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.
