iceracer wrote: I'm surprised Nascar and others aren't using wide 5s. You know, tradition
I wonder what effect it would have on tire changes? I'm guessing wide 5s would add time to pit stops due to the greater distance between lug nuts. It may also be more difficult to get the wheel lined up quickly with the lug studs, but that's just a guess
I saw a discussion in one of the Roadkill Extra videos with their mechanic friend Lucky something-er-other about his Chevelle with wide 5s that was on the cover of car craft and hot rod. Never really thought about them till then, but dam they look cool on a street car.
On your C4, be sure the car is still at stock ride height. If it has been lowered and the wheel/tire extends beyond the body, you may end up cracking your fenders when the tires smack them.
conesare2seconds wrote: On your C4, be sure the car is still at stock ride height. If it has been lowered and the wheel/tire extends beyond the body, you may end up cracking your fenders when the tires smack them.
No worries here -- we're a little outside the envelope of fitment on a "off the rack" C4 -- just concerned with the suspension at this point
In reply to orphancars: on my 84 c4 I was given a NEW pair of Hoosier 19's so had to buy wheels from a newer vette 18's f and 19'sR fronts fit great,rear's not so much,REALLY need at least a 1 3/4 spacer,the ones you get online are about 1 1/4 and not sure if I can get the alignmint I want."Trimming" the fenderwells will be required front and rear, I don't care how Wide the rear is but the Scrub radius up front needs to be right.
84-87 have different suspension parts and offset than 88-96. They have more traditional rwd offset, 88 started the deep backspacing
patgizz wrote: 84-87 have different suspension parts and offset than 88-96. They have more traditional rwd offset, 88 started the deep backspacing
Pat -- I have a hybrid of sorts -- early front suspension and late rear suspension. 17 x 11 fits front and rear, hence the different tires on the front -- pass side is 17 x 8, driver side is 17 x 11. All of that is going away with the wide-5 adapters and wheels though. I need a 23.5 x 11 x 16 slick.
orphancars wrote:patgizz wrote: 84-87 have different suspension parts and offset than 88-96. They have more traditional rwd offset, 88 started the deep backspacingPat -- I have a hybrid of sorts -- early front suspension and late rear suspension. 17 x 11 fits front and rear, hence the different tires on the front -- pass side is 17 x 8, driver side is 17 x 11. All of that is going away with the wide-5 adapters and wheels though. I need a 23.5 x 11 x 16 slick.
Do you have the early or later C4 brakes?
I have been trying to do some research for a friend. He is looking at doing one of those "c4 suspension on a frame under a c2" things and I saw some claims that the early c4 stuff would clear 15 inch rims...
If you can do 15's you actually get a neat and cheap option that would be fun if you arent overly serious about that last Nth...
http://www.americanraceronline.com/
But they dont seem to do 16's, only 15's.
Rough information I found is that they are kind of numb, not quite as fast as Hoosiers/Avons, but something like 50% the cost.
Didnt get much beyond that as I have nothing that can run them.
(although... I do have a friend who wants me to buy a derelict C4 4+3 car off of him for challenge money. I think I want to stay on target to build a K-powered Locost instead though. That said, there is a draw to building a Roadkill style Vette Kart, carb it, and slap the cheap Bias-plys on it.
Apexcarver wrote: Do you have the early or later C4 brakes?
Early C4 brakes on the front, later on the rear. Basically I have single piston all around.
And thanks for the link but not a fan of the American Racer tires. Most likely going the way of the purple crack or Avons. Feedback from the DM/EM community on them is that they don't deliver. Also cannot go down to a 15" because it'll hit the tie rod/steering arm. Going down to 16 is about as small as I can go. Went with a Sweet Mfg. rack and bumpsteer eliminator kit. The bumpsteer kit adds a little length to the connection between steering arm and outer tie rod.
I gotcha. I agree that all indications are that the AR tires dont really deliver as much on performance or feel, but thought that they might prove to have more fun-factor than going to 200tw tires and be able to be in the same consumable cost realm. Not really a great competitive option, but might be a good fun option.
In reply to Apexcarver:Patgizz, orphanboy,Dusterbud, Being mine is Early and I am looking for a dana 44 rear. can I get 88 or newer to install in the 84,and do away with spacers. already did the c5 front brake swap.
Bump, "cause I wanna Know"
GTXVette wrote: In reply to Apexcarver:Patgizz, orphanboy,Dusterbud, Being mine is Early and I am looking for a dana 44 rear. can I get 88 or newer to install in the 84,and do away with spacers. already did the c5 front brake swap.
Whoa....I thought you needed minimum of 17 inch wheels to clear C5 brakes.
In reply to Ovid_and_Flem: I do......18x10front-19x12rear coulda been from a c6,not factory as they are chrome(I was told). no matter, just wondering about the 88 newer rear end.
GTXVette wrote: In reply to Apexcarver:Patgizz, orphanboy,Dusterbud, Being mine is Early and I am looking for a dana 44 rear. can I get 88 or newer to install in the 84,and do away with spacers. already did the c5 front brake swap.
you'd need most of the assembly if i recall. i forget where the width comes from. but yes if you got a later D44 you'd do away with the spacers.
i had C6 Z51(aka HUGE) brakes on the front of my 91 for a while, they just barely cleared the A mold grand sport/zr1 wheels, after severe grinding on the calipers, and they removed the stick on wheel weights the first time i drove it.
iceracer wrote: I'm surprised Nascar and others aren't using wide 5s. You know, tradition
NASCAR modifieds run them and the do suck on pit stops. Most races are short enough that it doesn't matter. There's also a bell that mounts to the hub to help align the wheels if your doing a lot of tire changes. The cup series cars pretty much always ran the smaller 5x5 pattern though I think it wasn't required until Mark Donohue showed up with 4 lug wheels to speed up pit stops. I could be wrong about that but my father had talked about it a few times.
GTXVette wrote: In reply to Ovid_and_Flem: I do......18x10front-19x12rear coulda been from a c6,not factory as they are chrome(I was told). no matter, just wondering about the 88 newer rear end.
Sorry. I missed that earlier in the thread. For some reason I thought you were wanting to run 15 inch wide fives. If you can pull it off it would definitely be cool.
Do you have an early pre 88 front end on it? If so I have a spare set of poly bushings If you need them. Upper and lower control arms bushings. Black compound
In reply to Ovid_and_Flem: Sirs, I would like them very much,I bought a set of leftovers (new) minus the front end bushings. I love the FAT tire look, but, the Rubber band look is what it is. Back in the Day... F1 only allowed a 13" wheel to keep down rotor size, Now we have Inboard brakes.
Cup cars are based on the stock cars of the early years which all ran the 5 bolt pattern.
Heck, along with wide five, dirt modifieds run a straight front axles an a ridiculous power steering set up.
I raced asphalt round track. Last dirt race I saw the left front was just a weight penalty,wasn't on the ground much.and they Diamonded the High bank oval to make 2 drag tracks,wierd but fast.
David S. Wallens wrote: JG will back me up, but not much is cooler than wide-fives. On a Buick Somerset race car.
I have some fond memories of a lumina we ran, ugly as a car, Killer as a race body,I'll find a pic.
You'll need to log in to post.
