When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Bro! Those tires are grossly undersized for 10 and 10.5 wheels! Like it can't ride well and it's probably dangerous. No offense intended, why do you want this setup? Do you just like the way it looks? Trying to understand
Bro! Those tires are grossly undersized for 10 and 10.5 wheels! Like it can't ride well and it's probably dangerous. No offense intended, why do you want this setup? Do you just like the way it looks? Trying to understand
it’s definitely undersized and outside of the approve rim width range set by TRA/ETRTO.
since these have much more sidewall than most stretch setups it and ride feel is normal compared to a 255/40 285/435 that I’ve ran on a 9.5”.
the narrower tires was needed to give enough clearance as I’m not running any camber.
the stretch does stiffen up the tire carcass.
though, I won’t be tracking on this setup, and it’ll just be for daily use.
Bro! Those tires are grossly undersized for 10 and 10.5 wheels! Like it can't ride well and it's probably dangerous. No offense intended, why do you want this setup? Do you just like the way it looks? Trying to understand
Agree that the setup looks good. I wonder how having a narrow tire on a wide wheel effects tire life and handling?
Tire life can be fine depending on alignment, just like any other setup. Handling will be "worse" than a larger tire due to less rubber/contact patch. None of that really matters though, you don't stretch tires for performance. It just looks good when done right, preferably on a significantly lowered car with the tires out near the guards.
You aren't running spacers? Looks fine to me. Not flush as many desire, but flush comes with its own set of problems. The height looks good as well IMO.
No spacers in that pic. I did try 15mm bolt on spacers in the rear which had more poke than I like. If someone would want to run that, I think it would be possible with like -3deg camber and maybe bracket trimming ? Hard to say without seeing articulation under cornering load.
Really I should buy a bunch of different sizes and mess around to see what works best. Or leave good enough as is but if I wanted that I would have refinished the OEM 19's
Whelp, I did not expect to post a different setup in this thread again so soon (or in general). I ran into some issues with my powdercoated 57CRs. Because I believe the issue was with the powder coaters and whatever they did to my wheels, I no longer felt safe running them.
After contemplating my options, I decided I've owned this car for way too long to let go now. And even though I've done most of the mods I've wanted to do, I have yet to fully enjoy it. Will I regret sinking more time and money into this car? I hope not lol. This car is handling amazingly at autocross right now, so there's that!
Wheel: VOLK RACING TE37 SAGA S-plus w/ 37 center caps in Bronze (Almite) Size: 18x9.5 +38 Tire: Kumho Ecsta PS91 265/40R18 Weight: 19.46 lbs, 47.49 lbs w/ tire Clearance: Clears Akebonos. Rear wheels rub fender liner with 2 adults in the back Spacer: 3mm front (for fitment reasons only)
Bittersweet for sure, and the faces do look flatter than I prefer (especially in pictures. Face 4 has more concavity, but only comes in +30). But I can't be too upset as these are the dream wheels of every JDM kid in high school. The specs are the exact same as the CRs, so I just included pics of the wheels on the car.
If anyone's interested, below are images of the damaged 57CRs. For context: the wheels had less than 4,000 miles, only 1 autocross event, did not hit any potholes, or wreck the car (obviously). These wheels have a load rating of 1,521 lbs, the same as the OEM tires for the car, and these wheels are advertised and used in motorsports. I'm still not 100% sure what happened, but I think whatever the powdercoaters did in their whole process ruined the heat treating and weakened the wheels (and you can see how they didn't even mask the mating surface, and took them 2 tries to get it right). This is from my biased opinion, so take it with a grain of salt. And maybe I'm completely off in my assessment. I could've gotten 2 defective wheels at the same time, but that seems very unlikely from Rays.
Agree that the setup looks good. I wonder how having a narrow tire on a wide wheel affect tire life and handling?
Stretching (to a certain extent) can have some performance improvements and it’s popular in the Miata autocross community.
Tire Rack did a comparison on their track and found that 215/45r17 on a 9” wheel width performed the best (fast lap time) in dry and wet than a 245/40r17 on a 7” wheel width.
the stretch changes the characteristics of the tire as it still stiffen the carcass and also widen the tread contact patch but could be at the expense of a shorter contact patch length.
the 215 on a 9” would definitely be outside of the TRA/ETRTO approve size pairing, and they can’t offer it to customers, so it was strictly for testing.
my stretch is purely for fitment. And not for performance. I’m running no camber and it’s the only way to fit the 10.5” and 10.0” setups with the offsets it has. This setup would need about -4 or -5 if I wanted to move to a wider tire.
Stretching (to a certain extent) can have some performance improvements and it’s popular in the Miata autocross community.
Tire Rack did a comparison on their track and found that 215/45r17 on a 9” wheel width performed the best (fast lap time) in dry and wet than a 245/40r17 on a 7” wheel width.
the stretch changes the characteristics of the tire as it still stiffen the carcass and also widen the tread contact patch but could be at the expense of a shorter contact patch length.
the 215 on a 9” would definitely be outside of the TRA/ETRTO approve size pairing, and they can’t offer it to customers, so it was strictly for testing.
my stretch is purely for fitment. And not for performance. I’m running no camber and it’s the only way to fit the 10.5” and 10.0” setups with the offsets it has. This setup would need about -4 or -5 if I wanted to move to a wider tire.
No Camber, meaning 0 degrees? Interesting as even utilitarian cars like Honda suvs have a little (-) camber dialed in.
No Camber, meaning 0 degrees? Interesting as even utilitarian cars like Honda suvs have a little (-) camber dialed in.
yea, zero degrees currently.
I’ll be adding more suspension and dialing in my setup for track (spl midlinks, spherical knuckle bushings, and a few more chassis braces in the rear), and looking to add possibly -2.8 to -3.5 degrees of camber up front and -1.5 to -2 degrees in the rear.
Stretching (to a certain extent) can have some performance improvements and it’s popular in the Miata autocross community.
Tire Rack did a comparison on their track and found that 215/45r17 on a 9” wheel width performed the best (fast lap time) in dry and wet than a 245/40r17 on a 7” wheel width.
the stretch changes the characteristics of the tire as it still stiffen the carcass and also widen the tread contact patch but could be at the expense of a shorter contact patch length.
the 215 on a 9” would definitely be outside of the TRA/ETRTO approve size pairing, and they can’t offer it to customers, so it was strictly for testing.
my stretch is purely for fitment. And not for performance. I’m running no camber and it’s the only way to fit the 10.5” and 10.0” setups with the offsets it has. This setup would need about -4 or -5 if I wanted to move to a wider tire.
215/35 is my favorite setup on 9.5jjs. Good to know I can tell people its for performance reasons moving forward.
Whelp, I did not expect to post a different setup in this thread again so soon (or in general). I ran into some issues with my powdercoated 57CRs. Because I believe the issue was with the powder coaters and whatever they did to my wheels, I no longer felt safe running them.
After contemplating my options, I decided I've owned this car for way too long to let go now. And even though I've done most of the mods I've wanted to do, I have yet to fully enjoy it. Will I regret sinking more time and money into this car? I hope not lol. This car is handling amazingly at autocross right now, so there's that!
Wheel: VOLK RACING TE37 SAGA S-plus w/ 37 center caps in Bronze (Almite) Size: 18x9.5 +38 Tire: Kumho Ecsta PS91 265/40R18 Weight: 19.46 lbs, 47.49 lbs w/ tire Clearance: Clears Akebonos. Rear wheels rub fender liner with 2 adults in the back Spacer: 3mm front (for fitment reasons only)
Bittersweet for sure, and the faces do look flatter than I prefer (especially in pictures. Face 4 has more concavity, but only comes in +30). But I can't be too upset as these are the dream wheels of every JDM kid in high school. The specs are the exact same as the CRs, so I just included pics of the wheels on the car.
If anyone's interested, below are images of the damaged 57CRs. For context: the wheels had less than 4,000 miles, only 1 autocross event, did not hit any potholes, or wreck the car (obviously). These wheels have a load rating of 1,521 lbs, the same as the OEM tires for the car, and these wheels are advertised and used in motorsports. I'm still not 100% sure what happened, but I think whatever the powdercoaters did in their whole process ruined the heat treating and weakened the wheels (and you can see how they didn't even mask the mating surface, and took them 2 tries to get it right). This is from my biased opinion, so take it with a grain of salt. And maybe I'm completely off in my assessment. I could've gotten 2 defective wheels at the same time, but that seems very unlikely from Rays.
The other front wheels:
Looks proper! I agree TE37s are everyone's childhood JDM dream!
