leaf springs and shocks that might benefit but we should be careful the advice given fits the car the owner is asking about.
Edit: Carl did move up to 18s. Came across this while searching for something else: FRONT , What's the widest 18" on a stock sub
Wow, that tire test was nearly 20 years ago!
At the time appropriate rims and tires were tough to find and the tires were not very good. Todays tires are in a different orbit. In the automotive world there have been few things that have advanced as much as tire technology.
Back then the larger 18" sizes gave good grip but had little traction threshold before violently breaking loose. Combined with an at-the-time too short section height left them not at the top of the list. 17's had better compounds, larger traction threshold, etc. At the time they were a better choice.
The Camaro has had three size variants of Vintage Wheel Works V45's with the current 18" x 9.5" x 5-3/4"BS square being the best of them all. With the newest Michelin Pilot Sport 4S it has excellent warm weather / track / autocross performance, and is phenomenal in the wet. There is, IMO, no better overall tire than the 4S. Great grip, lots of threshold, low noise, tracks/trammeling nicely, and sufficient sidewall in a 275/35/18 to protect the rim and have good ride quality.
We do run the sizes square since for One Lap of America we need to carry all of our gear with us, and having two rim/tire combinations changes the logistics sufficiently that we would need to tow a trailer. We've spent a lot of time balancing the the setup so that it works really well on the square setup.
It does take -2.5* camber to make it clear the top of the front wheelwell, but the tires do not wear the inside first ;-)
Trying to choose a tire/rim without regard to the rest of the car may result in unintended consequences. It's telling when walking through shows/cruise-in's/donunt runs etc. with builds where the car looks wonderful, great drivetrain and suspension, lots of careful thought, and the crappiest tires on the face of the earth. Totally understand the nature of budgets + etc., but these are big $ builds that have tires I would not trust on anything I drive. No matter how bad-*** the car is, if the tire is junk, so will the performance of the car. Getting a good tire, matching it with a spring/shock/swaybar package, and getting a really good alignment will do wonders for a stock subframe car.
At the time appropriate rims and tires were tough to find and the tires were not very good. Todays tires are in a different orbit. In the automotive world there have been few things that have advanced as much as tire technology.
Back then the larger 18" sizes gave good grip but had little traction threshold before violently breaking loose. Combined with an at-the-time too short section height left them not at the top of the list. 17's had better compounds, larger traction threshold, etc. At the time they were a better choice.
The Camaro has had three size variants of Vintage Wheel Works V45's with the current 18" x 9.5" x 5-3/4"BS square being the best of them all. With the newest Michelin Pilot Sport 4S it has excellent warm weather / track / autocross performance, and is phenomenal in the wet. There is, IMO, no better overall tire than the 4S. Great grip, lots of threshold, low noise, tracks/trammeling nicely, and sufficient sidewall in a 275/35/18 to protect the rim and have good ride quality.
We do run the sizes square since for One Lap of America we need to carry all of our gear with us, and having two rim/tire combinations changes the logistics sufficiently that we would need to tow a trailer. We've spent a lot of time balancing the the setup so that it works really well on the square setup.
It does take -2.5* camber to make it clear the top of the front wheelwell, but the tires do not wear the inside first ;-)
Trying to choose a tire/rim without regard to the rest of the car may result in unintended consequences. It's telling when walking through shows/cruise-in's/donunt runs etc. with builds where the car looks wonderful, great drivetrain and suspension, lots of careful thought, and the crappiest tires on the face of the earth. Totally understand the nature of budgets + etc., but these are big $ builds that have tires I would not trust on anything I drive. No matter how bad-*** the car is, if the tire is junk, so will the performance of the car. Getting a good tire, matching it with a spring/shock/swaybar package, and getting a really good alignment will do wonders for a stock subframe car.
Speak of the devil! Your "tires" must have been burning!! How have you been Carl? It's been a long time. Thanks for your input, you have valuable first hand knowledge!
Keeping busy as my career has changed to full-time VaporWorx fuel systems. My co-driver and I had a bucket list trip planned before CV19 hit so we're re-vamping plans for a possible summer '22 trip since the uncertainty of summer '21 did not allow sufficient logistics time. The Camaro is humming along nicely with some new projects pending when time allows. Hope all is well on your front Dennis. It's been too long......
Hi Carl - can you please tell me what the backspacing and offset is on your rear wheels? I just read through this thread and ultimately need to find wheels with a little more backspacing but not sure how much. Thanks in advance.
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
