GolfGTIforum.co.uk
Model specific boards => Golf mk2 => Topic started by: monkeyinmyhead on 23 June 2009, 01:11
-
Settled on some Borbet A's for my mk2, 16inch with stretched rubber, Rimstyle offer a 7.5" width on the front with 9" at the back. Has anyone done this? Is it at all practical? Does anyone know how low I can go with it?
Thanks guys.
-
I had 7.5x16 front and 9x16 keskins on my mk2 a few years ago...and a fairly wild offset like et10/15. I ran G60 arches that had had a little work on the inside and never caught even with weight in the back.
(http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a378/Simon_Henry/1-1.jpg)
I now run 9x16 prolines all round.
-
No further than the arch.
-
ive ran some 9's in the past. They handled like crap and looked soo sh1t.
9's = wrong! You need to run the right tyres to pull off a good look. too much stretch looks cool but looks dangerous too. Thicker tyres = looks crap.
8's max imo.
ohh and mk2's are front wheel drive :grin:
-
ohh and mk2's are front wheel drive
Quite.
-
I know lol, just enquiring whether or not I need to do work is all. Geezer at Rim style says I can drop 60mm without work on stretched rubber wrapped around 16's. Sounds good?
-
Sounds like it'll handle like utter balls.
Complete waste of time and effort, but hey - it's your dime/severeal hundred pounds.
-
Oh TC, you knowz you wantz to drop it to the deck, fit them 18s and stretch that rubba :grin:
-
I would stick with 7" or maybe 8" wide.
-
I know lol, just enquiring whether or not I need to do work is all. Geezer at Rim style says I can drop 60mm without work on stretched rubber wrapped around 16's. Sounds good?
I've had a bad experiance with Rim style. Take what they say with a pinch of salt they are sales man after all! :sick:
-
I know lol, just enquiring whether or not I need to do work is all. Geezer at Rim style says I can drop 60mm without work on stretched rubber wrapped around 16's. Sounds good?
I've had a bad experiance with Rim style. Take what they say with a pinch of salt they are sales man after all! :sick:
yeah thats true, maybe go for 7.5" all round then I guess, thanks for teh advice fellas
-
I know lol, just enquiring whether or not I need to do work is all. Geezer at Rim style says I can drop 60mm without work on stretched rubber wrapped around 16's. Sounds good?
Your going to need arch work.
-
why would a mk2 running 9" wide rims handle like utter balls? A wider track with more rubber on the tarmac is hardly an equation for disaster. The other thing is, some mk2s run enough power that you need increased traction :wink:
-
That's a good point but what about a bog standars 8v with out PAS. Thats got to be hard work and alot of drag?
-
if you're only going 7.5" fronts its going to be no different steering wise. Lets be honest, with standard 8v power its going to improve the aesthetics more than be negative on the driving experience.
-
if you're only going 7.5" fronts its going to be no different steering wise. Lets be honest, with standard 8v power its going to improve the aesthetics more than be negative on the driving experience.
What you trying to say about 8v's ay?! :angry: :tongue: :smiley:
-
if you're only going 7.5" fronts its going to be no different steering wise. Lets be honest, with standard 8v power its going to improve the aesthetics more than be negative on the driving experience.
:grin: The only problem for me is if you go WIDE you got to go LOOOOW. Which has got to reck the drive ability and spoil you fun on B roads. Or am I just being gay...? :huh:
-
no, you'd have to go lower on skinnier rims just to get the same 'tuck' into the arches.
-
why would a mk2 running 9" wide rims handle like utter balls? A wider track with more rubber on the tarmac is hardly an equation for disaster. The other thing is, some mk2s run enough power that you need increased traction
Wider wheels and tyres = less pressure per square inch on the ground - doesn't necessarily mean more traction. :wink:
Plus rolling resistance and the fact that some idiots think stretched tyres are a good idea, especially on wide rims - it's veering into a world of wrongness.
-
Plus rolling resistance and the fact that some idiots think stretched tyres are a good idea, especially on wide rims - it's veering into a world of wrongness.
Damn right, the whole really wide rims with mega stretch on the rubber, just looks daft to be honest. Totally changes the ride and handling of the car as well, and is no good for a bit of spirited driving on a back road.
Really depends on what you want the car for, B-road caning or town cruising.
-
For fast road and occasional track use what is the best size wheel and tyre to use?
-
195/50 R15, on either 6.5 or 7" wide rim.
Cheaper than many other sizes and very wide choice and good stock availability.
It also handles well on them.
Why else would VW have specced them on the high performance Golfs at the time?
-
I ran lightweight 15x7 Compomotives with 195/45 et15 and was very pleased with performance....but at the time I was only running 175bhp/150lbs 2.0 16v so it didn't have much power to put down. Increasing the bhp and more than doubling the torque figure and there wasn't enough grip...hence going 9x16 with 215/45s. Has it made a difference - yes.
Why else would VW have specced them on the high performance Golfs at the time?
The increased tramlining and road noise probably outweighed the aesthetic benefits of wider rims/tyres to average Golf GTi buyers at the time. The high specced Golfs of that time also had soggy springs/shocks and a 4x4 stance...does that mean VW set it up the best for performance that they could? No, they compromised because it was a car for everyday use.
If wide rims/tyres were such a bad thing why would every kind of motorsport, other than ice racing, run that set up?
-
That's a good point, but like you say, I think that you have to have the power to justify the poke.
-
read here
http://www.carbibles.com/tyre_bible_pg2.html
-
Good link and lots to digest.
Who on here is running over 300lb ft of torque through their Golf2? If they are then they're going to struggle to put that down sensibly no matter how wide the front wheels. I've seen some serious track Golf2s with 16VTs and they seemed to be putting down their grunt through a 195 on a 7" rim pretty well.
The increased tramlining and road noise probably outweighed the aesthetic benefits of wider rims/tyres to average Golf GTi buyers at the time. The high specced Golfs of that time also had soggy springs/shocks and a 4x4 stance...does that mean VW set it up the best for performance that they could? No, they compromised because it was a car for everyday use.
It was set up for the best performance they could acheive in everyday conditions. Those are the conditions in which you drive your Golf, unless it's a track car.
I was referring to Golfs like the G60 and Limited. I don't recall the road tests of these cars commenting on the soggy springs and shocks.
I think you're suggesting that ride height is inversely proportional to 'handling'. That's very much not the case and there's an awful lot of theory as well as anecdotal evidence to confirm that.
If wide rims/tyres were such a bad thing why would every kind of motorsport, other than ice racing, run that set up?
Ummmm, I don't think they do. Let's have a look at the VW GTI series (and many others like it). Hell, let's even look at WRC cars on tarmac rallies.
I suspect there are an awful lot of competition motors out there running on 7" wide rims. Of course touring and Formula cars run wide wheels, but then the downforce they're working with is HUGE!
Compare cars of the era that were fitted with the sort of width rim you're proposing is a good idea to fit to a Golf2 - you're into Porsche 928s and the like. Much much heavier cars, with much much more power.
I'm going to maintain that the only thing rims wider than 7" with wide tyres is going to yield is just much higher tyre bills when you need to replace the tyres.
-
MKII GTi Champ cars run 185 60 14 or 195 50 15 Toyo R888's. To be honest tyre quality makes far more of a difference than width. Good skinny tyres are way better than cheap stretched nankangs.
Nick
-
Who on here is running over 300lb ft of torque through their Golf2?
err me. I'm talking from experience.
I was referring to Golfs like the G60 and Limited. I don't recall the road tests of these cars commenting on the soggy springs and shocks.
how many G60 owners do you know that haven't uprated their suspension?
I think you're suggesting that ride height is inversely proportional to 'handling'. That's very much not the case and there's an awful lot of theory as well as anecdotal evidence to confirm that.
Ride height is important to centre of gravity isn't it? I was moreso suggesting that the standard suspension leads itself to comfort (and consequent lean) as much as performance.
I'm going to maintain that the only thing rims wider than 7" with wide tyres is going to yield is just much higher tyre bills when you need to replace the tyres.
how about if someone just likes the look? Afterall, clear rear lenses do not improve the efficiency of your brake lights...so why do it? Our arguement could roll on but a high powered car will, with matching chassis and tyres, have more traction with wider tyres. It's fuel economy and top speed will be less.
Has my traction improved from running wider rims/tyres...yes. Do I suffer extra tramlining, road noise and expense when replacing...yes. Will the owner of an 8v mk2 be bothered about the above negatives compared to the elation he gets when he stands back and looks at it...if he's into that most likely otherwise he wouldn't have asked.
-
Im thinking of putting 8x16s all round on my mk2 16v with 195-40-16s and my golfs been lowered 80mm,im hoping they go straight on but i guess ill find out?!
-
how many G60 owners do you know that haven't uprated their suspension?
I know one who's putting their suspension back up right about now.
Ride height is important to centre of gravity isn't it? I was moreso suggesting that the standard suspension leads itself to comfort (and consequent lean) as much as performance.
You REALLY need to do some reading. Centre of gravity isn't the issue here.
high powered car will, with matching chassis and tyres, have more traction with wider tyres.
Matching chassis and tyres? How are you 'matching' them? You need to read the link above (among a long list of other material). Your statement is balls in some situations and a Golf2 on uber-wide wheels is one of those.
-
195/50 R15, on either 6.5 or 7" wide rim.
Cheaper than many other sizes and very wide choice and good stock availability.
It also handles well on them.
Why else would VW have specced them on the high performance Golfs at the time?
sweet thats what im running :smiley:
-
how many G60 owners do you know that haven't uprated their suspension?
I know one who's putting their suspension back up right about now.
Really, one whole person?
Ride height is important to centre of gravity isn't it? I was moreso suggesting that the standard suspension leads itself to comfort (and consequent lean) as much as performance.
You REALLY need to do some reading. Centre of gravity isn't the issue here.
Wow resorting to caps lock now to get your point across. The cog obviously needs to be kept as low as possible. It is the theoretical point that the car will balance from if it were suspended in free air. From a handling point-of-view it is one of the most important variables to consider.
high powered car will, with matching chassis and tyres, have more traction with wider tyres.
Matching chassis and tyres? How are you 'matching' them? You need to read the link above (among a long list of other material). Your statement is balls in some situations and a Golf2 on uber-wide wheels is one of those.
With the same suspension set up, ARBs etc and brand of performance tyres. My opinion is 'balls'? I'm disappointed that you have to take what was an interesting chat to such a basic level. You going to start name calling next?
This thread started off with a basic question that I answered. Yes there will be downsides to someone running wider wheels than standard but if that is the look they want then who are you to judge? Nigh on everyone on this forum has lowered their vehicle from standard...are you going to criticise them for that because there are just as many negatives involved in daily driving.
From the link provided earlier...
So why do wider tyres perform better when cornering? Well apart from the softer rubber compound giving better mechanical keying and a higher coefficient of friction, they have lower profile sidewalls. This makes them more resistant to deforming under lateral load, resulting in a more predictable and stable contact patch. In other words, you can get to a higher lateral load before reaching the peak slip angle.
So do wider tyres give better grip?
If the contact patch remains the same size and the coefficient of friction and frictional force remain the same, then surely there is no difference in performance between narrow and wide tyres? Well there is but it has a lot to do with heat transfer. With a narrow tyre, the contact patch takes up more of the circumference of the tyre so for any given rotation, the sidewall has to compress more to get the contact patch on to the road. Deforming the tyre creates heat. With a longer contact patch and more sidewall deformation, the tyre spends proportionately less time cooling off than a wider tyre which has a shorter contact patch and less sidewall deformation. Why does this matter? Well because the narrower tyre has less capacity for cooling off, it needs to be made of a harder rubber compound in order to better resist heating in the first place. The harder compound has less mechanical keying and a lower coefficient of friction. The wider tyres are typically made of softer compounds with greater mechanical keying and a higher coefficient of friction. And voila - wider tyres = better grip. But not for the reasons we all thought.
-
there is no rule to say this size tyre on this car. there are far too many variables to consider
-
Lol, always has to be an arguement with one member :rolleyes:.
Btw, most of the racecars mentioned in the examples used in this thread are regulated on the maximum tyre widths to reduce cornering speeds but the open cars probably wouldnt use much wider tyres anyway due to the aero drag hit they would take being greater than the extra grip/traction they could get (open tyres are incredibly draggy!). The only recent good example of a racecar using wider tyres than the norm is the new Acura LMP1 prototype in ALMS which uses wider fronts than most of its competitors and is somewhat compromised in doing this (I point you now to Junes edition of Racecar Engineering) although they seem happy with their compromises. The F1 boys are looking at using narrower tyres at the front now the grooves have gone to balance the car out and the tyre manufacturer beleives its the way forward too, though the rears will stay as wide as the regs allow.
Anyway, if any of you are really interesteed in the whys and wherefores of what your "discussing", have a read of http://www.amazon.com/Race-Vehicle-Dynamics-book-workbook/dp/0768001218/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1245975131&sr=8-1 which is the Bible of suspension design and read through some of these news letters from Mark Ortiz who writes for Racecar Engineering http://www.theoryinpracticeengineering.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=10 (the last one is links to someone elses forum but all of his articles are on there, you just have to dig through the nascar rubbish :P. If you want to receive them yourself you can email him direct IIRC and he adds you to his mailing list). I wont bore you all with my explanations of the subjects raised here as I wont do as good a job as the book and articles in the links.
-
Im running 8's up front with an et of 1 I believe and 9s at rear with an et of -5
Get your arches rolled, but only to the extent of removing the top rivet hole then fading out to the two next lower ones which you will need.
Dont bond the arch on :laugh:, buy the correct rivets from VW that are coated N 906 349 01. and cut some inner plastic arch away as it rubs :cool:
Good luck mate :smiley:
-
how many G60 owners do you know that haven't uprated their suspension?
I know one who's putting their suspension back up right about now.
Really, one whole person?
Ride height is important to centre of gravity isn't it? I was moreso suggesting that the standard suspension leads itself to comfort (and consequent lean) as much as performance.
You REALLY need to do some reading. Centre of gravity isn't the issue here.
Wow resorting to caps lock now to get your point across. The cog obviously needs to be kept as low as possible. It is the theoretical point that the car will balance from if it were suspended in free air. From a handling point-of-view it is one of the most important variables to consider.
high powered car will, with matching chassis and tyres, have more traction with wider tyres.
Matching chassis and tyres? How are you 'matching' them? You need to read the link above (among a long list of other material). Your statement is balls in some situations and a Golf2 on uber-wide wheels is one of those.
With the same suspension set up, ARBs etc and brand of performance tyres. My opinion is 'balls'? I'm disappointed that you have to take what was an interesting chat to such a basic level. You going to start name calling next?
This thread started off with a basic question that I answered. Yes there will be downsides to someone running wider wheels than standard but if that is the look they want then who are you to judge? Nigh on everyone on this forum has lowered their vehicle from standard...are you going to criticise them for that because there are just as many negatives involved in daily driving.
From the link provided earlier...
So why do wider tyres perform better when cornering? Well apart from the softer rubber compound giving better mechanical keying and a higher coefficient of friction, they have lower profile sidewalls. This makes them more resistant to deforming under lateral load, resulting in a more predictable and stable contact patch. In other words, you can get to a higher lateral load before reaching the peak slip angle.
So do wider tyres give better grip?
If the contact patch remains the same size and the coefficient of friction and frictional force remain the same, then surely there is no difference in performance between narrow and wide tyres? Well there is but it has a lot to do with heat transfer. With a narrow tyre, the contact patch takes up more of the circumference of the tyre so for any given rotation, the sidewall has to compress more to get the contact patch on to the road. Deforming the tyre creates heat. With a longer contact patch and more sidewall deformation, the tyre spends proportionately less time cooling off than a wider tyre which has a shorter contact patch and less sidewall deformation. Why does this matter? Well because the narrower tyre has less capacity for cooling off, it needs to be made of a harder rubber compound in order to better resist heating in the first place. The harder compound has less mechanical keying and a lower coefficient of friction. The wider tyres are typically made of softer compounds with greater mechanical keying and a higher coefficient of friction. And voila - wider tyres = better grip. But not for the reasons we all thought.
I'm with you all the way on this one. Some people have extremely dated views where as "if Vw made it like it, it must be the best way" etc etc...? Imo don't bother trying to correct Hell, its a complete waste of time because he knows absolutely everything about everything. I ignore all posts from it now!
-
Do you live under a bridge?
-
Ive just put 8x16s on my 16v which is lowered 80mm,im running 195-40-16 tyres and the wheels have a 35mm offset.
No rubbing at all not even on full lock,i can still get my fingers between the tyres and the arch! HAPPY DAY!!!! :grin:
-
^^^ what the feck?... p155 off!
-
Is that acura a daily drive ??