Mini-Tubbing for cars under 500hp - Page 2 - Lateral-g Forums

ArisESQ · #11 06-02-2009, 12:01 PM

my car is mini tubbed, and currently has around 440 horse and a set of 295. i plan on widening the wheels to 12 inches and running a 335 in the near future, along with some more hp.

and i mean in all honesty, if i wanted a balls out performance car and didn't care about aesthetics at all, i wouldn't spend my time and money on a first gen camaro. a C5 Z06 with the same amount of money invested would probably walk circles around even the most well balanced and setup pro touring camaro... but then it doesn't have the presence and look that a first gen has.

EBMC · #12 06-02-2009, 12:30 PM

On alot of cars we've done, we narrow the rearend and leave stock tubs. Its a good compromise and gives the look we want without the major surgery. This is a car in our shop now with 275 and 245's.

**Flash68** · #13 06-02-2009, 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sparky67

Actually, it depends on the aftermarket subframe and if it is a 1967-68 Camaro, my 67 has 335's, and I also have 255's in the front. I do have more than 500 hp, but I probably would still run 335's if I had less than 500 hp. I just like the look of it.

Jeff

http://www.kodakgallery.com/67rscamaro

Is there an aftermarket sub that doesnt allow for a 275 front on any year 1st gen? I am not aware of one. I am one of the few who is running a 275 with the stock sub but most do not and many advise against it. I obviously give up some turning radius ability but it is what it is. I believe it is easier with the 67-68.

But I agree the 335 rear, regardless of need and power level, it just looks bad ass.

XLexusTech · #14 06-02-2009, 03:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sparky67

The DSE subframe on 67-68's will only allow for 18 x 9" rim, so you are limited to a 255 size tire. DSE did try a 275, but it hits on the fender lip. While 69 fenders have more room to run the bigger tires. I have NOS front fenders, so I rather go with a smaller tire. So most likely with your 275's you will hit the fender lip, when you hit a bump.

Jeff

http://www.kodakgallery.com/67rscamaro

There's some great info you don't get every day. Thanks for the heads up on that. Not that I was going for a DSE Sub for my 67 anyway but its god info none the less

Rhino · #15 06-02-2009, 04:17 PM

The reason I'm mini-tubbing is honestly budget. It sounds weird to say, but the truth. I'm planning on running Vette wheels. Either take offs or reproductions. They're 10-11 inches in the rear and widely available at a very affordable price. You don't see many high volume production aftermarket wheels in widths greater than 8.5".
I rolled my own mini-tubs by widening a set of reproduction inners 2.75". I have to build a new rear anyway so I'm building it a little wider than stock to account for the high offset.

A second reason for it was the "while I'm at it" syndrome. I figured it would be much easier to mini-tub it now than to do it on the finished car. I'm only planning on running 295's out of the gate, but I'll have a ton of wiggle room and can always add more tire as needed.

6D9 · #16 06-02-2009, 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stang

On alot of cars we've done, we narrow the rearend and leave stock tubs. Its a good compromise and gives the look we want without the major surgery. This is a car in our shop now with 275 and 245's.

That looks great! How much are you guys narrowing the rear per side?? I used to run 18x10's with 5.75" bs and it looked sweet as well. Yours looks to be a 10" wheel with about 4.5" bs or so??

ArisESQ · #17 06-02-2009, 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flash68

Is there an aftermarket sub that doesnt allow for a 275 front on any year 1st gen? I am not aware of one. I am one of the few who is running a 275 with the stock sub but most do not and many advise against it. I obviously give up some turning radius ability but it is what it is. I believe it is easier with the 67-68.

But I agree the 335 rear, regardless of need and power level, it just looks bad ass.

I don't think the Chris Alston Chassis accommodates an oversized front tire either.

EBMC · #18 06-02-2009, 06:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 6D9

That looks great! How much are you guys narrowing the rear per side?? I used to run 18x10's with 5.75" bs and it looked sweet as well. Yours looks to be a 10" wheel with about 4.5" bs or so??

We narrowed a 9" 1.5" per side. and I believe it is a 4.375 B.S. on a 18x9. A 10" will work but we wanted more tire bulge. We also fabbed an inboard shock setup due to caliper clearance with this setup as well.

6D9 · #19 06-07-2009, 11:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stang

We narrowed a 9" 1.5" per side. and I believe it is a 4.375 B.S. on a 18x9. A 10" will work but we wanted more tire bulge. We also fabbed an inboard shock setup due to caliper clearance with this setup as well.

Thanks for the info!

**Steve1968LS2** · #20 06-07-2009, 11:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ill steez

I don't think the Chris Alston Chassis accommodates an oversized front tire either.

I do believe it does..

In any event a 335 is all about looks.. a better combo for performance would be a 315/275 ... when there's too much of a size differential between the front and rear it just creates understeer.

But it does look sweet.