What's with all the room around these 295s?

[bull]

For years people here have been telling me that 295s will barely fit under the back of my '68 and they'll be rubbing, etc. Maybe so on the rubbing but I think I'd have to have a couple 200 pounders in the back seat and a full trunk to do it. I have an inch of space between the widest part of the inside tires and the leaf springs and 1.5" between the lip on the quarter panel wheel well and the outside tires. The only way anything would rub is if the rear end squatted down a good 4-5 inches to where the outer wheel house hump is, and like I said I would need a lot of weight in the back for that to happen. Even then it looks like it would miss. What gives? I guess what I'm saying is I'm no longer buying all the doom and gloom reports about wide tires under the back of these cars, least not until I can drive it. I'm about ready to go out and get some 305s.

[Jon Smith]

put a 295 hoosier next to it and check the difference...not all 295's are created equal

[bull]

put a 295 hoosier next to it and check the difference...not all 295's are created equal

I guess not. I thought 295 was a measurement, not part of the name. In my mind 295 mm should equal 295 mm.

[terrible one]

Bull,

What are your rim specs?

Yep, the 295 when fit right in the middle doesn't look too wide in the huge 2nd gen wheel wells. I plan to run a 295 but with less backspacing so that it's more toward the outer lip and therefore looks like it fills it up better. . .

[Jon Smith]

put a 295 hoosier next to it and check the difference...not all 295's are created equal

I guess not. I thought 295 was a measurement, not part of the name. In my mind 295 mm should equal 295 mm.

it should, but it doesn't....

[Blown70]

BULL JUST A NOTE...... IT DONT LOOK BAD!!!!!!!! welll bad but in a GOOD WAY!!!!

[bull]

These are 15x8 rims with I believe 5" of BS. I don't like the looks of the 15x10 Magnum 500s I've seen with a lot of outward offset (which is the common trick to make them look wide); they have too much of the rim sticking out. Either I stay with this setup or I go with after market rims and less BS. Still, I figured they would be closer to the springs than they are with this BS. Even though it's only an inch it looks like more. Oh well, I bet they won't rub.

Here's what the 15x10 Magnums look like without much backspacing (it's probably about 4.5" I believe):

[bull]

BULL JUST A NOTE...... IT DONT LOOK BAD!!!!!!!! welll bad but in a GOOD WAY!!!!

Thanks, I appreciate that. I'm not super worried about it but I was a little let down.

[694spdRT]

I think they do look good but you do have room to spare. I would expect some settling once you get a full tank of gas, bumpers, spare tire, beer, etc. in there too.

If you really want to err on the side of caution my F70-14's left plenty of room with 5 guys in my R/T.  The lightest of the three in the back weighed 235# and there was a trunk full of car show stuff.     

[bull]

Nah, that's more caution than I'm willing to accept. I'll just take my chances.

[Musicman]

As a few others have said, not all 295's are created equal... rim width is also a factor in the final outcome. I have 295/50/15 BFG T/A's on mine, mounted on 10" rims, and they are a fat... 12.5" to 13"

Just as a note... the Cooper Cobra is listed as being almost an inch smaller than the BGF... bottom line, break out a ruler and check it for yourself.

[0X01B8]

According to the Tire Rack site, the section width will change +/-  2 tenths of an inch for a 1/2" change in rim width.  So, the section width on a Goodyear Eagle GT II is 12.1 on a 9.5" rim, so it will be roughly 11.5" on an 8 inch rim, or 12.3" on a 10 inch rim.  A half inch really isn't that much, but I think a bulgy sidewall can trick the eye into thinking you're looking at something much wider.  But, yeah, there's a load of room back there for meats!

[Back N Black]

According to the Tire Rack site, the section width will change +/-  2 tenths of an inch for a 1/2" change in rim width.  So, the section width on a Goodyear Eagle GT II is 12.1 on a 9.5" rim, so it will be roughly 11.5" on an 8 inch rim, or 12.3" on a 10 inch rim.  A half inch really isn't that much, but I think a bulgy sidewall can trick the eye into thinking you're looking at something much wider.  But, yeah, there's a load of room back there for meats!

I like your tire size and backspacing. what have you got on Her?

[suntech]

I will go with 335´s rear

[chargerboy69]

As a few others have said, not all 295's are created equal... rim width is also a factor in the final outcome. I have 295/50/15 BFG T/A's on mine, mounted on 10" rims, and they are a fat... 12.5" to 13"

Just as a note... the Cooper Cobra is listed as being almost an inch smaller than the BGF... bottom line, break out a ruler and check it for yourself.

That is true.


As a side note, the car is really looking good. 

[bull]

I also wonder if the wheel well trim will make a difference looks wise once I get it installed.

[SuperCommando]

Put 295/50 BFG T/A radials on the back of my 68 Charger and they rubbed:

Rear end: 8.75
Rim: 15x10in Chrysler steel wheel, 5.5in backspace
Tires: 295/50 R15 BFG Radial T/A

With this combo, the inside top portion of the tires rub against the inner wheel tub where the wheel tub meets the trunk and rear frame rail. It doesn't do this when it's sitting of course, just occasionally when I'm driving and hit a dip or pothole and the rear suspension compresses. Both sides of the rear inner wheel tubs exhibit rubbing. I have it set up where my rear sits high too (none of the tire is concealed by the quarter panel when viewed from the side) and it still rubbed. When measuring the gap between the bottom of the wheel lip to the outside face of the tire (where the raised white letters are), there seems to be at least in inch of clearance.

In hindsight I would get the same rims with a 4.5in backspace instead.

ps - These fat meats look great, but if you ever have to take them off the service the drums or brakes, they are a beeeyatch to get back on. Man are they heavy.

[Musicman]

I measured my backspace before ordering the rims... dead center required a 5" backspace. I ordered them with a 5.25" backspace however, just to be certain that I wouldn't hit the fender, then I shimmed them to exact center. In the end, 5" would have worked out fine, but I figured it was better to be safe than sorry.
You should be able to throw a couple of small shims behind yours to eliminate the rub, as long as you have clearance on the fender side, and a long enough stud to accomidate the shim thickness.

[bill440rt]

I have BFG 295/50's on my '68. 15 x 10 Centerlines with a 5" backspace. Backspacing is PERFECT. Tires are nice & fat & fill up the wheelhouses nicely. NO RUB.

[bill440rt]

A few more.

BTW Bull, your car looks great!! 

[SuperCommando]

Bill, I like the color combo. Looks like the 68 promo pamphlet car, eh? I agree, the 5in backspace was a good choice, and all I really needed was an extra 0.5in to get rid of the rubbing.
Can I trouble you for a side profile shot? Also what measurement do you have from the bottom of the wheel lip moulding to the ground?

[bill440rt]

SC,
Here are some side shots. Sorry but these were the only ones I could find. Both were taken at last year's Carlisle show.
From the ground to the bottom of the 1/4 lip molding measures about 26-3/8".

BTW, the Charger in the original dealer brochure was a much brighter red. This red is Scorch Red, looks like blood.    But, when the sun hits it right, it's brighter. 

[chgr500]

I think the key tool is to have at least a 10" rim with these tires...fills out so much better? ...

[bull]

I think the key tool is to have at least a 10" rim with these tires...fills out so much better? ...

I don't think that matters nearly as much as the backspacing, at least as far as the distance from the tire to the outer edge of the wheel well is concerned. The width of the wheel has a minimal effect on the width of the tire, I mean as long as it's within the recommended specs. By that I mean don't put 295s on a 15x7 rim or something like that.

[terrible one]

Yeah, I think you need less backspacing. What are your rear rim specs? What about the fronts? (you satisfied with those?)

[0X01B8]

I don't think that matters nearly as much as the backspacing, at least as far as the distance from the tire to the outer edge of the wheel well is concerned. The width of the wheel has a minimal effect on the width of the tire.

  Also, the backspacing measurement varies with wheel width so it's not really the greatest way to know what's going to work or not.  Offset really tells you what's what.  For just about any combo 0 to 1/2" negative offset is the sweet spot.  I always forget which is which, but negative offset pushes the wheel towards the outside.

My wheel fitment guide errs on the conservative side and shows wheel well lip interference before leaf spring interference, because it's easier (spacers / shims) to correct for too much positive offset than negative.

-john

ps. Back N Black - mine are R295/50/15x8 4.5 b.s (0 offset) and F235/60/15x7 3.625 b.s (-3/8" offset)

[0X01B8]

Oh, BTW, this thread title kinda cracks me up.  You'd probably never see something like this other non-mopar muscle car forums.  "Hey, I just put on these giant tires and I still have tons of room?  What's wrong?"   

[bull]

Good point. I was talking to my brother about this very thing regarding his '75 Vette and I was surprised to learn he can only go as big as about 255 on the back.

[Rolling_Thunder]

well - thanks for this thread people - I'm picking up some 295/50/15's on 15x10 wheels and 5"BS for my 69 A12 clone.

[MxRacer855]

I love the way those Centerline Pro Convo's look! Beautiful choice.