deception9

you are right, they just add wheel arch height loss, but for most people not versed in wheel fitment its easier to explain it as they add height.

plus one to aspect ratio. something within one or two percent is cool. just make sure its a common size, you don't want to pay up the rear for a limited selection of tires.

DaGou

one thing you said,
Since I would want to maintain the staggered stance of the S and not reduce its handling.

Going to a non-staggered set up will increase your handling, not reduce it. All most everyone on the track or autoX runs a 17 X 9 with a 255 non staggered or bigger.

g0g3tt4

It will reduce handling if you don't make the proper changes when going with a 'square' setup.

s2000Junky

Handling is a general and subjective term. What is improved handling? For some that isn't a non staggered set up on this car.

"stagger" in the case of this thread was about running 17/18" wheels front to back, not width.

SlowTeg

Yep.. going with a "staggered" 17front/18rear doesn't seem like a terrible idea, especially if you need/want a larger rear tire than 255. How it looks is another issue, but from a practical perspective it makes sense. Personally I love the handling of the stock staggered setup, and would love to keep the stock stagger and just add some more grip w/o changing the balance of the front and rear. Moving to a non-staggered setup has some clear disadvantages on the street.. You need to stiffen up the front end considerably to reduce oversteer, which results in a bumpier ride.

Most people run a non-staggered tire setup not necessarily because it's the best "handling," but because it's the easiest/cheapest/readily available/good for racing. Personally I think the idea of being able to rotate tires is incredibly overblown. I could honestly careless. In racing though, many classes only look at your largest tire size, so it's only natural to try and stuff the largest tires you can all the way around (non-staggered). Also, there aren't a good selection of tire sizes (non-r comps) > 255mm width. Finally, most s2k track guys are N/A, and a sticky 255 rear tire will usually suffice. Perhaps if there were more FI s2k track guys you'd see more staggered setups like Junky, but then again they might just run even wider tires non-staggered. Most people usually just stick with non-staggered though due to the lack of available tire sizes > 255mm in 17's, and 18" tires are considerably more $.

ZDan

If you run 17/18 on a car designed for same-diameter tires front and rear, you either have to have puny-looking rear tires relative to fronts, or go with larger-diameter rears to keep the look approximately right but affect braking bias (smaller front tires => braking bias moves forward, which is more stable anyway).
FWIW I went this route on the FD because I wanted 275 rears (500+ hp) with 245 fronts, don't particularly care for the looks of 18s up front on a proper small sports car, wanted lighter-weight front wheels and cheaper front tires.
245/40-17 fronts on 17x8.5, 275/35-18 rears on 18x9.5:


Front tires are 24.7", rears 25.6". Probably kinda pushing it, but braking is fine on the street and track.


If you went with 17x7 fronts and 18x8 rears, you could run 215/45-17 fronts (24.7") with maybe 235/40-18 rears (25.4") and it might not look too bad. If you went with same-diameter tires on 17" fronts and 18" rears, guaranteed the rears will look less meaty relative to the fronts (less sidewall).

IMO, no good reason to go with 18s unless you want to run wider than 255.

redap186

I have 17 up front n 18 in back.... Nothing wrong wit dat combo .The rear is not as meaty but that doesn't bother me to much. With a 17x7 u can run 215, 225 would be max pushin it but it depends on tire make. The 18x8 I fit a 245 no problem before. Buy then again it depends On brand of tire u go wit. 17 will Always be a lot cheaper than 18. With 17x7 and 18x8 I would recommend 215 40 17 and 235 35 18 But you can fit up too 225 up front and 245 in back. Good luck finding right tire. It will raise your car quite a bit, so I do recommend lowering it. If you end up lowering it. You might have to roll Ur fenders so they don't rub...... I'm running 17x7 with a 215 40 17 and 18x9.5 with a 255 35 18..... Next time I get tires ima try to put 225 up front. Sorry camera is missing so I can't post pic 4 yah

s2000Junky

What's the point in your case for pairing an 18 in the rear with your 17 up front? Just for the sake of being different, or some other reason? It doesn't look particularly good, and with your width choice there isn't any performance benefit. So I'm sort of confused.

why not 18 in front and 17 in back? The meatier tire profile in back would at least more resemble a rear wheel drive car of yester years.

ZDan

The tires sizes you recommend would not raise the car. 215/40-17 is 23.8", about an inch smaller in diameter than stock, front of car would ride ~1/2" lower. 235/35-18 is 24.5", about 1/4" shorter than stock, rear will ride 1/8" lower.

225 on 7" and 245 on 8" would pooch a bit.

On 17x7, 18x8, I'd go 215/45-17 and 235/40-18. OEM front tire size, rears would be ~1/2" bigger in diameter, would raise rear 1/4", but also the larger diameter fills the wheelwell better, so aesthetically speaking, no reason to lower IMO.

But still, the very idea of going to 18" rears with only 8" wheel width (narrower than OEM AP2) is IMO a little absurd...

I do think that 17/18 could work on the S2000, especially given its rakish stance. But I'd want to go with something like I did on the RX-7, maybe 17x8.5 +55-60 fronts with 245/40-17 and 18x9.5 +60-65 rears with 275/35-18.

Cars from yesteryear pretty much always had square fitments. Bigger-diameter front wheels than rears would look absurd on either an S2k or a vintage car! A lot of people would run beefier rear tires, wider and taller vs. fronts, same wheel diameter. The '70/'71 Dodge Challenger T/A and Plymouth AAR 'Cuda are the only older cars that come to mind that had staggered fitments from the factory: E60-15 fronts and G60-15 rears (equivalent to 225/60-15 and 245/60-15) on 15x7 wheels front and rear. One of the mags that tested the cars did suggest that maybe they should have put the wider tires in front given the massive understeer the cars exhibited!

s2000Junky

You miss the point, it was a rhetorical question. They both look absurd. Stick to either 17's all around or 18's. There is no reasonable performance benefit to mixing them up.

If you want to run wider then a 255/10" on this car then switch to an 18" that’s the only reason from a performance standpoint to make the switch.

Until Kuhmo may start up the 295/35/17 in the new XS replacement the v720, that’s what I will continue to preach. Other then myself, I have yet to see anyone fit one of those on anything less then functional over fenders anyway, so I still wont likely include the option unless asked.