Wheels and Tires Discussion about wheels and tires for the S2000.
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

Enkei RPF1 correct size

Thread Tools
 
Old 03-11-2015, 07:57 AM
  #1  
Registered User
Thread Starter
 
Joey2K's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Enkei RPF1 correct size

Hi guys, I'm planning on getting a staggered setup of 17" Enkei RPF1. Currently I have an AP2 with AP1 16"s. My fenders are already rolled by previous owner. TireRack says the correct size for S2000 is:
17x7.5 Front
Offset: 48mm

17x8 Rear
Offset: 45mm
TireRack notes that the Rear with 45mm is "aggressive" and might require fender rolling.

This is confusing because I see people talking about having a range of 17x7 front, and as wide as 17x9 rear, with a range of offsets that includes 35mm for rear wheels.
My question is, if I don't want to loose performance, or handling characteristics, whats the correct width? (I was thinking of getting 17x7 front with 45 offset; and 17x8 rear with 35 offset)
and secondly, whats the correct offset? will having 35 offset on 17x8 negatively effect my performance? will it even fit?
Lastly, from what I gather, these Enkei will be lighter than my AP1 16s (which is hard to believe) can anyone confirm this from experience? I don't want to end up with heavier wheels once I put the tires on them.

Thanks for any help guys.
Old 03-11-2015, 08:06 AM
  #2  

 
EVLS2K's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 890
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Not from my own experience with rpf1's but....some people run 17/8/45F and 17/9/45R
Depends also what tire sizes are you using , an 8in wheel is too small for a 255 tire so you need 9 or 9 1/2
Old 03-11-2015, 08:54 AM
  #3  

 
1nate7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Tucson
Posts: 4,273
Received 28 Likes on 27 Posts
Default

8" +45 front, 9" +45 rear. There is a HUGE thread in the gallery of RPF1 wheels. Be aware there are 2 different "faces" to this wheel with the cutoff being 8.5". 9" and wider have the concave face which looks 10x better in the rear. 8" will have the convex face good for brake clearance. They are lighter than stock 16" by around ~4-5 lbs per wheel.
Old 03-11-2015, 10:42 AM
  #4  
Community Organizer

 
s2000Junky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 31,059
Received 554 Likes on 506 Posts
Default

Yep, so if your fenders are already rolled as you mention, then id strongly recommend getting the typical best fitting/looking size of 8f/9r +45. This will give you the option to run as large as 235/40 front tire and 255 rear if you want without hassle. Typically people run a 225/45 up front paired with the 255/40 on this rim set. 215/245 or 215/255 is a possible combo as well.
Old 03-15-2015, 07:01 AM
  #5  
Registered User
Thread Starter
 
Joey2K's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by s2000Junky
Yep, so if your fenders are already rolled as you mention, then id strongly recommend getting the typical best fitting/looking size of 8f/9r +45. This will give you the option to run as large as 235/40 front tire and 255 rear if you want without hassle. Typically people run a 225/45 up front paired with the 255/40 on this rim set. 215/245 or 215/255 is a possible combo as well.
I noticed that a lot of people are talking about that 17x8 F and 17x9 R both with 45 offset, do you know if that fitment hampers performance (its not even close to the OEM AP2 size). Also, it seems like people are saying the 17x9 and 45 looks better because it has the concave look. i thought the concaveness was just a factor of offset.
Also, if the 17x9 and 45 looks good, why not go 17x9 and 35?
Old 03-15-2015, 07:09 AM
  #6  
Registered User
Thread Starter
 
Joey2K's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by 1nate7
8" +45 front, 9" +45 rear. There is a HUGE thread in the gallery of RPF1 wheels. Be aware there are 2 different "faces" to this wheel with the cutoff being 8.5". 9" and wider have the concave face which looks 10x better in the rear. 8" will have the convex face good for brake clearance. They are lighter than stock 16" by around ~4-5 lbs per wheel.
I checked out the thread, but there are still questions i couldnt get answered. Mostly no one mentioned if that setup is going to effect performance. But as far as looks, wouldnt the 17x9 with an ofset of 45 have less concave look than 17x8 and 35? Also why not go 17x9 and 35? Is that not going to fit?
Old 03-15-2015, 07:33 AM
  #7  

 
1nate7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Tucson
Posts: 4,273
Received 28 Likes on 27 Posts
Default

I noticed that a lot of people are talking about that 17x8 F and 17x9 R both with 45 offset, do you know if that fitment hampers performance (its not even close to the OEM AP2 size).

Why would it hamper performance? It should be an improvement over stock due to extra width and weight savings. You are right about offset not being close to stock, that is why you roll the fenders.

Also, it seems like people are saying the 17x9 and 45 looks better because it has the concave look.

I agree, which is why I changed from 8"/9" +45 to 9" +45 all around.

i thought the concaveness was just a factor of offset. Also, if the 17x9 and 45 looks good, why not go 17x9 and 35?

No, in the case of RPF1 it is based ONLY on width, any wheel 9"+ has the same lip/concave. You can do 35 but more fender work is required.

But as far as looks, wouldnt the 17x9 with an ofset of 45 have less concave look than 17x8 and 35?

Again, no. 8" has the dreaded convex face, 9" has the flat/concave face.

9" +45 is already much more aggressive than stock and requires a fender roll. IMO there is no reason to go +35, especially in front. This was my old car on 9" +45, 225/255 staggered tires:

Name:  4.jpg
Views: 11263
Size:  131.7 KB

And this was when I had 8"/9" staggered:

The following users liked this post:
sushimaster (07-31-2023)
Old 03-15-2015, 07:56 AM
  #8  
Member (Premium)
 
Chuck S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Chesterfield VA
Posts: 12,834
Received 1,235 Likes on 1,079 Posts
Default

No fitment problems with the 7" front or 8" rear Einke wheels that came on the '06 car I bought last summer but another inch may have problems. You'll be good if you stick with the stock rim size.

Car was otherwise stock, no fender roll.

17x7J 45mm on the front with 215/45-17 tires.
17x8J 45mm on the rear with 245/40-17 tires.

Name:  Wheel%20detail_zps4hje4jfm.jpg
Views: 10497
Size:  1.11 MB

Name:  17x8J45_zpse7b6hsez.jpg
Views: 8768
Size:  363.6 KB

Name:  IMG_1467_zps80486ec0.jpg
Views: 9274
Size:  116.8 KB

Name:  a4d279e5-67ca-431d-9b1d-60d44b8b533c_zps115bd853.jpg
Views: 11077
Size:  94.5 KB
The following users liked this post:
sushimaster (07-31-2023)
Old 03-15-2015, 08:18 AM
  #9  

 
1nate7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Tucson
Posts: 4,273
Received 28 Likes on 27 Posts
Default

I don't think Chuck will be offended since he immediately dumped those for stock wheels, but that is exactly why you don't want a convex rear.
Old 03-15-2015, 08:55 AM
  #10  
Member (Premium)
 
Chuck S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Chesterfield VA
Posts: 12,834
Received 1,235 Likes on 1,079 Posts
Default

It's impossible to offend me!

But, really, I couldn't wait to get the wheels off the car. I believe the new owner is running snow tires on them.

Honda OEM wheels are made by Einke if the Einke brand is important to anyone.

-- Chuck


Quick Reply: Enkei RPF1 correct size



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:33 PM.