Thanks for letting me know! Do you happen to know what the backspacing is for those wheels? How did your figure out what the maximum turning radius was?
5.25" for my setup. This puts the rim about 3/8" from the steering arm end. The turning radius was easy. Once the car is at ride height you turn the wheel from side to side. The outside wheel well is where the rubbing would be if you didn't limit the amount of turning. We are a 1/4 turn of the steering wheel from full lock so it didn't limit it much.
I am looking for the same stance that X has. What I can't figure out though is why people have said that with a STOCK front subframe 8" is the widest you can go, yet Mark got a 9" under there using the stock subframe with a car that is sitting that low. I am wondering how he was able to do it. Judging by his pervious works he measured everything about a billion times a broke out the slide rule and FOUND the way it would work. So how'd he do it?
I am looking for the same stance that X has. What I can't figure out though is why people have said that with a STOCK front subframe 8" is the widest you can go, yet Mark got a 9" under there using the stock subframe with a car that is sitting that low. I am wondering how he was able to do it. Judging by his pervious works he measured everything about a billion times a broke out the slide rule and FOUND the way it would work. So how'd he do it?
I'm running a 275 on a 9.5" wheel on the front of my 69. In order to do so, you will give up quite a lot of turning radius, there are various rub points from inconvenient all the way up to dangerous if not dealt with appropriately. The best way to prevent over-steering issues is to alter the steering stops on the stock control arms, ala Speedtech's idea. I don't know what the rub points are with a stock upper control arm, I am currently running GW's (but only until our new arms are done later this year...). It's not pretty in many cases, inner fenderwells, had to remove a couple of bolts for the wheelwell chrome trim pieces, etc. Worth it? In my eyes, completely. The added grip is significant, and the look is mean. I don't know what the backspacing is on my car, but it's irrelevant for most folks as I have some one-off custom stuff on the front (brakes, wheelspacer, etc).
Carl Casanova has a write-up on this in his website with a lot of detail, including backspacing etc.
Funny, one of my customer is in the process of buying wheels for his car, and one wheel source told him the very biggest he could run on the front of a 69 is a 7" wheel with a 225 tire. Swore up and down. Crazy.
Tyler (ATS) said, "It is indeed mini tubbed with the DSE kit, he is running the 18x9/18x12 combo, with I think a 335 rear Michelin tire". this is post number 62 in the Camaro X thread
Front rims-
Fikse Profil 5S, 18x9 with 6.125" of BS.
Rear rims-
Fikse Profil 5S, 18x11 with 6.125" of BS
Front suspension mods to make this work-
Upper and Lower DSE control arms, ATS AFX tall spindles, factory Camaro P/S steering arms, Baer bumpsteer adjustable outer tie rod ends with modded bolt and spacers, inner fender well hardware replaced with low profile buttom head screws.
Rear suspension mods-
DSE mini tub kit with Quadralink suspension, narrowed rear end.
Is there a certain tire size that you would recommend? Naturally Camaro X has the perfect stance IMHO but I probably won't start of with the quadra-link right off the bat; what would you suggest for a more traditional rear end set up? Thanks for the input!
Brian Hobaugh SCCA National Tour June 2014
First Hemi 'Cuda Convertible Ever Built
Short clips: Goodguys Pleasanton autocross and pit videos
Linear Mode
