17's on a mk2 golf

[R98 HUF]

But Martins did look sweet!!!!!!

[martinb]

But Martins did look sweet!!!!!!

cheers dude! 

[monkeyalan]

17's are way heavy compared to 15's aswell.
probably wouldn't notice much with a 16v but when i put 17's on a 115 bhp car with 15" standard alloys there was an obvious lack of urge to pull away compared to standard.

[...joe]

17's dont 'drive' as well as 15's, but thats not what you asked.

plenty of wheels look good in 17's but as with everything tis all down to the style of the wheel and the general styling of the car.

FYI O.Z. super t's are played out, its not 1999 again is it?

[clipperjay]

Going to be controversial on this, most big players have at least 17" and they look the part if correctly rolled arches and lowered. As for performance, ride and handling I would say yes most part on stock set up I agree stock is all good.
I still say that if your car has the right set up you can benefit from lighter 17" than stock. My Sebring’s are great, but they weigh a tonne unlike the Oz'ds I've replaced with.
They weight half of the Sebring’s and have made the handing much better IMHO
The other argument is that certain larger wheels are better for air to surface cooling for the brakes as maze types are closed and multi spokes let air pass more efficiently.

[golf mk2 tornado red]

mine on 17s et40 rubbed bad front n rear 40mm drop .15bbs are a treat and a treat to run on ie no traming
17s looked sweet on my mk3 but looked dreadfull on the 2

[bradford_golf]

yeah mark i remember, mines lowerd 55mm as well so think ill jsut stick with the wheels ive got on

[Ben Lessani]

i've got 15s on mine, but they do look a bit too small - it could may be because they are tucked into the arch and need spacing out a bit more.





that reminds me - i still need center caps for those stupid things

[tom26]

^ lovely wheels

[Ben Lessani]

why thank you sir....i have been neglecting them a bit - the whole car needs a major cleanup!