...

Go Back   Lateral-g Forums > Lateral-G Open Discussions > Open Discussion
User Name
Password



Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 06-22-2011, 08:39 PM
jocko124 jocko124 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Katy, TX
Posts: 164
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by elitecustombody View Post
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.
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.
__________________
Lee
1966 Cutlass


The difference between truth & fiction: fiction has to make sense.

Build Thread:
https://lateral-g.net/forums/showthread.php4?t=31963
  #2  
Old 06-22-2011, 09:07 PM
realcoray realcoray is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 196
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jocko124 View Post
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.
It seems really weird you have so much space on the backside. I had a 68 chevelle which is admittedly a completely different fitment and I had a 17x11 on the back with less room than that and I always thought that the 66-67 A bodies were not able to take that much wheel/tire stock.

And I would hesitate to use space between the wheel and the frame or fender as a guideline of what is possible because the wheel moves. In particular the finger in the lip picture seems fine to me because of that curve. If the wheel was out more it would probably rub pretty hardcore if the car was actually driven.
  #3  
Old 06-22-2011, 09:55 PM
jocko124 jocko124 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Katy, TX
Posts: 164
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by realcoray View Post
It seems really weird you have so much space on the backside. I had a 68 chevelle which is admittedly a completely different fitment and I had a 17x11 on the back with less room than that and I always thought that the 66-67 A bodies were not able to take that much wheel/tire stock.

And I would hesitate to use space between the wheel and the frame or fender as a guideline of what is possible because the wheel moves. In particular the finger in the lip picture seems fine to me because of that curve. If the wheel was out more it would probably rub pretty hardcore if the car was actually driven.
Point well taken. I think we're going back to the drawing board, actually measuring and going with the best option at that point.
__________________
Lee
1966 Cutlass


The difference between truth & fiction: fiction has to make sense.

Build Thread:
https://lateral-g.net/forums/showthread.php4?t=31963
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:29 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright Lateral-g.net