Originally Posted by Shift9303

Just by the name, I wouldn't trust a group called "fitment industries" because I get the kind of crowd they're going after. Every once in a while I get and ad or suggested video from them and the wheel and tire setups on those cars look terrible. Hellaflush trash. Maybe I'm prejudiced but IMO they're just ruining cars.

A couple things to keep in mind as you chase the "flushness" dragon. If you go non stagger the fronts will always look more flush than the rear due to the ways the fenders were designed. With that said, from the options that we're looking at nonstagger is pretty much the only option; and it's faster anyway. There are certain offsets that will look pretty flush at the front but leave some room to be desired at the back, usually in the higher +50 offset range, and certain offsets that well help approximate the difference but the fronts will always stick out more. Also keep in mind that with anything that will give you a flush look you're going to have to run a crap ton of front camber (i'm talking -2.5 to -3.5 range) and even then you'll still have to be careful of curbs and drainage ditches for drive ways and parking lots. I'd wager that the offset difference front to back is about 5-8 mm lower at the back to get even out the fender gaps. Unfortunately there are no easy spacer solutions if you want to go that way. 5mm is too much for stock studs, the thinnest bolt on spacer is 11 mm, and installing extended studs is a PITA and $$$.

My recs I'd stick to around the unicorn S2000 spec of 17x9.5 with +50 to 47 offset. This gets you the best balance of flushness front to back and front clearance. This offset range provides the best balance of front poke and reduction of rear fender gap. The front will definitely poke out but won't be too excessive to deal with that you'd require a pull and the rear will look just about flush. For reference I'm running 17x9.5+51 with 255s and camber F-3.2/R-3.0 camber. Ride height is 560 mm from fender lip to the bottom of wheel lip. Even with all that camber the front wheel lipe still is sitting outside of the fender lip by about ~5 mm. The massive camber does allow the tire tread block to just tuck inside the fender lip however it's still close, maybe 5-10 mm. That might seem like a lot however it unfortunately isn't. I have managed to catch my front fender before and I have to be very careful with certain parking lots and curbs around town that are deceptively deep. At the rear the wheel lip is just flush with the fender lip. The tire bloc tucks inside a bit due to offset and stretch however it looks visually acceptable to me. If you decide to go lower offset (+47) then you will be more flush at the rear but have more poke at the front. It's give and take. One option is 17x10+50. This can sometimes give you a more flush look by stretching the tire wall outboard a bit more due to the wheel width while retaining some more fender clearance due to the higher offset setting the actual tread block more in board. It's still on the bleeding edge though.

IMO +40 is on the bare edge of doable with fender roll and front pull. Most cars I've seen running that setup look like they have a fender pull at the front despite also running massive camber. +40 is also pretty aggressive at the rear and require decent camber back there as well. Based on my car the tread block will stick out even more at the front and it will be just at the edge of the fender lip at the rear; however even at the rear there will still be a decent amount of poke from the wheel lip.

Long post, but I hope that provides some perspective. Also if I may editorialize a bit more, skip adohan and avante garde, they're el-cheapo knock off wheels meant to corner more common car markets. The S2000 requires niche offsets and IMO deserves a bit of extra coin to get it right. Also if there's a wheel from them you like there is likely an original JDM wheel that they knocked theirs off from. For example, those adohan dso2s look like Work CR Kiwamis.

Edit: old pics that some of the usual folks are probably sick of seeing reposted but I think they make good reference.

Originally Posted by 707ap1

Base on my experiences, I think I can confidently answer questions 1 & 2.

A 17x8.5 +35 all around would work at the rear perfectly fine with a 245 or 255. The front will be more challenging if you wish to go square as you'd most likely need a pull or maybe get away with offset bushings/lower ball joints but should be easiest to fit a 215 or 225.
17x9 and up +35 will pose an even bigger challenge on stock bodies and I would avoid this because of that.

A +40 front and back on say a 17x9 square setup can work. It'll be a huge challenge up front but easy at the rear. From what I understand Fitment Industries aren't experts on our chassis and they're more on the "stance make em dance" side of things. I'd say get some advice elsewhere, like these forums, where people have experiences lots of trial and error in the wheel fitment department.

Since you're on the hunt for wheels, might I suggest the Wedssport SA72R ? Pretty cool looking wheel and comes in nice specs. They're also less than $350/wheel

Originally Posted by Silver_Bullet_S

Thanks so much for all the info... A reply can never be too long for me as I love to learn all i can so i really appreciate you taking the time to write such a detailed reply. I had a feeling Ftiment Industries was leading me astray, hence I decided to check this forum which always full of awesome people with so much knowledge.

I had planned to stay staggered since that's how the car came originally, but I'm open to a non staggered setup if it has advantages... When I was reading about stagger vs non staggered setups I heard that non staggered increases the snap oversteer issues with the S2K, is that your experience as well? When you say non staggered is faster, in what regards do you mean and why is that so? It was my understanding that turn in speed is faster, but at the cost of uncharacteristic handling and less feedback at the steering wheel. Why did you decide to go with a non stagger setup? If it's the better way to go, I'm all for it but just want to make sure i'm not making a mistake or dowgrading the handling/making the car harder to drive + more dangerous.

I can definintely see the poke of your front wheel in your pics, and 2.5 - 3.5 sounds like a lot of negative camber & more than I'd prefer to run. Did you have to do any fender pulling or rolled fenders with your setup, and if you had done fender mods could you have gotten away with less neg camber? Your rear looks just about flush so I get what you mean by the front will always look further out than the rear. So if you have 17x9.5+51 with 255s and F-3.2/R-3.0 camber and your front wheel still pokes so much should i shoot for 9.5 w/ a higher offset than +51 for the front maybe +53 to +55? What about if the front and rears were 9" vs 9.5" or is that not a good size to go with? As for the rear, would +47 be a good offset to get the wheel flush with rear fender when doing a +53 to +55 for the front to reduce the poke & pull the wheel back in t be flush-ish with the fender?

What would you recomend for staggered setup and I'd also love to know more about why recomend non staggered vs staggered? Thanks.

Originally Posted by TsukubaCody

Sorry, I should have mentioned that.

Everything I am mentioning will require rolled fenders. I know nothing about what works with untouched fenders.

Originally Posted by Shift9303

Changing offsets affects scrub radius and going lower will cause more positive scrub radius. I ain't no big brain engineer but from what I can gather the S2000 has near 0 to slightly positive scrub radius, maybe on the lower end of things but pretty typical for SLA suspensions and RWD cars. Both 0 scrub radius and extremes in positive or negative scrub radius are not desirable. Generally cars like ours prefers a moderate amount of positive scrub radius for more steering feel and more desirable on power characteristics for the type. I don't really know enough to say more than that.

This car has been around long enough for the public hive mind to have sort of found a consensus on what does and does not work. Honda's smarty pants engineers definitely know what they were doing and it's clear that specific design details were made for specific intentions however things are sometimes different in practice. Just look at OEM rear bump steer in the AP. In theory it's a good thing and a good driver can make use of it however in practice but it probably contributed some to the car's reputation of instability and they tuned it out in later years with the AP2.

In public hands fast enough drivers have worked the platform and have found their own solutions. Sure, going to lower offset wheels can have deleterious affects but if the setup is within reason and certain other circumstances are managed then in most regards the benefits out weighs the cons. At least when going nonstagger, any concerns about increased steering kick back and braking sensitivity is certainly outweighed by the additional grip. Sometimes it's more mental masturbation than practical application.

Also to add, if BBK clearance is a concern then staggered setup options are even slimmer or you have to run pretty low offsets at the front. The Spoon monoblock, aside from being only a minor performance benefit due to using stock rotors, seems to also be on the fat side and makes clearance even more difficult.


OP, this is Jack in the box's car:


I think the URL links on his original posts are dead. I believe he's running Rays TE37 SAGA in 17x9.5+58 with 3 mm spacer in front and 8 mm in back. Still flush without as much camber as me. The only problem is the spacer setup is a pain since you'll need extended studs and they're a pain to replace.