Results 81 to 100 of 100
Thread: 20's on first gen?
-
11-16-2005 #81
Registered User
- Join Date
- Aug 2004
- Posts
- 152
i use to be refured to as Pimp touring on here.
-
11-16-2005 #82
Registered User
- Join Date
- Nov 2004
- Location
- NW Arkansas
- Posts
- 1,742
Originally Posted by slownova
well thats not all bad if it's true lol I've been called much worseKENNY DAVIS HOTRODS
12-16-2005 #83Isn't the question rotating weight mass?
I have never seen anyone speak to what the "optimum" or "maximum advisable" weight of a wheel/tire combo would be.
Isn't that the real issue here (other than how they ultimately look)?
The overall diameter or width of the tire doesn't seem to be the issue. That is generally the biggest you can fit and since a 265 is a 265 whether it is 18" or 20",,,,,,
There could be a sidewall issue, but that is not what you hear when somebody says "that size (bigger than 18") will destroy your performance.
I bet there are even 18" combo's that are heavier (and thus worse for performance??) than a well selected 20" combo.
But nobody seems to talk about what the target weight should be. But I bet those Formula 1 guys figure that out...
Am I off base?
Let a brotha' know.
For the record I am looking for 20's that aren't purely Bling Bling,,,but I will never race my convertible. And I agree that some of these wheel combo's are ugly if they show puny brakes or the car is dumped over the top of them.Calicraig
67 Camaro SS Convertible
Frame off project started September 2005
Had a 69 Z28 clone back in the 80's
Still kicking myself for getting rid of it
12-16-2005 #84



Reply With Quote