Hi,

Have a few questions. And yeah, I tried searching, but didn't find a topic that was as straightforward. So, if you have track experience, please voice your opinion.

The car:

1. Normal, non-rolled fenders.
2. Possibly lowered a bit for performance reasons, not dropped.
3. Camber suitable for aggressive street driving (not tucked in).
4. Circumference of tire to remain the same as stock.
5. Rim able to support currently in production R-compound tire sizes and high-end street tires.

Your opinions:

1. 17" or 18"? <- my biggest question
2. Staggered or same size all around?
3. Acceptable rim offset/width range?

Again, this is purely for performance at the track. Appearance is not an issue.

Thanks in advance for your opinion!

 

255x4 17" on 9" wide wheels. The fronts are going to be tough without rolling the fenders or running camber though.

245x4 might be easier. I know Maxrev ran these.

18" makes no sense unless you are going all out with camber and rolling.

 

thanks blackey--exactly the advice i need.

1. how 'bout 255 rear and 245 front? i'd rather be safe than sorry. expensive investment.
2. would having the same width all around induce neutral handling? or would 255 all around induce oversteer, considering stock specs the rear to be wider?
3. to keep the car neutral or slight understeer, do i need to change the swaybars?
4. do you know Maxrev's offsets?

thanks man.

 

Most tire companies to not make the 245's and 255's.

You can look at his setup on Maxrev.net


Your going to need +63 or better.

On a completely stock car it will oversteer.

Big front bar would be highly recommended.

 

if the car would oversteer, wouldn't i want skinnier fronts--a staggered configuration?

 

Think it was Car and Driver did a test couple months ago on sizes 16,17,18 and the 17" wheel size were the best traction wise.

 

A thicker sway bar up front will increase lateral load from the unladen wheel to the laden therefore decreasing the amount of the grip the front pair of tires can produce. I'd also recommend increasing rear grip by using a smaller/no sway bar and then compensate for the increased body roll with higher spring rates (increased body roll isn't all that bad if the camber can be somewhat controlled).

I'm looking at 17x8 255/40 all around but I'm not set on an offset...

 

i guess the question is why would we want the same width all around?:

are we trying to maximize the amount of contact patch possible, then compensating for handling characterists by adjusting suspension?

or is there another reason why you would want the same width front and rear?

 

Unbreakable, I would use a wider wheel than 8" for a 255 tire.

I think tire choice size and stagger is a drivers preference. But for ultimate grip, you want the biggest tires you can get all the way around. The s2000 is well balanced with a 50/50 weight distribution and not a ton of torque so I think a non-staggered tire setup with sufficient roll control would yield the ultimate lateral grip. I currently have 225 Kumho V710s and 16 kg/mm springs all around and can hold 1.1g on crappy asphalt. I am looking to up that to at least 245s, maybe 285s.

Offset is another question, a compromise between fitting in the fenders, allowing sufficient articulation and steering geometry. The stock front offset is +55. I have used front wheels with +45 and +65 as well and found steering feel to change dramatically. Too light with +45s and too much with +65s. I am going to try 18x9 +55 wheels all around.

18 wheels give you a better selection of wide tires (race tires, that is) near or around the stock tire diameter (so as not to affect gearing adversely). There are 245/35-18s and 285/30-18s. It may be a tough squeeze up front to get 245s in there on a +55, I'll let you know how it goes when I get the tires. My front fenders are not pulled, I have just cut the lining and bent those two tabs out of the way.

 

Shoot, I meant 17x9..

Scrub radius (and fitment) is my main concern with offset, thank you for the input. Please let me know how the e55 offset works out..