Not to stir the pot.
i read 80% of the posts, and i am a little lost as to what the fitment problem is, sorry les. can you please clarify in a couple sentances where the fitment problem is?
when i look at the rears they look like they are perfect. unless you wanted a larger wheel/tire in there, and if that was the case you should have measured and provided the backspacing that would fit.... OR what is do is draw a simple picture with all the measurements and send it to the wheel guy to double check.
actually i just installed a set of Forgelines on a 70 mustang 18 x 8 4.5bs which is "supposed" to be the right fitment, maybe Jon can confirm that.
guess what......... it's not. they need 5 to 5.25 to get the ride height correct. even Forgeline says 4.5-4.75 is correct and a 235 tire. so now what do I DO
shoud Forgeline send me new wheels?

Blake, I beleive he wanted the widest wheel properly fitted, from pics he posted,it looks like he could have 1.5 inch wider wheels ,that's what I gathered.

No offense to anybody here but if I'm spending 5 grand on wheels i'm the one measuring for the fit not someone else

That's exactly correct. I asked for the widest wheel that would fit in the rear without having to modify the frame. I offered to measure (with help from Jon of course) but he said it was not necessary. Based on the fact that he's a pro-touring wheel expert and has "complied recommended fitments that we can suggest with 100% confidence" I took his word as gospel. If we all did not need a wheel expert to help us with this, Jon really would not have a viable business model would he?

Here's the issue: If my rear end has been modified in any fashion, I'm wrong and Jon is correct and could not possibly recommend a correct fitment for it when he thought it was stock. If it is stock, Jon is wrong in his assumption that all 66-67 A Bodies are the same with regards to wheel fitment and should stand behind his recommendation.
The second point is that I think his "it fits" comment is taking liberty with the word "fit". I asked him for the same thing every pro-touring customer wants: the widest wheel you can stuff in the rear. If you're telling me that all the Chevelles and Camaros he's building wheels for have 2" of room to the frame/rear wheel well then I stand corrected. If they are all much closer to his recommended .75" then he's wrong---simple as that.

Agreed! When I ordered my HRE's, I did all the footwork. I called Baer myself for a template, took my car to a wheel shop and watched a guy measure my bs. Then after he measured it, I did it again myself to make sure it was correct. I then emailed the brake template to HRE and had a Baer representative on a 3-way call with HRE so we would all be on the same page. All this to say, I handled my own business. I didn't just let someone tell me some numbers. Not at the expense of what I was going to be spending on wheels.

I on the other hand expect competent fitment advice for my 5 Grand--otherwise I wouldn't have wasted my time talking to Jon and would have gone directly to Forgeline.

It's an expensive lesson--but I can guarantee you I've learned it!:lol:

If I were in the wheel business I might give somebody a starting point on wheel size.But after that it would be up to the customer for final fitment. A framing square and tape measure are cheap compared to 5K wheel mistake.:_paranoid

narrow the rear 1" per side, put disc brakes on, use a 305 width tire and it will look bitchen.

People tend to think that if a tire has room sitting static that it won't rub when pushed..

Well, let me tell you that tires, even the rear need some room to articulate, especially when driven hard and the harder you drive the more room you need.

Personally I would rather have a touch more room than cut it too close and have rubbing. Plus, even if the wheel was 1" bigger what difference would that make with anything? Not much from a performance perspective.

To me wheel companies give "guidance" it's up to the customer to choose the right offset and size.